Services to Chester, Shrewsbury & North Wales post-HS2 Phase 1

[absolutelymilk]

Once HS2 Phase 1 opens, there should be a lot more capacity at Euston for services to Chester, Shrewsbury & North Wales. Are there enough Class 805s to take advantage of this, or will they continue to run the existing service but just with fewer delays? Furthermore, what do you think they should do with the extra capacity?

 

[The Planner]

Once HS2 Phase 1 opens, there should be a lot more capacity at Euston for services to Chester, Shrewsbury & North Wales. Are there enough Class 805s to take advantage of this, or will they continue to run the existing service but just with fewer delays? Furthermore, what do you think they should do with the extra capacity?

There won't be because HS2 dumps out at Handsacre. Shrewsbury extensions to the Birminghams haven't really took off either, and don't rely on HS2.

 

[absolutelymilk]

There won't be because HS2 dumps out at Handsacre. Shrewsbury extensions to the Birminghams haven't really took off either, and don't rely on HS2.

Not as much as Phase 2 would have done, but moving 3tph to Birmingham onto the high speed lines must free up some capacity! Plus even if they don't reduce the number of intercity trains to Manchester/Liverpool/Scotland from Euston, presumably they'll be less busy and so have fewer issues with overcrowding causing delays?

 

[The Planner]

Not as much as Phase 2 would have done, but moving 3tph to Birmingham onto the high speed lines must free up some capacity! Plus even if they don't reduce the number of intercity trains to Manchester/Liverpool/Scotland from Euston, presumably they'll be less busy and so have fewer issues with overcrowding causing delays?

But putting Birmingham trains on HS2 doesn't stop you running Euston to Shrewsbury now. The existing trains to the north will end up on HS2 but they don't allow extras to run through Colwich unless a Phase 2A etc solution is found, but we have done that one to death.

 

[Harpo]

Shrewsbury extensions to the Birminghams haven't really took off either

Shropshire folk wanting fast Londons, railhead at Stafford where journeys can be as little as 1hr 16 minutes, whereas Wolves is painfully slow, typically 1hr 51 to 2 hours plus.

In fact, Wolves to London is often quicker via Stafford, but not cheaper.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Plus Shrewsbury/Cambrian to London will be faster via Crewe (it already is at some times of day, but certainly after HS2 opens via Handsacre).
The extra WCML capacity is up for grabs, but I would expect more semi-fast regional trains and freight paths rather than increased long distance frequency.
Open access might have a part to play.

 

[absolutelymilk]

But putting Birmingham trains on HS2 doesn't stop you running Euston to Shrewsbury now. The existing trains to the north will end up on HS2 but they don't allow extras to run through Colwich unless a Phase 2A etc solution is found, but we have done that one to death.

Ah, I didn't realise that Colwich was such a constraint - I thought that WCML South was the most congested part.

In any case, the side benefit of HS2 for North Wales passengers might be that Euston station itself is less busy as intercity passengers go to OOC instead, particularly off-peak when the extra commuters from new LNWR services aren't there!

 

[Rhydgaled]

Given that travel to London from most places served by Avanti would be faster via HS2 (changing at Crewe for those destinations which won't have through HS2 services), I would focus the classic WCML more on traffic to and from Birmingham. For example, currently Liverpool-Birmingham has a semi-fast service at best. Meanwhile, Chester (and the north Wales coast) to/from Birmingham requires a change at Crewe or use of TfW's indirect service via Wrexham.

There should be fast Birmingham-Stafford-Crewe-Chester-North Wales services and faster Birmingham-Liverpool services. These could either be extensions of Euston-Birmingham Pendolino/80x services or possibly XC services? Either way, the main route for Chester-Birmingham through trains should be via Crewe and Stafford and Birmingham-Wrexham-Chester services should, in my view, either terminate in Chester or the bay platforms at Wrexham General (in the latter case, Wrexham-Chester would be supplemented by new services from Oswestry and/or Cardiff to make up the shortfall).

