'Higher Speed' Lines by bypassing slow sections with new track

[zwk500]

I think XC suffers from closure of the Midland line where it now snakes around (using slow flat junctions) between Yate and Bristol via Bristol Parkway (a relatively pointless stop as most services East-West from there can be reached by XC trains at Reading or Newport / Cardiff), the Parkway routing adds quite a few minutes over old route via Mangotsfield, so would be good to see it reopened as a cut off

Parkway is a busy interchange, I would not avoid it. However you could certainly do with realigning Westerleigh Junction, possibly Grade-separating it, but certainly straightening it out. Yate Jn would also need to be reconfigured so that the freight connection came off on the down side rather than the up as current. Moving the junction back towards Parkway would also make a 3rd line between Parkway and the junction more viable, which could potentially help with giving regulating opportunities for freight, or to allow trains to London and Gloucester direction to depart simultaneously.
It would be extremely nice if a single-track east-facing curve could be snuck in as well, to avoid freight having to route via Bath and Dr Day's Jn but that's off-topic.

 

[Cricketer8for9]

I wouldn't have thought rock would be a particular issue. Later this year I will be traveling through the Furka Base Tunnel which was built to bypass a treacherous mountain route that had to be closed for part of the year because of inclement weather (which is now a heritage line in summer!). If the Swiss can do it I can't see why we couldn't given enough money.

Significantly late and over budget in late 1970s Switzerland.

 

[Helvellyn]

The tunnel boring machines we have today make the ones that were available when the M6 was built look like toys though!
A base tunnel would not be cheap, but then doing anything at all on the existing railway is not cheap either, and the very real journey time and capacity benefits will be worth quite a lot.
I'm not sure there is a cheap way to cut 10+ minutes off the Scotland-England journey time at the end of the day!

Plus as I said, escaping having to maintain a railway in such an exposed location.

I wouldn't have thought rock would be a particular issue. Later this year I will be traveling through the Furka Base Tunnel which was built to bypass a treacherous mountain route that had to be closed for part of the year because of inclement weather (which is now a heritage line in summer!). If the Swiss can do it I can't see why we couldn't given enough money.

The point is if we don't have the money to build HS2 in the Midlands (unlocking capacity for multiple trains per hour to various destinations) what's the incentive to build a tunnel under the Eastern Fells for at maximum three trains per hour each way (two Avanti; one TransPennine)?

 

[Bald Rick]

It looks pretty dead from here.

That deoends from where you are looking from.

The point is that there are a large variety of ways to deal with congestion at Colwich and Shugborough.

Not that many.
And every study done in the last quarter of a century reached the same conclusion…
Perhaps they can’t all be wrong?

 

[eldomtom2]

That deoends from where you are looking from.

If you are legally restricted from talking about something, it is usually better to keep quiet than to make oblique hints.

Not that many.
And every study done in the last quarter of a century reached the same conclusion…
Perhaps they can’t all be wrong?

Can you give the names of these studies, and perhaps elaborate on how they agreed? It seems implausible that a large number of studies could come up with identical conclusions independently.

 

[Energy]

The absolute insanity of cancelling phase 2a is that they have already designed it, and got it through parliament, bought the land and I believe even started moving utilities. They must have spent at least 25% of the budget already, there won't be a cheaper solution

Indeed, the bit that should have been cut is Handsacre junction, which would only stop HS2 trains to Macclesfield long term.

2a isn't canceled, it's just delayed indefinitely. Until the act is repealed in parliament or the timelines sufficiently elapse it can be (fairly) easily restarted.

Can you give the names of these studies, and perhaps elaborate on how they agreed? It seems implausible that a large number of studies could come up with identical conclusions independently.

Why would it be implausible? It's either remodeling or a new line.

If its possible to build a new line without tunneling (2a) then it shouldn't be surprising that separate people choose similar routes.

 

[Bald Rick]

If you are legally restricted from talking about something, it is usually better to keep quiet than to make oblique hints.

