The next UK HSR (High Speed Rail) project?

[MattRat]

Just out of curiosity, what do people think will be the next high speed rail project in the UK after HS2 and 'High Speed North', if at all, and explain your reasoning.

For example, I think a high speed line will be built mirroring the ECML, in the same way HS2 mostly mirrors fhe WCML, as the current upgrades to the ECML are reminiscent of the last ones to the WCML before HS2 was proposed, and HS2 was built becuase the capacity boost of that upgrade ran out of space, so more space was needed, and I can see a repeat of that with the ECML.

But what are your own thoughts?

 

[A0]

Just out of curiosity, what do people think will be the next high speed rail project in the UK after HS2 and 'High Speed North', if at all, and explain your reasoning.

For example, I think a high speed line will be built mirroring the ECML, in the same way HS2 mostly mirrors fhe WCML, as the current upgrades to the ECML are reminiscent of the last ones to the WCML before HS2 was proposed, and HS2 was built becuase the capacity boost of that upgrade ran out of space, so more space was needed, and I can see a repeat of that with the ECML.

But what are your own thoughts?

Won't be ECML - HS2 will provide sufficient capacity to the Midlands & North for at least the next 50-100 years.

Possibly something from South Coast e.g. Southampton to Midlands to free up capacity on legacy network for freight from So'ton Docks.

 

[DanNCL]

I reckon it'll be something small. Quite possibly a Durham bypass line for the ECML, built to High Speed standards like the Selby diversion was. The current route between Tursdale Junction and Chester-le-Street is mostly 90mph, with one section of 75mph, and the routeing of all long distance trains via Durham also prevents any meaningful local service from running to serve Durham or Chester-le-Street.

For example, I think a high speed line will be built mirroring the ECML, in the same way HS2 mostly mirrors fhe WCML, as the current upgrades to the ECML are reminiscent of the last ones to the WCML before HS2 was proposed, and HS2 was built becuase the capacity boost of that upgrade ran out of space, so more space was needed, and I can see a repeat of that with the ECML.

No chance of that happening for the entire length of the ECML. A large section of the ECML is already suitable for 140mph as soon as ETCS is fitted. If it happens anywhere it'll be to bypass current "trouble" spots, such as Welwyn, Durham and possibly Morpeth.

Won't be ECML - HS2 will provide sufficient capacity to the Midlands & North for at least the next 50-100 years.

HS2 now that it's been cut back to East Midlands Parkway will only relieve the WCML and MML. If anything the ECML will be more stretched than it already is, as it'll effectively be functioning as an eastern equivalent of HS2 whilst still having to cater for freight and (south of Grantham and north of York) local services.

 

[HSTEd]

About 40km more high speed line would be enough to allow via HS2 journeys to beat the ECML to all locations reached via York.

Not much load demand there.

If there is another large high speed project I would put my money on a Brighton Line relief, that would be fast enough to then run along the coast and relieve all of the lines running south and south west from London.

 

[Nymanic]

I could have seen merit in an ECML slew branching off south of Northallerton, and serving Middlesbrough (for Teesside at large) and Sunderland. How you'd thread it through the latter and onwards to Newcastle, without the blank cheque of plunging the whole thing underground, would be one of very many challenges.

As others have alluded, HS2's capacity argument wouldn't really apply. You'd need a very drastic journey time reduction (30 mins York to Newcastle without stops??), and a government obsessively serious about "levelling-up" (and not just the empty rhetoric of it) to ever get it off the ground - and post-Covid, that probably wouldn't be good enough. You'd also expect integration with a 'full' HS2 and NPR network to maximise benefit - so much for that!

It'd be particularly transformative for Teesside, given its reputed deprivation and relatively poor connectivity with the wider network. Nevertheless, the same was said about Bradford...

So not a snowball's chance in hell, I'm assuming.

 

[JonathanH]

If there is another large high speed project I would put my money on a Brighton Line relief, that would be fast enough to then run along the coast and relieve all of the lines running south and south west from London.

All in a tunnel perhaps? To relieve the lines to the South West, you would probably have to have a delta Junction somewhere near Guildford and run to Southampton, Bournemouth and then west. The population isn't as well concentrated as it is in the HS2 west corridor.

 

[MattRat]

I reckon it'll be something small. Quite possibly a Durham bypass line for the ECML, built to High Speed standards like the Selby diversion was. The current route between Tursdale Junction and Chester-le-Street is mostly 90mph, with one section of 75mph, and the routeing of all long distance trains via Durham also prevents any meaningful local service from running to serve Durham or Chester-le-Street.

No chance of that happening for the entire length of the ECML. A large section of the ECML is already suitable for 140mph as soon as ETCS is fitted. If it happens anywhere it'll be to bypass current "trouble" spots, such as Welwyn, Durham and possibly Morpeth.

