Euston Station « The Anonymous Widower

Could We See Between London And Much Of The North By Train In Under Two Hours?

I shall write about each route in order starting from Euston and working East.

Avanti West Coast And Euston

These are services from Euston, that I feel could be under two hours.

London Euston And Liverpool Lime Street

On Thursday, I went to Liverpool by train.

My train took two hours and thirteen minutes between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street stations.
There were stops at Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.
The Class 390 train was travelling at 125 mph for a lot of the way.
The distance between the two terminals is 193.6 miles.
The start to stop average including the stops was 87.3 mph.

So could London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street be achieved in the magic two hours?

A few thoughts.

Average Speed

To do the journey in this time would need an average speed of 96.8 mph.

Accelerating And Stopping

Ideally, the train will run as fast as it can only changing speed for the station stops.

The train will accelerate from stop to cruising speed at Euston, Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn or four times.
The train will decelerate from cruising speed to stop at Stafford, Crewe, Runcorn and Liverpool Lime Street or four times.

Effectively, the train goes through four complete station stops, although one will be split between the two ends of the journey.

These figures are from Wikipedia and the Internet

The acceleration of the Class 390 train is 1.0 mph/sec which means that it takes 125 seconds to get to 125 mph.
The deceleration of a Class 390 train is 2.0 mph/sec, which means that it takes 63 seconds to stop from 125 mph.
The acceleration of a Class 801 train is 1.6 mph/sec which means that it takes 78 seconds to get to 125 mph.
The deceleration of a Class 801 train is 2.2 mph/sec, which means that it takes 57 seconds to stop from 125 mph.

These figures would appear to show, that a Class 801 train can decelerate and accelerate at a stop in nearly a minute faster than a Class 390 train.

So how can we increase the acceleration and deceleration? The two obvious ways are more power and less weight.

Form the Internet, I estimate that the average car in a Class 390 train is around 52 tonnes, as opposed to 41 tonnes for the Hitachi trains.

So does this weight difference explain some of the difference in acceleration and deceleration times?

Consider.

The Class 390 trains have all the extra weight of the tilt mechanism. More weight means slower acceleration.
Avanti West Coast’s new Class 807 trains have no diesel engines or batteries. Have the trains been put on a diet?
They also have a reprofiled nose. Is it more aerodynamic?

So if these trains can save time on the four accelerate/decelerate cycles compared to the Class 390 trains, they must be getting nearer to the magic two hours.

If two minutes a stop can be saved that would save eight minutes on the journey between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street.

140 Mph Running

The time to do a mile at various speeds are as follows.

100 mph – 36 seconds
125 mph – 29 seconds
140 mph – 26 seconds

So running at 140 mph, as opposed to the current 125 mph would save three seconds for every mile.

To save five minutes would mean the train would have to run for a hundred miles at 140 mph instead of 125 mph.

As Stafford is 133.5 miles from London, it could be that full digital signalling should be installed on the West Coast Main Line all the way to Stafford or even Crewe, which is 158 miles from London.

This schematic map of the West Coast Main Line was clipped from Wikipedia.

Note.

Trains between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street take the Trent Valley Line through Nuneaton and Lichfield Trent Valley and stop at Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.
Trains between London Euston and Manchester take a variety of routes and all go via Stockport.
One train per hour (tph) between London Euston and Glasgow Central takes the Trent Valley Line and goes non-stop between London Euston and Warrington Central.
Norton Bridge Junction just to the North of Stafford has recently been remodelled.

I believe there is potential to enable up to at least a hundred miles of 140 mph running to the South of Crewe. Especially as most of the track South of Crewe is quadruple track.

This should enable the shaving of five or more minutes off the time of any train capable of 140 mph running that uses the Trent Valley Line through Nuneaton, Lichfield Trent Valley and Stafford.

Norton Bridge Junction

Norton Bridge junction, which is five miles North used to be a bottleneck, but it has now been remodelled.

I wrote about it in The New Norton Bridge Junction In Action.

The new junction has probably been designed so that it can save a few seconds for trains going between Stafford and Crewe, whether or not they stop at either or both stations.

Non-Stop Between London Euston and Runcorn

If you look at the times of a London Euston and Glasgow Central train via the Trent Valley Line , it travels the 174.7 miles between London Euston and Weaver Junction non-stop in one hour and forty minutes. This is an average speed of 104.8 mph.

By comparison, my train on Thursday took one hour and forty-seven minutes with the two stops at Stafford and Crewe.

So there is at least six minutes to be saved by going non-stop.

Two Trains Per Hour Between London Euston And Liverpool Lime Street

Wikipedia says this about an additional service.

Subject to approval by the Office of Rail and Road, an additional hourly service will be introduced between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street with a stop at Liverpool South Parkway from December 2022.

I have a few thoughts and questions on extra services between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street,

In my view the second service is much needed.
I also think, that a later train back to London is needed.
Does the Wikipedia statement mean that only one train will stop at Liverpool South Parkway?
Does Runcorn need two tph to and from London?
Would the platforms at Liverpool South Parkway be lengthened to accept eleven-car Class 390 trains?

I feel that if a train stopped at both Liverpool South Parkway and Runcorn, this would make a two-hour journey more difficult to achieve.

London Euston And Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours

The new Class 807 trains will be delivered by 2022. Because of the pandemic, I’ll assume that of the ten trains on order, some, but not all, will be available by the December 2022 timetable change.

The time savings needed for a two-hour journey will come from four improvements.

The increased performance of the Class 807 trains.
Full digital signalling South of Crewe.
The track improvements already completed like Norton Bridge Junction.
Cutting out stop on the second service.

There may also be time savings to be obtained at the intermediate stops, by better working practices.

I doubt that the full digital signalling will have been installed, but all trains will be capable of 125 mph running.

Avanti West Coast probably have a good idea of the time they could achieve without digital signalling and I feel that they could be about five minutes over two hours with the Class 807 trains.

As the eleven-car Class 390 trains are too long for Liverpool South Parkway station, could we see the following service?

1 tph – Class 390 train – London Euston And Liverpool Lime Street via Runcorn, Crewe and Stafford.
1 tph – Class 807 train – London Euston And Liverpool Lime Street via Liverpool South Parkway.

Note.

The Class 390 train would run the existing timetable in two hours and thirteen minutes.
The Class 807 train would be a two-hour express service if possible.
Going from three stops to one could save the express at least seven minutes, as I showed earlier by looking at train timings South of Weaver Junction.
There would be time savings of at least two minutes on the express service due to the better performance of the Class 807 train.

To save the final four minutes, there would need to be at least eighty miles of 140 mph running, as each mile saves three seconds.

I am fairly certain, that London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street can be regularly achieved in two hours.

London Euston And Warrington Bank Quay

The hourly London Euston and Glasgow Central expresses seem to take one hour and forty-five minutes for the non-stop trip of 182.1 miles, which is an average speed of 104 mph.

As this service is non-stop, I believe that this service would get the maximum benefit from digital signalling and this service will only get faster, as more and more of the route allowed 140 mph-running.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see almost ten minutes lopped off this service by signalling and other improvements.

I am fairly certain, that London Euston and Warrington Bank Quay can be regularly achieved in well under two hours, by a Class 390 train.

London Euston And Wigan North Western

The hourly London Euston and Glasgow Central expresses seem to take one hour and fifty-six minutes for the single-stop trip of 193.9 miles, which is an average speed of 100.3 mph.

As this service just a single stop at Warrington Bank Quay, I believe that this service would get the maximum benefit from digital signalling and this service will only get faster, as more and more of the route allowed 140 mph-running.

As with Warrington Bank Quay, I wouldn’t be surprised to see almost ten minutes lopped off this service by signalling and other improvements.

I am fairly certain, that London Euston and Wigan North Western can be regularly achieved in comfortably under two hours, by a Class 390 train.

London Euston And Preston

The hourly London Euston and Glasgow Central expresses seem to take two hours and eleven minutes for the two -stop trip of 209 miles, which is an average speed of 95.7 mph.

As this service just stops at Warrington Bank Quay and Wigan North Western, I believe that this service would get the maximum benefit from digital signalling and this service will only get faster, as more and more of the route allowed 140 mph-running.

As with Warrington Bank Quay and Wigan North Western, I wouldn’t be surprised to see almost ten minutes lopped off this service by signalling and other improvements.

I am fairly certain, that London Euston and Preston can be regularly achieved in just under two hours, by a Class 390 train.

London Euston And Blackpool North

Avanti West Coast have indicated that their new Class 807 trains will run between London Euston and Blackpool North.

Consider.

I am fairly certain that a Class 390 train will be able to run between London Euston and Preston in under two hours, once digital signalling is installed South of Crewe.
Currently, Class 390 trains take twenty minutes between Preston and Blackpool North stations.
The Class 807 trains have better acceleration and deceleration and should be able to execute faster stops than the Class 390 trains.

I wonder if Avanti West Coast, Hitachi, Network Rail and Rock Rail have thought up a cunning plan to run Class 807 trains between London Euston And Blackpool North, in under two hours.

Trains would go via the Trent Valley.

Trains might only stop at perhaps Milton Keynes Central, Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western and Preston.

Trains would run at up to 140 mph using digital signalling, in as many places as possible.

Is the performance of the Class 807 trains sufficient to achieve London Euston and Blackpool North in under two hours via the Trent Valley?

London Euston And Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow

Consider.

Most trains between London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow seem to take around six or seven minutes over two hours.
I believe that if the 158 miles between London Euston and Crewe were to be digitally signalled, then this could save up to eight minutes by allowing trains to run at 140 mph rather than the current 125 mph.

This could be enough to bring the London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow below two hours.

I am not surprised at this, as the trains were built for 140 mph and because there is no digital signalling, they are limited to 125 mph, which slows the trains by six or seven minutes.

London Euston And Manchester Piccadilly via Stoke-on-Trent

Everything I said about trains between London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow probably apply, except that the services via Stoke-on-Trent are a few minutes slower.