While I feel the current frequency of 3tph between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury is an acceptable minimum, I would change the stopping pattern. Ideally, I think it should be:

• WMR clockface BHM-SHR service every 30 mins calling at Smethwick Galton Bridge, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton then all stations to Shrewsbury and
• TfW hourly clockface fast service, also extending into Birmingham but calling only at Wolverhampton and Telford Central on route to Shrewsbury (ie. no more Smethwick/Sandwell and Wellington stops)

This assumes the TfW service would use new heirs of class 158s/442s/444s that are fit for 21st century (ie. equipped with pantographs). If however TfW remain wedded to the likes of class 197s well beyond 2035 I would give that hourly fast path to whoever runs the WCML InterCity service by that point and have the TfW services from the Cambrian and Wrexham terminate at Shrewsbury. Either way, that clears the way for electrification between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.

Might need HS2 to be extended to Crewe to allow some of this of course.

 

[A S Leib]

Could Chester and Wrexham be given an hourly Birmingham service, or are there too many other constraints (single track sections between Chester and Shrewsbury?) for that?

 

[The Planner]

Given that travel to London from most places served by Avanti would be faster via HS2 (changing at Crewe for those destinations which won't have through HS2 services), I would focus the classic WCML more on traffic to and from Birmingham. For example, currently Liverpool-Birmingham has a semi-fast service at best. Meanwhile, Chester (and the north Wales coast) to/from Birmingham requires a change at Crewe or use of TfW's indirect service via Wrexham.

There should be fast Birmingham-Stafford-Crewe-Chester-North Wales services and faster Birmingham-Liverpool services. These could either be extensions of Euston-Birmingham Pendolino/80x services or possibly XC services? Either way, the main route for Chester-Birmingham through trains should be via Crewe and Stafford and Birmingham-Wrexham-Chester services should, in my view, either terminate in Chester or the bay platforms at Wrexham General (in the latter case, Wrexham-Chester would be supplemented by new services from Oswestry and/or Cardiff to make up the shortfall).

While I feel the current frequency of 3tph between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury is an acceptable minimum, I would change the stopping pattern. Ideally, I think it should be:

• WMR clockface BHM-SHR service every 30 mins calling at Smethwick Galton Bridge, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton then all stations to Shrewsbury and
• TfW hourly clockface fast service, also extending into Birmingham but calling only at Wolverhampton and Telford Central on route to Shrewsbury (ie. no more Smethwick/Sandwell and Wellington stops)

This assumes the TfW service would use new heirs of class 158s/442s/444s that are fit for 21st century (ie. equipped with pantographs). If however TfW remain wedded to the likes of class 197s well beyond 2035 I would give that hourly fast path to whoever runs the WCML InterCity service by that point and have the TfW services from the Cambrian and Wrexham terminate at Shrewsbury. Either way, that clears the way for electrification between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.

Might need HS2 to be extended to Crewe to allow some of this of course.

Might? You will.

 

[Bevan Price]

Given that travel to London from most places served by Avanti would be faster via HS2 (changing at Crewe for those destinations which won't have through HS2 services), I would focus the classic WCML more on traffic to and from Birmingham. For example, currently Liverpool-Birmingham has a semi-fast service at best. Meanwhile, Chester (and the north Wales coast) to/from Birmingham requires a change at Crewe or use of TfW's indirect service via Wrexham.

There should be fast Birmingham-Stafford-Crewe-Chester-North Wales services and faster Birmingham-Liverpool services. These could either be extensions of Euston-Birmingham Pendolino/80x services or possibly XC services? Either way, the main route for Chester-Birmingham through trains should be via Crewe and Stafford and Birmingham-Wrexham-Chester services should, in my view, either terminate in Chester or the bay platforms at Wrexham General (in the latter case, Wrexham-Chester would be supplemented by new services from Oswestry and/or Cardiff to make up the shortfall).