HS2 now that it's been cut back to East Midlands Parkway will only relieve the WCML and MML. If anything the ECML will be more stretched than it already is, as it'll effectively be functioning as an eastern equivalent of HS2 whilst still having to cater for freight and (south of Grantham and north of York) local services.

You sort of undid your own argument there, as you admit there are problems. Right now, sure, it could be managed, just about, but give it time, and it'll become just like the WCML now. Say 2040, around the time the IRP is finished.

 

[DanNCL]

You sort of undid your own argument there, as you admit there are problems. Right now, sure, it could be managed, just about, but give it time, and it'll become just like the WCML now. Say 2040, around the time the IRP is finished.

The ECML, at least south of Doncaster, doesn't have anywhere near the level of freight that the WCML has to handle (in theory it shouldn’t have to handle any freight between Grantham and Doncaster, although that’s not the case in practice) and likely never will. Apart from the obvious issues with Welwyn and Newark, the ECML's big issues are Northallerton-northwards.

 

[MattRat]

All in a tunnel perhaps? To relieve the lines to the South West, you would probably have to have a delta Junction somewhere near Guildford and run to Southampton, Bournemouth and then west. The population isn't as well concentrated as it is in the HS2 west corridor.

Maybe even have it split to places like Bristol and Cardiff, only for half of it to get cut when it goes over budget

The ECML, at least south of Doncaster, doesn't have anywhere near the level of freight that the WCML has to handle (in theory it shouldn’t have to handle any freight between Grantham and Doncaster, although that’s not the case in practice) and likely never will. Apart from the obvious issues with Welwyn and Newark, the ECML's big issues are Northallerton-northwards.

Well I suppose we could both be technically right, as maybe it would connect to HS2 and run parallel to the ECML past all the problem areas, serving Leeds, York, Doncaster and maybe Newcastle. Maybe even call it HS2 Eastern Leg

 

[The Ham]

All in a tunnel perhaps? To relieve the lines to the South West, you would probably have to have a delta Junction somewhere near Guildford and run to Southampton, Bournemouth and then west. The population isn't as well concentrated as it is in the HS2 west corridor.

I'd be tempted to suggest a HS line running from Stratford to a point North of London (more on where later) before running to Old Oak Common (for HS2 and Heathrow) and on to Salisbury where it splits to serve Southampton/Bournemouth and Bristol/Cardiff (with a connection to the B&H for services to Exeter, Plymouth and Cornwall).

That would allow a lot of services to a lot of places to be squeezed into a single line into London (as it's unlikely that you'd need much more than 2tph to most of those places with trains capable of seating 1,100 people, so I would guess shorter trains, say 250m rather than 400m, but slightly more frequent).

Whilst it would bypass Reading and wouldn't serve Central London that's probably not all that critical (simple change at Old Oak Common for Central London or to get to to places North rather than using XC)

It would however it could provide a good a connection to Eurostar services from HS2 without a need to walk through Central London.

Now back to that point North of London, or would be designed as a outer London station (akin to Old Oak Common) for another HS line running out to Cambridge and on to the ECML (depending how far north depends on if it can beat HS2 to get to Leeds to free up some capacity in HS2 phase 1).

 

[zwk500]

If there is another large high speed project I would put my money on a Brighton Line relief, that would be fast enough to then run along the coast and relieve all of the lines running south and south west from London.

No chance, you'd miss Clapham, Croydon and Gatwick, and have to stop miles from the actual destinations in Brighton. All for a journey that can be done on third rail infrastructure in under an hour for 50 miles.

I'd be tempted to suggest a HS line running from Stratford to a point North of London (more on where later) before running to Old Oak Common (for HS2 and Heathrow) and on to Salisbury where it splits to serve Southampton/Bournemouth and Bristol/Cardiff (with a connection to the B&H for services to Exeter, Plymouth and Cornwall).

That would allow a lot of services to a lot of places to be squeezed into a single line into London (as it's unlikely that you'd need much more than 2tph to most of those places with trains capable of seating 1,100 people, so I would guess shorter trains, say 250m rather than 400m, but slightly more frequent).

Whilst it would bypass Reading and wouldn't serve Central London that's probably not all that critical (simple change at Old Oak Common for Central London or to get to to places North rather than using XC)

It would however it could provide a good a connection to Eurostar services from HS2 without a need to walk through Central London.

Now back to that point North of London, or would be designed as a outer London station (akin to Old Oak Common) for another HS line running out to Cambridge and on to the ECML (depending how far north depends on if it can beat HS2 to get to Leeds to free up some capacity in HS2 phase 1).

Excuse me? Central London is the single biggest passenger destination in the country. If you are building a HS line you need to serve passenger destinations.