But I do feel, that this could be enough to bring the London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Stoke-on-Trent below two hours.

East Midlands Railway And St. Pancras

These is only one service from St. Pancras, that is not comfortably under two hours.

London St. Pancras And Sheffield

A typical service between London St. Pancras And Sheffield takes a few minutes over two hours..

There are two tph
There are stops at Leicester, Loughborough, East Midlands Parkway, Long Eaton, Derby or Chesterfield depending on the service.
The Class 222 trains travel at 125 mph for most of the way.
The distance between the two terminals is 164.7 miles.
The start to stop average including the stops is 81 mph.

I would suspect that East Midlands Railway’s new bi-mode Class 810 trains will be able to easily break the two-hour barrier.

They have four diesel engines so they can cruise at 125 mph on diesel.
They have electric power for South of Market Harborough.
Some diesel engines will be changed for batteries.

As electrification increases on the Midland Main Line, these trains will use less and less diesel.

I also suspect that digital signalling will start to creep into the route, starting from Bedford, where it is used on Thameslink.

LNER And King’s Cross

These are services from King’s Cross, that are or I feel will be under two hours.

London King’s Cross And Doncaster

A typical service between London King’s Cross And Doncaster takes around one hour and thirty-seven minutes.

There are four tph
There are stops at Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark and Retford depending on the service.
The Class 80x trains travel at 125 mph for most of the way.
The distance between the two stations is 156 miles.
The start to stop average including the stops is 96.5 mph.

Digital signaling is being installed on this section of the East Coast Main Line and I suspect that this will reduce timings between London King’s Cross And Doncaster.

A simple estimate based on the maximum operating speed, indicates a time of one hour and twenty-six minutes should be possible.

But as a Control Engineer, I believe that digital signalling will lead to faster running over the Digswell Viaduct and through the flat crossing at Newark.

The timing will certainly be under one hour and thirty minutes between London King’s Cross And Doncaster.

London King’s Cross And York

A typical service between London King’s Cross And York takes around one hour and forty-eight minutes.

There are two tph
There are stops at Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Retford and Doncaster depending on the service.
The Class 80x trains travel at 125 mph for most of the way.
The distance between the two stations is 188.5 miles.
A non-stop service takes one hour and fifty-two minutes, which is a start to stop average including the stops is 101 mph.

If my crude estimate of time savings because of digital signalling South of Doncaster can be applied, this would imply a reduction in journey time of at least eleven minutes.

London King’s Cross And Leeds

A typical service between London King’s Cross And Leeds takes around two hours and thirteen minutes.

There are three tph
There are stops at Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Doncaster and Wakefield Westgate depending on the service.
The Class 80x trains travel at 125 mph for most of the way.
The distance between the two terminals is 185.9 miles.
This is a start to stop average including the stops is 83.9 mph.

If my crude estimate of time savings because of digital signalling South of Doncaster can be applied, this would imply a reduction in journey time of at least eleven minutes, which would put a time between London King’s Cross and Leeds of around two hours.

London King’s Cross And Bradford Forster Square

LNER run some services on this route

The services take thirty minutes between Leeds and Bradford Forster Square stations.
The services do not reverse at Leeds.

Given that two hours should be possible between London Kings Cross and Leeds, it would appear that two hours and thirty minutes should be possible between Leeds and Bradford Forster Square stations.

London King’s Cross And Bradford Interchange

Grand Central run some services on this route

The services call at Doncaster, Wakefield Kirkgate, Mirfield, Brighouse and Low Moor
The services take two hours and fifty-four minutes between London King’s Cross and Bradford Interchange stations.

The services take one hour and seventeen minutes between Doncaster and Bradford Interchange stations.

The services are run by Class 180 diesel trains, which will have to be replaced to decarbonise the route.

I suspect that Hitachi will have a train for this route, that could use diesel or batteries to the North of Doncaster.

My estimate for the best time between King’s Cross and Doncaster is one hour and twenty-six minutes.
The current time between Doncaster and Bradford Interchange stations is one hour and seventeen minutes.

This gives a best time of perhaps two hours and forty-three minutes between Doncaster and Bradford Interchange stations.

The route to Bradford via Leeds is perhaps fifteen minutes faster, but it serves different stations.

London King’s Cross And Harrogate

LNER has been running to Harrogate for some time.

There is one train per two hours (tp2h)
The service calls at Stevenage, Grantham, Doncaster, Wakefield Westgate and Leeds.
some services reverse at Leeds.
The service takes two hours and fifty-five minutes between London King’s Cross and Harrogate stations.
The service takes thirty minutes between Leeds and Harrogate stations.

Given that two hours should be possible between London Kings Cross and Leeds, it would appear that two hours and thirty minutes could be possible between London King’s Cross and Harrogate stations.

London King’s Cross And Huddersfield

In LNER Expands To Huddersfield, I described LNER’s new service to Huddersfield.

There will be one train per day (tpd)
The service will call at Peterborough, Newark North Gate, Doncaster, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds and Dewsbury.
The service will split and join with the London King’s Cross and Skipton service at Leeds.
The service will reverse at Leeds.
The service take two hours and fifty-five minutes between London King’s Cross and Huddersfield stations.
The service will take twenty-five minutes between Leeds and Huddersfield stations.
Improvements are planned, which include electrification, between Dewsbury and Huddersfield

Given that two hours should be possible between London Kings Cross and Leeds, it would appear that two hours and thirty minutes could be possible between London King’s Cross and Huddersfield stations.

London King’s Cross And Hull

The fastest Hull Trains service between London King’s Cross And Hull takes around two hours and thirty minutes.

There are seven tpd
There are stops at Stevenage, Grantham, Retford, Doncaster, Selby, Howden and Brough depending on the service.
The Class 80x trains travel at 125 mph for most of the way.
The distance between the two terminals is 205.3 miles.
This is a start to stop average including the stops is 82.1 mph.

London King’s Cross And Middlesbrough

LNER have announced a Middlesbrough service, which I wrote about in LNER’s Middlesbrough And London Service. Starts On December 13th.

There will be one tpd in both directions
Intermediate stops will be at Thornaby and York.
The Middlesbrough and London service will leave Middlesbrough from Platform 1 at 07:08 and arrive in King’s Cross at 10:22.
The London and Middlesbrough service will leave King’s Cross at 15:25 and arrive in Middlesbrough in Platform 2 at 18:18.

There appear to be some curiosities in the timetabling of these trains, which I may explore later.

I would assume that is because LNER want a competitive time of three hours between King’s Cross and Middlesbrough.

These are Southbound times between Eaglescliffe and King’s Cross in the morning.

Grand Central – Two hours and thirty-nine minutes
LNER – Three hours and two minutes

Is this because the Class 180 train is a genuine 125 mph train on diesel and the Class 800 train is not?

Conclusion

Of the cities and towns in the North, that I have discussed only Bradford, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Hull and Middlesbrough, are ones that will be difficult to be provided with a two-hour journey time to and from London. But all should be possible in close to or under two hours and thirty minutes.

October 17, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 222 Train, Class 390 Train, Class 801 Train, Class 807 Train, Class 810 Train, Doncaster Station, East Coast Main Line, East Midlands Railway, Euston Station, Hull Station, Hull Trains, King's Cross Station, Leeds Station, Liverpool Lime Street Station, Liverpool South Parkway Station, LNER, Manchester Piccadilly Station, Norton Bridge Junction, St. Pancras Station, West Coast Main Line, York Station | 7 Comments

Thoughts On Splitting The Northern Line

In Battersea Power Station Station Opens, I talked about the scale of the new Battersea Power Station station.

It looks like it could have three entrances.
It’s got four escalators and two lifts to go to down to platform level.
It has two terminal platforms.

I feel it has been designed to handle as many passengers and trains as Morden station.

Morden station has five platforms.
The station is step-free.
The station handles ten million passengers per year.

The signalling can handle up to thirty trains per hour (tph) to Morden.

It looks to me that Battersea Power Station station has been designed to be big enough to take half the trains from North London with ease.

The Bank Station Upgrade

In the Bank Station Upgrade, nearly a mile of new train tunnel and several shorter pedestrian tunnels were built.

They were dug not with a tunnel boring machine, but by traditional methods, that would have been understood by Brunel and the ancient Egyptians; pick and shovel, but probably assisted by the best modern electrical diggers and trucks.

I would expect that any tunnelling needed to split the Northern Line will not use an expensive tunnel boring machine.

The Northern Line will be going back to the future.

The Proposed Split

There has been talk of splitting the Northern Line into two separate lines for some years.

The Western Line (Charing Cross Line) would run between Edgware and Battersea Power Station via Camden Town, Euston, Charing Cross and Kennington.
The Eastern Line (Bank Line) would run between High Barnet and Morden via Camden Town, Euston, Bank and Kennington.

Note.

I will call the two lines the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.
Both lines could have Victoria Line frequencies of at least thirty tph.
It is generally felt that the split would need a rebuild at Camden Town station to handle the extra passengers.
Camden Town station also needs better access between the trains and the street.
There would need to be better connections at Kennington and Euston stations.

Surely, the main advantages of the split would be as follows.

Trains on both lines would go end-to-end without crossing a junction, where signals and points were constantly switching trains. This is why the Victoria Line can handle more than thirty-three tph.
Trains will run at Victoria Line frequencies on both lines.
All trains at Camden Town and Kennington stations would use a route without points to go as fast as possible through the station.
Eliminating the points, would make both lines more reliable.
Euston station will have upwards at least sixty tph connecting it to Crossrail.

Effectively, the new Bank and Charing Cross Lines would be able to perform just like Dear Old Vicky.

I will now look at where work needs to or could be done to successfully split the two lines.

Kennington Station

In Could Access Between Platform And Train Be Improved At Kennington Station?, I outlined how passengers might use Kennington station to change between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

I developed this rule.

The rule would appear to be if you’re on one line and are going to a station on the other, you change at Kennington station.

