Avanti West Coast « The Anonymous Widower

Thoughts On Class 807 Trains And High Speed Two’s Classic-Compatible Trains

Avanti West Coast’s New Class 807 Trains

Avanti West Coast have ordered a small fleet of Class 807 trains.

This article on Railnews, gives this short description.

There will be more seats, because a seven-car train will have 453 and five-car sets will have 301. First said the seven-car version will have about the same number of seats as a nine-car Pendolino, because each IET vehicle is longer, at 26m.

Adding standard details of other Hitachi trains in the family, the following seems to be known.

They are seven-car trains.
The cars are the standard twenty-six metres, so a seven-car train will be 182 metres.
Ten trains have been ordered.
I suspect that like all the other trains in the family, they will be 125 mph trains, that are capable of 140 mph, when the signalling and track allows.
They are pencilled in for services between London Euston and Birmingham New Street, Blackpool North and Liverpool Lime Street stations
They will not have batteries or diesel engines for emergency or hotel power. Could this mean, that the trains have been designed for high performance, by removing excess weight?
The trains don’t have a tilting capability. Does this save weight and increase acceleration?
The trains have 453 seats, as opposed to the nine-car Class 390 trains, which have 469 seats.

Could these trains be designed, to be able to better the Class 390 train schedules on the West Coast Main Line?

They have no tilting capability.
They can only work on electric power, like the Class 390 trains.
They could have very fast acceleration, due to the weight loss.
They only reduce capacity by 3.5 %, when compared to a nine-car Class 390 train.

In Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours?, this was my conclusion.

I believe the following will be possible.

- A two hour service between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street will be possible with Avanti West Coast’s new Class 807 trains.
- The current Class 390 trains could go a bit faster.
- I estimate that a Class 807 train could save as much as two-and-a-half-minutes at each stop.
- Blackpool North and London times will be comfortably under three hours.
- Coventry and London times will be comfortably under an hour.

The performance of these Class 807 trains will improve the West Coast Main Line.

What will London in two hours, do for Liverpool?

Class 807 Trains With Different Car Lengths

It is possible to create a table showing car length, train length and capacity for Class 807 trains

26 metres – 182 metres – 453 seats
26.5 metres – 185.5 metres – 462 seats
27 metres – 189 metres – 470 seats
27.5 metres – 192.5 metres – 479 seats
28 metres – 196 metres – 488 seats
28.5 metres – 199.5 metres – 497 seats

It seems that by lengthening all cars by half a metre, just adds nine seats.

Does this point to the fact, that twenty-six metres was a carefully-chosen optimal car length?

Class 807 Trains With Different Numbers Of Cars

A similar table can also be created for different numbers of twenty-six metre cars.

7 cars – 182 metres – 453 seats
8 cars – 208 metres – 518 seats
9 cars – 234 metres – 582 seats
10 cars – 260 metres – 647 seats

Note that as an eleven-car Class 390 train is 265.3 metres, a ten-car Class 807 train will fit all platforms, currently used by eleven-car Class 390 trains.

Replacement Of Eleven-Car Class 390 Trains With Class 807 Trains

The eleven-car Class 390 trains are 265.3 metres long and seat 589 passengers.

Looking at the two tables, nine-car Class 807 trains would be almost direct replacements for an eleven-car Class 390 trains.

The performance of the Class 807 trains would be as good if not better.
The passenger capacity of both trains would be similar, with just seven seats less in the new trains.
The Class 807 trains would also be shorter and could fit any platform currently served by an eleven-car Class 390 train.

It should also be noted, that the Class 807 trains would have to run as singles, as platforms on the West Coast Main Line can’t handle a four hundred metre train.

I believe it is highly likely that the classic-compatible trains for High Speed Two and the trains that replace the Class 390 trains will be the same and based on the Class 807 trains, that are now being assembled at Hitachi’s factory at Newton Aycliffe.

Could A Class 807 Train Be Stretched To Become A High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Train?

The Classic-Compatible trains are described in this section in Wikipedia, by this sentence.

The classic-compatible trains, capable of high speed but built to a British loading gauge, permitting them to leave the high speed track to join conventional routes such as the West Coast Main Line, Midland Main Line and East Coast Main Line. Such trains would allow running of HS2 services to the north of England and Scotland, although these non-tilting trains would run slower than existing tilting trains on conventional track. HS2 Ltd has stated that, because these trains must be specifically designed for the British network and cannot be bought “off-the-shelf”, these conventional trains were expected to be around 50% more expensive, costing around £40 million per train rather than £27 million for the captive stock.

The trains will have the same characteristics as the full-size trains.

Maximum speed of 225 mph.
Cruising speed of 205 mph on High Speed Two.
Length of 200 metres.
Ability to work in pairs.
A passenger capacity around 500-600 passengers.

A seven-car Class 807 train with twenty-six metre long cars would appear to be a partial match and tick all the boxes, except for the following.

The train’s maximum and cruising speeds are well below what is needed.
The train is only 182 metres long.
The train has a passenger capacity of 453.

Would a train with eight twenty-five metre long cars be a better fit?

The train length would be 200 metres.
I doubt twenty-five metre cars would cause a problem!
I estimate the passenger capacity would be 498 seats.

The trains or members of the same family have already shown.

They can run on the East Coast, Great Western, Midland and West Coast Main Lines.
They can run on High Speed One.
They can split and join automatically.
When needed they can run on local lines.

If I was Avanti West Coast’s train-Czar, I would be seriously interested in a Classic-Compatible High Speed Two train, that was very similar to one, that I already had in service. Provided, of course it did what it promised in the specification.

In Wikipedia, the car lengths for Class 800, Class 801, Class 802, Class 805 and Class 810 trains are all given and have been reported in the media.

But the car lengths of the Class 803 and Class 807 trains are not given. Is it just an omission or is it deliberate?

Both these trains are designed for demanding routes.

The Class 803 trains are designed for London and Edinburgh in four hours.
I believe that the Class 807 trains are designed for London and Liverpool in two hours.

To get these demanding times, have Hitachi changed the car lengths?

Trains with shorter cars might accelerate better.
A redesigned interior might get more passengers in the shorter length.

I shall await the launch of both these lightweight speedsters with interest!

Conclusion

I wouldn’t be surprised that Hitachi’s offering for more trains on the West Coast Main Line and the Classic-Compatible trains for High Speed Two are very similar to the Class 807 trains.

The classic-compatible trains for High Speed Two could be eight-car trains with twenty-five metre cars.
The replacements for the eleven-car Class 390 trains could be nine-car trains with twenty-six metre cars.

Both would be based on the Class 807 train.

July 15, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 390 Train, Class 807 Train, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains | 6 Comments

Macclesfield Station And High Speed Two

Today, I went to Macclesfield station.

In the latest iteration of High Speed Two, two new destinations were added to the High Speed Two Network; Macclesfield and Lancaster.

These pictures show Macclesfield station.

It is a modern station, with three through platforms, two bridges and some Modernist architecture from the 1970s, that could be improved.

This Google Map shows the layout of the station.

Note.

Platform 1 is in the West and is used by trains to Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly.
Platform 2 is in the middle and is used by trains going to Stoke, London and the South.
Platform 3 is in the East and appears to be used a couple of times per day.
It also appears there might have been a fourth platform.

All platforms appear capable of handling an eleven-car Class 390 train, which are over two hundred and sixty metres in length.

Is the plan to use Macclesfield as a High Speed Two terminal feasible?

Which Trains Will High Speed Two Use On Macclesfield Services?

It appears that High Speed Two will have two types of trains.

Trains built to the European loading gauge, that will only be able to work on high lines like High Speed One and High Speed Two. Examples would be Eurostar’s Class 373 and Class 374 trains.
Trains built to the UK loading gauge, that could also work on existing UK 125 mph routes like the East Coast, Great Western, Midland and West Coast Main Lines. Examples would be Class 800. Class 801, Class 802, Class 390 and Class 745 trains.

The second type, which are referred to, as class-compatible trains will be used to Macclesfield, as these services will share track with Class 390 and other trains, that have been or will be built to the smaller UK loading gauge.

Will Classic-Compatible High Speed Two Trains Fit Into Macclesfield Station?

Currently, every hour, one eleven-car Class 390 train calls in Macclesfield station in both directions, as they provide one of Avanti \west Coast’s three trains per hour (tph) between London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly stations.

The current trains are sixty metres longer than the proposed classic-compatible High Speed Two trains, that could be terminating in Macclesfield station.

How Would Passengers Who Started And Finished Their Journeys In Macclesfield, Connect to Manchester?

Currently, these hourly services connect Manchester Piccadilly and Stoke stations.

Avanti West Cost – Manchester Piccadilly and London Euston.
CrossCountry – Manchester Piccadilly and Bournemouth
CrossCountry – Manchester Piccadilly and Bristol
Northern – Manchester Piccadilly and Stoke, which stops at all stations.

The characteristics would be common to all these four trains.

Services call at Stockport, Macclesfield and Stoke stations.
As services share tracks with a High Speed Two service, they must be reasonably fast.
All except the Northern service are 125 mph trains.
The Northern service is run by a 90 mph Class 323 electric train.
As Manchester Piccadilly and Stoke via Stockport is a fully-electrified route, the trains should probably be able to take advantage.

In an ideal world should the frequency be six tph or one train every ten minutes in each direction?

Which Platforms Would Be Used To Terminate High Speed Two Services?

Trains built to the UK loading gauge could probably terminate in any of the three platforms.

But it might be advantageous to terminate all services in the same platform.

Platform 3 would be the obvious choice.

It shares an island platform with classic services going South between Manchester Piccadilly and Stoke.
Passengers starting their journeys in Manchester Piccadilly or Stockport could just walk across from their connecting train to the High Speed Two train.

It must surely be a possibility to make Platform 2 able to operate bi-directionally, so that all trains between Manchester Piccadilly and Stoke stations in both directions, stop in Platform 2, alongside the High Speed Two train for London and the South, that is waiting in Platform 3. The combined frequency would be eight tph. All passengers would just walk across the island platform to change trains.

Could A North-Facing Bay Platform Be Fitted Into The Northern End Of The Island Platform 2/3?

If you are going to provide a High Speed Two service to and from Macclesfield station, it needs to have superb and comprehensive connections to as many places as possible.

The station currently has four tph to Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport and Stoke, but would a North-facing bay platform with level access to the High Speed Two platform make any of the following feasible?

Run a second local stopping service between Manchester Piccadilly and Macclesfield to give all intermediate stations two tph to High Speed Two.
Run hourly services to places that don’t have good connections to high speed services to London and the South.
The Stockport and Stalybridge Line could be used to connect Stalybridge and Huddersfield to High Speed Two.
There might even be a way of creating a link between Macclesfield and Manchester Airport.

Note.

Looking at the platform layout at Macclesfield station, fitting in a bay platform would appear to be feasible.
The important Stockport station, which seems to have been forgotten by High Speed Two would probably have at least six tph to High Speed Two at Macclesfield station.
The local train could be timed to arrive at Macclesfield station, a convenient time before the High Speed Two train is scheduled to depart.

The bay platform could even be part of Platform 3, if it was decided that trains stopping in Platform 3, never used the platform as a through platform. It would be Macclesfield’s version of the Clapham Kiss.

I suspect more space could be found, by moving the signal box at the end of the station.

\remember that these days most signalling is controlled from centralised Rail Operation Centres.

Could High Speed Two Trains Run Between Macclesfield And Manchester Piccadilly?

As I said earlier, High Speed Two’s classic-compatible trains will be the same cross-section and shorter, than an eleven-car Class 390 train.

So the answer to my question must be yes!

This would enable a stop at Stockport station.
No platform lengthening would be required at Manchester Piccadilly and Stockport stations.

High Speed Two must have good reasons for using Macclesfield as a terminal.

There are capacity issues between Macclesfield and Manchester Piccadilly stations.
Macclesfield offers opportunities to connect to places, that are difficult to reach from Manchester Piccadilly station.

But these problems could probably be overcome by digital signalling or extension of the Manchester Metrolink.

Could More High Speed Two Services Run Between Macclesfield Station and The South?

Consider.

I believe that Macclesfield station could handle more than an hourly High Speed Two train.
It is a general principle, that on a metro like the London Overground or Merseyrail, that a single platform can handle up to four or even six tph.
Four tph would surely be too high, but Macclesfield could easily handle a second classic-compatible train to and from Birmingham Curzon Street via Stoke and Stafford.
During the inevitable works at Manchester Piccadilly station to sccomodate High Speed Two, Macclesfield could offer an alternative route, between London and Manchester.

Using Macclesfield station, as an alternative terminal for Manchester Piccadilly, builds in extra capacity for the future and offers a valuable alternative route during construction and upgrade works.

Rationalisation Between Cross Country And High Speed Two

Consider.

In a lot of locations North of Birmingham, CrossCountry and High Speed Two seem to provide similar services between the same stations.
Using currently proposed connections between High Speed Two and the classic network, CrossCountry’s services could run faster.
CrossCountry’s new fleet of trains will probably be multi-mode trains, that will be very similar to the classic-compatible High Speed Two trains.
Some of the routes used by CrossCountry’s services will have a substantial upgrade to allow higher speeds and more trains, to speed up High Speed Two services.

There must be a case for rationalisation of services.

Conclusion

The more I look at High Speed Two terminating at Macclesfield station, the more I like it.

I can see these services running from the station in the future.

High Speed Two – Macclesfield and London Euston – One tph – This service would additionally call at Birmingham Interchange to link up with CrossCountry to the South.
High Speed Two – Macclesfield and Birmingham Curzon Street – One tph
CrossCountry – Macclesfield and Bournemouth, Plymouth or Reading – One tph.
Northern and others – Macclesfield and Manchester Piccadilly via Stockport – Four-six tph
Northern – Macclesfield and Huddersfield via Stockport and Stalybridge – Two tph
Northern – Macclesfield and Manchester Airport – Two tph.

Obviously, this is all speculation, but Macclesfield will develop into an important rail hub to the South-East of Manchester.

July 14, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 390 Train, CrossCountry Trains, Euston Station, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, Macclesfield Station, Manchester Piccadilly Station, Stockport Station | 4 Comments

Birmingham-Black Country-Shrewsbury

On the Midlands Connect web site, they have a page, which is entitled Birmingham-Black Country-Shrewsbury.

This is the introductory paragraph.

We’re examining the case to increase services from three to four per hour, made possible by capacity released post-HS2.

They then give the outline of their plans, which can be summed up as follows.

Services on the corridor are slow and unreliable.
Network Rail say the service is in danger of acute overcrowding.
Services will be increased from three trains per hour (tph) to four.
A direct hourly service from Shrewsbury, Wellington and Telford to London will be introduced.
Services to Birmingham International will be doubled.
The economic case will be examined for speeding up services between Shrewsbury and Birmingham from 56 to 45 minutes, via track upgrades and possible electrification.

It seems a safe, and not overly ambitious plan.

