New HS2 consultation -NPR link

[Confused52]

Last week a new Consultation on Design Refinements for HS2 was published.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/hs2-phase-2b-design-refinement-consultation

The interesting bit is the final change which puts in the ability to add two new junctions close to High Legh. One allows access from Warrington to the line to Manchester and the other gives access to Warrington from London. The significance is that as well as the NPR route from Liverpool via Warrington to Manchester, Leeds and beyond there is a proposal to have native HS2 trains from Liverpool via Warrington to Old Oak Common (for the Elizabeth Line and Heathrow) and Euston.

This could be a significant opportunity for the town but gives us the issue of where will the line go through Warrington and where will the station be sited, much popcorn on the  way?

[P J]

Cue the bananaism 😉

[Davy51]

They were telling  us on last night's local news that Virgin ,even though  they are losing the west coast franchise , are hoping to start a direct service between  Liverpool & London.

[Evil Sid]

58 minutes ago, P J said:

Cue the bananaism 😉

 ok.

 

[P J]

13 minutes ago, Evil Sid said:

 ok.

 

Lol.  I was referring to the Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything brigade

[Evil Sid]

So i was spot on then.

 

[Confused52]

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 1:59 PM, Davy51 said:

They were telling  us on last night's local news that Virgin ,even though  they are losing the west coast franchise , are hoping to start a direct service between  Liverpool & London.

The details as disclosed are:

Station calls in both directions: Liverpool Lime Street – Liverpool South Parkway – Lichfield Trent Valley – Tamworth – Nuneaton - London Euston

Number of services:

Down Direction - 13 trains (forming an hourly service)

First service 06:36 from London Euston, last service from London Euston 21:36. Our aspiration is for a sub-2h 30m journey time, including station calls. No services from London Euston in the evening peak period.

Up Direction – 11 trains (forming an hourly service)

First service 08:13 from Liverpool Lime Street, last service from Liverpool Lime Street 20:13. Our aspiration is for a sub-2h 30m journey time, including station calls."

This is an Open Access service and they usually get batted back by Virgin but they are presumably applying now because the successor in the West Coast Franchise has no legal way of objecting because they haven't been selected yet!

If I were them I would sell tickets from Warrington via South Parkway as that is not a permitted route on the West Coast Franchise. They could use HSTs as they have to be able to run at 125 mph and they cannot have the Pendolinos. Of course HSTs are more comfortable than Pendolinos with more space in my view.

[Confused52]

I went to the Consultation Event at High Legh yesterday. The location of the two junctions towards us are in the wedge of land south of the M56 in the area bounded by the  M56 . to the West of the A556 and to the North of the A50. The two junction and not the track leading from them towards Liverpool are the subject of the consultation. They are the connection to NPR.

The two junctions will have track heading towards Liverpool which will need to join together before they cross a main road in order to reduce costs and on the Map it looks as if that means crossing the M56 about a mile to a mile and a half East of M56 Junction 7, travelling in the direction of Grappenhall.

The best answer is to put a station to the north end of Arpley Yard connected to Bank Quay Station north facing chord to that Classic Compatible Trains from Carlisle, Preston and Glasgow can call at Warrington NPR before joining HS2 towards Old Oak Common/London Euston. That would mean that the Golborne link to Bamfurlong need not be built at all and Warrington would become an important rail hub with high speed connections to the whole North of England from Liverpool to Newcastle as well as up to Carlisle.

It is this kind of scenario which is what makes Warrington attractive for businesses and will cause the town to grow. It causes the town to be one of the big winners from HS2 but it will take land in South Warrington and through Great Sankey using the route via Fiddlers Ferry where possible. I point out that there is not an official route and I don't "know" anything other that what is in the first paragraph. Nevertheless using my speculation as an example where would others take the route and why?

[Davy51]

Is this going to happen  Confused or is  it an option or is it your opinion of what should happen ?

[Confused52]

33 minutes ago, Davy51 said:

Is this going to happen  Confused or is  it an option or is it your opinion of what should happen ?