While I feel the current frequency of 3tph between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury is an acceptable minimum, I would change the stopping pattern. Ideally, I think it should be:

• WMR clockface BHM-SHR service every 30 mins calling at Smethwick Galton Bridge, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton then all stations to Shrewsbury and
• TfW hourly clockface fast service, also extending into Birmingham but calling only at Wolverhampton and Telford Central on route to Shrewsbury (ie. no more Smethwick/Sandwell and Wellington stops)

This assumes the TfW service would use new heirs of class 158s/442s/444s that are fit for 21st century (ie. equipped with pantographs). If however TfW remain wedded to the likes of class 197s well beyond 2035 I would give that hourly fast path to whoever runs the WCML InterCity service by that point and have the TfW services from the Cambrian and Wrexham terminate at Shrewsbury. Either way, that clears the way for electrification between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.

Might need HS2 to be extended to Crewe to allow some of this of course.

One problem is that the Wales Senate (via TfW) is unlikely to agree that Birmingham - Chester - North Wales services cease going via Wrexham and reverting to going via Stafford & Crewe.

Also, will there be any through trains from HS2 to North Wales. There is no early prospect for electrification, and Class 805 is likely to be around until at least 2055 - so it would perhaps be more sensible for Euston - North Wales services to remain on WCML than to force people to rely on connections at Crewe.

Also, I am not sure if there is enough traffic to justify a fast Liverpool - Birmingham service that omits Wolverhampton...

 

[A S Leib]

Also, I am not sure if there is enough traffic to justify a fast Liverpool - Birmingham service that omits Wolverhampton...

Birmingham New Street to Stafford's 423 passengers per day (with 2 tph to Manchester and 1 tph via Preston), Crewe's 110 (also with 1 tph via Preston) and Liverpool Lime Street's 184.

 

[Meerkat]

Either way, the main route for Chester-Birmingham through trains should be via Crewe and Stafford and Birmingham-Wrexham-Chester services should, in my view, either terminate in Chester or the bay platforms at Wrexham General (in the latter case, Wrexham-Chester would be supplemented by new services from Oswestry and/or Cardiff to make up the shortfall).

That disconnects north wales from Wrexham - Welsh government won’t like that!

IIRC Aberystwyth-Birmingham Int is 2 hourly, but Aberystwyth-Shrewsbury is planned to eventually be hourly. Sending the second one onward to Crewe would give Aber/Shrewsbury a faster connection to London.

Sort out Wrexham-Chester so that Chester terminators from Euston and Crewe go to Wrexham.

 

[Harpo]

One problem is that the Wales Senate (via TfW) is unlikely to agree that Birmingham - Chester - North Wales services cease going via Wrexham and reverting to going via Stafford & Crewe.

The Senate doesn’t want anyone to realise that West Mids to North Wales is fastest via Crewe.

The travelling public is left with the appalling Crewe to Chester shuttle as a consequence of that dogma.

 

[krus_aragon]

Sort out Wrexham-Chester so that Chester terminators from Euston and Crewe go to Wrexham.

Pricey: the limiting factor on infrastructure is single-track bridges over the dual-carriageway A483.

 

[Rhydgaled]

One problem is that the Wales Senate (via TfW) is unlikely to agree that Birmingham - Chester - North Wales services cease going via Wrexham and reverting to going via Stafford & Crewe.

Why? North Wales would still have through trains to Birmingham. Wrexham would too, provided that TfW does get 'heirs of class 158s/442s/444s' beyond 2030ish instead of staying with 197s or similar.

That disconnects north wales from Wrexham - Welsh government won’t like that!