These are my thoughts.

Shrewsbury’s Unique Position

These are distances and times from important stations.

Birmingham International – 51 miles and 83 minutes
Birmingham New Street – 42.5 miles and 71 minutes
Chester – 42.5 miles and 53 minutes
Crewe – 33 miles and 53 minutes
Hereford – 51 miles and 59 minutes
Telford – 14 miles and 21 minutes
Wellington – 10 miles and 13 minutes
Welshpool – 20 miles and 25 minutes
Wolverhampton – 30 miles and 50 minutes

In Sparking A Revolution, I quoted this Hitachi-specification for a battery-electric train.

Range – 55-65 miles
Performance – 90-100 mph
Recharge – 10 minutes when static
Routes – Suburban near electrified lines
Battery Life – 8-10 years

I can’t see any problem, for a train with this specification being able to reach Shrewsbury from Birmingham International, Birmingham New Street and Crewe on battery power.

In Hitachi Trains For Avanti, I quote an article with the same title in the January 2020 Edition of Modern Railways as saying this.

Hitachi told Modern Railways it was unable to confirm the rating of the diesel engines on the bi-modes, but said these would be replaceable by batteries in future if specified.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Shrewsbury served from Birmingham and Crewe by fast electric trains, that used battery power. Avanti West Coast certainly seem to have that thought in mind.

Zero Carbon Trains Between Shrewsbury And Wales

It will be a formidable challenge to run battery trains from Shrewsbury to the Welsh destinations.

Aberystwyth – 81.5 miles
Cardiff – 107 miles
Carmarthen – 185 miles
Holyhead – 133 miles
Milford Haven – 225 miles
Swansea – 121.5 miles

Note.

These are challenging distances for battery-electric trains.
South Wales destinations served via Newport and Cardiff could use the electrification on the South Wales Main Line.
Many of these services start from East of Shrewsbury and can use the electrified lines that connects to Birmingham New Street and Manchester Piccadilly.

Unless someone like Riding Sunbeams, makes a breakthrough, I can’t see battery-electric trains running to Welsh destinations from Shrewsbury.

Transport for Wales New Trains

Transport for Wales have ordered seventy-seven new Class 197 trains, and these diesel trains will be used for services through Shrewsbury, mainly on services to Birmingham New Street and Birmingham International stations.

If these trains are similar to Northern’s Class 195 trains, they will be diesel multiple units with a noisy mechanical transmission.
I was surprised in these days of global warming that Transport for Wales didn’t buy something more eco-friendly, as they have for South Wales and the services around Chester.
The transmission of the Class 197 trains has not been disclosed.

Perhaps, CAF are going to do something innovative.

The CAF Civity is a modular train, with either electric or diesel power options.
The diesel-powered options use MTU engines.
A logical development would be to use an MTU Hybrid PowerPack to reduce diesel consumption and emissions.
This PowerPack would also reduce noise, as it has an electric transmission.
I wonder, if CAF can raid their parts bin and fit a pantograph, so where 25 KVAC overhead electrification is available, it can be used.
If CAF can convert a bog standard diesel multiple unit into a hybrid diesel-electric-battery multiple unit, by performing a heart transplant, it is a neat way of keeping new diesel Civities running until a later date.
Remember that Northern and West Modlands Trains have another seventy-four similar new diesel Civities in operation or on order. With trains having a forty year life, they don’t fit with an early phasing out of diesel.

I have no idea, what is actually happening, but my engineer’s nose tells me to expect a surprise from CAF.

Increasing Birmingham And Shrewsbury Services From Three Trains Per Hour To Four

Four trains per hour or one train every fifteen minutes seems to be a preferred frequency on several UK suburban lines.

These services seem to provide four tph or better on most, if not all of their routes.

Birmingham Cross-City Line
London Overground
Merseyrail
Tyne and Wear Metro

Four tph seems to be a very handy Turn-Up-And-Go frequency that encourages people to use rail services.

So I am not surprised to see Midlands Connect wanting four tph between Birmingham and Shrewsbury.

Currently, the following services seem to operate between Shrewsbury and Birmingham.

Avanti West Coast – 2 trains per day (tpd) – Shrewsbury and London Euston via Birmingham New Street and Birmingham International.
Trains for Wales – 1 train per two hours (tp2h) – Holyhead and Birmingham International via Birmingham New Street.
Trains for Wales 1 tph – Aberystwyth/Pwllheli and Birmingham International via Birmingham New Street
West Midlands Trains – 2 tph – Shrewsbury and Birmingham New Street – One semi-fast and one stopper.

Note.

All services call at Wolverhampton, Telford and Wellington.
Shrewsbury and Birmingham New Street is a 3.5 tph service.
Shrewsbury and Birmingham International is a 1.5 tph service.

It relies heavily on services from Trains for Wales, who probably don’t put Shrewsbury and Birmingham services at the top of their priorities.

I remember, when local services in the North-East of London were run by Greater Anglia from Norwich. Moving some services to Transport for London, brought about a large improvement

Quite frankly, the current service is best described as pathetic.

Should Trains for Wales Services Terminate As Shrewsbury?

I suspect some local politicians in Shrewsbury and Birmingham, think it would be best to adopt this sort of strategy.

All Welsh services terminate at Shrewsbury.
Birmingham and Shrewsbury mandate West Midlands Trains and Avanti West Coast to provide a frequent service between Shrewsbury and Birmingham.

It might be the way to go, but many travellers from the Marches, would probably want direct connections to Birmingham, Birmingham Airport and in the future High Speed Two.

Introducing A Direct Hourly Service From Shrewsbury, Wellington And Telford To London

On the face of it, it looks like a much needed service to and from Shrewsbury.

It will be hourly.
Initially it will use Class 221 diesel multiple units, but these will be replaced with bi-mode Class 805 trains.
The current infrequent service calls at Watford Junction, Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham International, Birmingham New Street, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Telford Central and Wellington.
There are also six other stations between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton, which might like an improved service.
The service will be run by Avanti West Coast.

There might also be the possibility of using battery power between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury, which is only thirty miles each way.

But there are other collateral benefits.

The service increases the frequency between Shrewsbury and Birmingham New Street stations by one tph to 4.5 tph
The service increases the frequency between Shrewsbury and Birmingham International by one tph to 2.5 tph.
The service increases the frequency between Wolverhampton and London Euston by one tph.
The service increases the frequency between Sandwell and Dudley and London Euston by one tph
The service increases the frequency between Birmingham New Street and London Euston by one tph.
The service increases the frequency between Birmingham International and London Euston by one tph.
The new service will provide an hourly quality connection to High Speed Two at Birmingham International for stations between Shrewsbury and Coventry.
It appears that the Class 390 trains to Birmingham New Street and being replaced by new Class 807 trains, so Birmingham will have three out of four tph, run by new trains.
The new Shrewsbury service , has a similar calling pattern to that of the current Scottish service through Birmingham. Will it replace that service, when High Speed Two opens?

Note.

Midlands Connect’s objective of four tph between Shrewsbury and Birmingham has been met.
Several stations get a better direct service to London.
Connectivity to High Speed Two is improved.
Birmingham New Street and London is now a Turn-Up-And-Go frequency of four tph.
The Class 805 train will also mean that Avanti West Coast could be zero-carbon in Birmingham. Especially, if it used battery power between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury stations.

The hourly direct service between Shrewsbury and London will make a lot of difference to train services between Shrewsbury and Birmingham.

Avanti’s London Euston and Birmingham New Street Service

Consider.

There are two tph that terminate in Birmingham New Street station, that take 88-89 minutes, from London Euston
There is one tph that goes through Birmingham New Street station to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Preston, or Shrewsbury, that takes 82-84 minutes, from London Euston.
Currently, the two terminating trains are Class 390 trains, whereas the through train can be a Class 221 train as well.
Through trains are allowed 5-10 minutes to pass through Birmingham New Street.
Trains that terminate at Birmingham New Street station are allowed 20-30 minutes to arrive and leave.
Avanti West Coast have said, that they will be running Class 807 trains between London and Birmingham New Street.

It doesn’t seem to be the best use of scarce platform resources in a busy station to park a train there for half-an-hour.

In Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours?, I came to the conclusion that the Class 807 trains have been designed as simple, fast, lightweight all-electric trains with no heavy batteries, diesel engines or tilt mechanism.

I think they’ll be able to shave a few minutes on the timings between London Euston and Birmingham New Street station.
I would suspect that they will match the 82-84 minutes of the through trains
The ultimate would be if they could do a round trip between London Euston and Birmingham New Street in three hours.
Two tph run by what would effectively be a London-Birmingham shuttle would need just six trains.

It might mean new methods of manning the trains, to reduce turnround times.

Doubling Of Services Between Shrewsbury And Birmingham International

The hourly direct London and Shrewsbury Avanti West Coast service will raise the current 1.5 tph service between Shrewsbury and Birmingham International to 2.5 tph, so will be a good start.

Perhaps Trains for Wales could find the missing 0.5 tph.
West Midlands Trains might be able to squeeze in another train.

But I suspect that the crowded line between Birmingham New Street and Birmingham International is the problem.

Shrewsbury And Birmingham In Forty-Five Minutes

This is the last objective and saving eleven minutes on this route would suggest that the best way would surely be to fully electrify the route.

Between Wolverhampton and Birmingham International stations is fully electrified.
Electric trains have faster acceleration and deceleration, so would probably achieve the required savings if they stopped more than five times.
From my virtual helicopter it doesn’t appear to be the most challenging of routes to electrify.
Only about thirty miles of double track would need to be electrified between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury stations.
Both Trains for Wales and West Midlands Trains would have to obtain new electric trains.
Avanti West Coast have already got bi-mode Class 805 trains, that could use the electrification.

But will Trains for Wales go along with Midlands Connect, when they tell them to get electric or bi-mode trains to work between Shrewsbury and Birmingham International stations?

It is because of dilemmas like this, that I feel that electric trains using battery or hydrogen power, when away from electrification can be a very good alternative.

There is no major disruption raising bridges for the electrification.
Stations don’t need to be closed for electrification.
The trains have all the comfort and performance of electric trains.
Costs and timescales can be reduced.
When running on battery or hydrogen power, these trains are very quiet, as there is no pantograph noise.

To run battery-electric trains between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton, the only infrastructure needed would be a method of charging the train at Shrewsbury station.

This Google Map shows the Southern end of Shrewsbury station.

Note.

The platforms are built over the River Severn.
The five-car Class 221 train in Virgin livery sitting in Platform 5.
When this train leaves it will turn left or to the East for Wolverhampton and Birmingham.
Trains can turn right for Wales.

It is a very unusual station layout.

Platform 5 is one of a pair of bay platforms; 5 & 6, that can access either Wales or Birmingham.
Outside of the bay platforms are a pair of through platforms; 4 & 7, that can also access Wales or Birmingham, but they can also access Chester by going through the station.
The 115 metre long Class 221 train fits easily in the bay platform 5.
The 130 metre long Class 805 train would probably need to use Platform 4 or 7.

But with well-planned electrification, it would be ideal for charging electric trains as they pass through or turned back!

Once the train reaches Wolverhampton, it will connect to electrification again.

Shrewsbury And High Speed Two

Currently, Shrewsbury has three connections to stations, where it would be convenient to take a High Speed Two train.

Birmingham International, which is 51 miles and 83 minutes away. Plus a ride on a people mover for High Speed Two.
Birmingham New Street, which is 42.5 miles and 71 minutes away. Plus a walk to Birmingham Curzon Street for High Speed Two.
Crewe, which is 33 miles and 55 minutes away.

Passengers will make their own choice.

Could Shrewsbury Have A Classic-Compatible High Speed Two Service To Manchester Piccadilly?

London To Shrewsbury, Now And Post-High Speed Two

Travel On Monday

If I want to go to Shrewsbury next Monday, one fast journey is taking the 09:10 from Euston and changing at Crewe, which gives a journey time of two hours and thirty-two minutes.

I can also get a train with a change at Birmingham International that takes seven minutes longer.

Travel On High Speed Two

After High Speed Two opens to Birmingham Curzon Street and Interchange in Phase 1 what sort of times to Shrewsbury can be expected?

I estimate the following.

Travelling via Birmingham Curzon Street could produce a time of around one hour and fifty minutes, if you’re lucky with the trains.
Travelling via Crewe could produce a time of one hour and thirty minutes, if you’re lucky with the trains.
Travelling via Interchange could produce a time of around one hour and fifty-five minutes. or forty-four minutes faster.

If I was going to Shrewsbury after High Speed Two has opened, I would probably change at Birmingham Curzon Street, if the walk to New Street station was still within my capabilities, as there will be a Turn-Up-And-Go frequency of four tph between Birmingham New Street and Shrewsbury stations.

Looking at the Midlands Connect objectives, these help with linking Shrewsbury with London.

Increasing services between Birmingham and Shrewsbury to four tph, as it’s Turn-Up-And-Go!
The direct hourly service to London from Shrewsbury, Wellington and Telford might be the quickest way to London by changing at Birmingham New Street/Curzon Street or Interchange.
Doubling the service between Shrewsbury and Birmingham International, may be a good move, as Interchange, which will be connected to Birmingham International by a high capacity people mover, will have five tph between London Euston and Old Oak Common stations.
Saving eleven minutes between Shrewsbury and Birmingham will certainly help.

Travelling between London and Telford, Wellington and Shrewsbury will be much improved.

June 27, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Battery-Electric Trains, Birmingham Curzon Street Station, Birmingham Interchange Station, Birmingham International Station, Birmingham New Street Station, Class 221 Train, Class 805 Train, Class 807 Train, High Speed Two, Midlands Connect, mtu Hybrid PowerPack, Shrewsbury Station, West Midlands Trains, Wolverhampton Station | 7 Comments

Existing Stations Where High Speed Two Trains Will Call

The June 2020 Edition Of Modern Railways has an article called HS2 Minister Backs 18 tph Frequency, which gives a detailed diagram of the route structure of High Speed Two and it is possible to summarise the stations, where High Speed Two trains will call.

Carlisle – 3 tph – 400 metres – Split/Join
Chesterfield – 1 tph – 200 metres
Crewe – 2 tph – 400 metres – Split/Join
Darlington – 2 tph – 200 metres
Durham – 1 tph – 200 metres
East Midlands Hub HS2 – 7 tph – 400 metres – Split/Join
Edinburgh Haymarket – 2.5 tph – 200 metres
Edinburgh Waverley – 2.5 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
Glasgow Central – 2.5 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
Lancaster – 2 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
Leeds HS2 – 5 tph – 400 metres
Liverpool Lime Street – 2 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
Lockerbie – 1 tph – 200 metres
Macclesfield – 1 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
Manchester Airport HS2 – 5 tph – 400 metres
Manchester Piccadilly HS2 – 5 tph – 400 metres
Motherwell – 0.5 tph – 200 metres
Newcastle – 3 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
Oxenholme – 0.5 tph – 200 metres
Penrith – 0.5n tph – 200 metres
Preston – 4 tph – 400 metres
Runcorn – 2 tph – 200 metres
Sheffield – 2 tph – 200 metres
Stafford – 1 tph – 200 metres
Stoke-on-Trent – 1 tph – 200 metres
Warrington Bank Quay – 1 tph – 200 metres
Wigan North Western – 1 tph – 200 metres
York – 4 tph – 200 metres

Note.

