Fantasy High Speed 2

[Waddon]

Just a bit of fun, but as many people on this site (modestly) know a lot more about railways than anyone in government, I thought it might be enlightening to design our own route for HS2, as current proposals are all so vague, and also just in case Adonis pops round for a cup of tea tomorrow and asks me what I think would be a good route Also, maybe in 30 years time, we could look back and see how right we got it, (and how wrong the politicians who approved it got it)

I'm not an expert on high speed railway design (I can't even get a Hornby to stay on the track) but I thought I'd give it a shot.

To start off, I would suggest Euston as the only likely London Terminus, with maybe the HS2 terminal built above the present platforms, maybe getting the extra length necessary by extending beyond their current buffers into the area which currently contains the food court, with an extra concourse built above. Then descending, either going directly into a tunnel, with a portal where the old carriage sidings are, next to Mornington Terrace, or taking over either the slow lines or the 3rd rail lines as far as Queens Park, before tunneling.

Depot somewhere around Willesden/Wembley.

Veering left in a tunnel around the Wembley area, following the Chiltern Line/ M40 corridor out of town, with tunnels under towns such as High Wycombe, then on to the only intermediate station, at Banbury, between the existing station and the motorway, before continuing north. I chose this location for a station because it has a good selection of connecting lines, and there is plenty of land available around the existing station, plus proximity to the motorway. Maybe the main running lines could skirt the town via the M40 route, I would also imagine in this scenario there would be electrification back to Oxford, so that a fast Oxford-Birmingham commuter service could be run.

The bit through south Birmingham is a bit fuzzy, but I envisage a new (terminal) station built on the industrial land somewhere adjacent to Moor St. (with the idea that trains going further north skip round the edge of Birmingham, maybe stopping at some sort of parkway station, or have a triangle junction to go back into Birmingham...)

Beyond that is a bit out of my area.

Any thoughts? How totally wrong have I got it? Maybe someone could continue the route north from here...

 

[Dai.]

I like the sounds of it, what I would like is to see someone add Cardiff, Swansea and Newport into the equation, maybe Holyhead and Llandudno.

 

[starrymarkb]

Someone on UK.railway insists that the route must serve Middlesborough at any cost....

 

[142094]

Have a bit of a problem getting to Middlesbrough when all the trackside cables are nicked everyday...

 

[generalvegitable]

I would probably start between kings cross and St Pancras I know that there was plenty of space there, plus its near HS1 tunnel it down under north London, bring it out somewhere near Edgeware have a parkway station at St Albans by the M25 which could be an interchange with trains going from Dover to the north which don't stop in London
tunnel it under Milton Keynes, a station there because its quite large (and it would remove some of the congestion on the west coast, split into two routes there.

one route going up to Birmingham, two dedicated platforms at new street, birmingham would be done with the plan to link up to a high speed line from the south west, another link to this line would be planned in just outside the London terminus, then this line would head north to a station on the Liverpool and Manchester line about half way between the two cities, then proceeding to Scotland calling at Preston, Lancaster then Carlisle where a junction would be planned in to link up via a tunnel to Northern Ireland and eventually the ROI, it would then terminate at Glasgow.

the other route would head north-east to Northampton, then up to Leicester then on to Nottingham and Sheffield then Leeds, then it would head up to Scotland calling at Middlesbrough and Newcastle, then it would proceed into Edinburgh where it would run non stop between Edinburgh and Glasgow along an upgraded classic line.

 

[317666]

I would build an underground terminal 'London National' slap-bang in the centre of London!

 

[generalvegitable]

I would build an underground terminal 'London National' slap-bang in the centre of London!

I would probably have done that aswell, but also reroute hs1 down there as well, name it London International

 

[Burkitt]

As an overview of the network, I would propose something like this for the major high speed lines. HS3 is a bit big so it could be split into phases, and the Liverpool branch might be best as separate project. HS4 could include a Nottingham - Birmingham spur, or start at Birmingham instead of London. HS5 could detour a bit to go via Oxford and Bath. HS6 would be a tunnel under the Irish Sea to Dublin!

 

[me123]

No, no, no, no, no. HS2 needs to extend to Scotland, with the Scottish Government paying their fair share, of course. Scotland is where the real benefits will be found. HS2 merely running to Manchester shall do little more than replace a fast service with a faster one. Most air passengers have already switched to rail. Whereas, a speedy service to Glasgow and Edinburgh would be economically viable from the beginning, because you'd be moving a lot of people from air to rail.

I think HS2 should be London-Birmingham-Manchester-Glasgow, with a branch serving Liverpool and another serving Birmingham-Sheffield-Leeds-Newcastle-Edinburgh. This leaves some gaps, like Transpennine and Edinburgh-Glasgow... but these could all be developed and filled in overtime. My suggestion would provide a good framework which could be filled in over the coming years.

Now, of course, going straight to Glasgow and Edinburgh in one go ain't going to happen. But the plans must be in place from the start to build HS2 up to Scotland if you want the route to be a success.

HS2 must also be limited stop as much as possible. There's no point simply replicating the WCML or ECML. These services can be retained and, indeed, enhanced. There's no need to stop a high speed train at Newark or Retford, for example, as these can be adequately served by the existing services.