Ah. However, my suggestion only impacts the Birmingham services; services to/from Cardiff could still reverse at Chester to go onto North Wales. That said, my preference would be for most of those to terminate at Chester as well (largely seperating the North Wales coast line from the Marches line operationally to make it eaiser to make a case for electrification of one or the other). In any event I would try and provide three daily fast services (breakfast, lunch and dinner trains) in each direction between Holyhead and Cardiff via Wrexham. Would the Welsh Government really not like that?

Also, will there be any through trains from HS2 to North Wales. There is no early prospect for electrification, and Class 805 is likely to be around until at least 2055 - so it would perhaps be more sensible for Euston - North Wales services to remain on WCML than to force people to rely on connections at Crewe.

I'm assuming there won't be HS2 services in North Wales. Therefore, even if you retained the classic WCML services to Chester and North Wales as they are now (ie. via the 'Trent Valley' rather than via Birmingham), the fastest way to get between Chester/Bangor/Holyhead and London would be to change on/off HS2 services at Crewe. My suggestion therefore is that North Wales and Chester would have their through WCML trains to/from London diverted via Birmingham. They would therefore have the option of a a slower through train to London or a faster (HS2) journey with a change at Crewe.

Also, I am not sure if there is enough traffic to justify a fast Liverpool - Birmingham service that omits Wolverhampton...

I'm not suggesting omitting Wolverhampton (at least, not for services on the classic network - obviously if there are HS2 services between Liverpool and Birmingham* they wouldn't be running through Wovlerhampton - but I guess that would need HS2 to Crewe at least to be viable). My suggestion for Liverpool-Birmingham on the classic network would be a fast service calling at Wolverhampton, Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn only (either using something like an OHLE-powered 442 or running through from Birmingham to somewhere like Bristol (XC), Paignton (XC) or Euston (ICWC) with Voyagers/80x/Pendolinos etc.).

* elsewhere I have argued that Birmingham Curzon Street should be in a cutting (like Old Oak Common) rather than on a viaduct. This would be to allow a future extension of HS2 southwards towards Bristol. HS2 services would therefore be able to serve routes like Penzance-Bristol-Birmingham-Crewe-Liverpool, replacing some XC services, but obviously anything like that's a long way away yet.

IIRC Aberystwyth-Birmingham Int is 2 hourly, but Aberystwyth-Shrewsbury is planned to eventually be hourly.

Not at the moment; the timetable review that resulted in the December 2024 timetable included cancelation of the full year-round hourly service to Aberystwyth. Personally, if there was a plan to introduce suitable rolling stock, I think it should be hourly Birmingham** to Aberystwyth. These to be formed using a pair of units with one detaching/attaching at Shrewsbury (for Wrexham) every two hours and Machynlleth (for Pwllheli) in the others. However, if intend to retain the class 197s through to 2050 and beyond, and eventually replace 197s with something basically the same as a 197, then I would terminate ALL Cambrian services in Shrewsbury and eliminate TfW's through running to/from Birmignham altogether.

** don't care if that is New Street or International - just do whatever works for reliability which at present is International but that may change with upgrades to the Wolverhampton-Shrewsbury line.

Sort out Wrexham-Chester so that Chester terminators from Euston and Crewe go to Wrexham.

Pricey: the limiting factor on infrastructure is single-track bridges over the dual-carriageway A483.

Years ago, when the (partial) redoubling project between Wrexham and Chester was being discussed, I thought it emerged that only one of the two bridges concerned goes over the A483, with the other going under the A483? While that may seem like a pedantic point, it means we are talking about two very different bridges and I think one of them may actually was said of have room for double track?

 

[The Planner]

* elsewhere I have argued that Birmingham Curzon Street should be in a cutting (like Old Oak Common) rather than on a viaduct. This would be to allow a future extension of HS2 southwards towards Bristol. HS2 services would therefore be able to serve routes like Penzance-Bristol-Birmingham-Crewe-Liverpool, replacing some XC services, but obviously anything like that's a long way away yet.

That would be one hell of a cutting to get under New St.

 

[Rhydgaled]

That would be one hell of a cutting to get under New St.