HS2 after the station name indicates a new station for High Speed Two
tph is trains per hour
0.5 tph is one train per two hours (tp2h).
200/400 metres is the maximum length of trains that will call.
Terminal indicates that trains will terminate at these stations.
Split/Join indicates that trains will split and join at these stations.

These are more detailed thoughts on how existing stations will need to be modified.

Train Lengths

Before, I look at the individual stations, I’ll look at the train lengths.

High Speed Two train – Single – 200 metres
High Speed Two train – Pair – 400 metres
Class 390 train – 11-car – 265.3 metres
Class 390 train – 9-car – 217.5 metres
Class 807 train – 7-car – 182 metres
Class 810 train – 5-car – 120 metres
Class 810 train – Pair of 5-car – 240 metres
InterCity 125 – 2+8 – 220 metres
InterCity 225 – 9-car – 245 metres
Class 222 train – 4-car – 93.34 metres
Class 222 train – 5-car – 116.16 metres
Class 222 train – 7-car – 161.8 metres
Class 222 train – 4-car+5-car – 209.5 metres
Class 222 train – 5-car+5-car – 232.32 metres

These are the thoughts on the individual stations.

Carlisle

Carlisle station will need two 400 metre through platforms, so each can accommodate a pair of 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

I estimate the platforms are about 380 metres, but it looks like, they could be lengthened, without too much difficulty.

As High Speed Two trains to the North of Carlisle will be 200 metres long, there would probably be no need for platform lengthening North of Carlisle, as these trains are shorter than the Class 390 trains, that currently work the routes to Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Carlisle station is step-free, has good secondary rail connections and is within walking distance of the city centre.

The only thing it needs, is a connection to Edinburgh on a rebuilt Borders Railway.

Chesterfield

Consider.

Chesterfield station will need to handle 200 metre trains.
Chesterfield station may be rebuilt for High Speed Two.
Chesterfield station can handle an InterCity 125, which is 220 metres.
It will need to handle a pair of Class 810 trains, which would be 240 metres.

This Google Map shows Chesterfield station.

Note.

The slow lines passing the station on the Eastern side.
There are two long through platforms and a third bi-directional platform on the down slow line.

There is space to build two long platforms for High Speed Two, but is it worth it, when one one tph will stop?

According to High Speed Two’s Journey Time Calculator, trains will take just twelve minutes between Sheffield and Chesterfield stations.
This compares with 12-15 minutes for the current diesel trains.
The distance between the two stations is 14 miles, which means that a twelve minute trip has an average speed of 70 mph.
If there are still two tph to St. Pancras, there will be four tph, that run fast between the Sheffield and Chesterfield stations, of which three will stop at Chesterfield.

I think this could result in a simple and efficient design for the tracks between Sheffield and South of Clay Cross, where High Speed Two joins the Erewash Valley Line.

Chesterfield station is step-free.

Crewe

Crewe station will need two 400 metre through platforms, so each can accommodate a pair of 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

There have been references to rebuilding of Crewe stations, but it does appear that some platforms are over 300 metres long.

Darlington

Darlington station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Durham

Durham station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Edinburgh Haymarket

Edinburgh Haymarket station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Edinburgh Waverley

Edinburgh Waverley station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Glasgow Central

Glasgow Central station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Currently, Avanti West Coast runs the following services to Glasgow Central.

One tph from London Euston calling at Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme Lake District (1tp2h), Penrith (1tp2h) and Carlisle.
One tp2h from London Euston calling at Milton Keynes Central, Coventry, Birmingham International, Birmingham New Street, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Crewe, Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme Lake District (1tp2h), Penrith (1tp2h) and Carlisle.

High Speed Two is proposing to run the following trains to Glasgow Central.

Two tph from London Euston calling at Old Oak Common, Preston and Carlisle.
One tp2h from Birmingham Curzon Street calling at Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme (1tp2h), Penrith (1tp2h), Carlisle, Lockerbie and Motherwell (1tp2h)

If the current services to Glasgow Central were to be replaced by the High Speed Two services, most travellers would get a similar or better service.

But if Avanti West Coast decide to drop their classic services to Glasgow via Birmingham, will travellers starting between Milton Keynes and Crewe, be a bit miffed to lose their direct services to Glasgow?

Glasgow Central station would appear to be ready for High Speed Two.

Lancaster

I was initially surprised, that on High Speed Two, one tph would terminate at Lancaster station.

This Google Map shows the station.

Note.

There are two bypass lines without any platforms on the Western side of the tracks, where trains can speed through.
The station has five platforms.
Some Avanti West Coast services terminate at Lancaster station.
265 metre, eleven-car Class 390 trains, stop in Lancaster station.

As High Speed Two services will use 200 metre trains, which are shorter than all Class 390 trains, I would suspect that High Speed Two services will be able to be turned at Lancaster station, without too much difficulty.

Liverpool Lime Street

Liverpool Lime Street station will need to be able to turn two 200 metre High Speed Two tph.

The remodelling of the station in 2018, probably allowed for two tph between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street station.
From 2022-2023, it will be turning two Class 807 trains per hour, which will probably be 182 metres long.

Liverpool Lime Street station may well be ready for Phase One of High Speed Two. It’s also very much step-free.

There are also alternative plans for a new High Speed station in Liverpool.

It would be alongside the current Liverpool Lime Street station.
The station would have a route to High Speed Two at Crewe via Warrington and a junction at High Legh.
Northern Powerhouse Rail would start in the station and go to Manchester via Warrington, High Legh and Manchester Airport.
It would enable six tph between Liverpool and Manchester, in a time of just 26 minutes.

I talked about this plan in Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North, where I included this map.

High Legh Junction is numbered 5 and 6.

Nothing published about High Speed Two, would appear to rule this plan out.

Lockerbie

Lockerbie station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Macclesfield

I was initially surprised, that on High Speed Two, one tph would terminal at Macclesfield station.

This Google Map shows the station.

Wikipedia says this about the platforms in the station.

There are three platforms but only two are in regular use, the up platform for services to Manchester and the down platform to Stoke-on-Trent and Birmingham. Platform 3 sees a small number of services. Evidence of a fourth platform can be seen, on which a Network Rail building now exists.

As the station has a regular Avanti West Coast service every hour, the platforms must be over 200 metres long and they will be long enough for the 200 metre High Speed Two trains.

So why would High Speed Two want to terminate a train at Macclesfield, rather than at Manchester Piccadilly as they do now?

Currently, Avanti West Coast runs these services between London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly.

One tph via Milton Keynes Central, Stoke-on-Trent and Stockport.
One tph via Stoke-on-Trent, Macclesfield and Stockport
One tph via Stafford, Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport

The diagram in the Modern Railways article shows these High Speed Two services to Manchester Piccadilly.

One tph from London Euston via Old Oak Common, Birmingham Interchange and Manchester Airport
Two tph from London Euston via Old Oak Common and Manchester Airport
Two tph from Birmingham Curzon Street via Manchester Airport.

Note.

None of these five tph serve Macclesfield, Milton Keynes Central, Stockport, Stoke-on-Trent or Wilmslow.
All five proposed services are shown to call at Manchester Airport.
It is likely, that a tunnel will be bored between Manchester Airport and Manchester Piccadilly stations.
The High Speed Two station at Manchester Piccadilly might even be in a tunnel under the current Manchester Piccadilly station or central Manchester.
A below-ground High Speed Two station for Manchester could also serve Northern Powerhouse Rail services to Leeds and the East.
According to the plans, I talked about under Liverpool Lime Street earlier, there could also be up to six tph running between Liverpool and Manchester via Manchester Airport, as part of Northern Powerhouse Rail.

Plans need to be developed to serve the towns and cities, that will not be served by High Speed Two’s current proposals.

It appears Stafford, Stoke-on-Trent and Macclesfield will be served by an independent High Speed Two service from London Euston.
Terminating one tph at Macclesfield station doesn’t appear to be challenging.
A rail route between Macclesfield and Manchester Airport to link up with the proposed tunnel could be very difficult.
Manchester Piccadilly and Macclesfield stations have a frequent rail connection, with most trains calling at Stockport station.
Perhaps during construction work for High Speed Two in the centre of Manchester, Macclesfield station can be used as an alternative route into the city, using the existing Manchester Piccadilly station.

The London Euston and Macclesfield service via Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent could be a pragmatic solution to part of the problem, but what about Milton Keynes, Wilmslow and Stockport?

According to the title of the Modern Railways article, High Speed Two will have a maximum frequency of 18 tph.

When fully-developed, the current proposed timetable shows the following.

A frequency of 17 tph between London Euston and Birmingham Interchange stations.
A frequency of 11 tph between Birmingham and Crewe.
A frequency of 9 tph through East Midlands Hub station.

It would appear that if there is a capacity bottleneck, it is between London and Birmingham.

However if classic services to Manchester Piccadilly are replaced by the High Speed Two services to the city via the new tunnel from Manchester Airport to a new station in the City Centre, there will be spare capacity on the Crewe and Manchester Piccadilly route via Wilmslow and Stockport stations.

This could lead to a number of solutions.

A direct High Speed Two service runs using the spare path, between London and the current Manchester Piccadilly station.
Similar to the previous service, but the service splits and joins at Crewe, with one individual train going to Manchester Piccadilly and the other somewhere else. Blackpool?
One service between London and Liverpool is planned to split and join at Crewe with individual trains going to Lancaster and Liverpool. The other Liverpool service could split at Crewe with individual trains going to Liverpool and Manchester Piccadilly.
The service between London and Macclesfield is run by a pair of trains, that split at Birmingham Interchange, with individual trains going to Macclesfield and Manchester Piccadilly. The advantage of this service, is that if you got into the wrong train, you’d still be going to roughly the same destination.
Wikipedia says “At peak times, the current Avanti West Coast services may additionally call at one or more of: Watford Junction, Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Lichfield Trent Valley.” So why not run classic services on the West Coast Main Line between Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Milton Keynes using suitably fast trains. Perhaps, the new Class 807 trains would be ideal.

Note.

All services serving the current Manchester Piccadilly station would call at Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport stations.
Passengers going to or from Manchester Airport would change at Crewe.

The more I look at Macclesfield, the more I like using it as a High Speed Two destination.

Motherwell

Motherwell station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Newcastle

Newcastle station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Oxenholme

Oxenholme station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Penrith

Penrith station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Preston

Preston station will need two 400 metre through platforms, so each can accommodate a pair of 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

I estimate that the main through platforms aren’t much short of the required 400 metres.

But something must be done to make the station step-free.

Runcorn

Runcorn station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 217 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also step-free.

Sheffield

Sheffield station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

As the station can already handle a 220 metre InterCity 125, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also substantially step-free.

Stafford

Stafford station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also step-free.

Wikipedia says this about Stafford station and High Speed Two.

Under current proposals, Stafford will be a part of the High Speed 2 network, via a ‘Classic Compatible’ junction, which will allow HS2 trains to operate to Stafford, and further on towards Liverpool. This would shorten journey time from Stafford to London, to an estimated 53 minutes. Under current proposals it is expected that an hourly services will operate in both directions, however it is currently unclear if these services will terminate at Stafford, or Liverpool.

This does appear to be rather out of date with High Speed Two’s latest proposals as disclosed in the Modern Railways article, which say that Stafford is served by the following service.

One tph between London Euston and Macclesfield.
Calls at Old Oak Common, Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent.
A 200 metre train.

One possibility must surely be to run a pair of 200 metre trains to and from Stafford, where they would split and join.

One could go as currently proposed to Stoke-on-Trent and Macclesfield.
The second train could go to Liverpool via Crewe and Runcorn or Manchester Piccadilly via Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport.
The recent works at Norton Bridge Junction will have improved the route for the second train.

There would need to be platform lengthening at Stafford to accommodate the 400 metre pair of trains.

A split and join at Stafford does show the possibilities of the technique.

Another possibility is mentioned for Stafford in Wikipedia.

There is also been proposals to reintroduce services to Stafford to terminate on the Chase Line which was cutback to Rugeley Trent Valley in 2008. The Key Corridors states “Extension of Chase Line services to Stafford”. This is proposed to be in development.

It will surely connect a lot of people to Stafford for High Speed Two.

The extract from Wikipedia, that I used earlier, mentions a Classic Compatible junction, which will allow High Speed Two trains to reach Stafford.

This map clipped from the High Speed Two web site, shows the junction North of Lichfield, where High Speed Two connects to the Trent Valley Line through Stafford.

Note.

High Speed Two runs North-South across the map.
After the Junction by Fradley South,
High Speed Two to Crewe and the North, is the branch to the East.
The other branch connects to the Trent Valley Line, which can be picked out North of Lichfield, where it passes through Lichfield Trent Valley station.

The Trent Valley Line is no Victorian double-track slow-speed bottleneck.

Most of the route between Rugby and Stafford is three or four tracks.
The speed limit is generally 125 mph.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Avanti West Coast’s Class 390 and Class 807 trains running at 140 mph on the route.
This speed would probably be attained by High Speed Two trains.

London Euston and Stafford would only have under twenty miles of slower line and that could be 140 mph, so High Speed Two times on the route could be very fast. High Speed Two is quoting 54 minutes on their Journey Time Calculator.

Stoke-on-Trent

Stoke-on-Trent station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also step-free.

Warrington Bank Quay

Warrington Bank Quay station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Wigan North Western

Wigan North Western station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

In Is Wigan North Western Station Ready For High Speed Two?, I said this.

Wigan North Western station would accept a single-train now, but the platforms would need lengthening to handle a double-train.

As all trains through Wigan North Western station will only be 200 metre single trains and the station is step-free, the station appears to be ready for High Speed Two.

York

York station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Conclusion

I have come to these conclusions.

Because most of these stations have been rebuilt in the last few decades to accommodate the 200-plus metre InterCity 125s, InterCity 225s and Class 390 trains, all the stations can handle a 200 metre High Speed Two train without significant lengthening.
Some stations like Carlisle, Crewe, Preston and Stafford may need a small amount of platform lengthening to accommodate a pair of trains, but most of the improvements needed for a world-class High Speed railway will be more refurbishment than a complete rebuild.
Using existing platforms at Lancaster and Macclesfield stations as terminal platforms is an elegant and a much more affordable solution than building new stations or even platforms.
Because all five tph into the High Speed Two station at Manchester Piccadilly go via Manchester Airport, I would envisage that this will be in a tunnel, that can be part of a future Northern Powerhouse Rail.

I also think that the plan has been devised with the Project Management and minimising disruption to travellers in mind.