The NPR junction to HS2 will almost certainly happen. NPR from Liverpool to Leeds is supposed to be happening but the detailed plans will not published until next year sometime. What I outlined is an option which does meet the council's aspirations as laid out in the fourth Local Transport Plan, LTP4. The paragraph which starts "The best answer …" is what I think is my opinion of what should happen.

That the location of the line as it heads to Liverpool is where I said: crossing the M56 near to the M6 junction is probably inevitable. What is interesting is that whatever you do from there towards Liverpool seems to cause problems with the Local Plan. I hope that is clearer.

[Davy51]

I see . There is also the need to cross the river , will they use the existing railway bridge ,build a new crossing or take up part  of one of the existing road bridges to carry the railway ?

 

 

[Confused52]

9 hours ago, Davy51 said:

I see . There is also the need to cross the river , will they use the existing railway bridge ,build a new crossing or take up part  of one of the existing road bridges to carry the railway ?

 

 

For the HS2 style route between the junctions at High Legh and Liverpool the bridges need to be dedicated to HS2, they will have different technical rail standards so new crossings will be required. The track bed itself is a minimum of 25m wide and the specification normally calls for a minimum dedicated path of 55m wide and preferably 75m wide. The trains will probably run at up to 150mph and may run faster the full HS2 speed is 250mph. Trains will 200m or 400m long, so similar to one or two Pendolinos. Sharing with road bridges would not be possible.

When the track joins on to the West Coat Mainline it is the same standard as that track. So if the two lines join south of Bank Quay Station it can share the same tracks through Bank Quay station.

[Davy51]

I see.

 

[Milky]

I am confused (nothing new there!) by HS2.

In order for the train to be lighting fast and running up to 14 times an hour I am guessing the number of stops has to be at a minimum which is great if I live in Manchester and want to go into central LOndon, but what if I live in Warrington, or Chester or Preston, I need to get into Manchester to catch a train, that will save me 5 minutes in the end! 

I also wonder how much tickets will cost, judging by the current fares it will be very very expensive

[Confused52]

1 hour ago, Milky said:

I am confused (nothing new there!) by HS2.

In order for the train to be lighting fast and running up to 14 times an hour I am guessing the number of stops has to be at a minimum which is great if I live in Manchester and want to go into central LOndon, but what if I live in Warrington, or Chester or Preston, I need to get into Manchester to catch a train, that will save me 5 minutes in the end! 

I also wonder how much tickets will cost, judging by the current fares it will be very very expensive

Milky,

Second para: The changes which form the subject of this thread are about a change to HS2 for the purpose of connecting to NPR/HS3. The effect of that would be to allow captive HS2 trains to travel from Liverpool stopping at Warrington and then calling at Old Oak Common for Crossrail before reaching Euston. That service will be likely run by the West Coast Partnership which is due to take over from Virgin next year. The Trains would replace the current Pendolinos. Trains from Preston would be HS2 compatible trains which would join HS2 just after leaving the West Coast Main Line at Warrington and taking the same route as the Liverpool Service. They would be from Glasgow/Edinburgh as now and would replace the Pendolinos. They would also be operated by the West Coast Partnership. Chester could not have HS2 services because they are only available on electrified lines. the services to Chester are likely to remain as now but will be run by the West Coast Partnership. Without the change being discussed being made the original plan was for the Glasgow trains (using HS2 Compatible trains) to call at Warrington Bank Quay as now and then join HS2 at Crewe. No passenger will be expected to change at Manchester from the stations you list, unless it offers an advantage of some kind to the passenger himself.

Third paragraph.

The fares will be the same fares as today albeit subject to the usual increases associated with time. Railways are not commercial enterprises in the normal sense and their fares are set to reduce the overall public subsidy to the whole network to an acceptable level with the Public Sector Budget. The fare levels for popular lines such as those going to London already cross-subsidise fares on less popular lines such as Northern commuter services. It is not to be expected that fares will become relatively higher because of HS2 but there will be much more capacity and more passengers to contribute. That should mean that the fraction of tickets sold at higher prices should go down not up whilst giving the same operating cross-subsidy back to the government. The average ticket price paid is not likely to be very, very expensive.

