UK railways 'must boost capacity'

[Metroland]

Britain's railways may need to double their capacity in the next 30 years to cope with demand from passengers, according to train operators.

In a joint report with infrastructure owner Network Rail, they say long-term plans must be made within five years.

New lines will need to be built as well as extra trains added, it says.

A new high-speed London to Scotland line and the electrification of the Great Western and Midland main lines are among the options it suggests.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8071249.stm

The report looked ahead to a railway where:

* Passengers experience more comfortable journeys with better stations, and less overcrowding;
* There is much better integration with other forms of transport;
* 80 per cent of passengers travel on a green, electrified network;
* There is new capacity on the network, including new high-speed lines;
* Record train punctuality will be further improved and sustained;
* Most replacement bus services during improvement work have been eliminated:
* Freight market share doubles from 11.5 per cent to 20 per cent, taking millions of lorry journeys off the roads;
* The railway plays a vital role in reducing carbon emissions;
* Trackside signals and telephones are eradicated as trains are controlled by computer and digital radio technology;
* Taxpayers, passengers and freight users see a network that is highly efficient and affordable.

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel...perately-needed-as-journeys-soar-1692308.html

http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/news/story.php?id=5945

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Content/detail.asp?ReleaseID=4389&NewsAreaID=2&zip=True

 

[j0hn0]

all very good but nowhere does it say anything about raising bridges and lowering tracks for double deck trains, freight and passenger. Is that too simple because to me it would instantly double capacity for both freight and rail.

I am a big fan of the new high speed proposal and electrification, but I honestly believe that these simple measures, along with the other projects mentioned, can be co-ordinated to raise the clearances on the most heavily congested routes.

I know that some of it is down to the signalling infrastructure aswell, but wasn't WCML upgrade supposed to have in cab signalling until they realised it was going to be too expensive?

Living in Haarlem for a year or so and travelling by train to Amsterdam every day made me appreciate the capacity of their double deck trains. In the morning there were 7 double deck trains an hour to Amsterdam and they cleaned out full platforms every time whilst already being packed.

 

[gordonthemoron]

I'm not sure that double decker trains do double capacity because:

a) a double decker coach does not provide twice as many seats as a single decker coach due to staircases & single deck sections over bogies

b) in my experience, double decker trains have fewer coaches that single decker ones

 

[j0hn0]

I'm not sure that double decker trains do double capacity because:

a) a double decker coach does not provide twice as many seats as a single decker coach due to staircases & single deck sections over bogies

b) in my experience, double decker trains have fewer coaches that single decker ones

Strange you should say that

a) So freight-wise, 2 containers on top of each other is not doubling capacity?
Passenger-wise, In Holland, ViRM's have twice the capacity of a standard UK coach - yet the single deck parts (vestibule) have seats, toilets, disabled areas and lots of standing capacity which UK trains just don't have. An ideal commuter train.

b) I cannot see what argument that statement points to. Surely it is down to each country to decide how long to make trains depending on usage. In Holland I have caught a Stoptrein DDM with just 4 double deck carriages, then I'll catch a sneltrein which has 12.

I worked overlooking the tracks of Amsterdam Centraal and there were 12 coach ViRM and DDM coaches running regularly throughout the day. Holland has the most densely populated "land" in europe, they run regular, high capacity trains to meet that demand.

We've run double deck buses for years to double capacity, why not trains?

 

[jopsuk]

I'm not sure that double decker trains do double capacity because:

a) a double decker coach does not provide twice as many seats as a single decker coach due to staircases & single deck sections over bogies

b) in my experience, double decker trains have fewer coaches that single decker ones

a) indeed. They do increase capacity massively though. I think that j0hn0 is however somewhat naive in underestimating just how much work would be needed. However, were the work to be done, it would make sense to increase the loading guage not only upwards but outwards as well

b) double deckers do provide more efficient capacity. The French calculated when building the TGV Duplex that for the same passenger capacity, the duplex would use less power than the single decker TGVs (assuming the same power cars). So unless the single deckers they replace are outrageously overloaded, of course the double deckers will run in shorter formations (with higher capacity). The Duplexes, meanwhile, often get run as double sets.