Oh I’m not legally restricted. I just have a different viewpoint.

 

[eldomtom2]

2a isn't canceled, it's just delayed indefinitely. Until the act is repealed in parliament or the timelines sufficiently elapse it can be (fairly) easily restarted.

Political will seems to be lacking on that front however...

Why would it be implausible? It's either remodeling or a new line.

If its possible to build a new line without tunneling (2a) then it shouldn't be surprising that separate people choose similar routes.

Similar routes can still diverge on a whole host of relevant matters.

Oh I’m not legally restricted. I just have a different viewpoint.

Would you care to elaborate?

 

[zwk500]

Similar routes can still diverge on a whole host of relevant matters.

Please do tell us what all those previous studies have missed.

 

[Bald Rick]

Political will seems to be lacking on that front however...

politics changes quickly, as we have seen on this subject (and will see again).

Would you care to elaborate?

Yes. I have a different perspective than you. Free country and all that.

 

[BrianW]

Please do tell us what all those previous studies have missed.

Agreed. I guess for some it's a case of commissioning as many 'new' reports until one comes up with the 'desired' answer. Any study is open to manipulation by choice and justification of different criteria, cost 'estimates', usage, standpoint (perspective) etc, etc.

 

[eldomtom2]

Please do tell us what all those previous studies have missed.

I'm not saying they missed anything. I'm saying that they're presumably not all identical.

politics changes quickly, as we have seen on this subject (and will see again).

I've yet to see any evidence that Labour will sign off on Phase 2a exactly as it was when they get back into power.

Yes. I have a different perspective than you. Free country and all that.

Generally, if one is stating a viewpoint, it is common sense to provide evidence backing up the viewpoint. You have stated there are no legal barriers here.

 

[Bald Rick]

Generally, if one is stating a viewpoint, it is common sense to provide evidence backing up the viewpoint. You have stated there are no legal barriers here.

1) all the prelim work for Ph2a is done (consents. design. land purchase. ie all the difficult bits.) It took around 6-7 years, and several hundred million pounds to do this, as thatis how long such activities take. None of this is done for any other solution that doesn’t involve using all of part of 2a.
2) Politicians from different parties are actively investigating how to improve connections between the west midlands and Manchester.
3) there is a general election in the next 10 months, and politicians have oroven themselves to change policy very quickly in many areas including this one.

As you are so fond of evidence, what evidence do you have to the contrary?

 

[eldomtom2]

1) all the prelim work for Ph2a is done (consents. design. land purchase. ie all the difficult bits.) It took around 6-7 years, and several hundred million pounds to do this, as thatis how long such activities take. None of this is done for any other solution that doesn’t involve using all or part of 2a.

The bolded part is the key point in my opinion - of course any project aiming to do the same thing as Phase 2a will reuse as much as possible from the work done on it. That does not mean it will be identical to Phase 2a.

As you are so fond of evidence, what evidence do you have to the contrary?

Rail will not be a high priority for any government. Being seen as fiscally responsible will be. Reinstating Phase 2 after it was cancelled due to high costs will open the government up to easy attacks.

 

[JKF]

Parkway is a busy interchange, I would not avoid it. However you could certainly do with realigning Westerleigh Junction, possibly Grade-separating it, but certainly straightening it out. Yate Jn would also need to be reconfigured so that the freight connection came off on the down side rather than the up as current. Moving the junction back towards Parkway would also make a 3rd line between Parkway and the junction more viable, which could potentially help with giving regulating opportunities for freight, or to allow trains to London and Gloucester direction to depart simultaneously.
It would be extremely nice if a single-track east-facing curve could be snuck in as well, to avoid freight having to route via Bath and Dr Day's Jn but that's off-topic.

Could the Midland line be used as part of the realignment? It heads south from Yate in a better direction than the current mainline, a chance to create something which would allow for higher speeds.

