High speed rail on existing infrastructure post HS2 construction

[Fazaar1889]

The purpose of HS2 is to increase capacity on existing railways by moving the high speed lines off existing railways onto the new shiny HS2 lines. On the assumption that HS2 is built in full, will there still be high speed trains on the existing lines? This question mainly stems from a recent video by RMTransit where he mentioned that Network Rail is upgrading the signalling on the East Coast Mainline to allow for speeds of up to 140mph following the East Coast Digital Programme which will allow these fast trains from 2030. This implies that they want to continue running High speed trains on the existing network right?

East Coast Digital Programme - Network Rail

We're transforming the East Coast Mainline, using digital train control technology to deliver a better, more dynamic and reliable service.

www.networkrail.co.uk

 

[Esker-pades]

HS2 "in full" should not be an assumption made. The bits of HS2 that are funded are Old Oak Common <> Curzon Street/Handsacre. The aspiration is to get to Euston, but that's only with private funding. There's nothing beyond the West Midlands (to Crewe/Manchester/Wigan).

Thus....the possible removal of high speed traffic from the Midland and East Coast Main Lines won't happen.


Also.......HS2 high speed is different to ECML 'high speed'. 225mph v 140mph

 

[Benjwri]

The purpose of HS2 is to increase capacity on existing railways by moving the high speed lines off existing railways onto the new shiny HS2 lines. On the assumption that HS2 is built in full, will there still be high speed trains on the existing lines? This question mainly stems from a recent video by RMTransit where he mentioned that Network Rail is upgrading the signalling on the East Coast Mainline to allow for speeds of up to 140mph following the East Coast Digital Programme which will allow these fast trains from 2030. This implies that they want to continue running High speed trains on the existing network right?

The only railway HS2 can move trains off, if it is built in full, is the West Coast Mainline.

The East Coast Mainline serves totally different places, including Edinburgh, North East Scotland, York and Newcastle, there would be a need for high speed trains on the ECML regardless of how much of HS2 was built.

 

[Fazaar1889]

The East Coast Mainline serves totally different places, including Edinburgh, North East Scotland, York and Newcastle, there would be a need for high speed trains on the ECML regardless of how much of HS2 was built.

I see thanks, but surely if they continue to use "High speed trains" on the ECML, there wouldn't be an increase of capacity for local/regional and freight trains? Unless they just have less high speed services? What's the plan? cos I have no idea...

 

[Benjwri]

I see thanks, but surely if they continue to use "High speed trains" on the ECML, there wouldn't be an increase of capacity for local/regional and freight trains? Unless they just have less high speed services? What's the plan? cos I have no idea...

HS2 will cause an increase in capacity for the West Coast Mainline, which it will remove some highspeed trains from, although the amount depends on how much of HS2 is eventually built.

The East Coast Mainline will not benefit from HS2 is a significant way, and this was never really the plan once the leg to Leeds was scrapped.

 

[Esker-pades]

The only railway HS2 can move trains off, if it is built in full, is the West Coast Mainline.

The East Coast Mainline serves totally different places, including Edinburgh, North East Scotland, York and Newcastle, there would be a need for high speed trains on the ECML regardless of how much of HS2 was built.

Yes and no. If the full spec as per 2019 assumptions (IE: to Golborne / Leeds & York), then the ECML would likely have pivoted to a more outer-suburban and Lincolnshire focused railway (more trains to Biggleswade, Retford, and the like) with HS2 picking up the fast Leeds, Newcastle, and Edinburgh trains.
There would still be high speed rolling stock, but it would likely have made more stops so the overall differential would be less. Maybe we'd've seen a Cambridge to Middlesbrough train. Who knows?

Even with the Integrated Rail Plan culling of the Eastern Leg, the fast London <> Edinburgh trains would've switched to HS2, so there would be some re-jigging of priorities.

I see thanks, but surely if they continue to use "High speed trains" on the ECML, there wouldn't be an increase of capacity for local/regional and freight trains? Unless they just have less high speed services? What's the plan? cos I have no idea...

Yes. If HS2 isn't built to 2019 specs then the impact on the conventional network is less and either more money needs to be spent upgrading it or there is less capacity. That's why the October '23 Sunaxing annoyed RailFreight groups. They can do the joined up thinking....Sunak is not versed in basic railway capacity theory.

What's the plan? For post-HS2 it's being reformulated. ECML Digital programme continues as is.

 

[HSTEd]

The only railway HS2 can move trains off, if it is built in full, is the West Coast Mainline.

The East Coast Mainline serves totally different places, including Edinburgh, North East Scotland, York and Newcastle, there would be a need for high speed trains on the ECML regardless of how much of HS2 was built.

Even if HS2 only ever reached Manchester, de-facto the fastest route to Leeds would be via Manchester.
That would rip the heart out of the long distance requirements for the ECML.

Indeed, if NPR ever reached Marsden it is likely it would be competitive with the ECML for York and points north.