Staff would need to be on the platform to help those, who were changing direction.

But I do think changing can be made to work well with step-free access between train and platform on all four platforms at Kennington station.

It will be interesting to see, what proportion of train changes at Kennington are simple cross-platform changes, where there is no use of the steep stairs. I think it could be quite high.

I believe Kennington station will grow into a very smooth interchange between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

Although, there’ll be a problem for some time, if you’re in a wheelchair and want to go between Morden and Battersea Power station.

This could be solved by lifts between each pair of platforms and the intermediate level passage, which connects to the lifts to the surface.

The Camden Town Problem

This map from cartometro.com shows the lines around and through Camden Town station.

Note.

Camden Town station has four platforms.
The Eastern pair are under Kentish Town Road and connect to High Barnet in the North.
The Western pair are under Camden High Street and connect to Edgware in the North.
In each pair of tracks the Northbound track is above the Southbound track.
There is a level passage between the two Northbound tracks, so it is an easy interchange, if you’re on the wrong train going North.
The passage between the two Southbound tracks has stairs at either end, if you want to change Southbound trains at the station.

But the real problem lies South of the station; the horrendously complicated Camden Town Junction.

The junction must be able to handle trains going between the following stations.

Bank and Edgware
Bank and High Barnet
Charing Cross and Edgware
Charing Cross and High Barnet

Note in the map, that the High Barnet tracks dive under the Edgware tracks so they can form two separate pairs of tracks to Euston, only one of which goes via Mornington Crescent.

If there was a similar junction on the motorways of the UK or the Interstate Highways of the US, it would have years ago been simplified.

The split will mean the following.

The Eastern pair of platforms will still be connected to High Barnet as now, but will also be directly connected to the tracks that go directly to Euston and on to Bank.
The Western pair of platforms will still be connected to Edgware as now, but will also be directly connected to the tracks that go to Euston via Mornington Crescent and on to Charing Cross.
Camden Town Junction could be seriously simplified, with perhaps the ability to swap between routes only available for depot and engineering movements.

I do suspect, it would also mean all trains from High Barnet will go via Bank and all trains via Edgware will go via Charing Cross.

A proportion of passengers would have to change at Camden Town.
Both routes would connect to High Speed Two at Euston.
Both routes connect to the Central, Jubilee, Piccadilly and Victoria Lines.
Improvements promised for Euston will give better access to the Sub-Surface Lines.

I think it will be a case of winning some good routes and losing others. Disgusted from Finchley might complain.

But then there will be Crossrail, which as it connects to both lines at Tottenham Court Road and Moorgate could give serious advantages.

The split isn’t without passengers who will object to losing their preferred route.

Camden Town Station

This document on TfL’s web site gives more details of the proposed capacity upgrade at Camden Town station. This schematic of the tunnels, platforms and walkways shows how the station could look in a few years time.

Note.

New tunnels are shown in light grey.
Existing tunnels are shown in dark grey.
The Northbound platforms are above the Southbound ones.
The tunnels in the foreground are those of the Charing Cross Line.
The far tunnels are those of the Bank Line.
The new Buck Street entrance is labelled 8.
There is a new pedestrian tunnel between the two Northbound Lines.
Below it is a new tunnel between the two Southbound Lines.
There is an existing passage linking the four lines.

The full upgrade is very much on the back burner, but could Camden Town station be upgraded with the proposed extra cross passages.

These would enable passengers to change lines easily on the level.
Passengers changing between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines could be kept away from the existing escalators and the space at their bottom.
The tunnels would increase the circulation area.
The tunnels would be part of the new Buck Street entrance if it were to be built.

I feel with improved cross-platform interchange, Camden Town could function as an interchange station between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

A similar rule as I used for Kennington station would apply for passengers.

The rule would appear to be if you’re on one line and are going to a station on the other, you change at Camden Town station.

Staff would need to be on the platform to help those, who were changing direction.

But it would be a more comprehensive and easier interchange than Kennington, as all changes would be without steep stairs.

Once Camden Town station is working well with the new cross passages, I would then get a developer to put a large development on the proposed site of the Buck Street entrance, with a new entrance with lifts and escalators underneath, that reached down to the new cross tunnels.

After what the contractors did at Whitechapel, I suspect this could be achieved, whilst keeping the trains running and leaving the existing Camden Town station intact.

This Google Map shows the area between Camden Road and Camden Town stations.

Note.

Camden Road station on the North London Line is in the North-East corner of the map.
Camden Town station is at the bottom of the map towards the West.
The Charing Cross Line to Edgware is under Camden High Street.
The Bank Line to High Barnet is under Kentish Town Road.
Buck Street is to the North of Camden Town station connecting Camden High Street and Kentish Town Road.
The red-roofed building in Buck Street is the former Hawley School, which is now owned by Transport for London and is earmarked for the new station entrance.
The Regent’s Canal, which has a convenient towpath, runs East-West across the map.
A lot of development is happening on the North bank of the canal.

The map doesn’t show how difficult it is to walk between the two stations along the busy Camden Road.

In Between Camden Road And Camden Town Stations Along The Canal, I walked between the two stations along the canal and then up Kentish Town Road. It took me fourteen minutes in total with seven minutes between the canal and Camden Town station.

I believe the following will happen.

People living and working in the new developments will need access to Camden Town station.
The Regent’s Canal towpath will be updated into a safer walking route between Camden Lock and Camden Road station, that serves a lot of the developments.
More tourists will need to get to Camden Lock and the markets.

These will increase the need for extra capacity at Camden Town station.

The only way it will get built is by a private developer, who puts a lot of housing on the Buck Street site and sells it as quality housing in an iconic location.

A lot of politicians won’t like it, but solving the problems at Camden Town station, which is an overcrowding accident waiting to happen, is more important than their egos.

These pictures show some of the features of Camden Town station.

I believe Camden Town station could grow quickly into a very smooth interchange between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

In a few years time, when the Buck Street entrance is built, the capacity problems will be on their way to solution.

Finally, once the Buck Street entrance is complete, the original station can be refurbished.

Euston Station, Crossrail, Crossrail 2 and the Northern Line

Consider.

Euston station is a very busy station and it will be even busier, when High Speed Two opens.
Crossrail 2 will not be built before High Speed 2 opens.
The Victoria Line doesn’t connect to Crossrail.
The only connection between Euston station and Crossrail are the two branches of the Northern Line.

Splitting the Northern Line into the Bank and Charing Cross Lines will increase the number of Northern Line trains through Euston to at least sixty tph, if both lines can handle Victoria Line frequencies.

It looks to me, that making the Northern Line step-free at Euston is the best short-term alternative to building Crossrail 2.

Euston Station

Euston station is the third station, where the Bank and Charing Cross Lines connect.

This map from cartmetro.com shows the Northern Line through Euston station.

Note.

The Northern Line is shown in black.
The Victoria Line is shown in blue
The Sub-Surface Lines are shown in purple and yellow.

In the map, the platforms are as follows going from top to bottom.

Platform 1 – Northbound – Northern – Charing Cross to Camden Town
Platform 2 – Southbound – Northern – Camden Town to Charing Cross
Platform 6 – Southbound – Northern – Camden Town to Bank
Platform 5 – Northbound – Victoria – Victoria to Walthamstow
Platform 4 – Southbound – Victoria -Walthamstow to Victoria
Platform 3 – Northbound – Northern – Bank to Camden Town

It is a bit unusual as the cross-platform interchange between Bank and Victoria Lines involves a change of direction.

With the development of Euston station for High Speed Two, I am sure interchange between the two branches of the Northern Line and the other lines at Euston will be made step-free.

Plans have already been published that will connect Euston Square station and Euston station. I wrote about it in The New Step-Free Entrance At Euston Square Station.

These pictures are of Euston station.

I feel the wide Platform 6 could give scope for innovation.

Level Access Between Train And Platform

I believe that many platforms on the Northern Line can be modified to give level access between train and platform.

In Could Access Between Platform And Train Be Improved At Kennington Station?. I outlined how it could be achieved at Kennington station.

At Kennington station, all platforms are straight and this is a prerequisite to making the access level.

I also feel that any straight platform with a Harrington Hump could effectively be given a full length hump.

I suspect that a lot of stations could be converted to level access between train and platform

Conclusion

I believe that splitting the Northern Line would be very worthwhile.

September 27, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Battersea Power Station Station, Camden Road Station, Camden Town Station, Crossrail, Crossrail 2, Euston Square Station, Euston Station, Harrington Hump, High Speed Two, Northern Line, Northern Line Extension, Northern Line Split, Politics, Regent's Canal, Step-Free, Victoria Line | Leave a comment

Could Avanti West Coast Run A Lumo-Style Service Between London And Liverpool?

Avanti West Cost’s Class 807 Trains

Avanti West Coast will be introducing their new Class 807 trains by 2023.

One of the routes, on which they will run, will be between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street stations.

These trains are members of Hitachi’s AT300 family, with these characteristics.

Seven cars.
453 seats
125 mph operating speed, with 140 mph possible under in-cab signalling, where the track allows.

They have been designed to be able to achieve or better times from the Class 390 trains, which have the advantage of tilt.

The Seats In The New Trains

Seats are important to passengers and there has been criticism, that some of the seats in Hitachi trains are like ironing boards.

But, so far nothing has been said about the seats on the new Class 807 trains.

453 seats in seven cars of a Class 807 train is 64.7 seats per car.

These are comparison figures for other trains.

On a nine-car Class 801 train, there are 611 seats or 67.8 seats per car.
On a five-car Class 801 train, there are 302 seats or 60.4 seats per car.
On a five-car Class 810 train, there are 301 seats or 60.2 seats per car.
On a five-car Class 803 train, there are 406 seats or 81.2 seats per car.
On a nine-car Class 390 train, there are 469 seats or 52.1 seats per car.
On an eleven-car Class 390 train, there are 589 seats or 53.5 seats per car.

Note.