Is the formation of the east-facing curve intact? I can’t tell if there is a road built on it, or just running parallel. If parallel it doesn’t look like there has been any encroachment. When was it taken out of use? I suspect it’s not really worth the expenditure as there isn’t that much going that way, and not sure how long Tytherington will remain in operation considering it’s been mothballed before.

 

[edwin_m]

Could the Midland line be used as part of the realignment? It heads south from Yate in a better direction than the current mainline, a chance to create something which would allow for higher speeds.

The Midland line is still extant as far as the oil terminal, including a bridge under the M4. However, I don't believe there is any conceivable route into Bristol unless it was to tunnel most of the way from here. The former alignment is a well-used cycle track and I think the locals would be marching with pitchforks (or maybe bike forks) if that was threatened. It's also encroached on in several places. Surfacing near Temple Meads would also be difficult.

 

[zwk500]

Could the Midland line be used as part of the realignment? It heads south from Yate in a better direction than the current mainline, a chance to create something which would allow for higher speeds.

Not in any meaningful way while still calling at Parkway. You can get a 1-1.5km radius curve in between the existing Yate Jn and Parkway by skirting (or cutting through) the edge of the solar farm, which would give you a 75mph linespeed or so.

Is the formation of the east-facing curve intact? I can’t tell if there is a road built on it, or just running parallel. If parallel it doesn’t look like there has been any encroachment. When was it taken out of use? I suspect it’s not really worth the expenditure as there isn’t that much going that way, and not sure how long Tytherington will remain in operation considering it’s been mothballed before.

There's a clubhouse of some sort inside the former triangle, the access for which would require a level crossing - not impossible, but if you moved the main line then a low-speed freight chord might be able to wriggle around the back of it and avoid the problem altogether. 4 paths of 13 booked ran today, 2 of them would have been able to make use of a Swindon-facing chord: https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/se...24-03-04/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt. Not masses, but given the pressure relief on Dr Day's Jn, potentially valuable.

 

[JKF]

The Midland line is still extant as far as the oil terminal, including a bridge under the M4. However, I don't believe there is any conceivable route into Bristol unless it was to tunnel most of the way from here. The former alignment is a well-used cycle track and I think the locals would be marching with pitchforks (or maybe bike forks) if that was threatened. It's also encroached on in several places. Surfacing near Temple Meads would also be difficult.

I only meant for use as a realignment of Westerleigh Jn, so using the northern end of the part that is still there, then curving west towards Parkway. The current mainline from Yate curves slightly towards the east before the Junction.

 

[cle]

Is there a world where we move from the traditional French HS to the German approach (hybrid / higher speed but mixed sections and bypasses) - where else would even be viable to upgrade?

I would say Carlisle to Carstairs (with freight interventions) as higher speed, maybe Didcot-Bristol and sections of Stevenage-York. B&H line if anything really used it. Not tons more.

Bypasses - Morpeth is obvious. Probably some in the Pennines. I don't see tons of indirect railways though, just capacity, signalling and curve issues due to topography which would never be viable to invest against.

 

[Bald Rick]

The bolded part is the key point in my opinion - of course any project aiming to do the same thing as Phase 2a will reuse as much as possible from the work done on it.

Excellent, then we agree it isn‘t dead.

 

[eldomtom2]

Excellent, then we agree it isn‘t dead.

Depends on your definition of "dead". I don't think whatever gets built will be identical, though it will reuse work, and so in that sense I see it as dead.

 

[Bald Rick]

Depends on your definition of "dead". I don't think whatever gets built will be identical, though it will reuse work, and so in that sense I see it as dead.

each to their own.

 

[Meerkat]

I'm not sure if any real mechanism exists to compel electric traction on freight operators, or double heading.

Then create a mechanism!

Leamside line summary so far. Great idea to reopen it, but no-one so far has any idea how to use it. I doubt it would ever be a better fast route to Newcastle overall, simply because of the Victoria Viaduct. The Team Valley route was after all built to speed the route to Newcastle up. I doubt Virgin (as mentioned up thread) had the first idea of how to use it either.