At which point the southern ECML would turn into a comparatively short distance railway with a simplified timetable. Whilst cheaper to operate high speed trains operated by HS2.

The UK only really needs one north-south trunk main line, the only reason we have two primary ones today is because of the terrible performance of Victorian steam trains and signalling systems.

 

[Benjwri]

Even if HS2 only ever reached Manchester, de-facto the fastest route to Leeds would be via Manchester.
That would rip the heart out of the long distance requirements for the ECML.

Indeed, if NPR ever reached Marsden it is likely it would be competitive with the ECML for York and points north.

At which point the southern ECML would turn into a comparatively short distance railway with a simplified timetable. Whilst cheaper to operate high speed trains operated by HS2.

The UK only really needs one north-south trunk main line, the only reason we have two primary ones today is because of the terrible performance of Victorian steam trains and signalling systems.

Unfortunately at this point as long as the land sales go ahead it’s unlikely the ECML will ever see any improvement. Admittedly yes if the other legs had gone ahead it mightve been quicker via HS2.

 

[Fazaar1889]

Unfortunately at this point as long as the land sales go ahead

I thought land sales had been quietly paused?

 

[Benjwri]

I thought land sales had been quietly paused?

They have because of a court challenge, but there is still a year to go before an election most likely, and plenty of time for them to continue, which they will if they can.

 

[chris11256]

I thought land sales had been quietly paused?

There’s definitely been a legal challenge, I think. Although no doubt the government is still trying behind-the-scenes to row back even further & scupper phase 1.

 

[Fazaar1889]

They have because of a court challenge, but there is still a year to go before an election most likely, and plenty of time for them to continue, which they will if they can.

There’s definitely been a legal challenge, I think. Although no doubt the government is still trying behind-the-scenes to row back even further & scupper phase 1.

oh right

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Take statements about 140mph on the ECML with a pinch of salt.
The ETCS upgrade, delivering in-cab signalling, should allow for higher speeds than now over the stretches where it is being implemented - as far as Grantham at the moment, though that's only about a third of the overall route.
But you'll find several threads on here listing the reasons why 140mph is not likely in the short term.
Notably, upgrades would be necessary to the track, structures, OHLE and power supply, plus the elimination of level crossings.
Running at 140mph also reduces the capacity to share the route with slower traffic (other TOCs and freight).

The full-fat HS2 plan was to deliver all that and more, and deliver extra capacity on both MML and ECML.
Now nobody knows how the current hiatus will turn out in service terms.
Euston was due to deliver the main Edinburgh service under HS2b via Carlisle, but that's out of the question now.

 

[class26]

They have because of a court challenge, but there is still a year to go before an election most likely, and plenty of time for them to continue, which they will if they can.

The informed opinion is that an election is looking likely now for May 7. That means parliament breaking at the beginning of April which, if true leaves very, very little time for any wrecking tactics from sunak.

 

[WilloughbyGC]

The informed opinion is that an election is looking likely now for May 7. That means parliament breaking at the beginning of April which, if true leaves very, very little time for any wrecking tactics from sunak.

no the election will be October or later I'm afraid. May only possible if the opinion polls narrow dramatically

 

[Hairy Airey]

HS2 will cause an increase in capacity for the West Coast Mainline, which it will remove some highspeed trains from, although the amount depends on how much of HS2 is eventually built.

The East Coast Mainline will not benefit from HS2 is a significant way, and this was never really the plan once the leg to Leeds was scrapped.

The original question was "if built in full" and yes, should that have happened the WCML, MML and ECML would all have had capacity increase.

Even with ETCS the ECML still has significant bottlenecks with freight traffic. Sections of double and triple track where four tracks are needed all the way into London.

I would not rule out another reversal!

 

[Arkeeos]

They have because of a court challenge, but there is still a year to go before an election most likely, and plenty of time for them to continue, which they will if they can.

They won't be able to sell off the land within a year, it still has compulsory purchase powers over it.

 

[Roast Veg]

Even with ETCS the ECML still has significant bottlenecks with freight traffic. Sections of double and triple track where four tracks are needed all the way into London.

I would not rule out another reversal!

Given the existence of the joint line, the only two/three track sections I can see are between Peterborough and Huntingdon, and over the Welwyn viaduct. Did I miss any other constraints?

 

[Energy]

The informed opinion is that an election is looking likely now for May 7. That means parliament breaking at the beginning of April which, if true leaves very, very little time for any wrecking tactics from sunak.

I doubt Sunak will touch it anymore. He's moved on to promising tax cuts (and getting himself a job in tech). He's been burned once over his terrible Network North plan and still does every time a new project comes up under it. He hasn't made any news about HS2 since.

They won't be able to sell off the land within a year, it still has compulsory purchase powers over it.

They can still sell off but they'll struggle to get a good price when they still have the legal powers to compulsory purchase it back again.

 

[HSTEd]

Given the existence of the joint line, the only two/three track sections I can see are between Peterborough and Huntingdon, and over the Welwyn viaduct. Did I miss any other constraints?