The next HS project would seem most sensibly to be to Cardiff via Bristol involving a new Severn Tunnel. Relief the GWML which is now full, release capacity on the nice Brunel Billiard Table for freight and XC while giving the South West and South Wales good connections to each other and to London, proven high-volume high-value flows. Only problem is getting it from Maidenhead into London...

 

[MattRat]

Whilst it would bypass Reading and wouldn't serve Central London that's probably not all that critical (simple change at Old Oak Common for Central London or to get to to places North rather than using XC)

Except how would you get parliament's approval if it doesn't serve London? Look at the current situation for Birmingham to Leeds on HS2.

 

[Bevan Price]

Apart from a few minor additions to existing plans, I doubt that many on this forum will be aroung long enough to see a HS3.

 

[zwk500]

Apart from a few minor additions to existing plans, I doubt that many on this forum will be aroung long enough to see a HS3.

You're probably right

 

[MattRat]

Apart from a few minor additions to existing plans, I doubt that many on this forum will be aroung long enough to see a HS3.

You could say the same about HS2. Remember this is speculation on what could end being built one day, not whether or not people will see it.

 

[175mph]

Apart from a few minor additions to existing plans, I doubt that many on this forum will be aroung long enough to see a HS3.

Well I'm nearly 30, do you think I’ll be around for long enough to see a HS3?

 

[HSTEd]

All in a tunnel perhaps? To relieve the lines to the South West, you would probably have to have a delta Junction somewhere near Guildford and run to Southampton, Bournemouth and then west. The population isn't as well concentrated as it is in the HS2 west corridor.

Would you have to have a delta Junction?

It's only about 50km further or so going via Brighton as Via Guildford to Southampton.
That sounds like a lot, but it's only ~160km London to Southampton via that route.

The fastest leg from London stations to Southampton I can find is 74 minutes out of Waterloo.

That would be an average speed of "only" 130km/h via Brighton.
Kyushu Shinkansen experience would indicate you could do that even if the train stopped every 20km or so.

With stops only at Clapham, Brighton, Portsmouth and Southampton you could crush it.

Not sure the delta is really worth it when you could just run the trains the "long way around".

 

[zwk500]

Would you have to have a delta Junction?

It's only about 50km further or so going via Brighton as Via Guildford to Southampton.
That sounds like a lot, but it's only ~160km London to Southampton via that route.

The fastest leg from London stations to Southampton I can find is 74 minutes out of Waterloo.

That would be an average speed of "only" 130km/h via Brighton.
Kyushu Shinkansen experience would indicate you could do that even if the train stopped every 20km or so.

Not sure the delta is really worth it when you could just run the trains the "long way around".

Are you planning to put a terminal station in the middle of Brighton and reverse or have a Parkway-type on the edge and bus everybody in and out, skirting the South Downs? And are you planning to serve Croydon and Gatwick along the way?

 

[HSTEd]

Are you planning to put a terminal station in the middle of Brighton and reverse or have a Parkway-type on the edge and bus everybody in and out, skirting the South Downs? And are you planning to serve Croydon and Gatwick along the way?

Well either option is plausible in an engineering sense with ATO/full automation, or even just a station box on the sea front!
But I leave the fine details as an exercise for the reader.

Also would serve whatever major traffic generators are in the line's path.

 

[The Ham]

Excuse me? Central London is the single biggest passenger destination in the country. If you are building a HS line you need to serve passenger destinations.

The next HS project would seem most sensibly to be to Cardiff via Bristol involving a new Severn Tunnel. Relief the GWML which is now full, release capacity on the nice Brunel Billiard Table for freight and XC while giving the South West and South Wales good connections to each other and to London, proven high-volume high-value flows. Only problem is getting it from Maidenhead into London...

And your last point highlights why I've avoided going to a central London location.

The problem with ANY Central London location is that it's also not the other 10 Central London locations, as such there's always going to be people who will need to use metro/tube/bus services to get to it.

By connecting with 3 semi outer hub locations (Old Oak Common, Strafford and another) chances are for the majority of people it'll be no worse than getting to the wrong Central London location. For instance from Euston or Paddington it would be circa 10 minutes to Old Oak Common, likewise with a 18 mile round the outskirts line running at an average of 70mph Strafford to Old Oak Common would be circa 15 minutes.

The other factor is that you avoid the need to dig under Central London and the need to meet with Central London stations, both of which would be fairly costly. Now whilst an around route would be further it's likely that there'd be less things to hit/miss making it an easier task to do. As well as there being a better chance to access work sites from above if needed.

 

[LLivery]

I've thought before about a new tunnel paralleling the GWML from Paddington/Old Oak to Reading with a stop at Heathrow. 225km/h line speed, shift all the InterCity services off the mains onto it, free up the mains for GWR Thames Valley, and the reliefs for Crossrail. Could also free up some South Western capacity, by potentially having direct Windsor & Basingstoke branches into Paddington and maybe taking the Exeter/Sailsbury services from Waterloo.