The purpose of using High Speeds is to increase capacity to the point where one Inter-City line to Euston can replace almost all the Inter-City Services that run on the East Coast Mail Line, the West Coast Main Line and the Midland Main Line (to Sheffield and Leeds). A change that will make the system more efficient and more reliable by only carrying High Speed trains, all of them running at similar speeds. That is the secret of the reliable operation of the Japanese Shinkansen (bullet) trains which the government is trying to achieve. What is not about is making a few rich businessmen pay more for their rail tickets to London. That is just a myth put about by nimbies who do not want development near them. I hope the alternative view is useful.

[Milky]

Even if the train does stop at Warrington (and I am not sure why it would) it still leaves people from places like Chester, Preston and further afield to make it to a stop that has a high speed train and in many cases it won't be worth it

I bet it still be cheaper to go by self drive electric car

[grey_man]

17 hours ago, Confused52 said:

Milky,

Second para: The changes which form the subject of this thread are about a change to HS2 for the purpose of connecting to NPR/HS3. The effect of that would be to allow captive HS2 trains to travel from Liverpool stopping at Warrington and then calling at Old Oak Common for Crossrail before reaching Euston. That service will be likely run by the West Coast Partnership which is due to take over from Virgin next year. The Trains would replace the current Pendolinos. Trains from Preston would be HS2 compatible trains which would join HS2 just after leaving the West Coast Main Line at Warrington and taking the same route as the Liverpool Service. They would be from Glasgow/Edinburgh as now and would replace the Pendolinos. They would also be operated by the West Coast Partnership. Chester could not have HS2 services because they are only available on electrified lines. the services to Chester are likely to remain as now but will be run by the West Coast Partnership. Without the change being discussed being made the original plan was for the Glasgow trains (using HS2 Compatible trains) to call at Warrington Bank Quay as now and then join HS2 at Crewe. No passenger will be expected to change at Manchester from the stations you list, unless it offers an advantage of some kind to the passenger himself.

Third paragraph.

The fares will be the same fares as today albeit subject to the usual increases associated with time. Railways are not commercial enterprises in the normal sense and their fares are set to reduce the overall public subsidy to the whole network to an acceptable level with the Public Sector Budget. The fare levels for popular lines such as those going to London already cross-subsidise fares on less popular lines such as Northern commuter services. It is not to be expected that fares will become relatively higher because of HS2 but there will be much more capacity and more passengers to contribute. That should mean that the fraction of tickets sold at higher prices should go down not up whilst giving the same operating cross-subsidy back to the government. The average ticket price paid is not likely to be very, very expensive.

The purpose of using High Speeds is to increase capacity to the point where one Inter-City line to Euston can replace almost all the Inter-City Services that run on the East Coast Mail Line, the West Coast Main Line and the Midland Main Line (to Sheffield and Leeds). A change that will make the system more efficient and more reliable by only carrying High Speed trains, all of them running at similar speeds. That is the secret of the reliable operation of the Japanese Shinkansen (bullet) trains which the government is trying to achieve. What is not about is making a few rich businessmen pay more for their rail tickets to London. That is just a myth put about by nimbies who do not want development near them. I hope the alternative view is useful.

And yet the Eddington Report explicitly stated that high speed rail of this type is not needed in a country with the UK's geography. We should invest in infrastructure and have an integrated transport strategy as set out in the report. Instead we've put all our eggs in one massively expensive, badly designed but glossy basket. 

The capacity issues it sets out to solve are primarily south of Rugby and experts have argued that HS2 classic compatible trains might even reduce capacity on parts of the network including North of Warrington. That's even before you get to the issue of how HS2 will actively harm the economies of cities like Stoke. HS2 does very little in terms of the rest of the country's transport issues which are related to connectivity rather than capacity. 

And then you have its ludicrous design flaws necessitated by the need for speed such as bypassing East Midlands airport to stop in Toton so that it serves both Derby and Nottingham which will require the construction of new lines so that people can use it. These lines are not in the budget of course and you have to wonder about the advantages of having to travel from these cities to even use it. 

It doesn't link to HS1 and the Northern Line can't cope with it at Euston. And of course it's massively environmentally damaging with a great deal of that damage a consequence of the need for it to be unnecessarily fast. 