 

[j0hn0]

a) indeed. They do increase capacity massively though. I think that j0hn0 is however somewhat naive in underestimating just how much work would be needed. However, were the work to be done, it would make sense to increase the loading guage not only upwards but outwards as well

b) double deckers do provide more efficient capacity. The French calculated when building the TGV Duplex that for the same passenger capacity, the duplex would use less power than the single decker TGVs (assuming the same power cars). So unless the single deckers they replace are outrageously overloaded, of course the double deckers will run in shorter formations (with higher capacity). The Duplexes, meanwhile, often get run as double sets.

I don't think I am underestimating the work that needs to be done. I merely compare it against building a new fast line which doesn't serve any of those regional destinations. Along with the lengthening of platforms, open the loading gauge to take it even further. Are you being naive in saying that passenger growth will not continue and will not exponentially rise? If so, how can it continue on these little tin pot commuter trains we have now?

How can building new lines increase capacity for places that they don't pass through?

ViRM factsheet http://www.nsfinancialservices.ie/_fileupload/Image/VIRM_74570856.pdf

Wouldn't the GWML already be built to a larger loading gauge? At the same time as electrifying, lower tracks where appropriate. I'm pretty sure box tunnel doesn't need that kind of work.

Try it on the GW and see how well it works

 

[Geezertronic]

How much would it cost in downtime and how much disruption would be caused by preparing a stretch of line for double-deck use?

 

[MCR247]

I'm not sure that double decker trains do double capacity because:

a) a double decker coach does not provide twice as many seats as a single decker coach due to staircases & single deck sections over bogies

a) In DD coaches, some have to have room at the back for luggage so dosent double capacity, but at train can have seats all the way back

 

[generalvegitable]

A double decker coach does have benefits like alot of extra capacity at the expense of needing to put stair wells in at the ends of the coaches and disabled access, the reason that it works everywhere else is because we have really high platforms compared to say france, and it isnt commercially viable to lower all our platforms just to have some double deck trains running.

 

[jon0844]

Improving signalling so trains can run closer together seems an obvious choice for improving peak capacity, especially with lots of services sharing the same tracks.

More rolling stock seems essential to run a more regular service, to encourage people to feel confident in just turning up to go - rather than having to study timetables that aren't always very logical (regular clockface departures) during the day and at weekends.

Combining the two means we can probably do without having to make massive changes to the type of trains used - although double decker trains would no doubt be suitable in some locations (especially if it means increasing capacity without having to lengthen platforms).

It's because there are multiple solutions to the problem that we need joined-up thinking and a realisation that one thing needs the other. Vital for when the accountants try to cut back and do it on the cheap.

 

[me123]

As has been said, double deckers do not double capacity. And there's a huge problem getting them to be DDA compliant.

Besides, the infrastructure upgrades would not be feasible. Plenty of low bridges for a start, and low OHLE in places as well.

 

[Metroland]

Double deck trains have been ruled out on grounds of cost. Though I think personally the EU should pay for it all to be converted to Bern gauge

 

[Pumbaa]

mproving signalling so trains can run closer together seems an obvious choice for improving peak capacity, especially with lots of services sharing the same tracks.

Aye - I feel that actually developing automated control is the way forward. Develop perfect acceleration and braking curves, get the system to run trains as far together as possible et voila - huge increase in capacity.

As for drivers out of a job, sadly times change. Retraining programmes should be provided, obviously. The TL upgrade has already shown that this is considered as a future possibility.

 

[Geezertronic]

I don't know about other TOCs but Virgin Trains and London Midland have the right idea by doubling up trains from Euston (for example) then splitting them further down the line with each going to a different destination.

A good example of this is the 2 x SuperVoyager train I saw at Euston yesterday (18:10 departure if memory serves) where the train splits at Crewe (or Chester, can't quite remember) and one SV goes onto Holyhead with the other SV going to Wrexham. Doing this saves a path out of Euston and down the southern part of the WCML I presume.

Obviously not ideal for all destinations and cannot be done with the Pendolino's but for Wales I assume it is ideal?

 

[Pumbaa]

GZ: Crewe I think.

In practice, this is quite common. On the Southern network, trains split and join extremely frequently at Haywards Heath, Horsham, Crawley, Redhill and Gatwick to name but a few. The same is true (I think) of Southeastern. Sometimes not always possible however; I know one of the reasons it's frowned upon on the south ECML is that if one unit is heavily delayed into Welwyn, St Evenage or where-ever, it buggers up the entire route. I think the only place that this is practiced currently is Gordon Hill.