My idea is to use it to take freight off the main route, with a chord toward Tyne Dock, and an intermodal terminal near the A184/A194 junction, and a siding into Nissan. Maybe a local/Metro service too, looping back to the Team Valley.

However you could certainly do with realigning Westerleigh Junction, possibly Grade-separating it, but certainly straightening it out. Yate Jn would also need to be reconfigured so that the freight connection came off on the down side rather than the up as current. Moving the junction back towards Parkway would also make a 3rd line between Parkway and the junction more viable,

My crayons/need for neatness always fancy replacing Westerleigh with a new line that arrives at Parkway on the south side, segregating flows a bit. But then I look at the terrain, and even the crayons get nervous.

In relative terms how big a project is putting in crawler uphill 3rd lines either side of Shap? A superficial look suggests from Tebay north it’s not that mental an idea.

I always fancy quadrupling north out of Newcastle as far as practicable then pushing a new high speed diversion through to north of Pegswood, or even Widdrington, to speed up the intercity services and make room for a meaningful local service.

 

[HSTEd]

Then create a mechanism!

The entire system is designed to prevent that kind of coercion!

You'd have to tear down the entire industry to force the freight operators to obey, and although I am not opposed to such an action it would cost a lot of political capital.

 

[Bald Rick]

You'd have to tear down the entire industry to force the freight operators to obey

No, you wouldn‘t. One thing FOCs are very good at is negotiating. But all it needs is some end dated access right, a declaration of congested infrastrcuture, and a cheque book.

 

[Nottingham59]

No, you wouldn‘t. One thing FOCs are very good at is negotiating. But all it needs is some end dated access right, a declaration of congested infrastrcuture, and a cheque book.

And imposition of a congestion supplement to track access charges at the busiest times of day.

 

[miklcct]

Is it possible to build a bypass from Woolston direct to a new part of Southampton Central, separate from the South Western Main Line, in order to add capacity into the region? If such a line can be built, the West Coastway can be fully segregated from main line services, with Bitterne station closed and served by local buses instead.

If there is no space at Southampton Central, can the line be extended into new station at Southampton, and a tramway built to connect the old and new stations? The population of Southampton deserves a tramway in the city.

 

[Meerkat]

No, you wouldn‘t. One thing FOCs are very good at is negotiating. But all it needs is some end dated access right, a declaration of congested infrastrcuture, and a cheque book.

Or subsidise traction electricity for freight, operator agnostic.

 

[zwk500]

Is it possible to build a bypass from Woolston direct to a new part of Southampton Central, separate from the South Western Main Line, in order to add capacity into the region? If such a line can be built, the West Coastway can be fully segregated from main line services, with Bitterne station closed and served by local buses instead.

No, and a fairly swift glance at google maps would show you why. The Itchen has plenty of masted vessels mooring upstream of a potential crossing point, and the waterfront is fully built up with roads on the level. There's no room to lift the railway over the roads, let alone the river. Also once you get to the Western bank, you need to cross the docks line at 90 degrees, and then there's zero space for a new station and no route to meet the SWML west of So'ton Central.

If there is no space at Southampton Central, can the line be extended into new station at Southampton, and a tramway built to connect the old and new stations? The population of Southampton deserves a tramway in the city.

If you wanted a tram, you'd keep it separate from the West Coastway. A tramway crossing the Itchen isn't completely mad - you could serve a very nice park and ride by the M27, as well as serving areas missed by the mainline trains, and there are several corridors west of Southampton to get a nice network of 2/3 branches on either side combining for a core turn-up-and-go frequency in Southampton Centre. But keep it apart from the trains, tram-trains just increase costs.

 

[Bald Rick]

Or subsidise traction electricity for freight, operator agnostic.

Hence thelast two words in my post you quoted!