June 13, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 390 Train, Class 807 Train, High Speed Two, HS3/Northern Powerhouse Rail, InterCity 125, InterCity 225, Lancaster Station, Macclesfield Station, Project Management, Stations, Step-Free, West Coast Main Line | 6 Comments

Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours?

Note that I have rewritten this post to take account of this information from the January 2020 and December 2022 Editions of Modern Railways, in an article, which is entitled Hitachi Trains For Avanti.

This is said about the ten all-electric AT-300 trains for Birmingham, Blackpool and Liverpool services, which have now been numbered as Class 807 trains.

The electric trains will be fully reliant on the overhead wire, with no diesel auxiliary engines or batteries.

It may go against Hitachi’s original design philosophy, but not carrying excess weight around, must improve train performance, because of better acceleration.

Currently, Avanti West Coast‘s trains between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street stations are timetabled as follows.

The journey takes two hours and thirteen or fourteen minutes.
There are three stops at Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.
The stops with the current Class 390 trains seem to take around a minute.
There is one train per hour (tph)
A second hourly service with a stop at Liverpool South Parkway is planned to be introduced in December 2022.

In 2022, a new fleet of Hitachi AT-300 trains will be introduced on the route. I believe, it would be reasonable to assume, that these Class 807 trains will have similar or better performance, than the current Class 390 trains.

Acceleration and braking are likely to be better.
Regenerative braking energy may well be handled more efficiently.
The trains may well be equipped with in-cab digital signalling and be able to travel in excess of 125 mph in places, where the track allows.

I would expect, that these trains could be running near to or at 125 mph for most of the journey.

London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street are 193.5 miles apart, so if a train could be running at 125 mph all the way, a train would take 93 minutes.

Extra time must be added for the following.

Acceleration from a standing start to 125 mph at London Euston, Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.
Deceleration from 125 mph to a stop at Stafford, Crewe, Runcorn and Liverpool Lime Street.
Dwell time in the platforms at Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.

This page on the Eversholt Rail web site, has a data sheet for a Class 802 train, which is a bi-mode AT-300 train with three diesel engines.

The data sheet shows that a five-car train can accelerate to 125 mph and then decelerate to a stop in six minutes in electric mode. As Avanti West Coast’s Class 807 trains will be all-electric seven-car trains with no heavy engine or battery, I doubt they will be slower than a Class 802 train in electric mode. So four accelerations/deceleration cycles to 125 mph should take no more than twenty-four minutes.

I will assume two minutes for each of the three stops.

I can now give an estimate for the journey.

Base journey time – 93 minutes
Acceleration from and deceleration to stops – 24 minutes
Station dwell time – 6 minutes

This gives a journey time between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street of two hours and three minutes.

The journey time can probably be improved in the following ways.

Take full advantage of the track improvements on the approach to Liverpool Lime Street station and at Norton Bridge Junction.
Better train pathing, as has been done on London Liverpool Street and Norwich services to create the fast Norwich-in-Ninety services.
Track and signal improvements to pinch a minute here and a minute there.
As Runcorn now has an hourly Liverpool Lime Street and Chester service, will the Runcorn stop be dropped to save time?
Reduction in station dwell time.
Better driver aids.
Better staff operating procedures at stops and whilst turning the train.

It should be born in mind, that a two hour journey between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street would be a start-stop average speed of 97 mph on a 125 mph route. Intriguingly, this means the trains would run at 77 % of the maximum operating speed of the route, which is the same figure for Norwich-in-Ninety services.

Some of these improvements may enable the Class 390 trains to go a bit faster.

It has to be considered, that Avanti West Coast’s Marketing Department would be ecstatic, when told that London and Liverpool were less than two hours apart.

How Many Trains Would Be Needed?

Currently, this is a typical train round trip to Liverpool Lime Street.

07:07 – Leave London Euston
09:20 – Arrive Liverpool Lime Street
09:47 – Leave Liverpool Lime Street
12:02 – Arrive London Euston

The five-hour round-trip would indicate that five trains would be needed for the one tph service.

This train didn’t return to Liverpool, but went off to the Wembley Depot.

After their Liverpool trip, there is no real pattern of where the train will go next, as this table shows.

06:41 – 6 – 33 minutes – Wembley Depot
07:48 – 2 – 36 minutes – Manchester Piccadilly
08:47 – 1 – 40 minutes – Manchester Piccadilly
09:47 – 7 – 30 minutes – Wembley Depot
10:47 – 4 – 42 minutes – Preston
11:47 – 4 – 37 minutes – Preston
12:47 – 1 – 34 minutes – Preston
13:47 – 15 – 13 minutes – Birmingham New Street
16:47 – 6 – 16 minutes – Glasgow Central
17:47 – 1 – 42 minutes – Manchester Piccadilly

Note.

The time is departure time from Liverpool Lime Street, the number is the platform and the minutes are the turnround time in Euston.
I have left out a couple of trains as there was a very late train.
There doesn’t seem to be any regular pattern.
It looks like trains can be turned in under fifteen minutes.
I think there was a time, when Liverpool couldn’t accept eleven-car trains, but the new longer platforms appear to accept them.
Trains appear to be running services to Glasgow Central and Manchester Piccadilly, who seem to usually get eleven-car trains.

I almost think, that they’re allocating trains as they go.

With the new Class 807 trains, I suspect the following is possible.

London Euston to Liverpool Lime Street – Two hours
Turnround – Fifteen minutes
Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston – Two hours
Turnround – Fifteen minutes

This means it’s a four-and-a-half hour round trip.

Journey times of two hours.
Time enough for well-drilled staff to turn the trains.
Dedicated platforms at London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street.
It would be a very attractive customer-friendly service.

Two tph would need nine trains.

It would be everything the Marketing Department wanted!

Thoughts On The Current Class 390 Timings

As the Class 390 trains are a 125 mph train, their base timing of 93 minutes, between London and Liverpool should still be the same.

As their doors and lobbies are similar in design to those of the Hitachi AT-300 trains, I would allow the same two minutes of dwell time at each station.

Current timings of services on the route vary between 132 and 134 minutes. I’ll take the average of 133 minutes.

So the current services take thirty-four minutes to perform the four accelerate and decelerate sequences on the route.

It would appear that this sequence would take eight-and-a-half minutes in comparison with the six minutes of the new Hitachi AT-300 trains.

I have a feeling, if Class 390 trains cut out a couple of stops, given the other improvements, that they could achieve the magic two hour timing.

Plans For The Second Hourly Service From December 2023

These have been announced in the December 2022 Edition of Modern Railways.

The Class 807 trains would take over the current service and will stop at Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.
There will be an additional call at Liverpool South Parkway on the Class 807 service.
Class 390 trains will run the second hourly service to Euston.
This service will stop at Lichfield Trent Valley and Tamworth.

The Class 807 service will stop four times and the Class 390 service will stop twice. I suspect the lesser number of stops from the Class 390 train, is to allow the train to match the timing of the Class 807 train.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see both trains take two hours.

An Improved London Euston and Blackpool North Service

The new AT-300 trains will also be running to Blackpool.

London Euston and Blackpool North takes between two hours and forty-four minutes and two hours and fifty-nine minutes.
Journey times are not very consistent, probably due to timetabling difficulties.
Trains stop between four and five times on the West Coast Main Line.

Would the faster stops of the new AT-300 trains mean that Avanti West Coast could run a more regular timetable, with all services under three hours?

It should also be noted, that Grand Central will start a London Euston and Blackpool North service in Spring 2020.

As the rolling stock for this new service will be Class 90 locomotives hauling rakes of Mark 4 coaches, that will be limited to 110 mph, are Avanti West Coast making sure, that they have the fastest trains on the route?

Would AT-300 Trains Save Time To Other Avanti West Coast Destinations?

If we assume that AT-300 trains can save two-and-a-half minutes per accelerate and decelerate sequence times could change as follow.

Birmingham New Street – One hour and twenty-two minutes – Three stops – One hour and twelve minutes
Coventry – One hour – Two stops – Fifty-five minutes
Crewe – One hour and thirty-four minutes – One stop – One hour and thirty minutes
Glasgow – As services stop six or thirteen times, there may be substantial savings to be achieved.
Manchester – Between two hours and seven minutes and two hours and thirteen minutes – Three stops – Between one hour and fifty-seven minutes and two hours and three minutes.

Note.

The number of accelerate and decelerate sequences is one more than the number of stops.
Coventry services would be under an hour.
Two out of three Manchester services would be under two hours.

This analysis illustrates how fast train performance is important in more customer-friendly services.

Conclusion

I believe the following will be possible.

A two hour service between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street will be possible with Avanti West Coast’s new Class 807 trains.
The current Class 390 trains could go a bit faster and if they cut out a couple of stops could probably break two hours.
I estimate that a Class 807 train could save as much as two-and-a-half-minutes at each stop.
Blackpool North and London times will be comfortably under three hours.
Coventry and London times will be comfortably under an hour.

The performance of these Class 807 trains will improve the West Coast Main Line.

March 27, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 390 Train, Class 807 Train, Class AT-300 Train, Grand Central Trains, Liverpool Lime Street Station, Norton Bridge Junction | 10 Comments

Are Hitachi Designing the Ultimate Battery Train?

In Sparking A Revolution, a post based on an article of the same name in Issue 898 of Rail Magazine, I repeated this about the specification of Hitachi UK Battery Train Specification.

Range – 55-65 miles
Performance – 90-100 mph
Recharge – 10 minutes when static
Routes – Suburban near electrified lines
Battery Life – 8-10 years

Does this mean that the train can do 55-65 miles cruising at 90-100 mph?

How Much Energy Is Needed To Accelerate A Five-Car Class 800 Train To Operating Speed?

I will do my standard calculation.

Empty train weight – 243 tonnes (Wikipedia for Class 800 train!)
Passenger weight – 302 x 90 Kg (Includes baggage, bikes and buggies!)
Train weight – 270.18 tonnes

Using Omni’s Kinetic Energy Calculator, the kinetic energy at various speeds are.

60 mph – 27 kWh
80 mph – 48 kWh
90 mph – 61 kWh
100 mph – 75 kWh
125 mph – 117 kWh – Normal cruise on electrified lines.
140 mph – 147 kWh – Maximum cruise on electrified lines.

Because the kinetic energy of a train is only proportional to the weight of the train, but proportional to the square of the speed, note how the energy of the train increases markedly after 100 mph.

Are these kinetic energy figures a reason, why Hitachi have stated their battery train will have an operating speed of between 90 and 100 mph?

A 100 mph cruise would also be very convenient for a lot of main lines, that don’t have electrification in the UK.

What Battery Size Would Be Needed?

In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?, I calculated that a five-car Class 801 electric train, needed 3.42 kWh per vehicle-mile to maintain 125 mph.

For comparison, an InterCity 125 train, had a figure of 2.83 kWh per vehicle-mile.

Hitachi are redesigning the nose of the train for the new Class 810 train and I suspect that these trains can achieve somewhere between 1.5 and 3 kWh per vehicle-mile, if they are cruising at 100 mph.

Doing the calculation for various consumption levels gives the following battery capacity for a five-car train to cruise 65 miles at 100 mph

1.5 kWh per vehicle-mile – 487 kWh
2 kWh per vehicle-mile – 650 kWh
2.5 kWh per vehicle-mile – 812.5 kWh
3 kWh per vehicle-mile – 975 kWh

These figures don’t include any energy for acceleration to line speed from the previous stop or station, but they would cope with a deceleration and subsequent acceleration, after say a delay caused by a slow train or other operational delay, by using regenerative braking to the battery.

The energy needed to accelerate to operating speed, will be as I calculated earlier.

90 mph – 61 kWh
100 mph – 75 kWh

As the battery must have space to store the regenerative braking energy and it would probably be prudent to have a ten percent range reserve, I can see a battery size for a train with an energy consumption of 2 kWh per vehicle-mile, that needed to cruise at 100 mph being calculated as follows.

Energy for the cruise – 650 kWh
10% reserve for cruise – 65 kWh
Braking energy from 100 mph – 75 kWh

This gives a total battery size of 790 kWh, which could mean that 800 kWh would be convenient.

Note that each of the three MTU 12V 1600 diesel engines, fitted to a Class 800 train, each weigh around two tonnes.

In Innolith Claims It’s On Path To 1,000 Wh/kg Battery Energy Density, I came to these conclusions.

Tesla already has an energy density of 250 Wh/Kg.
Tesla will increase this figure.
By 2025, the energy density of lithium-ion batteries will be much closer to 1 KWh/Kg.
Innolith might achieve this figure. But they are only one of several companies aiming to meet this magic figure.

Suppose two of the MTU 12V 1600 diesel engines were each to be replaced by a two tonne battery, using Tesla’s current energy density, this would mean the following.

Each battery would have a capacity of 500 kWh.
The train would have one MWh of installed battery power.
This is more than my rough estimate of power required for a 65 mile trip.
The train would have little or no weight increase.
I also wouldn’t be surprised to find that the exchange of a diesel engine for a battery was Plug-and-Play.

Hitachi would have an electric/battery/diesel tri-mode train capable of the following.

Range – 55-65 miles
Out and Back Range – about 20-30 miles
Performance – 90-100 mph
Recharge – 10 minutes when static
Emergency diesel engine.

I feel it would be a very useful train.

Trains That Could Be Fitted With Batteries

The original article in Rail Magazine says this.

For the battery project, positive discussions are taking place with a number of interested parties for a trial, with both Class 385s and Class 800s being candidates for conversion.

So this means that the following operators will be able to use Hitachi’s battery technology o their trains.

Avanti West Coast – Class 80x trains
First East Coast Trains – Class 80x trains
East Midlands Railway – Class 80x trains
GWR – Class 80x trains
Hull Trains – Class 80x trains
LNER – Class 80x trains
ScotRail – Class 385 trains
TransPennine Express – Class 80x trains

Although, I based my calculations on Class 80x trains, I suspect that the methods can be applied to the smaller Class 385 trains.

Possible Out-And-Back Journeys

These are possible Out-And-Back journeys, that I believe Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains could handle.

Edinburgh and Tweedbank – 30 miles from Newcraighall
London Paddington and Bedwyn – 30 miles from Reading
London Euston and Blackburn – 12 miles from Preston
London Kings Cross and Bradford – < 27 miles from Leeds
London Euston and Chester – 21 miles from Crewe
London Kings Cross and Harrogate – <18 miles from Leeds
London Kings Cross and Huddersfield – 17 miles from Leeds
London St. Pancras and Leicester – 16 miles from Market Harborough
London Kings Cross and Lincoln – 17 miles from Newark
London St. Pancras and Melton Mowbray – 26 miles from Corby
London Kings Cross and Middlesbrough – 20 miles from Northallerton
London Kings Cross and Nottingham – 20 miles from Newark
London Paddington and Oxford – 10 miles from Didcot
London Kings Cross and Redcar – 29 miles from Northallerton
London Kings Cross and Rotherham- 14 miles from Doncaster
London Kings Cross and Sheffield – 20 miles from Doncaster
London and Weston-super-Mare – 19 miles from Bristol

Note.