It's a boondoggle and not surprisingly a favourite of Lord Adonis who has a love of such things for London including the Garden Bridge and The Tulip.

[Confused52]

8 hours ago, grey_man said:

And yet the Eddington Report explicitly stated that high speed rail of this type is not needed in a country with the UK's geography. We should invest in infrastructure and have an integrated transport strategy as set out in the report. Instead we've put all our eggs in one massively expensive, badly designed but glossy basket. 

The capacity issues it sets out to solve are primarily south of Rugby and experts have argued that HS2 classic compatible trains might even reduce capacity on parts of the network including North of Warrington. That's even before you get to the issue of how HS2 will actively harm the economies of cities like Stoke. HS2 does very little in terms of the rest of the country's transport issues which are related to connectivity rather than capacity. 

And then you have its ludicrous design flaws necessitated by the need for speed such as bypassing East Midlands airport to stop in Toton so that it serves both Derby and Nottingham which will require the construction of new lines so that people can use it. These lines are not in the budget of course and you have to wonder about the advantages of having to travel from these cities to even use it. 

It doesn't link to HS1 and the Northern Line can't cope with it at Euston. And of course it's massively environmentally damaging with a great deal of that damage a consequence of the need for it to be unnecessarily fast. 

It's a boondoggle and not surprisingly a favourite of Lord Adonis who has a love of such things for London including the Garden Bridge and The Tulip.

Eddington did not take into account the driving need to maintain the existing railway. When HS2 is able to carry the majority of fast services on the WCML they will close the fast and ten slow lines for maintenance south of Rugby which would have been impossible without HS2. The existing WCML has poor maintenance access and such measures are essential. After that I expect they will put in dynamic block signalling to increase the capacity of each pair of tracks by letting trains run closer together than at present. Theses changes will take decades to get to the point where the railway is sustainable.

The main capacity round here is south of Arpley Yard. The problem with north of Warrington is that the DMUs are too slow not to get in the way of Pendolinos so stops have to be minimised hence only Virgin trains between WBQ and anywhere north that is actually on the main line.

You are correct that much of the problem is to do with connectivity but that in turn is down to lack of volume prepared to leave the car.

It is not clear that Stoke will be significantly worse off because we do not yet have an idea what the West Coast Partnership will have as a Train Service Requirement from the High Speed Train date.

East Midlands Airport is not better that Toton Yard. If anything it was East Midlands Parkway that was badly sited by giving Loughborough equal sway to Derby and Nottingham. The proposed new connecting services do not need new railway building as they can be reached from Sawley Junction (Long Eaton) via Sheet Stores Jn and that is the route for trains to Nottingham at the moment. Trains from Nottingham to the Erewash Valley can already use Attenborough Junction so one can see that Derby Nottingham trains can easily operate via Toton, were they would reverse. That would also give connections to the tram system extended from the other side of Toton Lane through Beeston and the University. It is only the trains that aren't in the budget because they are not part of HS2, they could also give rail access to Alfreton Parkway and if timetables permit Langley Mill from Derby. The benefits of this scheme in terms of connectivity probably significantly outweigh a high speed station near Castle Donington Airport for both Derby and Nottingham. It is a matter of pride though that Derby regards the main line as being through the town and definitely not via Nottingham. By road from the Derby Inner Ring Road you can be at the Toton Island Garden Centre way before you can get to the A50 and Castle Donington.

The connection at Old Oak Common is intended to get those travelling to central London on to the Elizabeth Line (Crossrail !) and will reduce the load on the Northern Line south of Euston rather than increase it.

[grey_man]

20 minutes ago, Confused52 said:

Eddington did not take into account the driving need to maintain the existing railway. When HS2 is able to carry the majority of fast services on the WCML they will close the fast and ten slow lines for maintenance south of Rugby which would have been impossible without HS2. The existing WCML has poor maintenance access and such measures are essential. After that I expect they will put in dynamic block signalling to increase the capacity of each pair of tracks by letting trains run closer together than at present. Theses changes will take decades to get to the point where the railway is sustainable.