Building Birmingham Curzon Street (HS2) to allow for a future extension towards Bristol wouldn't have been that much harder than Old Oak Common (HS2) or Stratford International (HS1) surely? Since no trains would run non-stop through Curzon Street, the linespeeds wouldn't need to be high so the line could curve fairly tightly immedately after the end of the platform at Curzon Street and thus avoid going directly under BHM (New Street station). Would need a rather long tunnel to get out of the city without demolishing lots of properties, but such a tunnel would not be unprecedented compared to what has been done / is planned in London.

 

[The Planner]

Building Birmingham Curzon Street (HS2) to allow for a future extension towards Bristol wouldn't have been that much harder than Old Oak Common (HS2) or Stratford International (HS1) surely? Since no trains would run non-stop through Curzon Street, the linespeeds wouldn't need to be high so the line could curve fairly tightly immedately after the end of the platform at Curzon Street and thus avoid going directly under BHM (New Street station). Would need a rather long tunnel to get out of the city without demolishing lots of properties, but such a tunnel would not be unprecedented compared to what has been done / is planned in London.

Have a look at Googlemaps and see how sharp a bend that is. It would still need to be deep as the approach into New St tunnels is on a steep slope.

 

[krus_aragon]

Years ago, when the (partial) redoubling project between Wrexham and Chester was being discussed, I thought it emerged that only one of the two bridges concerned goes over the A483, with the other going under the A483? While that may seem like a pedantic point, it means we are talking about two very different bridges and I think one of them may actually was said of have room for double track?

I think you're right in that.

 

[Bevan Price]

Why? North Wales would still have through trains to Birmingham. Wrexham would too, provided that TfW does get 'heirs of class 158s/442s/444s' beyond 2030ish instead of staying with 197s or similar.


Ah. However, my suggestion only impacts the Birmingham services; services to/from Cardiff could still reverse at Chester to go onto North Wales. That said, my preference would be for most of those to terminate at Chester as well (largely seperating the North Wales coast line from the Marches line operationally to make it eaiser to make a case for electrification of one or the other). In any event I would try and provide three daily fast services (breakfast, lunch and dinner trains) in each direction between Holyhead and Cardiff via Wrexham. Would the Welsh Government really not like that?


I'm assuming there won't be HS2 services in North Wales. Therefore, even if you retained the classic WCML services to Chester and North Wales as they are now (ie. via the 'Trent Valley' rather than via Birmingham), the fastest way to get between Chester/Bangor/Holyhead and London would be to change on/off HS2 services at Crewe. My suggestion therefore is that North Wales and Chester would have their through WCML trains to/from London diverted via Birmingham. They would therefore have the option of a a slower through train to London or a faster (HS2) journey with a change at Crewe.

People mostly do not like changing trains, even if a through trains is slower. Diverting North Wales - Euston services would add up to an hour to the journey time. Plus widespread experience in recent years is that "connections" cannot be trusted. The main beneficiary of such a change would be the motor car industry.

 

[Snow1964]

Building Birmingham Curzon Street (HS2) to allow for a future extension towards Bristol wouldn't have been that much harder than Old Oak Common (HS2) or Stratford International (HS1) surely? Since no trains would run non-stop through Curzon Street, the linespeeds wouldn't need to be high so the line could curve fairly tightly immedately after the end of the platform at Curzon Street and thus avoid going directly under BHM (New Street station). Would need a rather long tunnel to get out of the city without demolishing lots of properties, but such a tunnel would not be unprecedented compared to what has been done / is planned in London.

With the section from Delta junction to Birmingham interchange being multi-track (so trains to/from North and Curzon Street can run in parallel, it would have made more sense to have added a short branch spur provision just south of the platform loops which could become a new South Western branch.

It is another piece of the shortsighted approach that only ever had a Y shape and not provision for X shape with branch towards South West and South Wales. A line (roughly following M42) to near Worcestershire parkway was all that's needed (although an extension to where Bristol and South Wales routes split near Gloucester would be better still).