The Class 390 trains or Pendolinos have less seats per car, than the Hitachi trains. Is this because of all the space taken up by the tilting mechanism?
As the seats per car for a Class 807 is between the five- and nine-car Class 801 trains, it would appear that the seat density is not much different to the trains on LNER and Great Western Railway.
Lumo’s Class 803 trains on their low-cost service would appear to have a higher seating density. But Lumo says that they have redesigned the seats for more comfort.
In The Seat Of Aurora, I looked at a report from Modern Railways on the seats in the Class 810 trains, which the writer found were much more comfortable.

It would appear that the two latest fleets of Hitachi trains have seats that are designed for more comfort.

Consider.

First Group own seventy percent of Avanti West Coast.
First Group own hundred percent of two train operating companies; Great Western and TransPennine Express, who run versions of Hitachi AT300 trains, so they probably have a lot of bottom-level feedback.
In the current Class 390 train upgrade, Avanti West Coast are replacing all the Standard Class seats, the company must care about seat quality.
First Group own hundred percent of Lumo, who have acquired new trains with comfortable seats.

I would be very surprised if the seats in the new Class 807 trains for Avanti West Coast were not custom-designed for their routes.

The Unusual Length Of The Class 807 Train

These are the length of the Class 390 and Class 807 trains.

Class 390/0 – nine-car – 217.5 metres
Class 390/1 – eleven-car – 265.3 metres
Class 807 – seven-car – 182 metres

Note.

A ten-car Class 807 train would be 260 metres.This could be convenient, if more eleven-car Pendolinos were needed.
The Class 807 train is thirty-five metres shorter, than the nine-car Pendolino.

As eleven-car Class 390 trains commonly run London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street, why would they need the Class 807 train to be shorter?

I think there is a clue in this picture.

It shows a Class 390 train in Liverpool South Parkway station.

At the time, Liverpool Lime Street station was closed for track remodelling.
Liverpool South Parkway was acting as Liverpool’s main terminus.
To accommodate the Pendolinos a temporary platform extension was built in the station.

Could it be that shorter trains were ordered to avoid the expense of lengthening the platforms at Liverpool South Parkway and perhaps other stations, that Avanti West Coast might serve?

The Current Service Between London Euston And Liverpool

The current London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street service is as follows.

There is one train per hour (tph)
The service calls at Milton Keynes Central, Stafford, Crewe and Runcorn.
All of the stations can accommodate an eleven-car Pendolino.
Trains take around an average of two hours and twelve minutes.
The first Northbound train leaves at 07:07 and the last at 21:07.
The first Southbound train leaves at 07:00 and the last at 20:48.

Services are generally run by eleven-car Class 390 trains, which gives a capacity of 589 passengers per hour.

I always think, there a need for a later train back to London, but then that could be said of many places.

A Possible Service From December 2022

Wikipedia says this.

There will be two tph.
The second service will call at Liverpool South Parkway station.

If two tph were to be run by Class 807 trains, this would give the following.

A capacity of 906 seats per hour.
This is a 54 % increase in capacity.

But if only the Liverpool South Parkway service was run by a Class 807 train and the other service was still run by an eleven-car Class 390 train, this would give the following.

A capacity of 1042 seats per hour.
This is a 77 % increase in capacity.

And all without expensive and disruptive platform extensions at Liverpool South Parkway station.

According to Wikipedia, the plans will need to be approved by the Office of Road and Rail.

How Fast Will A Class 807 Train Travel Between London Euston And Liverpool?

The Class 807 trains will have these features.

The trains will have no diesel engines or batteries. This must save weight and that means better acceleration.
The trains will have no tilt mechanism.. This must save weight and that means better acceleration.
The trains will have a new nose. Is it more aerodynamic, which would cause less drag and increase operating speed?

Would these features mean the Class 807 trains can match the performance of the Class 390 train, despite not having tilt?

There are also improvements on the West Coast Main Line, that have not been fully reflected in the timetable.

I did a full analysis about how a two-hour journey time might be achieved in Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours? This analysis led me to these conclusions.

I am convinced that the new trains are designed for a two hour journey between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street stations.
Refurbished Class 390 trains should also be able to do the same time.
I also calculated that nine trains would be needed for the two tph service, if they can arrange a fifteen minute turnround at both ends of the route. So would, the Class 807 trains be used on the Liverpool service to release newly-refurbished Class 390 trains to boost Blackpool and Birmingham services?

Alternatively, if the two services are run using eleven-car Class 390 trains for the current service and seven-car Class 807 trains for the one via Liverpool South Parkway, Avanti West Coast would need five of each train.

They could fit in thirty minute turnrounds at both ends of the route.
The mixed pair of trains would give a 77 % increase in capacity.
The Class 807 service would be a two-hour trip.
If the Class 390 service couldn’t match the time it could use current timings.

Whatever is done, it would be a flagship service between London and Liverpool.

The new trains will pay for themselves many times over, if this is the case, as a two-hour journey will surely attract passengers.

Organising The Service

If you really wanted to make the service simple and passenger-friendly, you would have dedicated platforms for the trains at both ends of the route.

In Liverpool Lime Street station trains seem to have used one platform for many years. Currently, they seem to be using Platform 9.
Surely, a similar arrangement could be setup at London Euston.

The service could also be setup with contactless ticketing, if that was felt the way things should be done.

Going The Whole Way

Suppose, that the London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street service is very successful for any number of reasons.

The two hour journey time.
The all-electric service.
The doubling of the frequency.
The availability of more seats.
The expansion of Merseyrail into England’s first battery-electric Metro, which I wrote about in Chancellor To Fund £710m Merseyrail Expansion.
The cost of driving, due to a mileage charge on all journeys.

Will this lead to a need to expand the service?

If it does, the obvious way would be to lengthen Liverpool South Parkway station and run longer trains.

An Eleven-car Class 390 train would carry 589 passengers.

Adding three-cars to a seven-car and the train would still be shorter than an eleven-car Class 390 train, but it would carry around 650 passengers.

This would add an extra ten percent capacity to the route.

This would surely provide the capacity until High Speed Two arrives towards the end of the decade.

I do wonder if Avanti West Coast are using the London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street service to experiment with how they might run High Speed Two services.

Conclusion

As a two tph service run by Class 807 trains in two hours would be over 4,500,000 seats in each direction, I feel that this will be a very popular and intensive service.

I feel that Avanti West Coast will need to apply lessons learned on sister company’s Lumo’s service between London Kings Cross and Edinburgh.

September 14, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Euston Station, FirstGroup, Great Western Railway, High Speed Two, Liverpool Lime Street Station, Liverpool South Parkway Station, Low-Cost Trains, Lumo, TransPennine Express | 7 Comments

Anxiety Over HS2 Eastern Leg Future

I did think about giving this post a title of Here We Go Again, as it yet another story about delaying or cancelling the Eastern Leg of High Speed Two.

But in the end I decided to use the title of the article in the September 2021 Edition of Modern Railways.

I wrote about this subject in Is The Eastern Leg Of High Speed Two Under Threat? in December 2020.

In that post, this was my major conclusion.

To achieve the required timings for High Speed Two, major improvements must be made to existing track on the East Coast Main Line and these improvements will mean that existing services will be competitive with High Speed Two on time.

It is backed up by the timings in the following table., which show the direct time by High Speed Two and my best estimate of time on an improved East Coast Main Line.

Bradford – Will not served by High Speed Two – One hour and fifty-four minutes
Cleethorpes – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and fifty-one minutes
Darlington – One hour and forty-nine minutes – One hour and forty-nine minutes
Doncaster – Will not served by High Speed Two – One hour
Edinburgh – Three hours and forty minutes via Western Leg – Three hours and thirty minutes.
Grimsby – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and thirty-six minutes
Harrogate – Will not served by High Speed Two – One hour and fifty-two minutes
Huddersfield – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and eight minutes
Hull – Will not served by High Speed Two – One hour and fifty minutes
Leeds – One hour and twenty-one minutes – One hour and thirty minutes
Lincoln – Will not served by High Speed Two – One hour and fifty-one minutes
Middlesbrough – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and twenty minutes
Newcastle – Two hours and seventeen minutes – Two hours and sixteen minutes
Nottingham – One hour and seven minutes – One hour and fifty minutes
Scarborough – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and fifty-seven minutes
Sheffield – One hour and twenty-seven minutes – One hour and twenty-seven minutes
Skipton – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and seven minutes
Sunderland – Will not served by High Speed Two – Two hours and thirty minutes
York – One hour and twenty-four minutes – One hour and twenty-four minutes

Note.

I have included all destinations served by Grand Central, Hull Trains and LNER.
I have included Nottingham and Sheffield for completeness and in case whilst electrification is installed on the Midland Main Line, LNER run services to the two cities.
I suspect LNER services to Bradford, Harrogate, Huddersfield and Skipton will split and join at Leeds.

There are a total of nineteen destination in this table.

Twelve are not served by High Speed Two.
Six are not more than fifteen minutes slower by the East Coast Main Line.

Only Nottingham is substantially quicker by High Speed Two.

In Is The Eastern Leg Of High Speed Two Under Threat?, I said that if Nottingham services ran at the sort of speed on the East Coast Main Line, that a time of one hour and twenty-one minutes between London St. Pancras and Nottingham could be possible. That would be just fourteen minutes slower than the time on High Speed Two with a change at East Midlands Hub.

Conclusion

I am getting more convinced that we don’t need the Eastern Leg of High Speed Two to East Midlands Hub and Leeds for a few years yet, as by uprating the East Coast and Midland Main Lines we can handle the traffic that we currently are generating with ease.

August 23, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | East Coast Main Line, Euston Station, High Speed Two, Hull Trains, King's Cross Station, Leeds Station, LNER, Midland Main Line, St. Pancras Station | 17 Comments

Why Does Birmingham Interchange Station On High Speed Two Need Four Long Platforms?

This page on the High Speed Two web site describes the design and construction at Birmingham Interchange station.