Similarly actually, several trains from Edinburgh and Glasgow split en route during peaks.

 

[Metroland]

Aye - I feel that actually developing automated control is the way forward. Develop perfect acceleration and braking curves, get the system to run trains as far together as possible et voila - huge increase in capacity.

As for drivers out of a job, sadly times change. Retraining programmes should be provided, obviously. The TL upgrade has already shown that this is considered as a future possibility.

Well headway is limited by braking distance, but small gains can be had by automation (aprox 20-25% increase in capacity, or 60 second-90 second headways). After that you are limited by passenger boarding and fixed junctions. But 100,000 people per hour per direction can be technically achieved in the right circumstances, such as Hong Kong.

Most of the LUL lines will be automatic in the next few years, and parts of Thameslink will be ATO. There won't be a case for completely getting rid of the driver (it wouldn't happen in 50 years anyway, we still have Victorian signalling!) because you need someone on the front should things go wrong. Though I do wonder how much automation is possible.

This is analogous to Airline pilots. Planes fly themselves most of the time (including take off and landing), yet you still have 2 crew in the cockpit, though technically you could still someone in a control room flying many aircraft at once - this already happens in the military.

 

[Bittern]

Ah, a new main line? Oh yes. I'd recommend connecting London to the Scottish highlands. One train a day and a sleeper to/from Inverness doesn't seem like enough, considering Inverness is growing.

 

[j0hn0]

A double decker coach does have benefits like alot of extra capacity at the expense of needing to put stair wells in at the ends of the coaches and disabled access, the reason that it works everywhere else is because we have really high platforms compared to say france, and it isnt commercially viable to lower all our platforms just to have some double deck trains running.

dutch platforms are fairly high and they have no problems.

All the recent journeys I can remember required me to step down onto a platform from a train. Are UK platforms really that high?

Improved signalling, infrastructure and rolling stock would more than double capacity on the network. Passenger AND Freight.

We still really do live in the stone age when it comes to railways, I wonder if the channel tunnel was initially considered commercially viable? If everything continues to be run by accountants, the real problems with our existing structure will continue to exacerbate.

 

[generalvegitable]

well our problem is that we listen to the accountants, if we just said to them "f**k you I'm doing it whether you like it or not" the U.K would be a better place

~please note that the speech is highly exaggerated, usually a simple no would be the norm

 

[merlodlliw]

I don't know about other TOCs but Virgin Trains and London Midland have the right idea by doubling up trains from Euston (for example) then splitting them further down the line with each going to a different destination.

A good example of this is the 2 x SuperVoyager train I saw at Euston yesterday (18:10 departure if memory serves) where the train splits at Crewe (or Chester, can't quite remember) and one SV goes onto Holyhead with the other SV going to Wrexham. Doing this saves a path out of Euston and down the southern part of the WCML I presume.

Obviously not ideal for all destinations and cannot be done with the Pendolino's but for Wales I assume it is ideal?

You are correct, several trains for Holyhead/Bangor split at Chester Or
Join up at Chester or Crewe.

One point about the VT Wrexham service is, it carries few direct passengers
Euston to Wrexham and is seen as a commuter Chester to Wrexham replacing
the ATW who gave up the path for it, on the up service ex Wrexham 0700 &
link up at Chester with the Holyhead, again this is used 99% as a commuter
to Chester for Manchester/Liverpool, the big moan is these commuters hang around Wrexham qtr hour having changed off an ATW from Shrewsbury,who
gave up another path for the VT. Its only on trial for a year, as a means of
getting at W/S trade, however this seems to have failed, due to the VT walk on fare being £150 or so higher than W/S fare, I welcome any extra service
into Wrexham but the public have chosen W/S.

As for extra capacity, I can imagine Rhyl today, hundreds will be left stranded
as usual on a hot sunny day at the station, due to ATW being incapable of
adding extra coaches to its two coach DMUs, whereas Gerald the WAG Express
will lie idle at Holyhead Sat & Sun, no wonder people go by car to North Wales
and queue for hours in traffic.

my opinion, but factural

 

[tbtc]

I think one major capacity issue not mentioned is the multi modal nature of our railways. we try to cram intercity, local stoppers, frieght, railtours etc all on to one line, with few loops/ four track sections.