Provided that the Out-And-Back journey is less than about sixty miles, I would hope that these stations are comfortably in range.
Leicester is the interesting destination, which would be reachable in an Out-And-Back journey. But trains from the North stopping at Leicester would probably need to charge at Leicester.
I have included Blackburn as it could be a destination for Avanti West Coast.
I have included Melton Mowbray as it could be a destination for East Midlands Railway.
I have included Nottingham, Rotherham and Sheffield as they could be destinations for LNER. These services could prove useful if the Midland Main Line needed to be closed for construction works.
I’m also fairly certain, that no new electrification would be needed, although every extra mile would help.
No charging stations would be needed.

I suspect, I’ve missed a few possible routes.

Possible Journeys Between Two Electrified Lines

These are possible journeys between two electrified lines, that I believe Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains could handle.

London St. Pancras and Eastbourne via Hastings – 25 miles between Ashford and Ore.
Leeds and York via Garforth – 20 miles between Neville Hall and Colton Junction
London Kings Cross and Norwich via Cambridge – 54 miles between Ely and Norwich.
Manchester Victoria and Leeds via Huddersfield – 43 miles between Manchester Victoria and Leeds.
Preston and Leeds via Hebden Bridge – 62 miles between Preston and Leeds.
Newcastle and Edinburgh – Would battery-electric trains get round the well-publicised power supply problems on this route?

Note.

I am assuming that a range of 65 miles is possible.
If the trains have a diesel-generator set, then this could be used to partially-charge the battery in places on the journey.
Leeds and York via Garforth has been scheduled for electrification for years.
Preston and Leeds via Hebden Bridge would probably need some diesel assistance.
London Kings Cross and Norwich via Cambridge is a cheeky one, that Greater Anglia wouldn’t like, unless they ran it.
As before no new electrification or a charging station would be needed.

I suspect, I’ve missed a few possible routes.

Possible Out-And-Back Journeys With A Charge At The Destination

These are possible Out-And-Back journeys, that I believe Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains could handle, if the batteries were fully charged at the destination.

Doncaster and Cleethorpes – 52 miles from Doncaster.
London Paddington and Cheltenham – 42 miles from Swindon
London Kings Cross and Cleethorpes via Lincoln – 64 miles from Newark
London Euston and Gobowen – 46 miles from Crewe
London Euston and Wrexham – 33 miles from Crewe
London Kings Cross and Hull – 45 miles from Selby
London Kings Cross and Shrewsbury – 30 miles from Wolverhampton
London Kings Cross and Sunderland 41 miles from Northallerton
London Paddington and Swansea – 46 miles from Cardiff
London Paddington and Worcester – 67 miles from Didcot Parkway
London St. Pancras and Derby – 46 miles from Market Harborough
London St. Pancras and Nottingham – 43 miles from Market Harborough

Note.

I am assuming that a range of 65 miles is possible.
If the trains have a diesel-generator set, then this could be used to partially-charge the battery in places on the journey.
I am assuming some form of charging is provided at the destination station.
As before no new electrification would be needed.

I suspect, I’ve missed a few possible routes.

Midland Main Line

The Midland Main Line could possibly be run between London St. Pancras and Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield without the use of diesel.

Consider.

The route will be electrified between London St. Pancras and Market Harborough.
In connection with High Speed Two, the Midland Main Line and High Seed Two will share an electrified route between Sheffield and Clay Cross North Junction.
London St. Pancras and Derby can be run with a charging station at Derby, as Market Harborough and Derby is only 46 miles.
London St. Pancras and Nottingham can be run with a charging station at Nottingham, as Market Harborough and Nottingham is only 43 miles.
The distance between Clay Cross North Junction and Market Harborough is 67 miles.
The distance between Sheffield and Leeds is 38 miles.

It looks to me that the range of East Midlands Railway’s new Class 810 trains, will be a few miles short to bridge the gap on batteries, between Clay Cross North Junction and Market Harborough station, but Leeds and Sheffield appears possible, once Sheffield has been electrified.

There are several possible solutions to the Clay Cross North and Market Harborough electrification gap.

Fit higher capacity batteries to the trains.
Extend the electrification for a few miles North of Market Harborough station.
Extend the electrification for a few miles South of Clay Cross North Junction.
Stop at Derby for a few minutes to charge the batteries.

The route between Market Harborough and Leicester appears to have been gauge-cleared for electrification, but will be difficult to electrify close to Leicester station. However, it looks like a few miles can be taken off the electrification gap.

Between Chesterfield and Alfriston, the route appears difficult to electrify with tunnels and passig through a World Heritage Site.

So perhaps options 1 and 2 together will give the trains sufficient range to bridge the electrification gap.

Conclusion On The Midland Main Line

I think that Hitachi, who know their trains well, must have a solution for diesel-free operation of all Midland Main Line services.

It also looks like little extra electrification is needed, other than that currently planned for the Midland Main Line and High Speed Two.

North Wales Coast Line

If you look at distance along the North Wales Coast Line, from the electrification at Crewe, you get these values.

Chester – 21 miles
Rhyl – 51 miles
Colwyn Bay – 61 miles
Llandudno Junction – 65 miles
Bangor – 80 miles
Holyhead – 106 miles

It would appear that Avanti West Coast’s new AT-300 trains, if fitted with batteries could reach Llandudno Junction station, without using diesel.

Electrification Between Crewe And Chester

It seems to me that the sensible thing to do for a start is to electrify the twenty-one miles between Crewe and Chester, which has been given a high priority for this work.

With this electrification, distances from Chester are as follows.

Rhyl – 30 miles
Colwyn Bay – 40 miles
Llandudno Junction – 44 miles
Bangor – 59 miles
Holyhead – 85 miles

Electrification between Crewe and Chester may also open up possibilities for more electric and battery-electric train services.

But some way will be needed to charge the trains to the West of Chester.

Chagring The Batteries At Llandudno Junction Station

This Google Map shows Llandudno Junction station.

Note.

It is a large station site.
The Conwy Valley Line, which will be run by battery Class 230 trains in the future connects at this station.
The Class 230 train will probably use some of Vivarail’s Fast Charging systems, which use third-rail technology, either at the ends of the branch or in Llandudno Junction station.

The simplest way to charge the London Euston and Holyhead train, would be to build a charging station at Llandudno Junction, which could be based on Vivarail’s Fast Charging technology or a short length of 25 KVAC overhead wire.

But this would add ten minutes to the timetable.

Could 25 KVAC overhead electrification be erected for a certain distance through the station, so that the train has ten minutes in contact with the wires?

Looking at the timetable of a train between London Euston and Holyhead, it arrives at Colwyn Bay station at 1152 and leaves Llandudno Junction station at 1200.

So would it be possible to electrify between the two stations and perhaps a bit further?

This Google Map shows Colwyn Bay Station,

Note how the double-track railway is squeezed between the dual-carriageway of the A55 North Wales Expressway and the sea.

The two routes follow each other close to the sea, as far as Abegele & Pensarn station, where the Expressway moves further from the sea.

Further on, after passing through more caravans than I’ve ever seen, there is Rhyl station.

The time between arriving at Rhyl station and leaving Llandudno Junction station is nineteen minutes.
The distance between the two stations is fourteen miles.
Rhyl and Crewe is fifty-one miles.
Llandudno Junction and Holyhead is forty-one miles.

It would appear that if the North Wales Coast Line between Rhyl and Llandudno Junction is electrified, that Hitachi’s proposed battery trains can reach Holyhead.

The trains could even changeover between electrification and battery power in Rhyl and Llandudno Junction stations.

I am sure that electrifying this section would not be the most difficult in the world, although the severe weather sometimes encountered, may need some very resilient or innovative engineering.

It may be heretical to say so, but would it be better if this section were to be electrified using proven third-rail technology.

West of Llandudno Junction station, the electrification would be very difficult, as this Google Map of the crossing of the River Conwy shows.

I don’t think anybody would want to see electrification around the famous castle.

Electrification Across Anglesey

Llanfairpwll station marks the divide between the single-track section of the North Wales Coast Line over the Britannia Bridge and the double-track section across Anglesey.

From my virtual helicopter, the route looks as if, it could be fairly easy to electrify, but would it be necessary?

Llandudno Junction and Holyhead is forty-one miles, which is well within battery range.
There is surely space at Holyhead station to install some form of fast-charging system.

One problem is that trains seem to turn round in only a few minutes, which may not be enough to charge the trains.

So perhaps some of the twenty-one miles between Llanfairpwll and Holyhead should be electrified.

London Euston And Holyhead Journey Times

Currently, trains take three hours and forty-three minutes to go between London Euston and Holyhead, with these sectional timings.

London Euston and Crewe – One hour and thirty-nine minutes.
Crewe and Holyhead – Two hours and four minutes.

The big change would come, if the London Euston and Crewe leg, were to be run on High Speed Two, which will take just fifty-five m,inutes.

This should reduce the London Euston and Holyhead time to just under three hours.

Freight On The North Wales Coast Line

Will more freight be seen on the North Wales Coast Line in the future?

The new tri-mode freight locomotives like the Class 93 locomotive, will be able to take advantage of any electrification to charge their batteries, but they would probably be on diesel for much of the route.

Conclusion On The North Wales Coast Line

Short lengths of electrification, will enable Avanti West Coast’s AT-300 trains, after retrofitting with batteries, to run between Crewe and Holyhead, without using any diesel.

I would electrify.

Crewe and Chester – 21 miles
Rhyl and Llandudno Junction – 14 miles
Llanfairpwll and Holyhead – 21 miles

But to run battery-electric trains between London Euston and Holyhead, only Rhyl and Llandudno Junction needs to be electrified.

All gaps in the electrification will be handled on battery power.

A Selection Of Possible Battery-Electric Services

In this section, I’ll look at routes, where battery-electric services would be very appropriate and could easily be run by Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains.

London Paddington And Swansea

Many were disappointed when Chris Grayling cancelled the electrification between Cardiff and Swansea.

I went along with what was done, as by the time of the cancellation, I’d already ridden in a battery train and believed in their potential.

The distance between Cardiff and Swansea is 46 miles without electrification.

Swansea has these services to the West.

Carmarthen – 32 miles
Fishguard – 73 miles
Milford Haven 71 miles
Pembroke Dock – 73 miles

It looks like, three services could be too long for perhaps a three car battery-electric version of a Hitachi Class 385 train, assuming it has a maximum range of 65 miles.

But these three services all reverse in Carmarthen station.

So perhaps, whilst the driver walks between the cabs, the train can connect automatically to a fast charging system and give the batteries perhaps a four minute top-up.

Vivarail’s Fast Charging system based on third-rail technology would be ideal, as it connects automatically and it can charge a train in only a few minutes.

I would also electrify the branch between Swansea and the South Wales Main Line.

This would form part of a fast-charging system for battery-trains at Swansea, where turnround times can be quite short.

I can see a network of battery-electric services developing around Swansea, that would boost tourism to the area.

Edinburgh And Tweedbank

The Borders Railway is electrified as far as Newcraighall station and the section between there and Tweedbank is thirty miles long.

I think that a four-car battery-electric Class 385 train could work this route.

It may or may not need a top up at Tweedbank.

The Fife Circle

The Fife Circle service from Edinburgh will always be difficult to electrify, as it goes over the Forth Rail Bridge.

The Fife Circle is about sixty miles long.
Plans exist for a short branch to Leven.
The line between Edinburgh and the Forth Rail Bridge is partly electrified.

I believe that battery-electric Class 385 train could work this route.

London Kings Cross and Grimsby/Cleethorpes via Lincoln

The Cleethorpes/Grimsby area is becoming something of a renewable energy powerhouse and I feel that battery trains to the area, might be a significant and ultimately profitable statement.

LNER recently opened a six trains per day service to Lincoln.

Distances from Newark are as follows.

Lincoln – 17 miles
Grimsby – 61 miles
Cleethorpes – 64 miles

A round trip to Lincoln can probably be achieved on battery alone with a degree of ease, but Cleethorpes and Grimsby would need a recharge at the coast.

Note that to get to the Cleethorpes/Grimsby area, travellers usually need to change at Doncaster.

But LNER are ambitious and I wouldn’t be surprised to see them dip a toe in the Cleethorpes/Grimsby market.

The LNER service would also be complimented by a TransPennine Express service from Manchester Airport via Sheffield and Doncaster, which could in the future be another service run by a Hitachi battery train.

There is also a local service to Barton-on-Humber, which could be up for improvement.

London Waterloo And Exeter

This service needs to go electric, if South Western Railway is going to fully decarbonise.

But third-rail electrification is only installed between Waterloo and Basingstoke.

Could battery-electric trains be used on this nearly two hundred mile route to avoid the need for electrification.

A possible strategy could be.

Use existing electrification, as far as Basingstoke – 48 miles
Use battery power to Salisbury – 83 miles
Trains can take several minutes at Salisbury as they often split and join and change train crew, so the train could be fast-charged.
Use battery power to the Tisbury/Gillingham/Yeovil/Crewkerne area, where trains would be charged – 130 miles
Use battery power to Exeter- 172 miles

Note.

The miles are the distance from London.
The charging at Salisbury could be based on Vivarail’s Fast-Charging technology.
The charging around Yrovil could be based on perhaps twenty miles of third-rail electrification, that would only be switched on, when a train is present.

I estimate that there could be time savings of up to fifteen minutes on the route.

To Be Continued…

February 18, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Battery-Electric Trains, Charging Battery Trains, Class 230 Train, Class 385 Train, Class 800 Train, Class 810 Train, Clay Cross North Junction, Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Electrification, Conwy Valley Line, East Midlands Railway, Electrification, First East Coast Trains, Great Western Railway, High Speed Two, Hitachi, Hull Trains, Lithium-Ion Battery, LNER, Midland Main Line, North Wales Coast Line, ScotRail, TransPennine Express, Vivarail | 5 Comments

Could High Speed Two Trains Serve Chester And North Wales?

This may seem a slightly outrageous proposal to run High Speed Two trains to Chester.

The city is a major tourist destination.
Despite its closeness to Crewe it is a major rail hub, with services across Wales to Cardiff, Holyhead and Llandudno and along the border between England and Wales to Shrewsbury and Newport.
Merseyrail serves the city and the station can be considered to be part of Liverpool’s extensive commuting area. This service is likely to be more reliable and faster with the delivery of new Class 777 trains.
For parts of Merseyside, travelling to London or Manchester Airport, is easier via Chester than Liverpool Lime Street or Liverpool South Parkway.

If the promoters of High Speed Two are serious about creating a railway for the whole country, then I feel that running trains direct to and from Chester could be very beneficial for the towns and cities, that can be served by the current network at Chester.

Current And Possible Timings

Currently, trains take two minutes over two hours between Euston and Chester.

When Avanti West Coast introduces the new Hitachi AT-300 trains on the route, the following times will be possible.