This paragraph talks about the overall design philosophy of the station.

The Interchange Station itself will be made up of two 415 metre long island platforms, offering 4 platform faces, as well as 2 central high speed through lines for non-stopping services. The station will be linked to the NEC, Birmingham International Station and Birmingham Airport via an automated people mover carrying up to 2,100 passengers per hour in each direction. In addition to the APM, the station will be fully integrated with other local buses, taxis and private vehicle options.

Note.

There would appear to be six tracks through the station.
The four platforms will accept the longest High Speed Two trains.
The automated people mover appears to be very comprehensive.

Birmingham Interchange certainly seems to have been designed as a very high capacity station.

This table gives the a list of the trains that will call at Birmingham Interchange station.

Train 2 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 3 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 7 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 11 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
Train 11 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
Train 14 – London Euston and Leeds – 400 metre Full-Size

Note.

400 metre Full-Size trains will be a pair of 200 metre trains.
Train 11 is a pair of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains, that split and join at Carlisle.

Only five 400 metre trains call at Birmingham Interchange.

I have some thoughts.

Stations Served From Birmingham Interchange

These destinations are served from Birmingham Interchange.

Two tph – Birmingham Curzon Street
One tph – Carlisle
One tph – East Midlands Hub
One tph – Edinburgh Haymarket
One tph – Edinburgh Waverley
One tph – Glasgow Central
One tph – Leeds
Five tph – London Euston
One tph – Manchester Airport
One tph – Manchester Piccadilly
One tph – Motherwell
One tph – Preston

I suspect as the service develops more services will stop at Birmingham Interchange, to reduce the number of passenger journeys where a change is necessary.

Surely Liverpool needs a service from Birmingham Interchange, as it doesn’t have one from Birmingham Curzon Street.

Perhaps, the Liverpool/Lancaster service should stop at Birmingham Interchange?

Splitting And Joining At Birmingham Interchange

Consider.

The position of Birmingham Interchange to the South of the junction where the Western and Eastern legs, surely makes it an ideal place for splitting and joining a pair of trains, one of which serves the Western leg and the other serves the Eastern.
The Liverpool/Lancaster service could split and join at Birmingham Interchange to give better connectivity between the North West and the West Midlands.

Intelligent use of splitting and joining at Birmingham Interchange could make better use of paths to and from Euston.

Splitting And Joining Of Full-Size Trains At Birmingham Interchange

According to the currently proposed timetable Birmingham Curzon Street, Manchester Airport and Manchester Piccadilly will all get three Full-Size tph to and from London Euston, with East Midlands Hub and Leeds getting two Full-Size tph.

This may be a right decision, but if four Full-Size tph is the frequency needed on some routes, then splitting and joining of Full-Size trains can be used at Birmingham Interchange to increase frequencies.

Suppose it was decided that the Leeds and Manchester services needed to be four Full-Size tph.

The London and Manchester service that stops at Birmingham Interchange would split into two trains at the station, with one train going to Manchester and the other going to Leeds.
The London and Leeds service that stops at Birmingham Interchange would split into two trains at the station, with one train going to Manchester and the other going to Leeds.

Coming South the two services would join at Birmingham Interchange.

I can almost envisage Full-Size pairs of trains leaving London Euston every ten minutes, which then split and join at Birmingham Interchange to give Leeds and Manchester a core service of six Full-Size tph.

There are a large number of possibilities.

Down One Leg Up T’Other

Birmingham Interchange can be used as an interchange station for journeys where you come South on one leg and then go North on the other.

It might even be possible to arrange some changes with an interchange across one of the island platforms at Birmingham Interchange.

Turning Back Trains

There is a worry about late trains delaying everything.

But because it has four platforms, it could be the station, where trains are turned back, when they are running very late.

It could be better to turnback a train at Birmingham Interchange, rather than let it run all the way to Euston and create havoc.

Perhaps, simulation has shown, that two extra platforms at Birmingham Interchange enable the optimal working of ten platforms t Euston?

Line Blocked Or Blockaded Between Birmingham And Euston

Events happen and there may be reasons why services can’t run through to London.

It could easily be turned into a mini-terminus for services to the North and linked to London by either the West Coast Main Line or a Rail Replacement Bus.

Conclusion

Because of its position in the middle of the country, I suspect there are many reasons for the four long platforms at Birmingham Interchange station.

August 21, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Automatic Splitting And Joining Of Trains, Birmingham Interchange Station, Euston Station, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, replace | 10 Comments

How Many High Speed Two Trains Will Be Able To Terminate In Euston Station?

This is one of those questions for which you get a different answer depending on what conditions you put on the question.

But there are some physical constraints that have been built into the design.

High Speed Two Tracks And Signalling Are Designed For Eighteen Trains Per Hour

It seems to be an accepted fact, that High Speed Two tracks and signalling will be able to handle 18 trains per hour (tph) or a train every three minutes and twenty seconds.

If this applies to all High Speed Two routes it is certainly a big increase in capacity of the UK rail network.

Seventeen Trains Per Hour In Euston Station

Does it also mean that Euston station must be able to handle 18 tph? Not necessarily, as High Speed Two will only need to handle 17 tph, because they will be keeping one path for recovering the service, after perhaps a train breaks down.

If the station has eleven platforms, that means each platform must handle 1.5 tph or in practice two tph or a train every thirty minutes.
If the station has ten platforms, that means each platform must handle 1.7 tph or in practice two tph or a train every thirty minutes.

Ten platforms appear to make little difference in normal operation But when things go wrong, it is more likely, there will be another platform to park a late train.

Turning Trains In Thirty Minutes At Euston Station

One train every thirty minutes means that operating procedures and staff training must be such that trains can be turned within this time.

If trains could be turned faster, then this would enable services to be recovered after a delay.

Twenty-Four Trains Per Hour In Euston Station

If say at some time in the future, signalling improves and 24 tph on High Speed Two is possible with perhaps Automatic Train Operation, this would mean that if there were ten platforms each would have to handle 2.4 tph, or in practice three tph or a train every twenty minutes.

A frequency of 24 tph won’t happen in my lifetime, but I do believe it is possible on High Speed Two with ten platforms at Euston station.

Thirty Trains Per Hour In Euston Station

Thirty tph may be practical on Metros today and could be possible on High Speed Two in the far future, but in practice, that would only be four tph or a train every fifteen minutes.

The Initial Full Timetable Is Seventeen Trains Per Hour

Currently, this is planned to be the case and the trains to and from London Euston are planned to be as follows.

Train 1 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 2 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 3 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 4 – London Euston and Lancaster – Classic Compatible
Train 4 – London Euston and Liverpool – Classic Compatible
Train 5 – London Euston and Liverpool – Classic Compatible
Train 6 – London Euston and Macclesfield – Classic Compatible
Train 7 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 8 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 9 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 10 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
Train 10 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
Train 11 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
Train 11 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
Train 12 – London Euston and Sheffield – Classic Compatible
Train 12 – London Euston and Leeds – Classic Compatible
Train 13 – London Euston and Leeds – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 14 – London Euston and Leeds – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 15 – London Euston and Sheffield – Classic Compatible
Train 15 – London Euston and York – Classic Compatible
Train 16 – London Euston and Newcastle – Classic Compatible
Train 17 – London Euston and Newcastle – Classic Compatible

Note.

I have assumed 400 metre Full-Size trains will be a pair of 200 metre trains.
Trains 4, 10, 11, 12 and 15 are pairs of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains, that split and join at Crewe. Carlisle, Carlisle and East Midlands Hub respectively.
Trains 5, 6, 16 and 17 are single 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains.

This graphic shows the services.

Note.

Trains to the left of the vertical black line are Phase 1 and those to the right are Phase 2.
Full-Size trains are shown in blue.
Classic-Compatible trains are shown in yellow.
The dotted circles are where trains split and join.
In the red boxes routes alternate every hour.

In an hour, the following trains will leave London Euston.

8 – 400 metre Full-Size trains, each of which consist of a pair of 200 metre trains.
5 – Pairs of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains.
4 – Single 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains.

Note.

Adding up the 200 metre trains gives a total of thirty trains.
If all paths were handling a pair of 200 metre trains, the total would be thirty-four trains.

As I showed in Could High Speed Two Serve Holyhead?, these four trains can be used to serve extra destinations by appropriate splitting and joining.

So in answer to the question in the title of this post, the answer is thirty-four 200 metre trains.

Each path can carry one pair of 200 metre trains per hour.
The number of paths is determined by the 18 tph that each leg can handle, reduced by one for a path for recovery.

I am assuming each platform can handle two tph.

But thirty or forty years in the future, this figure with more advanced trains and signalling could be a lot higher.

Does Euston Station Need Ten Or Eleven Platforms?

Mathematically, the following is possible.

Ten platforms can handle thirty tph, if trains can be turned in fifteen minutes.
Ten platforms can handle twenty-four tph, if trains can be turned in twenty minutes.
Ten platforms can handle seventeen tph, if trains can be turned in thirty minutes.

The only need for the eleventh platform, is for when things go seriously wrong.

August 21, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Euston Station, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, High Speed Two Euston Station | Leave a comment

Should London Euston’s High Speed Two Station Have Ten Or Eleven Platforms?

This article on Ian Visits is entitled Call For A Rethink Of HS2’s Euston Station Plans.

These two paragraphs describe the current plan for Euston station.

The current plans for the HS2 station at Euston will see it delivered in two phases, with six platforms opened first to carry HS2 trains on the first stage of the railway up to the West Midlands. The second phase of the Euston station would open later, with an additional 5 platforms to manage demand when HS2 is extended to Crewe, Manchester and Leeds.

Phase one was scheduled for completion in 2026, and phase two in 2033.

This paragraph describes the latest idea from the Department for Transport.