 

[Mojo]

Is this really "High Speed 2," or merely "High Capacity 1?"

 

[Drsatan]

No, no, no, no, no. HS2 needs to extend to Scotland, with the Scottish Government paying their fair share, of course. Scotland is where the real benefits will be found. HS2 merely running to Manchester shall do little more than replace a fast service with a faster one.

Agreed. According to NR's own benefit/cost ratio it would only be worth building HS2 if it extends all the way to Scotland. The benefit/cost ratio would be negative if HS2 only went as far as Manchester, although that does ignore the well-documented phenomena of passengers transferring from plane to train following the introduction of high-speed trains, which has been observed in France following the completion of the Paris-Lyon LGV in 1981, and other countries.

HS1 should begin at Euston for the time being, with access to the high speed line somewhere near Watford. It would extend first to Birmingham (with a chord allowing the possibility of Birmingham-Glasgow trains), and then Manchester and Liverpool, and finally onto Glasgow. For the time being trains to Edinburgh would use the line from Carstairs, although if the Waverly line is reopened for its full length that could be used. I'd investigate the possibility of building a tunnel between Stranraer and Northern Ireland, which would require reopening the Carlisle-Stranraer line to avoid going via Dumfries, and building a completely new line (since NI uses 5'6 gauge track) from the tunnel portal (which would be somewhere near Bangor) to Belfast, and finding space in Belfast to build a new station.

No-one hear has raised the possibility of a high speed line somewhere in Southern England, given that there's always demand for people to travel from say, Brighton, to Manchester. A 186mph line might be out of the question in this regard, but a new mixed traffic line from Woking to Southampton paralleling the M3, relieving pressure on the SWML, might be a possibility.

HS2 must also be limited stop as much as possible. There's no point simply replicating the WCML or ECML.

To get round this, simply build intermediate stations at places where demand exists (e.g. Wigan, Milton Keynes) and run a few stopping trains along the high speed line. If all high speed trains are limited stop then you miss out on a lot of traffic, and revenue would suffer as a result.

Trains on HS1 should operate at, say, 225 mph as opposed to 186 mph.

 

[starrymarkb]

Maybe a mix of HS and upgraded Classic lines would work. After all isn't the GWML good for 150ish mph on alignments. ETCS should help raise speeds there

 

[Burkitt]

HS2 must also be limited stop as much as possible. There's no point simply replicating the WCML or ECML. These services can be retained and, indeed, enhanced. There's no need to stop a high speed train at Newark or Retford, for example, as these can be adequately served by the existing services.

I would advocate following the Japanese model of having several different classes of train using the high speed route, with the faster trains overtaking the stoppers at stations.
For HS2 I would suggest limited stop trains would run only to major cities on the high speed line itself. They would be built to full UIC loading gauge, double decker and run up to 360kph.
"Stopping" trains would be built to normal UK loading gauge, and run to smaller cities on the HSL and also to destinations beyond it. Their top speed would only need to be 250kph or so. When the first stage of the network is built they could be used to provide services to major cities beyond it, eg in Scotland, then cascaded to serve smaller destinations and slower services once the full HSL was complete.

 

[Waddon]

I agree that the line should be as limited stop as possible, but there must be capacity for trains to join/exit the system at various points between major cities, much as happens on HS1 at Ashford and Ebbsfleet.

These locations could have stations, but not on the main running line, so not to interfere with the core route. Thats why in my initial suggestion I stated Banbury as a possible intermediate location between London and Birmingham.

The town itself, due to its size, probably does not merit a high speed station and most through trains would not stop here, but the ones that would could then veer off by traditional routes to locations such as Oxford/West of England.

It would also get around the issue of what to do with your service when parts of the line are closed for engineering work - by modern standards, you can expect this to occur on a regular basis starting about 18months after the line opens!

p.s. Current proposals are suggesting a 250mph route - I'm imagining that this will mean quite a radical redesign of stations and infrastructure... I imagine a yellow line on the platform and an announcement won't be quite enough if a train passes through at 250mph... Plus, can you imagine how long the pointwork will need to be at a 250mph junction?

 

[generalvegitable]

pointwork for a 250mph line would need to be about 1/4 of a mile I would say

 

[starrymarkb]

p.s. Current proposals are suggesting a 250mph route - I'm imagining that this will mean quite a radical redesign of stations and infrastructure... I imagine a yellow line on the platform and an announcement won't be quite enough if a train passes through at 250mph... Plus, can you imagine how long the pointwork will need to be at a 250mph junction?

UIC standards for HSL require the platforms to be on loops...

Plus on TGV routes the high speed junctions are full speed ahead, 125mph diverging

 

[me123]

To get round this, simply build intermediate stations at places where demand exists (e.g. Wigan, Milton Keynes) and run a few stopping trains along the high speed line. If all high speed trains are limited stop then you miss out on a lot of traffic, and revenue would suffer as a result.

Yes, build where demand exists. But don't simply stop trains at somewhere for the sake of it. A lot of places are well served by existing services, and the benefits of the High Speed Service are going to be minimal in these places when compared to the benefits of faster Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh to London trains.

Lockerbie doesn't need a high speed service, for example, and can be well served be utilising the WCML existing services. Remember, a lot of services in the UK operate in excess of 100mph, many up to 125mph, and this is still a very fast speed.