But ultimately multiple policy changes mean now getting a section from Old Oak to Birmingham with excess capacity that doesn't link well to continuation services to any other part of UK.

 

[The Planner]

With the section from Delta junction to Birmingham interchange being multi-track (so trains to/from North and Curzon Street can run in parallel, it would have made more sense to have added a short branch spur provision just south of the platform loops which could become a new South Western branch.

It is another piece of the shortsighted approach that only ever had a Y shape and not provision for X shape with branch towards South West and South Wales. A line (roughly following M42) to near Worcestershire parkway was all that's needed (although an extension to where Bristol and South Wales routes split near Gloucester would be better still).

But ultimately multiple policy changes mean now getting a section from Old Oak to Birmingham with excess capacity that doesn't link well to continuation services to any other part of UK.

The original plans had a junction at Washwood Heath where the lines are pretty much level, you didn't need a massive new build.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Years ago, when the (partial) redoubling project between Wrexham and Chester was being discussed, I thought it emerged that only one of the two bridges concerned goes over the A483, with the other going under the A483? While that may seem like a pedantic point, it means we are talking about two very different bridges and I think one of them may actually was said of have room for double track?

The A483 overbridge near Balderton was double-tracked in the upgrade a decade ago - they left enough room.
The narrow rail bridge at the top of Gresford bank over the A483 is still there, with the Rossett-Wrexham single track on it.
Plus assorted incomplete sections of 60/90mph track on that section.

 

[The Ham]

The Senate doesn’t want anyone to realise

...HS2 could actually improve rail services within Wales.

(That's maybe a little unfair, however there's quite a strong narrative that Wales should get more money due to HS2 not benefitting Wales - although in truth I suspect it's those opposed to HS2 actually just trying to divide the population against it, see also the narrative about Scotland not benefitting from HS2)

 

[Meerkat]

...HS2 could actually improve rail services within Wales.

(That's maybe a little unfair, however there's quite a strong narrative that Wales should get more money due to HS2 not benefitting Wales - although in truth I suspect it's those opposed to HS2 actually just trying to divide the population against it, see also the narrative about Scotland not benefitting from HS2)

Or the senate forgot that Welsh railways aren’t just the south coast!

 

[Rhydgaled]

People mostly do not like changing trains, even if a through trains is slower. Diverting North Wales - Euston services would add up to an hour to the journey time. Plus widespread experience in recent years is that "connections" cannot be trusted. The main beneficiary of such a change would be the motor car industry.

What are you suggesting then? Cancel HS2 altogether, or limit the top speed to 125/140mph (or sacrifice capacity by mixing train types) so that class 805s from Chester and North Wales can run through to Euston on HS2? Because I can't see the North Wales Coast Line getting electrified until quite a bit after HS2 exists between Euston and Crewe. Therefore, there will be at least a few years when HS2 will be running but services from Chester and North Wales will still be relying on diesel. During that time, it will be faster for passengers on that route to change onto HS2 at Crewe. Given that HS2 will then be catering for the time-sensitive market, I am suggesting slowing down the classic WCML InterCity services while still providing a through service (albeit slower than currently) to Euston for those who don't like changing trains. Another example of this logic is that, once HS2 is up and running between Euston and Crewe (assuming it does eventually get there), I would try to make all classic WCML services passing through Milton Keynes Central, Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham International, Stafford and Crewe call at those stations, including InterCity services (ie. Pendo, Voyager and 80x). Half of them would also call at Watford Junction and Tamworth, with the other half serving Nuneaton instead.