However, the Oakervee review from last year called for a redesign of the station scaling back the station and increasing the amount of oversite development to fund it. Earlier this year it was revealed that the Department for Transport has instructed HS2 to refine the development to build it in one phase, but with just 10 platforms instead of 11 platforms.

There are now two camps arguing as to whether the station should be built with ten or eleven platforms.

I used to write project management software for four decades.

I have seen and heard of many arguments like these where money, time and resources push the design of a project one way or another.

My feeling is that Oakervee is right to recommend increasing the amount of oversite development to fund the station, as there are a lot of knockers of High Speed Two, who object to the amount of money being spent.

But this might mean that the station should be built in one phase, so that the oversite development can proceed at pace on the whole site, rather than just half at a time. I wasn’t involved in the planning of Canary Wharf, but it did seem to go up faster than other developments. And it was a large site!

So perhaps building the station in one phase will get it finished earlier in a better financial state.

But the downside of that, is the station will have ten platforms instead of eleven. But it will have ten platforms from the day it opens!

I would object to the reduction in the number of platforms, if it made High Speed Two more difficult to operate.But I do tend to believe those who say that High Speed Two can manage with ten platforms, as signalling, train design and operation is improving fast.

As an example, I think the next generation of high speed trains will be able to be turned faster in a terminal station.

The test of this statement will come in a few months, when I take a ride to Edinburgh on the new East Coast Trains service, which seems to be proposing to run to a tight timetable. This says to me, that they have found ways of running more efficiently!

Conclusion

I will let others choose the number of platforms at Euston, but I reserve the right to criticise their decision.

Although, I do believe that it could be better to build the station in one phase to maximise the oversite development and optimise the cash flow to pay for the project, both during the building and in the operation.

I would also hope to see some radical ideas for the uses of the oversite development. But I suspect, it will be more of the same.

August 21, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Development, Euston Station, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Euston Station, Lumo, Oakervee Review, Project Management | 4 Comments

Could High Speed Two Serve Holyhead?

Why?

It could be a way to create a zero- or low-carbon route between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

Battery-Electric Trains Could Be The Solution

In Will High Speed Two’s Classic-Compatible Trains Have Battery Operation?, I suggested that it might be feasible for High Speed Two’s Classic-Compatible trains to have batteries.

I said this at the start of that post.

I believe it is very likely, that High Speed Two’s new classic-compatible trains will have battery capabilities.

- Batteries would handle energy generated by regenerative braking.
- Batteries would give a train recovery capability in case of overhead catenary failure.
- Batteries would be used for depot movements.
- Batteries would probably improve the energy efficiency of the trains.

Effectively, the batteries would power the train and would be topped-up by the electrification and the regenerative braking.

Since I wrote that post in February 2020, Hitachi have launched two battery-electric trains, one of which is the Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, which is described in this Hitachi infographic.

As diesel (or should I say Stuart) engines are so nineteenth-century. any high speed independently-powered train would probably use batteries, have no diesel engines and be a battery-electric train.

So could Hitachi or any other bidder for the High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains produce a train, that would be capable of handling the long-distance routes from London, that would be difficult or expensive to electrify, by the use of batteries?

Batteries will improve dramatically in the next few years.
Batteries will also become more affordable.
Engineers will also learn how to package them in better and more innovative ways.

I think it is very likely, that a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train could be produced with a reliable range of over eighty miles on batteries.

Holyhead And Crewe By Battery-Electric Classic-Compatible High Speed Train

These are the distances between stops on the route between Holyhead and Crewe

Holyhead and Bangor – 25 miles.
Bangor and Llandudno Junction – 16 miles
Llandudno Junction and Colwyn Bay – 4 miles
Colwyn Bay and Rhyl – 10 miles
Rhyl and Prestatyn – 4 miles
Prestatyn and Flint – 14 miles
Flint and Chester – 13 miles
Chester and Crewe – 21 miles

Note.

It is a route of only 105 miles.
There is no 25 KVAC electrification, except at Crewe.
It is nearly all double-track.
The operating speed is 90 mph
The route is also generally flat and mainly along the coast.

Suppose the following were to be done.

Erect traditional electrification between Chester and Crewe.
Hitachi ABB Power Grids build a section of their discontinuous electrification around Llandudno Junction.
Install a battery charging system at Holyhead.

An alternative might be to put another section of discontinuous electrification through Bangor, if installing the charging station at Holyhead proved to be difficult.

I believe it would be possible to run a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train equipped with batteries between London Euston and Holyhead.

What Time Would Be Possible?

Consider.

High Speed Two are predicting 56 minutes between London Euston and Crewe.
Avanti West Coast are showing journey times of one hour and 57 minutes between Crewe and Holyhead.
Avanti West Coast are using 125 mph Class 221 trains, but are restricted to a lot less than this speed.
The HSC Dublin Swift can sail between Dublin and Holyhead in several minutes under two hours.

I believe that a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train equipped with batteries could go between London Euston and Holyhead in under three hours.

If this were to be linked to the latest hydrogen-powered fast ferry between Holyhead and Dublin, would London Euston and Dublin be fast enough to attract passengers from the airlines?

The journey time could be under five hours.
It would be zero-carbon.
By cutting stops to the West of Chester and track improvements train times could be reduced.
It would be the sort of adventure, that some families like!

I think that Avanti West Coast and the ferry company could have a rail and ferry service, that would appeal to many travellers.

Would There Be A Path To Euston For Another High Speed Service?

In How Many Trains Are Needed To Run A Full Service On High Speed Two?, I listed the trains that would use the Western leg of High Speed Two.

Train 1 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 2 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 3 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 4 – London Euston and Lancaster – Classic Compatible
Train 4 – London Euston and Liverpool – Classic Compatible
Train 5 – London Euston and Liverpool – Classic Compatible
Train 6 – London Euston and Macclesfield – Classic Compatible
Train 7 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 8 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 9 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
Train 10 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
Train 10 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
Train 11 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
Train 11 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
Train 12 – Birmingham Curzon Street and Edinburgh or Glasgow – Classic Compatible
Train 13 – Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester – 200 metre Full-Size
Train 14 – Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester – 200 metre Full-Size

Note.

A lot of the paths into London Euston would appear to be allocated.
Train 4 is a pair of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains, that will split and join at Crewe, with one train going to Liverpool and the other going to Lancaster.
Train 5 is only a single 200 metre long Classic-Compatible train.

I suspect it would be possible to make Train 5 a pair of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains, that will split and join at Crewe, with one train going to Liverpool and the other going to Chester and Holyhead.

It does appear that the proposed timetable for High Speed Two has been designed so extra trains can be added if the demand is there.

What Times Would Be Possible Between Holyhead And Crewe?

Consider.

I have looked at the route from my virtual helicopter and suspect that much of the route can be upgraded to 100 mph running.
The current average speed between Holyhead and Crewe is 54 mph.
London Liverpool Street and Norwich is 114.5 miles and is regularly achieved in ninety minutes on a 100 mph line, which is an average speed of 76 mph.
The number of stops could be reduced.

I can build a table of times for faster average speeds.

60 mph – One hour and 45 minutes – Two hours and 41 minutes
70 mph – One hour and 30 minutes – Two hours and 26 minutes
80 mph – One hour and 19 minutes – Two hours and 15 minutes
90 mph – One hour and 10 minutes – Two hours and 6 minutes
100 mph – One hour and 3 minutes – One hour and 59 minutes

Note.

The first time is Holyhead and Crewe.
The second time is London and Holyhead.

I am fairly certain, that a substantial time improvement is possible.

Why Not Electrify All The Way Between Holyhead And Crewe?

I am seventy-four and can remember several incidents of serious storms and flooding along the North Wales Coast Line.

There was a warning earlier this year according to this article on the BBC.

Perhaps it would be better to spend the money on improving the resilience and operating speed of the track?

Conclusion

London Euston and Holyhead could be a serious proposition.

With some development and a new fast ferry, it could also open up a practical zero-carbon route between Great Britain and Ireland.

Times of four and a half hours between London Euston and Dublin could be possible.

August 21, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Battery-Electric Trains, Dublin, Euston Station, Ferry, Global Warming/Zero-Carbon, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, Hitachi ABB Power Grids, Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, Holyhead, North Wales Coast Line | 8 Comments

London To Glasgow Train Journey Record Bid Fails By Just 21 Seconds

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on ITV.com.

These are the first three paragraphs.

An attempt to break the 36-year-old record for the fastest train journey between London and Glasgow has failed.

Avanti West Coast’s Royal Scot train arrived at Glasgow Central 21 seconds behind the record of three hours, 52 minutes and 40 seconds set by British Rail in December 1984, according to rail expert Mark Smith, who was onboard.

Mr Smith, founder of Seat61.com, wrote on Twitter that a temporary speed limit on the track in Carstairs, South Lanarkshire, “cost us 90 seconds”.

It appears to be a valiant attempt that failed by a small margin.

I have a few thoughts.

The Trains

The British Rail 1984 record was set by an Advanced Passenger Train (APT) and today’s run was by a nine-car Class 390 train.

The design speed of the APT was 155 mph and that of a Class 390 train is 140 mph.
Service speed of both trains was and is 125 mph.
Record speed of the APT was 162 mph and that of a Class 390 train is 145 mph.
Both trains employ similar tilt technology to go faster.

At a brief look the performance of these two trains is very similar.

The InterCity 225

The InterCity 225 train is the ringer in this race to the North.

The design speed is 140 mph.
The service speed is 125 mph
The record speed of an InterCity 225 is 161.7 mph.
The train doesn’t use tilting technology.
The train was built after the APT around 1990.
The train holds the record between London Kings Cross and Edinburgh at thirty seconds under three-and-a-half hours.
To rub things in, one of these trains, even holds the London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly record.

But there can’t be much wrong with the InterCity 225 trains as a few are being brought back into service, whilst LNER are waiting for ten new bi-mode trains to be delivered.

Hitachi Class 80x Trains

The various variants of Class 800 trains run to Edinburgh and I’m sure they will run to Glasgow.