The main capacity round here is south of Arpley Yard. The problem with north of Warrington is that the DMUs are too slow not to get in the way of Pendolinos so stops have to be minimised hence only Virgin trains between WBQ and anywhere north that is actually on the main line.

You are correct that much of the problem is to do with connectivity but that in turn is down to lack of volume prepared to leave the car.

It is not clear that Stoke will be significantly worse off because we do not yet have an idea what the West Coast Partnership will have as a Train Service Requirement from the High Speed Train date.

East Midlands Airport is not better that Toton Yard. If anything it was East Midlands Parkway that was badly sited by giving Loughborough equal sway to Derby and Nottingham. The proposed new connecting services do not need new railway building as they can be reached from Sawley Junction (Long Eaton) via Sheet Stores Jn and that is the route for trains to Nottingham at the moment. Trains from Nottingham to the Erewash Valley can already use Attenborough Junction so one can see that Derby Nottingham trains can easily operate via Toton, were they would reverse. That would also give connections to the tram system extended from the other side of Toton Lane through Beeston and the University. It is only the trains that aren't in the budget because they are not part of HS2, they could also give rail access to Alfreton Parkway and if timetables permit Langley Mill from Derby. The benefits of this scheme in terms of connectivity probably significantly outweigh a high speed station near Castle Donington Airport for both Derby and Nottingham. It is a matter of pride though that Derby regards the main line as being through the town and definitely not via Nottingham. By road from the Derby Inner Ring Road you can be at the Toton Island Garden Centre way before you can get to the A50 and Castle Donington.

The connection at Old Oak Common is intended to get those travelling to central London on to the Elizabeth Line (Crossrail !) and will reduce the load on the Northern Line south of Euston rather than increase it.

Your last point and the dog's dinner in the East Midlands proves my point. Somebody currently taking one train from Nottingham will now have to take three. Or drive to a parkway and take two.

It is obviously the project's obsession with speed that means it has to bypass cities and airports.

As does  the bit about Stoke and other  cities being harmed economically. What sort of national project is that?

Eddington's report was at least an integrated strategy. HS2 is just what I said. An expensive mess that creates almost as many problems as it solves. And that's even before you get to the final cost which clearly will be massively higher than the original budget.

[Confused52]

45 minutes ago, grey_man said:

Your last point and the dog's dinner in the East Midlands proves my point. Somebody currently taking one train from Nottingham will now have to take three. Or drive to a parkway and take two.

It is obviously the project's obsession with speed that means it has to bypass cities and airports.

As does  the bit about Stoke and other  cities being harmed economically. What sort of national project is that?

Eddington's report was at least an integrated strategy. HS2 is just what I said. An expensive mess that creates almost as many problems as it solves. And that's even before you get to the final cost which clearly will be massively higher than the original budget.

I expect that Derby and Nottingham journeys will not take three trains, but at most two. The current slow trains will no doubt continue to operate direct to serve Loughborough and Leicester. The obsession with speed is to build one line instead of three from the Midlands southwards. The stark alternative is to build three more current inter-city routes which would cost even more and cause environmental damage. If you think any rail project is going to be on cost consider recent history which suggests not. The point is that leaving it the way it is today is just not a rational option.

[grey_man]

2 hours ago, Confused52 said:

I expect that Derby and Nottingham journeys will not take three trains, but at most two. The current slow trains will no doubt continue to operate direct to serve Loughborough and Leicester. The obsession with speed is to build one line instead of three from the Midlands southwards. The stark alternative is to build three more current inter-city routes which would cost even more and cause environmental damage. If you think any rail project is going to be on cost consider recent history which suggests not. The point is that leaving it the way it is today is just not a rational option.

Personally, I think the obsession with speed is nothing more than an obsession with speed from an industry that likes the idea coupled to a bottomless money pit. The design flaws of the project are so obvious, inevitable and a dead giveaway that the solution was developed for reasons other than functionality. Certainly Lord Adonis likes this kind of awful project. 

Not that we have a lot of choice in the matter now it has got this far. I still suspect it may never get past Birmingham or Crewe and that we'll see smarter solutions that serve the rest of the UK better.