Look at Sheffield to Manchester - two of the largest cities in England, but only one (two track) line between them, and the need for an "all stops" service / freight paths means we can only have a half hourly "fast-ish" service between the two.

Same with lines like Newcastle to Edinburgh - trying to run all types of train on one line just means everything slowing down to fit around the slowest trains, and the speed differentials cause bottlenecks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As for extra capacity, I can imagine Rhyl today, hundreds will be left stranded as usual on a hot sunny day at the station, due to ATW being incapable of adding extra coaches to its two coach DMUs, whereas Gerald the WAG Express will lie idle at Holyhead Sat & Sun, no wonder people go by car to North Wales and queue for hours in traffic.

my opinion, but factural

Surely there'd be a lot more demand for Rhyl/ Llandudno/ North Wales Coast if there were still direct trains from places like Liverpool/ Leeds (via Manchester)?

If the "North Western" franchise had been kept then there'd be scope for running longer services from these destinations to the holiday resorts at the weekend (since, as a commuter service there's units like the 180s spare in north west England at the weekend). Whereas, you now have a service from Cardiff instead, which isn't going to attract anything like as many tourists.

 

[merlodlliw]

I think one major capacity issue not mentioned is the multi modal nature of our railways. we try to cram intercity, local stoppers, frieght, railtours etc all on to one line, with few loops/ four track sections.

Look at Sheffield to Manchester - two of the largest cities in England, but only one (two track) line between them, and the need for an "all stops" service / freight paths means we can only have a half hourly "fast-ish" service between the two.

Same with lines like Newcastle to Edinburgh - trying to run all types of train on one line just means everything slowing down to fit around the slowest trains, and the speed differentials cause bottlenecks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Surely there'd be a lot more demand for Rhyl/ Llandudno/ North Wales Coast if there were still direct trains from places like Liverpool/ Leeds (via Manchester)?

If the "North Western" franchise had been kept then there'd be scope for running longer services from these destinations to the holiday resorts at the weekend (since, as a commuter service there's units like the 180s spare in north west England at the weekend). Whereas, you now have a service from Cardiff instead, which isn't going to attract anything like as many tourists.

Fully agree with you, if politics had been kept out of North Wales rail and FNW for example had been kept, we would have longer trains at week ends.
Cardiff as no idea of North Wales rail needs, it might have a couple of head honchos muttering sweet nothings, but where there is idle stock at W./E
use it, WAG Express stock idle all W/E is a perfect example of politics carrying no passengers. This stock could be used to North West destinations.

 

[tbtc]

Fully agree with you, if politics had been kept out of North Wales rail and FNW for example had been kept, we would have longer trains at week ends.
Cardiff as no idea of North Wales rail needs, it might have a couple of head honchos muttering sweet nothings, but where there is idle stock at W./E
use it, WAG Express stock idle all W/E is a perfect example of politics carrying no passengers. This stock could be used to North West destinations.

Genuine question, but apart from the valley lines and the one WAG service, is there much of a difference between the peak service, weekday daytime servce and Saturday service for ATW services?

At least Northern run additional services to match peak demand into Manchester and other cities, hence the reason they can leave 180s sat around at the weekend - in the same way that EMT run fewer London services on Saturday so have the resources to run an HST to Skeg. Same deal with FGW needing fewer weekend HSTs so being able to run them to Newquay I guess. Whereas, ATW seems to have pretty similar unit numbers Monday to Saturday, as there's not the same commuter needs (and bringing "spare" stock from Cardiff up to Manchester/ Liverpool so it could run "bucket and spade" services to the coast is obviously impractical).

 

[merlodlliw]

Genuine question, but apart from the valley lines and the one WAG service, is there much of a difference between the peak service, weekday daytime servce and Saturday service for ATW services?

At least Northern run additional services to match peak demand into Manchester and other cities, hence the reason they can leave 180s sat around at the weekend - in the same way that EMT run fewer London services on Saturday so have the resources to run an HST to Skeg. Same deal with FGW needing fewer weekend HSTs so being able to run them to Newquay I guess. Whereas, ATW seems to have pretty similar unit numbers Monday to Saturday, as there's not the same commuter needs (and bringing "spare" stock from Cardiff up to Manchester/ Liverpool so it could run "bucket and spade" services to the coast is obviously impractical).