The design speed is 140 mph.
The service speed is 125 mph

If an InterCity 225 can go between Edinburgh and London in around three-and-a-half hours, I can’t see why these trains can’t.

Especially, as Hitachi seem to be able to produce versions like the Class 803 and Class 807 trains, which appear to be lighter and more efficient, as they don’t have any diesel engines.

A Small Margin

I said earlier that it was only a small margin between the times of the APT and the Class 390 train. But why was the InterCity 225 able to run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh at thirty seconds under three-and-a-half hours?

This section in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive is entitled Speed Record. This is the first paragraph.

A Class 91, 91010 (now 91110), holds the British locomotive speed record at 161.7 mph (260.2 km/h), set on 17 September 1989, just south of Little Bytham on a test run down Stoke Bank with the DVT leading. Although Class 370s, Class 373s and Class 374s have run faster, all are EMUs which means that the Electra is officially the fastest locomotive in Britain. Another loco (91031, now 91131), hauling five Mk4s and a DVT on a test run, ran between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh Waverley in 3 hours, 29 minutes and 30 seconds on 26 September 1991. This is still the current record. The set covered the route in an average speed of 112.5 mph (181.1 km/h) and reached the full 140 mph (225 km/h) several times during the run.

It looks from the last sentence of this extract, that the record run of the InterCity 225 train ran up to 140 mph in places, whereas the record run of the APT and today’s run by a Class 390 train were limited to 125 mph.

The Signalling

In the Wikipedia entry for the InterCity 225 train, the following is said.

Thus, except on High Speed 1, which is equipped with cab signalling, British signalling does not allow any train, including the InterCity 225, to exceed 125 mph (201 km/h) in regular service, due to the impracticality of correctly observing lineside signals at high speed.

Note.

I have regularly flown my Cessna 340 safely at altitude, with a ground speed of around two hundred miles per hour.
High Speed One has an operating speed of 186 mph.
Grant Schapps, who is Secretary of State for Transport has a pilot’s licence. So he would understand flight instruments and avionics.

So why hasn’t a system been developed in the thirty years since trains capable of running at 140 mph started running in the UK, to allow them to do it?

It is a ridiculous situation.

We are installing full digital ERTMS in-cab signalling on the East Coast Main Line, but surely a system based on aviation technology could be developed until ERTMS is ready. Or we could install the same system as on High Speed One.

After all, all we need is a system, to make sure the drivers don’t misread the signals.

But then the EU says that all member nations must use ERTMS signalling.

Didn’t we just leave the EU?

Conclusion

By developing our own in-cab digital signalling we could run trains between London and Scotland in around three-and-a-half hours.

The Japanese could even have an off-the-shelf system!

ERTMS sounds like a closed shop to give work to big European companies, who have lobbied the European Commission.

June 17, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 390 Train, Digital Signalling, ERTMS, European Union, Euston Station, Glasgow Central Station, High Speed Rail, Trains | 5 Comments

What Is Possible On The East Coast Main Line?

In the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive, there is an amazing story.

This picture shows one of these locomotives at Kings Cross.

Note.

They have a design speed of 140 mph.
They have a power output of 4.8 MW.
They were built around 1990 by British Rail at Crewe.

They were designed to run services between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh as fast as possible, as the motive power of the InterCity 225 trains.

This section in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive is entitled Speed Record. This is the first paragraph.

A Class 91, 91010 (now 91110), holds the British locomotive speed record at 161.7 mph (260.2 km/h), set on 17 September 1989, just south of Little Bytham on a test run down Stoke Bank with the DVT leading. Although Class 370s, Class 373s and Class 374s have run faster, all are EMUs which means that the Electra is officially the fastest locomotive in Britain. Another loco (91031, now 91131), hauling five Mk4s and a DVT on a test run, ran between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh Waverley in 3 hours, 29 minutes and 30 seconds on 26 September 1991. This is still the current record. The set covered the route in an average speed of 112.5 mph (181.1 km/h) and reached the full 140 mph (225 km/h) several times during the run.

Note.

For the British locomotive speed record, locomotive was actually pushing the train and going backwards, as the driving van trailer (DVT) was leading.
How many speed records of any sort, where the direction isn’t part of the record, have been set going backwards?
I feel that this record could stand for many years, as it is not very likely anybody will build another 140 mph locomotive in the foreseeable future. Unless a maverick idea for a high speed freight locomotive is proposed.

I have a few general thoughts on the record run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh in three-and-a-half hours.

I would assume that as in normal operation of these trains, the Class 91 locomotive was leading on the run to the North.
For various reasons, they would surely have had at least two of British Rail’s most experienced drivers in the cab.
At that time, 125 mph InterCity 125 trains had been the workhorse of East Coast Main Line for well over ten years, so British Rail wouldn’t have been short of experienced high speed drivers.
It was a Thursday, so they must have been running amongst normal traffic.
On Monday, a typical run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh is timetabled to take four hours and twenty minutes.
High Speed Two are predicting a time of three hours and forty-eight minutes between Euston and Edinburgh via High Speed Two and the West Coast Main Line.

The more you look at it, a sub-three-and-and-a-half hour time, by 1980s-technology on a less-than-perfect railway was truly remarkable.

So how did they do it?

Superb Timetabling

In Norwich-In-Ninety Is A Lot More Than Passengers Think!, I talk about how Network Rail and Greater Anglia created a fast service between Liverpool Street and Norwich.

I suspect that British Rail put their best timetablers on the project, so that the test train could speed through unhindered.

Just as they did for Norwich-in-Ninety and probably will be doing to the East Coast Main Line to increase services and decrease journey times.

A Good As ERTMS Signalling

Obviously in 1991, there was no modern digital in-cab signalling and I don’t know the standard of communication between the drivers and the signallers.

On the tricky sections like Digswell Viaduct, through Hitchin and the Newark Crossing were other trains stopped well clear of any difficult area, as modern digital signalling can anticipate and take action?

I would expect the test train got a signalling service as good as any modern train, even if parts of it like driver to signaller communication may have been a bit experimental.

There may even have been a back-up driver in the cab with the latest mobile phone.

It must have been about 1991, when I did a pre-arranged airways join in my Cessna 340 on the ground at Ipswich Airport before take-off on a direct flight to Rome. Air Traffic Control had suggested it to avoid an intermediate stop at say Southend.

The technology was arriving and did it help the drivers on that memorable run North ensure a safe and fast passage of the train?

It would be interesting to know, what other equipment was being tested by this test train.

A Possible Plan

I suspect that the plan in 1991 was to use a plan not unlike one that would be used by Lewis Hamilton, or in those days Stirling Moss to win a race.

Drive a steady race not taking any chances and where the track allows speed up.

So did British Rail drive a steady 125 mph sticking to the standard timetable between Kings Cross and Edinburgh?

Then as the Wikipedia extract indicated, at several times during the journey did they increase the speed of the train to 140 mph.

And the rest as they say was an historic time of 3 hours, 29 minutes and 30 seconds. Call it three-and-a-half-hours.

This represented a start-to-stop average speed of 112.5 mph over the 393 miles of the East Coast Main Line.

Can The Current Trains Achieve Three-And-A-Half-Hours Be Possible Today?

Consider.

The best four hours and twenty minutes timings of the Class 801 trains, represents an average speed of 90.7 mph.
The Class 801 trains and the InterCity 225 trains have similar performance.
There have been improvements to the route like the Hitchin Flyover.
Full ERTMS in-cab signalling is being installed South of Doncaster.
I believe ERTMS and ETC could solve the Newark Crossing problem! See Could ERTMS And ETCS Solve The Newark Crossing Problem?
I am a trained Control Engineer and I believe if ERTMS and ETC can solve the Newark Crossing problem, I suspect they can solve the Digswell Viaduct problem.
The Werrington Dive Under is being built.
The approaches to Kings Cross are being remodelled.

I can’t quite say easy-peasy. but I’m fairly certain the Kings Cross and Edinburgh record is under serious threat.

A massive power supply upgrade to the North of Doncaster is continuing. See this page on the Network Rail web site.
ERTMS and ETC probably needs to be installed all the way between Kings Cross and Edinburgh.
There may be a need to minimise the number of slower passenger trains on the East Coast Main Line.
The Northumberland Line and the Leamside Line may be needed to take some trains from the East Coast Main Line.

Recent Developments Concerning the Hitachi Trains

There have been several developments since the Hitachi Class 800 and Class 801 trains were ordered.

Serious engineers and commentators like Roger Ford of Modern Railways have criticised the lugging of heavy diesel engines around the country.
Network Rail have upgraded the power supply South of Doncaster and have recently started to upgrade it between Doncaster and Edinburgh. Will this extensive upgrade cut the need to use the diesel power-packs?
Hitachi and their operators must have collected extensive in-service statistics about the detailed performance of the trains and the use of the diesel power-packs.
Hitachi have signed an agreement with Hyperdrive Innovation of Sunderland to produce battery-packs for the trains and two new versions of the trains have been announced; a Regional Battery Train and an Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train.
East Coast Trains have ordered five five-car Class 803 trains, each of which will have a small battery for emergency use and no diesel power-packs.
Avanti West Coast have ordered ten seven-car Class 807 trains, each of which have no battery or diesel power-packs.

And these are just the ones we know about.

The Class 807 Trains And Liverpool

I find Avanti West Coast’s Class 807 trains the most interesting development.

They have been partly financed by Rock Rail, who seem to organise train finance, so that the train operator, the train manufacturer all get the best value, by finding good technical solutions.
I believe that these trains have been designed so they can run between Euston and Liverpool Lime Street stations in under two hours.
Does the absence of battery or diesel power-packs save weight and improve performance?
Euston and Liverpool Lime Street in two hours would be an average of only 96.8 mph.
If the Class 807 trains could achieve the same start-stop average of 112.5 mph achieved by the InterCity 225 test run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh, that would mean a Euston and Liverpool Lime Street time of one hour and forty-three minutes.
Does Thunderbird provision on the West Coast Main Line for the Class 390 trains mean that the Class 807 trains don’t need emergency power?
Have diesel power-packs been rarely used in emergency by the Hitachi trains?