The joint line might be useful for getting some freight out of the way, but it is a far less capable route than the ECML slow lines for other traffic

 

[grinderx]

HS2 will cause an increase in capacity for the West Coast Mainline, which it will remove some highspeed trains from, although the amount depends on how much of HS2 is eventually built.

The impact is only likely to be felt south of Stafford right?

What goes into those slots? Will they run faster trains than class 350 semi fasts up towards crewe?

If not then I can't see how this will be a meaningful benefit tbh. It's already a nightmare catching a Glasgow services as you either have to go into new street or chase it up the line to crewe (and spend an hour looking at the rusty roofing and ohle supports propped up with scaffolding).

As an aside, what's the contingency for a closure on hs2? Do they copy eurostar and not run at all or will they need a plan for kicking other services off the classic lines?

 

[Arkeeos]

They can still sell off but they'll struggle to get a good price when they still have the legal powers to compulsory purchase it back again.

They're bound by certain conventions that require them to get value for money from sales, they could try and circumvent them and sell the land off for cheap, but it would be a headache and (worse for them) a PR nightmare.

 

[HSTEd]

As an aside, what's the contingency for a closure on hs2? Do they copy eurostar and not run at all or will they need a plan for kicking other services off the classic lines?

It is likely to be to accept the stoppage of the HS2 service and try to scramble any available additional resources for the classic lines.

 

[Smedley]

Regarding capacity benefits, one very valid point that has been made elsewhere is that by terminating HS2 in the West Midlands, capacity north of there may well be negatively impacted as non-tilting HS2 stock used on through services will likely be slower on curving sections of the WCML than most of the current (tilting) Avanti fleet

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The impact is only likely to be felt south of Stafford right?
What goes into those slots? Will they run faster trains than class 350 semi fasts up towards crewe?

South of Lichfield actually, there will be an awkward HS2/WCML junction at Handsacre, between Lichfield and Armitage.

HS2 trains will have the new "MU" speed profile being implemented for Avanti's 80x trains.
This is faster than the 110mph max of the 350s, but with less 125mph running than with Avanti's tilting 390s with EPS.

Nobody has ventured a timetable yet, but one notion I have seen is that there will be no additional trains north of Lichfield, with each HS2 path replacing a current 390 path.

 

[The Ham]

no the election will be October or later I'm afraid. May only possible if the opinion polls narrow dramatically

The issue with a post May election is that there would be a LOT of lost local election seats for the Tories which would only add bad news and so make it even more likely that the wider population would view them as a lost cause for being the winner of a general election.

Regarding capacity benefits, one very valid point that has been made elsewhere is that by terminating HS2 in the West Midlands, capacity north of there may well be negatively impacted as non-tilting HS2 stock used on through services will likely be slower on curving sections of the WCML than most of the current (tilting) Avanti fleet

Long term this may be a good thing, in that it's likely to highlight how playing politics with a rail scheme is a bad move. Especially if (which is probable) rail use catches up to the HS2 model for the justification for HS2.

 

[grinderx]

South of Lichfield actually, there will be an awkward HS2/WCML junction at Handsacre, between Lichfield and Armitage.

HS2 trains will have the new "MU" speed profile being implemented for Avanti's 80x trains.
This is faster than the 110mph max of the 350s, but with less 125mph running than with Avanti's tilting 390s with EPS.

Nobody has ventured a timetable yet, but one notion I have seen is that there will be no additional trains north of Lichfield, with each HS2 path replacing a current 390 path.

I wonder at what point the balance point shifts for passengers starting a northbound trip below say rugby end up finding it easier to go south first to London? The last thing I want to see is a disjointed operation like this. It's a pain in France, especially when trains become reservation only and heavily replace classic service options.

I was hoping for more Glasgow services to stop for passengers South of Warrington but that sounds unlikely given what was said about paths.

 

[The Ham]

I wonder at what point the balance point shifts for passengers starting a northbound trip below say rugby end up finding it easier to go south first to London? The last thing I want to see is a disjointed operation like this. It's a pain in France, especially when trains become reservation only and heavily replace classic service options.

I was hoping for more Glasgow services to stop for passengers South of Warrington but that sounds unlikely given what was said about paths.

There's probably not much of a shift in where people would find it easier to head south before heading north under the current approved setup (especially if that doesn't include Euston - as that would shift things more towards just heading north due to the lack of access from the WCML services to Old Oak Common).

 

[Roast Veg]

I wonder at what point the balance point shifts for passengers starting a northbound trip below say rugby end up finding it easier to go south first to London?

You mean like travellers for the Scottish Highlands heading from the north to London to pick up the sleeper?

It might look odd on a map, but if it's the quickest route then it's the quickest route.

 

[Kingston Dan]

Long term this may be a good thing, in that it's likely to highlight how playing politics with a rail scheme is a bad move. Especially if (which is probable) rail use catches up to the HS2 model for the justification for HS2.

Isn't HS2 modelled on something like 2010 passenger numbers? Latest figures are already in advance of that.