Yes thats the problem of having a rail HQ on the other side of the Country,
where everything is different,culture,way of life etc. ATWs Cardiff base population remains fairly static,whereas North Wales summer population
increases by a million or so, with the same amount of ATW capacity as winter.
Holiday makers find the trains full,tell everyone about it, so most travel by
car and ignore the train. The call is for more carriages not extra services.
As I used to live in Rhyl (30 miles away) I often go along to the station when
I see friends, last Monday two coach DMUs were arriving from Junction with
standing room only, yet another 100 plus were wanting to board to go home
to Manchester & West Midlands.The last Vt service is ex Rhyl at 1500 the
only 5 coach train out, but too early for those returning after a day out.

I can only think of one commuter extra ATW service Monday to Friday, that is the 1719 man Pic to Chester, put on by the old FNW to cope with
high passenger numbers, otherwise its Mon/Sat status que.

 

[tbtc]

Yes thats the problem of having a rail HQ on the other side of the Country,
where everything is different,culture,way of life etc. ATWs Cardiff base population remains fairly static,whereas North Wales summer population
increases by a million or so, with the same amount of ATW capacity as winter

That's a good point - like the population of Devon/ Cornwall increasing in the summer months. The difference is that FGW have capacity to lay on extra trains at the weekend (that may be doing peak commuter trips to London during the week) and long enough trains to make a difference (HSTs).

Whereas ATW have a lot of two car units, plus the WAG express service and a handful of three car 175s, meaning little "spare". In First North Western days, there were loco-hauled services on the North Wales coast (Manchester to Holyhead IIRC - since the boat traffic obviously adds to the "peaks").

I'm not sure who'd be best operating the Manchester - Llandudno and Conwy services, but you know that Northern or Transpennie would be able to add to capacity on summer weekends (either Northern's 180s at the moment, or adding any spare TPE 185s/ NR 158s to give longer services. It's a real shame that in this year of people taking UK holidays (due to the recession and weak pound), the railway can't offer more capacity, especially when there's spare units at other TOCs.

(I'm now having daft ideas about Northern Rail running a North Wales service that splits at Warrington Bank Quay to give portions to Manchester, Liverpool and maybe even East Lancashire via Preston on summer weekends - join them all together as a six/ eight coach 156/ 158 to give a nice morning service to Llandudno and tea time service "home" again for the tourist market - given the number of "peak" units required during the week that may be spare at the weekend)

 

[merlodlliw]

We all seem to have good ideas, and you are correct in this year of recession
and people taking holidays at home we should be able to cope with a rail service that can carry extra passengers, I know I go on about W/S,which to me is a dam good service, as a Wrexham based Company they are able to rent in extra carriages within days to cope with their forseen extra capacity.

In Wales we have this crazy situation that ATW must run all services(except
IC VT in the north), Northern are also very good, but any of its spare capacity will not be allowed unless some one not ATW pays for it, and when the Halton curve is up and running dual track, I dont see any Northerns being allowed past Chester due to politics, yet we have WAG All Wales Franchise managed stations at Chester/Hereford/Shrewsbury/Helsby/Frodsham/Runcorn East/Church Stretton/Craven Arms/Ludlow/Leominister/Gobowen plus others on the heart of Wales line with bi ling signage all in England, I make no comment on the language.

Common sense tells us in North East Wales, we have more in common with
Merseyside & Manchester than Cardiff, and a North Western service would be far better catering for the needs of passengers, not political ambitions.

Take Holyhead for example, Wales major Ireland/Wales ferry port, last train
out 8.25p.m. to Chester, First train out Mon to Sat 4.30a,m, to Cardiff,
yet at little South West Wales Fishguard station, we have an ATW boat train at 1.30a.m. in the morning to connect with the one sailing, but Fishguard is down South, as is ATWs HQ.

Thats how I feel and my opinion of course. A golden opportunity as been lost this year.






In FGW days, you are correct we had loco hauled trains on the Holyhead to Manchester run thus giving extra capacity, alas now we have ATW.