I believe the mathematics show that excellent sub-two hour times between Euston and Liverpool Lime Street are possible by Avanti West Coast’s new Class 807 trains.

The Class 803 Trains And Edinburgh

East Coast Trains ordered their Class 803 trains in March 2019, nine months before Avanti West Coast ordered their Class 807 trains.

In Trains Ordered For 2021 Launch Of ‘High-Quality, Low Fare’ London – Edinburgh Service, I outlined brief details of the trains and the proposed service.

FirstGroup is targeting the two-thirds of passengers, who fly between London and Edinburgh.
They are also targeting business passengers, as the first train arrives in Edinburgh at 10:00.
The trains are five-cars.
The trains are one class with onboard catering, air-conditioning, power sockets and free wi-fi.
Stops will be five trains per day with stops at Stevenage, Newcastle and Morpeth.
The trains will take around four hours.
The service will start in Autumn 2021.

I also thought it would be a successful service

As I know Edinburgh, Liverpool and London well, I believe there are similarities between the Euston-Liverpool Lime Street and Kings Cross-Edinburgh routes.

Both routes are between two cities known all over the world.
Both routes are fully-electrified.
Both routes have the potential to attract passengers from other transport modes.

The two services could even be run at similar speeds.

Euston-Liverpool Lime Street in two hours will be at 96.8 mph
Kings Cross-Edinburgh in four hours will be at 98.3 mph.

Does this explain the similar lightweight trains?

Could Lightweight Trains Help LNER?

There is one important factor, I haven’t talked about in detail in this post. Batteries and diesel power-packs on the Hitachi trains.

I have only mentioned them in the following circumstances.

When trains are not fitted with battery and/or diesel power-packs.
When battery developments are being undertaken.

Let’s consider the LNER fleet.

LNER has thirteen nine-car Class 800 trains, each of which has five diesel power-packs
LNER has ten five-car Class 800 trains, each of which has three diesel power-packs
LNER has thirty nine-car Class 801 trains, each of which has one diesel power-pack
LNER has twelve five-car Class 801 trains, each of which has one diesel power-pack

There are sixty-five trains, 497 coaches and 137 diesel power-packs.

And look at their destinations.

Aberdeen – No Electrification from Edinburgh
Alnmouth – Fully Electrified
Berwick-upon-Tweed – Fully Electrified
Bradford Forster Square – Fully Electrified
Darlington – Fully Electrified
Doncaster – Fully Electrified
Durham – Fully Electrified
Edinburgh – Fully Electrified
Glasgow – Fully Electrified
Grantham – Fully Electrified
Harrogate – No Electrification from Leeds – Possible Battery Destination
Huddersfield – No Electrification from Leeds – Possible Battery Destination – Probable Electrification
Hull – No Electrification from Temple Hirst Junction – Possible Battery Destination
Inverness – No Electrification from Stirling
Leeds – Fully Electrified
Lincoln – No Electrification from Newark North Gate – Possible Battery Destination
Middlesbrough – No Electrification from Northallerton – Possible Battery Destination
Newcastle – Fully Electrified
Newark North Gate – Fully Electrified
Northallerton – Fully Electrified
Peterborough – Fully Electrified
Skipton – Fully Electrified
Retford – Fully Electrified
Stevenage – Fully Electrified
Stirling – Fully Electrified
Sunderland – No Electrification from Northallerton – Possible Battery Destination
Wakefield Westgate – Fully Electrified
York – Fully Electrified

The destinations can be summarised as followed.

Not Electrified – 2
Possible Battery Destination – 6
Fully Electrified – 20

This gives a total of 28.

Could the trains be matched better to the destinations?

Some routes like Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle and Stirling could possibly be beneficially handled by lightweight trains without any diesel or battery power-packs.
Only Aberdeen and Inverness can’t be reached by all-electric or battery-electric trains.
In LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes, I proposed a hydrogen-electric flagship train, that would use hydrogen North of the existing electrification.

There certainly appear to be possibilities.

Example Journey Times To Edinburgh

This table shows the various time for particular start-stop average speeds between Kings Cross and Edinburgh.

80 mph – 4:54
85 mph – 4:37
90 mph – 4:12
98.2 mph – 4:00
100 mph – 3:56
110 mph – 3:34
120 mph – 3:16
125 mph – 3:08

Note.

Times are given in h:mm.
A few mph increase in average speed reduces journey time by a considerable amount.

The figures certainly show the value of high speed trains and of removing bottlenecks, as average speed is so important.

Decarbonisation Of LNER

LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes was based on an article in the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, with the same title. These are the first two paragraphs of the article.

LNER has launched the procurement of at least 10 new trains to supplement its Azuma fleet on East Coast main line services.

In a Prior Information Notice published on 27 October, the operator states it is seeking trains capable of operating under 25kW overhead power with ‘significant self-power capability’ for operation away from overhead wires. ‘On-board Energy Storage for traction will be specified as a mandatory requirement to reduce, and wherever practical eliminate, diesel usage where it would otherwise be necessary, although LNER anticipates some degree of diesel traction may be required to meet some self-power requirements. Suppliers tendering are asked to detail their experience of designing and manufacturing a fleet of multi-mode trains with a range of traction options including battery-electric, diesel-electric, hydrogen-electric, battery-diesel, dual fuel and tri-mode.

From this, LNER would appear to be serious about decarbonisation and from the destination list I published earlier, most services South of the Scottish Central Belt can be decarbonised by replacing diesel-power packs with battery power-packs.

That last bit, sounds like a call for innovation to provide a solution to the difficult routes to Aberdeen and Inverness. It also looks as if it has been carefully worded not to rule anybody out.

This press release from Hitachi is entitled Hitachi And Eversholt Rail To Develop GWR Intercity Battery Hybrid Train – Offering Fuel Savings Of More Than 20%.

It announces the Hitachi Intercity Tri-mode Battery Train, which is described in this Hitachi infographic.

As the Hitachi press release is dated the 15th of December 2020, which is after the publication of the magazine, it strikes me that LNER and Hitachi had been talking.

At no point have Hitachi stated what the range of the train is on battery power.

To serve the North of Scotland these gaps must be bridged.

Aberdeen and Edinburgh Haymarket – 130 miles
Inverness and Stirling – 146 miles

It should also be noted that distances in Scotland are such, that if these gaps could be bridged by battery technology, then probably all of the North of Scotland’s railways could be decarbonised. As Hitachi are the major supplier of Scotland’s local and regional electric trains, was the original Prior Information Notice, written to make sure Hitachi responded?

LNER run nine-car Class 800 trains on the two long routes to Aberdeen and Inverness.

These trains have five diesel power-packs under coaches 2,3, 5, 7 and 8.
As five-car Class 800 trains have diesel power-packs under coaches 2, 3 and 4, does this mean that Hitachi can fit diesel power-packs under all cars except for the driver cars?
As the diesel and battery power-packs appear to be interchangeable, does this mean that Hitachi could theoretically build some very unusual trains?
Hitachi’s trains can be up to twelve-cars in normal mode and twenty-four cars in rescue mode.
LNER would probably prefer an all Azuma fleet, even if a few trains were a bit longer.

Imagine a ten-car train with two driver and eight intermediate cars, with all of the intermediate cars having maximum-size battery-packs.

Supposing, one or two of the battery power-packs were to be replaced with a diesel power-pack.

There are a lot of possibilities and I suspect LNER, Hitachi and Hyperdrive Innovation are working on a train capable of running to and from the North of Scotland.

Conclusion

I started by asking what is possible on The East Coast Main Line?

As the time of three-and-a-half hours was achieved by a short-formation InterCity 225 train in 1991 before Covids, Hitchin, Kings Cross Remodelling, Power Upgrades, Werrington and lots of other work, I believe that some journeys between Kings Cross and Edinburgh could be around this time within perhaps five years.

To some, that might seem an extraordinary claim, but when you consider that the InterCity 225 train in 1991 did it with only a few sections of 140 mph running, I very much think it is a certainly at some point.

As to the ultimate time, earlier I showed that an average of 120 mph between King’s Cross and Edinburgh gives a time of 3:16 minutes.

Surely, an increase of fourteen minutes in thirty years is possible?

May 15, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Aviation, British Rail, Class 800 Train, Class 801 Train, Class 91 Locomotive, Digital Signalling, Digswell Viaduct, Driving Van Trailer, East Coast Main Line, Edinburgh Station, ERTMS, Euston Station, Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, Hitachi Regional Battery Train, Hyperdrive Innovation, InterCity 125, InterCity 225, King's Cross Remodelling, King's Cross Station, Leamside Line, Liverpool Lime Street Station, Network Rail, Newark Crossing, Northumberland Line (Newcastle And Ashington/Blyth), Norwich In Ninety, Rock Rail, Werrington Dive Under | 3 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 1,905 other subscribers

The Anonymous Widower

Could We See Between London And Much Of The North By Train In Under Two Hours?

Avanti West Coast And Euston

East Midlands Railway And St. Pancras

LNER And King’s Cross

Conclusion

Thoughts On Splitting The Northern Line

Could Avanti West Coast Run A Lumo-Style Service Between London And Liverpool?

Anxiety Over HS2 Eastern Leg Future

Why Does Birmingham Interchange Station On High Speed Two Need Four Long Platforms?

How Many High Speed Two Trains Will Be Able To Terminate In Euston Station?

Should London Euston’s High Speed Two Station Have Ten Or Eleven Platforms?

Could High Speed Two Serve Holyhead?

London To Glasgow Train Journey Record Bid Fails By Just 21 Seconds

What Is Possible On The East Coast Main Line?

About This Blog

Charities

Useful Links

Top Posts

WordPress Admin

Email Subscription

Archives

Categories

Tweets

Site info