In other words, I cannot see HS2 being delivered without making through journeys (ie. without the need to change trains) between destination pairs not served by HS2 slower than they are now. The question is, do you:

1. keep the same pattern of classic WCML InterCity through services as now, with only minor slowdowns, by just adding a few stops on the existing routes or,
2. provide new and faster through journey opportunities on routes currently poorly served (such as Chester/N.Wales to Birmingham) at the expense of slowing down through journeys to/from London on some classic WCML trips much-more significantly (eg. adding 1 hour to Chester to Euston through journeys by re-routing through Birmingham)?

Which option would the motor car industry benefit more from?

With the section from Delta junction to Birmingham interchange being multi-track (so trains to/from North and Curzon Street can run in parallel, it would have made more sense to have added a short branch spur provision just south of the platform loops which could become a new South Western branch.

Platform loops where? Birmingham Interchange? If so, that wouldn't really address the issue since Curzon Street would still be on a lonely spur and you couldn't just shift XC's NE-SW corridor services onto HSR because the central Birmingham call would be lost.

It is another piece of the shortsighted approach that only ever had a Y shape and not provision for X shape with branch towards South West and South Wales. A line (roughly following M42) to near Worcestershire parkway was all that's needed (although an extension to where Bristol and South Wales routes split near Gloucester would be better still).

Electrification to Bristol also needed. One idea I've had is that the existing line between Worcestershire Parkway and the junction south of Bromsgrove (where it joins the line from Droitwich Spa) be upgraded for higher speeds, larger loading guage (and possibly more tracks, depending on if freight can-be/is routed via Worcester Shrub Hill instead) and electric operation, to become part of the new HSR branch towards Bristol and South Wales. Using the existing route like this would reduce the amount of land purchase required compared to building a third route between Bromsgrove and Worcestershire Parkway). As you say, I don't see a need for the SW arm of the HighSpeed X-shaped network to go any further south than Worcestershire Parkway at first, just join onto the classic line there (and electrify it of course).

The original plans had a junction at Washwood Heath where the lines are pretty much level, you didn't need a massive new build.

A junction with what? I'm guessing you mean a junction between HS2 and the classic WCML into New Street, in which case that would have been fairly useful had HS2 phase 2 gone ahead (since you could have XC services north of Birmingham use HS2 instead of the classic lines, but they would still need to serve New Street rather than Curzon Street so the benefit of releasing capacity at the former would not be realised compared to a through version of Curzon Street without shortsighted buffer-stops).

The A483 overbridge near Balderton was double-tracked in the upgrade a decade ago - they left enough room.
The narrow rail bridge at the top of Gresford bank over the A483 is still there, with the Rossett-Wrexham single track on it.
Plus assorted incomplete sections of 60/90mph track on that section.

There's also an A483 overbridge at the south end of the single track section, just north of the junction where the Bidston line diverges from the Wrexham-Chester route. Hopefully they left enough room under that one as well as the one near Balderton, which would leave the narrow rail bridge (rail-over-road) as the only constraint to completing the double-tracking of Wrexham-Chester.

 

[Nottingham59]

The original plans had a junction at Washwood Heath where the lines are pretty much level, you didn't need a massive new build.

Would it be feasible to re-introduce that link? Or has the option been lost when the plans were de-scoped?

 

[The Planner]

A junction with what? I'm guessing you mean a junction between HS2 and the classic WCML into New Street, in which case that would have been fairly useful had HS2 phase 2 gone ahead (since you could have XC services north of Birmingham use HS2 instead of the classic lines, but they would still need to serve New Street rather than Curzon Street so the benefit of releasing capacity at the former would not be realised compared to a through version of Curzon Street without shortsighted buffer-stops).

Well yes, it wasn't going to be a junction with anything else.

Would it be feasible to re-introduce that link? Or has the option been lost when the plans were de-scoped?

No, I don't think it was ever a serious proposal that was thought through and was discarded very early on.

 

[Palmerston]

Would there be merit in diverting some WCML 'stopping' services via Coventry and Nuneaton? Helps avoid reducing Coventry services, if most Birmingham ones are just on HS2. That line would need to be electrified, but that's not a bad thing.