Euston and Crewe via West Coast Main Line – 90 minutes – Fastest Pendelino
Crewe and Chester – 24 minutes – Current timing

This would give a time of one hour and 54 minutes, which is a saving of 8 minutes. But a lot of carbon would not be emitted between Euston and Crewe.

I estimate, that with High Speed Two Phase 2a completed, the following timings will be possible.

Euston to Crewe via HS2 – 55 minutes – HS2 website
Crewe and Chester – 24 minutes – Current timing

This would give a time of one hour and 19 minutes, which is a saving of 43 minutes.

Infrastructure Needed

There will need to be some infrastructure changes.

Platform Lengthening At Chester Station

The station would probably be served by two-hundred metre long High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains, which might need some platform lengthening.

This Google Map shows the station.

It looks to me, that there is plenty of space.

Will Chester And Crewe Be Electrified?

We know little about the capabilities of the trains proposed by the various manufacturers.

But, I wouldn’t be surprised that one or more of the proposals use batteries for one of the following purposes.

Regenerate braking.
Emergency power.
Range extension for up to perhaps sixty miles.

As Chester and Crewe stations are only twenty-one miles apart with no intermediate stations, which will be run at an average speed of only 52 mph I don’t think it will be impossible to extend the service to Chester on battery power.

If electrification is required I wrote about it in Hitachi Trains For Avanti.

As it is only just over twenty miles, I don’t think it will be the most challenging of projects, although there does seem to be a lot of bridges.

Electrification would also allow Avanti West Coast’s Hitachi trains to run on electricity to Chester.

What About Holyhead?

Holyhead could become a more important destination in the next few years.

It is probably the best alternative to avoid flying and driving between Great Britain and the Island of Ireland.

And who can accurately predict, what effect Brexit and thinking about global warming will have?

I have a feeling that after electrification to Chester, using on-board energy storage could be used West of Chester.

It is very difficult to predict battery ranges in the future, but I can see a two hundred metre long High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train being able to reach Holyhead on battery power, with or without some limited extra electrification.

Alternatively, the UK and Welsh governments, might bite the bullet and just electrify the whole route between Crewe and Holyhead.

I have found a train on Real Time Trains, that covered the 105.5 miles between Holyhead and Crewe in two hours and 11 minutes at an average speed of 48 mph. The train took then a total of three hours and forty-five minutes to get to Euston

I estimate that with electrification and some track improvements, that it will be possible to travel between Euston and Holyhead in under three hours before High Speed Two.

Conclusion

It looks to me, that when High Speed Two, think about adding extra destinations, Chester and Holyhead could be on the list.

I also suspect that even without electrification and High Speed Two services, but with the new Class 805 trains, the route could be a valuable one for Avanti West Coast.

January 21, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Aviation, Battery-Electric Trains, Chester Station, Class 777 Train, Class 805 Train, Class AT-300 Train, Crewe Station, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, High Speed Two Extensions, Hitachi, Holyhead, Merseyrail, West Coast Main Line | 5 Comments

Hitachi Trains For Avanti

The title of this post is the same as that of an article in the January 2020 Edition of Modern Railways.

The Bi-Mode Trains

Some more details of the thirteen bi-mode and ten electric Hitachi AT 300 trains are given.

Engine Size and Batteries

This is an extract from the article.

Hitachi told Modern Railways it was unable to confirm the rating of the diesel engines on the bi-modes, but said these would be replaceable by batteries in future if specified.

I do wonder if my speculation in Will Future Hitachi AT-300 Trains Have MTU Hybrid PowerPacks? is possible.

After all, why do all the hard work to develop a hybrid drive system, when your engine supplier has done it for you?

Would Avanti West Coast need a train that will do 125 mph on diesel?

The North Wales Coast Line has a maximum line speed of just 90 mph.
Wikipedia is uncertain of the maximum speed of the Chester and Shrewbury Line, but it is extremely unlikely to be more than 80-90 mph.

The only place, they will be able to run at 125 mph or even higher will be on the West Coast Main Line, where they will be running under electric power from the pantograph.

If I were designing a bi-mode for 90 mph on diesel and 125 mph on electric, I would have batteries on the train for the following purposes.

Handle regenerative braking.
Provide hotel power in stations or when stationery.
Provide an acceleration boost, if required, when running on diesel.
Provide emergency power, if the wires go down in electric mode.

I’m sure MTU could work out a suitable size of diesel engine and batteries in an MTU PowerPack, that would meet the required performance.

Or maybe a smaller diesel could be used. An LNER Class 800 train has 1680 kW of installed power to maintain 125 mph. But the Great Western Railway versions have 2100 kW or twenty-five percent more, as their routes are more challenging with steeper gradients.

For the less challenging routes at a maximum of 90 mph between Crewe, Chester, Shrewsbury and North Wales, I wonder what level of power is needed.

A very rough estimate based on the speed required could put the power requirement as low as 1200-1500 kW.

As the diesel engines are only electrical generators, it would not effect the ability of the train to do 125 mph between Crewe and London.

There looks to be a virtuous circle at work here.

Lower maximum speed on diesel means smaller diesel engines.
Smaller diesel engines means lighter diesel engines and less fuel to carry.
Less weight to accelerate needs less installed power.
Less power probably means a more affordable train, that uses less diesel.

It looks to me, that Hitachi have designed a train, that will work Avanti West Coast’s routes efficiently.

The Asymmetric Bi-Mode Train

It looks to me that the bi-mode train that Avanti West Coast are buying has very different performance depending on the power source and signalling

90 mph or perhaps up to 100 mph on diesel.
125 mph on electric power.with current signalling.
Up to 140 mph on electric power with in-cab digital signalling.

This compares with the current Class 221 trains, which can do 125 mph on all tracks, with a high enough operating speed.

The new trains’ different performance on diesel and electric power means they could be called asymmetric bi-modes.

Surely, creating an asymmetric bi-mode train, with on-board power; battery, diesel or hydrogen, sized to the route, means less weight, greater efficiency, less cost and in the case of diesel, higher carbon efficiency.

Carbon Emissions

Does the improvement in powertrain efficiency with smaller engines running the train at slower speeds help to explain this statement from the Modern Railways article?

Significant emissions reduction are promised from the elimination of diesel operation on electrified sections as currently seen with the Voyagers, with an expected reduction in CO2 emissions across the franchise of around two-thirds.

That is a large reduction, which is why I feel, that efficiency and batteries must play a part.

Battery-Electric Conversion

In my quote earlier from the Modern Railways article, I said this.

These (the diesel engines) would be replaceable by batteries in future if specified.

In Thoughts On The Next Generation Of Hitachi High Speed Trains, I looked at routes that could be run by a battery-electric version of Hitachi AT-300 trains.

I first estimated how far an AT-300 train could go on batteries.

How far will an AT-300 train go on battery power?

I don’t think it is unreasonable to be able to have 150 kWh of batteries per car, especially if the train only has one diesel engine, rather than the current three in a five-car train.

I feel with better aerodynamics and other improvements based on experience with the current trains, that an energy consumption of 2.5 kWh per vehicle mile is possible, as compared to the 3.5 kWh per vehicle mile of the current trains.

Doing the calculation gives a range of sixty miles for an AT-300 train with batteries.

As train efficiency improves and batteries are able to store more energy for a given volume, this range can only get better.

I then said this about routes that will be part of Avanti West Coast’s network.

With a range of sixty miles on batteries, the following is possible.

Chester, Gobowen, Shrewsbury And Wrexham Central stations could be reached on battery power from the nearest electrification.

Charging would only be needed at Shrewsbury to ensure a return to Crewe.

Gobowen is probably at the limit of battery range, so was it chosen as a destination for this reason.

The original post was based on trains running faster than the 90 mph that is the maximum possible on the lines without electrification, so my sixty mile battery range could be an underestimate.

These distances should be noted.

Crewe and Chester – 21 miles
Chester and Shrewsbury – 42 miles
Chester and Llandudno – 47 miles
Chester and Holyhead – 84 miles

Could electrification between Crewe and Chester make it possible for Avanti West Coast’s new trains to go all the way between Chester and Holyhead on battery power in a few years?

I feel that trains with a sixty mile battery range would make operations easier for Avanti West Coast.

Eighty miles would almost get them all the way to Holyhead, where they could recharge!

Rlectrification Between Chester And Crewe

I feel that this twenty-odd miles of electrification could be key to enabling battery-electric trains for the routes to the West of Chester to Shrewsbury, Llandudno and Holyhead.

How difficult would it be to electrify between Chester and Crewe?

It is not a long distance to electrify.
There doesn’t appear to be difficult viaducts or cuttings.
It is electrified at Crewe, so power is not a problem.
There are no intermediate stations.

But there does seem to be a very large number of bridges. I counted forty-four overbridges and six underbridges. At least some of the bridges are new and appear to have been built with the correct clearance.

Perhaps it would be simpler to develop fast charging for the trains and install it at Chester station.

Conclusion On The Bi-Mode Trains

It appears to me that Avanti West Coast, Hitachi and Rock Rail, who are financing the trains have done a very good job in devising the specification for a fleet of trains that will offer a good service and gradually move towards being able to deliver that service in a carbon-free manner.

The initial bi-mode trains will give a big improvement in performance and reduction in emission on the current Voyagers, as they will be able to make use of the existing electrification between Crewe and London.
The trains could be designed for 125 mph on electric power and only 90-100 mph on diesel, as no route requires over 100 mph on diesel. This must save operating costs and reduce carbon emissions.
They could use MTU Hybrid PowerPacks instead of conventional diesel engines to further reduce emissions and save energy
It also appears that Hitachi might be able to convert the trains to battery operation in a few years.
The only new infrastructure would be a few charging stations for the batteries and possible electrification between Chester and Crewe.

I don’t think Avanti West Coast’s ambition of a two-thirds reduction in CO2 is unreasonable and feel it could even be exceeded.

Other Routes For Asymetric Bi-Mode Trains

I like the concept of an asymetric bi-mode train, where the train has the following performance.

Up to 100 mph on battery, diesel or hydrogen.
Up to 100 mph on electrified slower-speed lines.
125 mph on electrified high-speed lines, with current signalling.
Up to 140 mph on electrified high-speed lines, with in-cab digital signalling.

I am very sure that Hitachi can now tailor an AT-300 train to a particular company’s needs. Certainly, in the case of Avanti West Coast, this seems to have happened, when Avanti West Coast, Hitachi, Network Rail and Rock Rail had some serious negotiation.

LNER At Leeds

As an example consider the rumoured splitting and joining of trains at Leeds to provide direct services between London and Bradford, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Ilkley, Skipton and other places, that I wrote about in Dancing Azumas At Leeds.

In the related post, I gave some possible destinations.

Bradford – 13 miles – 25 minutes – Electrified
Harrogate – 18 miles – 30 minutes
Huddersfield – 17 miles – 35 minutes
Hull – 20 miles – 60 minutes
Ilkley – 16 miles – 26 minutes – Electrified
Skipton – 26 miles – 43 minutes – Electrified
York – 25 miles – 30 minutes

Note, that the extended services would have the following characteristics.

They would be run by one five-car train.

Services to Bradford, Ilkley and Skipton would be electric
Electrification is planned from Leeds to Huddersfield and York, so these services could be electric in a few years.
All other services would need independent power; battery, diesel or hydrogen to and from Leeds.
Two trains would join at Leeds and run fast to London on the electrified line.
Services would probably have a frequency of six trains per day, which works out at a around a train every two hours and makes London and back very possible in a day.
They would stop at most intermediate stations to boost services to and from Leeds and give a direct service to and from London.

As there are thirty trains per day between London and Leeds in each direction, there are a lot of possible services that could be provided.

Currently, LNER are only serving Harrogate via Leeds.

LNER are using either a nine-car train or a pair of five-car trains.
The trains reverse in Platforms 6 or 8 at Leeds, both of which can handle full-length trains.
LNER allow for a generous time for the reverse, which would allow the required splitting and joining.
All trains going to Harrogate are Class 800 bi-mode trains.

Note that the Class 800 trains are capable of 125 mph on diesel, whereas the average speed between Harrogate and Leeds is just 35 mph. Obviously, some of this slow speed is due to the route, but surely a train with a maximum speed of 90-100 mph, with an appropriate total amount of diesel power, would be the following.

Lighter in weight.
More efficient.
Emit less pollution.
Still capable of high speed on electrified lines.
Bi-mode and electric versions could run in pairs between Leeds and London.

LNER would probably save on track access charges and diesel fuel.

LNER To Other Places

Could LNER split and join in a similar way to other places?

Doncaster for Hull and Sheffield
Edinburgh for Aberdeen and Inverness
Newark for Lincoln and Nottingham
York for Middlesbrough and Scarborough.

It should be noted that many of the extended routes are quite short, so I suspect some train diagrams will be arranged, so that trains are only filled up with diesel overnight,

GWR

Great Western Railway are another First Group company and I’m sure some of their routes could benefit, from similar planning to that of Avanti West Coast.

Splitting and joining might take place at Reading, Swindon, Bristol and Swansea.

South Western Railway

South Western Railway will need to replace the three-car Class 159 trains to Exeter, that generally work in pairs with a total number of around 400 seats, in the next few years.

These could be replaced with a fleet of third-rail Hitachi trains of appropriate length.

Seven cars sating 420 passengers?
They would remove diesel trains from Waterloo station.
All South Western Railway Trains running between Waterloo and Basingstoke would be 100 mph trains.

I wonder, if in-cab digital signalling on the route, would increase the capacity? It is sorely needed!

Southeastern

Southeastern need bi-mode trains to run the promised service to Hastings.

Trains would need a third-rail capability.
Trains need to be capable of 140 mph for High Speed One.
Trains need to be able to travel the 25 miles between Ashford International and Ore stations.
Trains would preferably be battery-electric for working into St. Pancras International station.

Would the trains be made up from six twenty-metre cars, like the Class 395 trains?

The Simple All-Electric Train

The Modern Railways article, also says this about the ten all-electric AT-300 trains for Birmingham, Blackpool and Liverpool services.

The electric trains will be fully reliant on the overhead wire, with no diesel auxiliary engines or batteries.

It strikes me as strange, that Hitachi are throwing out one of their design criteria, which is the ability of the train to rescue itself, when the overhead wires fail.

In Do Class 800/801/802 Trains Use Batteries For Regenerative Braking?, I published this extract from this document on the Hitachi Rail web site.

The system can select the appropriate power source from either the main transformer or the GUs. Also, the size and weight of the system were minimized by designing the power supply converter to be able to work with both power sources. To ensure that the Class 800 and 801 are able to adapt to future changes in operating practices, they both have the same traction system and the rolling stock can be operated as either class by simply adding or removing GUs. On the Class 800, which is intended to run on both electrified and non-electrified track, each traction system has its own GU. On the other hand, the Class 801 is designed only for electrified lines and has one or two GUs depending on the length of the trainset (one GU for trainsets of five to nine cars, two GUs for trainsets of 10 to 12 cars). These GUs supply emergency traction power and auxiliary power in the event of a power outage on the catenary, and as an auxiliary power supply on non-electrified lines where the Class 801 is in service and pulled by a locomotive. This allows the Class 801 to operate on lines it would otherwise not be able to use and provides a backup in the event of a catenary power outage or other problem on the ground systems as well as non-electrified routes in loco-hauled mode.