 

[PTR 444]

I've thought before about a new tunnel paralleling the GWML from Paddington/Old Oak to Reading with a stop at Heathrow. 225km/h line speed, shift all the InterCity services off the mains onto it, free up the mains for GWR Thames Valley, and the reliefs for Crossrail. Could also free up some South Western capacity, by potentially having direct Windsor & Basingstoke branches into Paddington and maybe taking the Exeter/Sailsbury services from Waterloo.

If you could somehow find a clear route through west London, I would build a similar line from Waterloo International.

 

[MattRat]

Are you planning to put a terminal station in the middle of Brighton and reverse or have a Parkway-type on the edge and bus everybody in and out, skirting the South Downs? And are you planning to serve Croydon and Gatwick along the way?

If they suggest a reverse, prepare for a massive rant....

Edit: Missed the part where they nearly did. I mean, while they didn't fully commit, it's still ridiculous to even contemplate. Just ask all of Europe why it's a terrible idea.

 

[Gareth]

There won't be any. At least, nothing significant.

 

[CdBrux]

On top of what is proposed in IRP then the candidates seem to be, based on a combination of releasing capacity, increasing connectivity and speed, and without much idea which rank well on all 3 criteria:

• short extension HS2 west to north of Wigan / south of Preston
• WCML bypass Glasgow urban area
• (possibly WCML shortish bypass for a limited distance somewhere between Lancaster & Carstairs but not bypassing Carlisle)
• North of Sheffield to Leeds, possibly in some combination with
• Ravensthorpe area to Leeds
• relatively shortish Durham area bypass
• through Brum in direction SW - though big challenge to link into HS2 / Curzon street
• OOC to Bristol & S Wales with possibly a branch to connect more directly to SW

Not all of which would be designed for anywhere near 360km/h, more like 140mph

 

[Irascible]

I've thought before about a new tunnel paralleling the GWML from Paddington/Old Oak to Reading with a stop at Heathrow. 225km/h line speed, shift all the InterCity services off the mains onto it, free up the mains for GWR Thames Valley, and the reliefs for Crossrail. Could also free up some South Western capacity, by potentially having direct Windsor & Basingstoke branches into Paddington and maybe taking the Exeter/Sailsbury services from Waterloo.

Is there enough capacity after Reading for it to make a difference? and at Paddington?

I don't think HSR OOC to Bristol would actually save enough time to be worth it, it's not a particularily long journey now. A new alighmnent might speed things up in S. Wales a bit I odn't know the line speed. Plymouth to Birmingham via Bristol post HS2 would actually make a noticeable difference ( especially to people who currently fly ) - journeys on that route are in 7 figures per year - but I suspect the chances of money being actually spent is miniscule.

Really though I suspect there won't be any HSR planned post HS2.

 

[Mikey C]

An extension of HS2 to Scotland?

Either to unite the UK, or to tie together 2 independent but closely linked countries in the future...

 

[gordonthemoron]

London to Sydney via the earth's core?

 

[HSTEd]

An extension of HS2 to Scotland?

Either to unite the UK, or to tie together 2 independent but closely linked countries in the future...

Such a line is dodgy even without Scottish independence removing its strategic raison d'etre, the dramatic fall in traffic after any Scottish independence would render such a line hopelessly uneconomic.

There is a sixty miles of emptiness between the Scottish Central belt and major habitations in England, and even that is the comparatively small Carlisle.

Given the enormous border checks Scotland would impose as part of its inevitable attempt to rejoin the EU, very few people would make that journey.

Otherwise, you'd be better off taking my proposed South Coast Shinkansen and extending it from Bournemouth to Exeter and relieving Paddington of the Cornwall services too!

 

[Kingston Dan]

Such a line is dodgy even without Scottish independence removing its strategic raison d'etre, the dramatic fall in traffic after any Scottish independence would render such a line hopelessly uneconomic.

There is a sixty miles of emptiness between the Scottish Central belt and major habitations in England, and even that is the comparatively small Carlisle.

Given the enormous border checks Scotland would impose as part of its inevitable attempt to rejoin the EU, very few people would make that journey.

Otherwise, you'd be better off taking my proposed South Coast Shinkansen and extending it from Bournemouth to Exeter and relieving Paddington of the Cornwall services too!

How has Brexit affected London/Dublin passenger numbers?

An indy Scotland would still remain part of the common travel area (as does the Republic) and with c £5m air journeys between EDI/GLA and London airports an independent Scotland would have to adopt north Korea style isolationism for the numbers to drop to 'very few'.

On topic I would have thought a high speed connection to Scotland is almost certainly the next high speed rail project in the British Isles - whether or not it is the UK at the time.