This is a very comprehensive power system, with a backup in case of power or catenary failure.

So why does it look like Hitachi are throwing that capability out on the trains for Avanti West Coast.

There are several possibilities.

The reliability of the trains and the overhead wire is such, that the ability of a train to rescue itself is not needed.
The auxiliary generator has never been used for rescuing the train.
The West Coast Main Line is well-provided with Thunderbird locomotives for rescuing Pendelinos, as these trains have no auxiliary generator or batteries.
Removal of the excess weight of the auxiliary engine and batteries, enables the Hitachi AT-300 trains to match the performance of the Pendelinos, when they are using tilt.

Obviously, Hitachi have a lot of train performance statistics, from the what must be around a hundred trains in service.

It looks like Hitachi are creating a lightweight all-electric train, that has the performance or better of a Pendelino, that it achieves without using tilt.

No tilt means less weight and more interior space.
No auxiliary generator or batteries means less weight.
Wikipedia indicates, that Hitachi coaches are around 41 tonnes and Pendelino coaches are perhaps up to ten tonnes heavier.
Less weight means fast acceleration and deceleration.
Less weight means less electricity generated under regenerative braking.
Pendelinos use regenerative braking, through the catenary.
Will the new Hitachi trains do the same instead of the complex system they now use?

If the train fails and needs to be rescued, it uses the same Thunderbird system, that the Pendelinos use when they fail.

Will The New Hitachi Trains Be Less Costly To Run?

These trains will be lighter in weight than the Pendelinos and will not require the track to allow tilting.

Does this mean, that Avanti West Coast will pay lower track access charges for their new trains?

They should also pay less on a particular trip for the electricity, as the lighter trains will need less electricity to accelerate them to line speed.

Are Avanti West Coast Going To Keep The Fleets Apart?

Under a heading of Only South Of Preston, the Modern Railways article says this.

Unlike the current West Coast fleet, the Hitachi trains will not be able to tilt. Bid Director Caroline Donaldson told Modern Railways this will be compensated for by their improved acceleration and deceleration characteristics and that the operator is also working with Network Rail to look at opportunities to improve the linespeed for non-tilting trains.

The routes on which the Hitachi trains will operate have been chosen with the lack of tilt capability in mind, with this having the greatest impact north of Preston, where only Class 390 Pendelinos, which continue to make use of their tilting capability will be used.

Avanti West Coast have said that the Hitachi trains will run from London to Birmingham, Blackpool and Liverpool.

All of these places are on fully-electrified branches running West from the West Coast Main Line, so it looks like there will be separation.

Will The New Hitachi Trains Be Faster To Birmingham, Blackpool And Liverpool?

Using data from Real Time Trains, I find the following data about the current services.

Birmingham and Coventry is 19 miles and takes 20 minutes at an average speed of 57 mph
Blackpool and Preston is 16.5 miles and takes 21 minutes at an average speed of 47 mph
Liverpool and Runcorn is 3.15 miles and takes 15 minutes at an average speed of 52 mph

All the final legs when approaching the terminus seem to be at similar speeds, so I doubt there are much savings to be made away from the West Coast Main Line.

Most savings will be on the West Coast Main Line, where hopefully modern in-cab digital signalling will allow faster running at up to the design speed of both the Hitachi and Pendelino trains of 140 mph.

As an illustration of what might be possible, London to Liverpool takes two hours and thirteen minutes.

The distance is 203 miles, which means that including stops the average speed is 91.6 mph.

If the average speed could be raised to 100 mph, this would mean a journey time of two hours and two minutes.

As much of the journey between London and Liverpool is spent at 125 mph, which is the limit set by the signalling, raising that to 135 mph could bring substantial benefits.

To achieve the journey in two hours would require an overall average speed of 101.5 mph.

As the proportion of track on which faster speeds, than the current 125 mph increase over the next few years, I can see Hitachi’s lightweight all-electric expresses breaking the two hour barrier between London and Liverpool.

What About The Pendelinos And Digital Signalling?

The January 2020 Edition of Modern Railways also has an article entitled Pendolino Refurb Planned.

These improvements are mentioned.

Better standard class seats! (Hallelujah!)
Refreshed First Class.
Revamped shop.

Nothing is mentioned about any preparation for the installation of the equipment to enable faster running using digital in-cab signalling, when it is installed on the West Coast Main Line.

Surely, the trains will be updated to be ready to use digital signalling, as soon as they can.

Just as the new Hitachi trains will be able to take advantage of the digital signalling, when it is installed, the Pendellinos will be able to as well.

Looking at London and Glasgow, the distance is 400 miles and it takes four hours and thirty minutes.

This is an average speed of 89 mph, which compares well with the 91.6 mph between London and Liverpool.

Raise the average speed to 100 mph with the installation of digital in-cab signalling on the route, that will allow running at over 125 mph for long sections and the journey time will be around four hours.

This is a table of average speeds and journey times.

100 mph – four hours
105 mph – three hours and forty-eight minutes
110 mph – three hours and thirty-eight minutes
115 mph – three hours and twenty-eight minutes
120 mph – three hours and twenty minutes
125 mph – three hours and twelve minutes
130 mph – three hours and four minutes

I think that I’m still young enough at 72 to be able to see Pendelinos running regularly between London and Glasgow in three hours twenty minutes.

The paragraph is from the Wikipedia entry for the Advanced Passenger Train.

The APT is acknowledged as a milestone in the development of the current generation of tilting high speed trains. 25 years later on an upgraded infrastructure the Class 390 Pendolinos now match the APT’s scheduled timings. The London to Glasgow route by APT (1980/81 timetable) was 4hrs 10min, the same time as the fastest Pendolino timing (December 2008 timetable). In 2006, on a one off non-stop run for charity, a Pendolino completed the Glasgow to London journey in 3hrs 55min, whereas the APT completed the opposite London to Glasgow journey in 3hrs 52min in 1984.

I think it’s a case of give the Pendelinos the modern digital in-cab signalling they need and let them see what they can do.

It is also possible to give an estimate for a possible time to and from Manchester.

An average speed of 120 mph on the route would deliver a time of under one hour and forty minutes.

Is it possible? I suspect someone is working on it!

Conclusion

I certainly think, that Avanti West Coast, Hitachi and Network Rail, have been seriously thinking how to maximise capacity and speed on the West Coast Main Line.

I also think, that they have an ultimate objective to make Avanti West Coast an operator, that only uses diesel fuel in an emergency.

January 1, 2020 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Asymmetric Bi-Mode Train, Avanti West Coast, Battery-Electric Trains, Birmingham New Street Station, Blackpool North Station, Chester Station, Class 390 Train, Class AT-300 Train, Crewe, Electrification, Glasgow Central Station, Global Warming/Zero-Carbon, Hitachi, Liverpool Lime Street Station, Manchester Piccadilly Station, Network Rail, West Coast Main Line | 7 Comments

Could High Speed Two Be A One-Nation Project?

As currently envisioned, High Speed Two is very much an English project, with the following routes

London and Birmingham
London and Liverpool via Birmingham
London and Manchester Airport/Manchester via Birmingham and Crewe
London and Sheffield via Birmingham and the East Midlands Hub
London and Leeds via Birmingham and the East Midlands Hub

There are large numbers of mid-sized towns and cities that it won’t serve directly.

The West Coast Main Line

The West Coast Main Line serves the following routes.

London and Birmingham
London and Liverpool via Crewe
London and Manchester via Crewe
London and Glasgow via Crewe, Wigan, Preston and Carlisle
London and Blackpool via Crewe, Wigan, Preston
London and North Wales via Crewe and Chester.

It could probably be considered a two or two-and-a-half nation line, as it serves the Western half of Scotland and the Northern half of Wales.

Add the West Coast Main Line and High Speed Two together and you get a line, that serves a lot more places like Blackpool, Carlisle, Chester, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Preston, Stafford, Stoke and Wigan.

The current plan for both routes envisage them both being run by Avanti West Coast, so it looks like High Speed Two is being designed to work with the West Coast Main Line.
Destinations like Carlisle, Glasgow and Preston will be served using the West Coast Main Line.
Compatible trains will be built that can be run on both lines.
Some stations will be shared.

It does seem that there are advantages, if the two routes are considered as one system.

The East Coast Main Line

The East Coast Main Line serves the following routes.

London and Bradford
London and Cambridge
London and Edinburgh via Doncaster, York and Newcastle
London and Harrogate via Leeds
London and Hull
London and Kings Lynn via Cambridge
London and Lincoln via Newark.
London and Leeds via Doncaster
London and Middlesbrough
London and Skipton via Leeds
London and Sunderland

The East Coast Main Line could become another high speed line.

Extra services could be added.

London and Norwich via Cambridge
London and Nottingham
London and Grimsby and Cleethorpes via Lincoln.
London and Sheffield via Retford.

Add the East Coast Main Line and High Speed Two together and there could be a wider range of towns and cities served.

Peterborough and Doncaster could play the same role in the East as Birmingham and Crewe will play in the West.
The East Coast Main Line between London and Doncaster will be upgraded to in-cab ERTMS signalling in a few years time, which will allow 140 mph running on several sections of the route.
Improvements are either under way or being planned to reduce bottlenecks on the East Coast Main Line.
If High Speed Two can handle eighteen trains per hour (tph), then surely the East Coast Main Line, which has a lot of quadruple track, can handle upwards of twelve 140 mph trains per hour between London and Doncaster, after the improvements to track and signalling.
I estimate that 140 mph running between London and Doncaster could save as much as twenty minutes.
I feel that Barnsley, Doncaster, Hull, Leeds, Sheffield and York could all be reached in under two hours from London using the existing Azuma trains.
This morning the 0700 from Kings Cross is timetabled to reach York at 0852. Would it be possible for London and York to be around just ninety minutes?
Savings would also apply to trains between London and Leeds, Middlesbrough, Newcastle, Scotland and Sunderland.
Sub-four hour journeys between London and Edinburgh would be commonplace.

Note that the Internet gives a driving time of nearly three and a half hours between London and Leeds. Surely, two hours or less on High Speed Yorkshire would be much preferable.

I would add this infrastructure.

There might be a good case to create electrified routes to Hull and Sheffield and between Sheffield and Leeds, but they wouldn’t be needed to start the service or obtain the time savings. But they would ease operation, cut carbon emissions and save a few more minutes.
A station at Doncaster-Sheffield Airport.
A parkway station at Barnsley on the Dearne Valley Line with direct services to Doncaster, Leeds, London and Sheffield.

The two latter improvements have been proposed in Sheffield Region’s transport plans.

High Speed Yorkshire should be finished as soon as possible. A completion date of 2024 is not unreasonable.

Northern Powerhouse Rail

Northern Powerhouse Rail is a plan to build an East-West high speed line or at least a much faster one, than the overcrowded joke, that presently exists.

I discussed the latest thinking in Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North and the latest thinking and my views can best be summarised as follows.

Northern Powerhouse Rail will be an improved line with some new sections, between Liverpool and Hull via Manchester Airport, Manchester and Leeds.
Northern Powerhouse Rail and High Speed Two will connect at High Legh.
Northern Powerhouse Rail and High Speed Two will share infrastructure.
The High Speed Two route to Manchester would be via Birmingham, Crewe, High Legh and Manchester Airport.
The High Speed Two route to Liverpool would be via Birmingham, Crewe, High Legh and Warrington
Hull will get a London service from High Speed Two via Birmingham, Crewe, High Legh and Manchester Airport, Manchester and Leeds

The Oakervee review of High Speed Two is also underway and leaks are suggesting, that the report is recommending that High Speed Two be built in full, but differently.

One important thing, that is happening, is that Network Rail have started the procurement process to improve the current line between Leeds and Huddersfield, as I reported in Network Rail Reveals Detailed £2.9bn Upgrade Plans For TransPennine Route.

Extra tracks will be built.
There will be some extra electrification.

I very much feel, that this is one of the most difficult TransPennine sections to improve.

The other sections are summarised as follows.

Liverpool and Manchester Airport via Warrington and High Legh is across the flat lands of North Cheshire and could follow the M56.
Manchester Airport and Manchester will probably be a high speed tunnel.
Manchester and Huddersfield section could possibly be improved in the short term
Leeds and Hull and the required connections to the East Coast Main Line are in the flat lands of East Yorkshire.

It looks to me, that Network Rail have a plan in there to perhaps deliver improved services East of Huddersfield and radiating from Leeds in the next few years.

It certainly needs improvement, as the TransPennine route must be the worst main line in the UK.

A One-Nation Railway

I think these lines can be connected to create an integrated high speed network.

High Speed Two
West Coast Main Line
East Coast Main Line
Northern Powerhouse Rail

But.

It doesn’t connect to the whole country and needs to be extended.
It won’t be fully developed until at least 2035.
Improvements are needed now!

So what could be substantially delivered of the core network, by say 2024, which is around the date of the next General Election?

Faster and more frequent services on the East Coast Main Line.
An electrified higher capacity and faster line between Leeds and Huddersfield and possibly between Leeds and Hull.
New East Coast Main Line services from London to Barnsley Dearne Valley, Bradford, Cleethorpes, Doncaster Sheffield Airport, Grimsby, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Middlesbrough, Norwich, Nottingham, Scarborough and Sheffield and Sunderland.
Sub-four hour services between London and Edinburgh.
New local services to connect Blyth and Ashington to the East Coast Main Line at Newcastle.
A Tees Valley Metro connecting Bishop Auckland, Whitby and all in between to the East Coast Main Line at Darlington.
Improved local services between York and Leeds via Harrogate, Sheffield and Leeds via the Dearne Valley and on other lines in Yorkshire.

Effectively, the recommendations of this report on the Transport for the North web site, which is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail, which apply to Leeds and Sheffield would have been implemented to connect to high speed services at Doncaster, Leeds, Sheffield and York.

Technology used would include.

Some more electrification using the power from the electrified East Coast Main Line.
Conventional electric trains and compatible battery trains.
Tram-trains feeding into the Sheffield Supertram.
ERTMS digital signalling on the East Coast Main Line and the major branches to Hull, Leeds and Middlesbrough.

There would also need to be an increase in LNER’s Azuma fleet. But that is already rumoured as I wrote in More New Trains On LNER Wish List.

Could we see as many as twelve Axumas per hour between London and Doncaster? Yes!

Could it all be delivered by the 2024 General Election? Yes!

High Speed Scotland

The Scottish Nationalist Party is pushing for High Speed Two to be extended to Scotland.

I think that this will eventually be a feasible project, but it will be a very expensive and perhaps built around 2040.

These are my thoughts for the next few years up to 2024.

High Speed To Edinburgh

Consider.

Edinburgh currently supports a half-hourly service to and from London.
East Coast Trains are proposing to add five trains per day to this route.
TransPennine Express will run an hourly service between Edinburgh and Liverpool, via Manchester, Leeds, York and Newcastle, which starts at the December 2019 timetable change..
CrossCountry run an hourly service between Aberdeen and Plymouth.
It looks like Edinburgh and Newcastle have a four tph service.

All services, except the CrossCountry are planned to be run by Hitachi’s Class 800, 802 or 803 trains.

Currently, services take ninety minutes for the 125 miles between Newcastle and Edinburgh.
The Hitachi trains are all capable of 140 mph with digital signalling.
The Hitachi trains have better acceleration.
The route is fully electrified. Although, there are reports it needs enhancing to be able to handle the current number of trains.

How many minutes can be taken off thjs route, with a new timetable on a line running only Hitachi high speed trains?

Probably not that many, but it would ensure all London and Edinburgh trains were under four hours.

But it will all happen by 2024?

High Speed To Glasgow

So Edinburgh is alright, but what about Glasgow?

Consider.

Glasgow currently supports an hourly service to and from London.
TransPennine Express run an hourly service to and from Manchester Airport
TransPennine Express will run a three trains per day service to and from Liverpool.

Glasgow has a much lower frequency service to and from England than Edinburgh.

Currently, London and Glasgow takes over four-and-a half hours and there is going to be no serious improvement, until High Speed Two opens to Crewe, when the time could drop to perhaps just over three-and-a half hours.

But that won’t happen until possibly 2030.

In Does One Of Baldrick’s Descendents Work For Avanti West Coast?, I detail a cunning plan, that might allow London and Glasgow in four hours.

This was my conclusion in the other article.

To improve services between London and Birmingham, Blackpool, Liverpool and Scotland, appears to need the following.

Ten new Hitachi trains.

Full digital signalling on the West Coast Main Line.

Track improvements on the West Coast Main Line

Upgrading of the Pendelinos to allow 140 mph running.

This should reduce London and Glasgow to around four hours and London and Liverpool to around two hours.

There may be advantages in replacing the Pendelinos with the Classic-compatible High Speed Two trains on the London and Glasgow service as early as possible.

There would be a large increase of capacity between London and Glasgow.
What would be the possible speed of the Classic-compatible trains on updated track North of Crewe? I will assume 140 mph, but it could be more! That’s called engineering!
London and Glasgow timings would be improved, as soon as digital signalling is installed.
The trains would get a thorough testing before the opening of High Speed Two to Birmingham.

At least one platform at Glasgow Central would need to be extended to take a four-hundred metre long train.

According to Wikipedia, the Classic-compatible trains will be introduced from 2026.

I think by the December 2026 timetable change Glasgow could see a four-hour service to and from London.

But could it be 2024, if the Pendelinos can pick up time North of Crewe with digital signalling?

The Borders Railway

If High Speed Two is going to be a One Nation project, the Borders Railway must be extended from Tweedbank to Carlisle via Hawick.

Could this be done by 2024?

It would be a close-run thing! But possible!

The Glasgow South Western Line

The Glasgow South Western Line, is a secondary route between Glasgow and Carlisle.

It should be electrified early, so that during the upgrading of the West Coast Main Line North of Carlisle it can be used as a diversionary route.

Scotland Could Have Two Four-Hour Fully-Electrified Routes To And From London

But it’s not just London that gets good connectivity to and from Scotland!

Birmingham
Bradford
Carlisle
Leeds
Liverpool
Manchester
Newcastle
Peterborough
Preston
Wolverhampton
York

All these cities will have direct connections to Edinburgh and/or Glasgow.

High Speed Midlands

Almost unnoticed and with little fuss, the Midland Main Line is being upgraded to provide 125 mph services between London and Chesterfield, Derby, Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield.

New Hitachi bi-mode Class 804 trains will improve speeds and increase capacity
Over the last decade or so, the track has been upgraded for 125 mph running.
Electrification will reach between London and Market Harborough.
Market Harborough station has been remodelled to remove a bottleneck.
The Corby branch will be electrified with the trains running half-hourly.

I also think, that the Midland Main Line will link into all the improvements between Barnsley, Doncaster, Leeds and Sheffield and provide the following.

A high speed route between Leeds and the East Midlands.
A route for a Barnsley and London service.
A second route for Leeds and London services..

It also seems that rail planners are getting innovative with the design of the Midland Main Line.

It appears that the Midland Main Line and High Speed Two’s spur to Sheffield will be combined into an electrified line between Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield via Chesterfield.
An improved link to the East-West Rail link at Bedford could improve links between the North-East and the South of England.
The disused rail line between Market Harborough and Northampton could be reopened.

The line is a lot more than a connection between London and the East Midlands.

The upgrade should be complete by 2024.

East West Rail

East West Rail is still in a long planning stage, but it now looks likely to provide more than a passenger link between Oxford and Cambridge.

New freight routes for Felixstowe and Southampton.
Extra passenger services between Oxford and Reading in the West and Cambridge, Ipswich and Norwich in the East.
Connections to the Great Western Main Line, the Chiltern Line, West Coast Main Line, Midland Main Line, East Coast Main Line and the Great Eastern Main Line.

It has also been suggested that East West Rail should be connected to High Speed Two at a new station at Calvert. This could give Bristol, Cardiff and Southampton good links to and from High Speed Two.

Great Western Main Line

At the December 2019 timetable change, there has finally been some good news in the saga of the electrification of the Great Western Main Line.

Services between London and Bristol have been improved.
The timetable has been improved.

Whether it will stand up is another matter.

Certainly by 2024, it will be a much better main line.

It could have full digital in-can signalling, which could result in 140 mph running and journey time savings.

Who knows?

But what excites me is the possibility of a connection between High Speed Two and East West Rail at Calvert, which will allow trains to run between Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea, in Wales and the West and the North on a mainly electrified high speed railway.

High Speed North Wales

Avanti West Coast is purchasing thirteen new Hitachi bi-mode trains to run services to Chester and North Wales.

I can’t see much speed improvement in the services, although if the West Coast Main Line gets digital signalling, this could save a few minutes between London and Crewe.

High Speed Ireland

The technology is now available to build a rail bridge between Scotland and the island of Ireland.

I laid out the arguments in A Solution To The Northern Irish Problem!.

The Lincoln Solution

Lincoln is a city, that has been ignored by UK railways for decades.

But not any more as LNER now run six return trips a day to the city on Mondays to Saturdays and five on Sundays.

I wrote about the improvements in The Shape Of Train Services To Come.

How many other cities and large towns would benefit from a Lincoln solution?

LNER have already launched a similar service to Harrogate at the December 2019 timetable change and I’m sure that more will follow.

Disability And Access Issues

A true one-nation railway wouldn’t exclude anybody from using the trains.

Strides have been made to put up step-free bridges, but some of the access between platform and train is truly dreadful.

This picture shows what can be achieved by good design on a Class 755 train.

And this is the step on one of Hitachi’s new trains.

Note that all doors on these Hitachi trains are also far too narrow.

Some train manufacturers can do much better.

Recurring Themes

In this analysis, there are factors that keep cropping up.

Digital Signalling Or ERTMS

This is the key to squeezing more trains into our overcrowded railway.

Between London and Doncaster on the East Coast Main Line, should be operational in a few years and I believe the following lines should follow as soon as possible.

East Coast Main Line between Doncaster and York and possibly Newcastle.
East Coast Main Line North Of Newcastle
West Coast Main Line North Of Crewe
West Coast Main Line South Of Crewe
Midland Main Line
Great Western Main Line

As a time-expired Control Engineer, I believe that in-cab digital signalling is a major key to increasing capacity.

Faster Line Speeds

Some routes like TransPennine, have Victorian line speeds

Network Rail showed how it could improve line speed with the remodelling at Market Harborough station.

Bottlenecks, like the Trowse Swing Bridge at Norwich need immediate removal, no matter what the Heritage Taliban and other Luddites say.

New Hitachi Trains

There will be several more orders for the next generation of Hitachi’s high speed trains.

I have been critical of Hitachi’s manufacturing processes for these trains in the past, but they seem now to be running well in fleet service.

A standard UK train on 125 mph lines, that can also handle 140 mph with digital signalling must be a good thing for all sorts of reasons.

New Feeder Services

Several new feeder services have been indicated and there should be a lot more of these to bring the benefit of the high speed network to more of the UK population.

Delivering The Improvements

Geographically, the places where improvements are needed are spread thinly around the country and vary from projects with a cost of tens of millions to those with costs of tens of billions.

In the UK, we tend to go for the big hit, when perhaps several smaller ones might give a better short-term improvement.

We also duck projects, which would annoy the noisy local interests.

We need to have fundamental rethink about how we deliver and pay for rail improvements.

Conclusion

I am fairly pleased overall in that I think by 2024, many places in the UK, will have a much better train service than they do now!

Delivery of High Speed Two, East West Rail and Northern Powerhouse Rail as soon as possible after 2024, will be the icing on the cake.

Will It Be A One-Nation Project?

I think it can be!

December 16, 2019 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail, Avanti West Coast, Azuma Train, Borders Railway, Class 802 Train, Clay Cross North Junction, Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Electrification, East Coast Main Line, East-West Rail, ERTMS, Glasgow South Western Line, Great Western Main Line, High Speed Two, High Speed Yorkshire, HS3/Northern Powerhouse Rail, Midland Main Line, West Coast Main Line | 6 Comments

Does One Of Baldrick’s Descendents Work For Avanti West Coast?

I have been looking at the problems of maximising traffic and reducing journey times on the West Coast Main Line to the North of Crewe.

I think that what Avanti West Coast intend to do has a touch of the Baldricks about it.

Trains that go North from Crewe include the following Avanti West Coast services.

Blackpool, which branches off at Preston.
Glasgow, which goes up the West Coast Main Line via Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme and Carlisle.
Liverpool, which branches off at Weaver Junction, between Crewe and Warrington.
Manchester, which branches off at Crewe.

I find it interesting that according to Wikipedia, Avanti West Coast will be running their new Hitachi electric trains to Blackpool and Liverpool, but not Manchester.

Could it be that as these trains will be sharing tracks to the North of Crewe in the future with High Speed Two services to Preston, Carlisle and Scotland, that these trains will be built to have the same operating speed on the West Coast Main Line, as the classic-compatible High Speed Two trains, that will serve the route?

The Manchester Branch is slower, so will remain 125 mph Pendelino territory.

The Number Of Electric Trains Ordered

Doing a rough estimate< I reckon the following.

One train per hour (tph) to Liverpool needs five 125 mph Pendelinos.
One tph to Blackpool needs six 125 mph Pendelinos.
.Two tph to Liverpool needs ten 125 mph Pendelinos.
If the new Hitachi trains, are capable of 140 mph, I reckon two tph to Liverpool might need eight 140 mph trains.

The order of new Hitachi trains is not large enough to run both Blackpool and Liverpool services.

Will The New Hitachi Trains Be Used On London and Liverpool?

Consider.

It would probably the best policy to run each route with one class of train.
A two tph London and Liverpool service is much needed.
Running the new Hitachi trains on London and Liverpool, would release extra trains for London and Blackpool and London and Birmingham.
Two tph to Liverpool needs eight 125 mph Pendelinos or eight 140 mph Hitachi trains.

But it would also mean installing ERTMS signalling on the London and Liverpool route to enable 140 mph running.

It does appear that ten new Hitachi trains, able to run at 140 mph could service the London and Liverpool route and release five Pendelinos for other routes.

Could The Pendelinos Run At 140 mph?

They were designed for this speed, as were the InterCity 225 trains and only don’t run at this speed because of the lack of digital signalling on the West Coast Main Line.

The Wikipedia entry for the Class 390 Pendelino train says this about the speed of the train.

The Class 390 Pendolino is one of the fastest domestic electric multiple units operating in Britain, with a design speed of 140 mph (225 km/h); however, limitations to track signalling systems restrict the trains to a maximum speed of 125 mph (200 km/h) in service. In September 2006, the Pendolino set a new speed record, completing the 401 mi (645 km) length of the West Coast Main Line from Glasgow Central to London Euston in 3 hours, 55 minutes.

Perhaps it is time to unleash the Pendelinos?

Could the planned refurbishment of the Pendelinos install the required equipment, allow the trains to run using digital signalling at 140 mph?

What Is The Cunning Plan?

These are the possible objectives of adding the extra ten trains.

One tph between London and Glasgow in around four hours.
Two tph between London and Liverpool in around two hours.

Would this be one possible way to achieve these objectives?

Install digital signalling on the West Coast Main Line to allow 140 mph in places, where the track allows.
Improve the track of the West Coast Main Line, where necessary.
Run new Hitachi trains between London and Liverpool.
Release the current Pendelinos to other routes.
Upgrade the Pendelinos with digital signalling to allow 140 mph running, where possible.
Run 140 mph Pendelinos between London and Blackpool, Edinburgh and Glasgow.

The real plan will probably be a lot better and more comprehensive, but it does show how the two objectives can be met.

Conclusion

To improve services between London and Birmingham, Blackpool, Liverpool and Scotland, appears to need the following.

Ten new Hitachi trains.
Full digital signalling on the West Coast Main Line.
Track improvements on the West Coast Main Line
Upgrading of the Pendelinos to allow 140 mph running.

This should reduce London and Glasgow to around four hours and London and Liverpool to around two hours.

December 15, 2019 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Blackpool North Station, Class 390 Train, Class 802 Train, Digital Signalling, Glasgow Central Station, High Speed Two, Liverpool Lime Street Station, West Coast Main Line | 4 Comments

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

About This Blog

What this blog will eventually be about I do not know.

But it will be about how I’m coping with the loss of my wife and son to cancer in recent years and how I manage with being a coeliac and recovering from a stroke. It will be about travel, sport, engineering, food, art, computers, large projects and London, that are some of the passions that fill my life.

And hopefully, it will get rid of the lonely times, from which I still suffer.

Why Anonymous? That’s how you feel at times.

Search for:
Charities
Useful Links
Top Posts
WordPress Admin
Email Subscription

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address:

Join 1,898 other subscribers

The Anonymous Widower

Thoughts On Class 807 Trains And High Speed Two’s Classic-Compatible Trains

Macclesfield Station And High Speed Two

Birmingham-Black Country-Shrewsbury

Existing Stations Where High Speed Two Trains Will Call

Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours?

Are Hitachi Designing the Ultimate Battery Train?

Could High Speed Two Trains Serve Chester And North Wales?

Hitachi Trains For Avanti

Could High Speed Two Be A One-Nation Project?

Does One Of Baldrick’s Descendents Work For Avanti West Coast?

About This Blog

Charities

Useful Links

Top Posts

WordPress Admin

Email Subscription

Archives

Categories

Tweets

Site info