High Speed Two « The Anonymous Widower

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

Should Improvement Needed For High Speed Two On The East And West Coast Main Lines Be Given High Priority?

High Speed Two will bring major improvements in times between London and the North of England and Scotland, with these figures claimed by this page on the High Speed Two web site.

London Euston and Carlisle – 2 hours and 23 minutes saving 54 minutes
London Euston and Darlington – 1 hours and 50 minutes saving 32 minutes
London Euston and Durham – 2 hours and 16 minutes saving 37 minutes
London Euston and Edinburgh – 3 hours and 48 minutes saving 31 minutes
London Euston and Glasgow – 3 hours and 40 minutes saving 49 minutes
London Euston and Lockerbie – 2 hours and 55 minutes saving 43 minutes
London Euston and Newcastle – 2 hours and 17 minutes saving 32 minutes

Substantial savings would seem to be possible.

The Recent Record Run On The West Coast Main Line

A few weeks ago, Avanti West Coast ran a Class 390 train between London Euston and Glasgow in three hours and 53 minutes and 1 second. They were trying to beat the record set by the \APT-P in 1984 of three hours and 52 minutes and 40 seconds.

In Lessons From The Record Run in the August 2021 Edition of Modern Railways, Roger Ford makes a big hint in a section called Hint.

Roger starts with this paragraph.

In the virtual race with APT-P, the Pendolino was seven minutes ahead approaching the border, but this was not sufficient to overcome APT-P’s advantage of being able to run faster over lines which, unlike the southern end of the WCML, have not enjoyed the increased speeds further south, such as at Stafford and Crewe.

He then talks of a levelling-up of the infrastructure being needed on the Northern section of the West Coast Main Line.

Roger finishes the section with this paragraph.

Thus, the final message of the run is that if HS2 is to realise its full potential, planning for the West Coast Route Modernisation (North) needs to start now, both for journey time reductions and reliability.

The High Speed Two time between Preston and Glasgow of two hours and 26 minutes, given by their journey time calculator is in line with current timings.

I am drawn to the following conclusions about services between Preston and Glasgow.

I suspect the similar times could be expected, as the trains will have to cope with other trains on the route.
Most of High Speed Two’s savings must be on the new track to the South of Wigan.

It would appear that any savings made between Preston and Scotland will benefit both classic and high speed services.

I certainly agree with Roger’s hint to start planning the upgrade of the Northern section of the West Coast Main Line.

This would surely enable upgrade of the route to start sooner and places at the North of the route would benefit from faster journey times to the South before High Speed Two is complete.

Reducing The Journey Times On The West Coast Main Line

If you look at the average speed between Preston and Glasgow of a typical train, it is just 84.3 mph.

Various average speeds give the following times between Preston and Glasgow.

90 mph – two hours and 8 minutes
100 mph – one hour and 55 minutes
110 mph – one hour and 45 minutes

It would appear there is scope for reductions in journey times to be made.

I have flown my virtual helicopter along the Scottish part of the route and it doesn’t look to be too terrifying.

There are tight speed limits at Preston and Carlisle
The railway is not hemmed in by development until close to Glasgow.
Most of the modern bridges, where the M74 crosses the railway appear to have space for an extra track.
Connection of the Borders Railway to the West Coast Main Line could give scope for improvement between Gretna junction and Carlisle.
The depot at Annandale, that I wrote about in High Speed Two To Build Stabling Facility In Scotland, may give scope for a shorter, straighter and faster route between Grena Green and Kirkpatrick-Fleming, that could run closer to the M74.
North of Lockerbie, there may be scope to put extra tracks between the railway and the M74.
The Carstairs area could be ripe for improvement.

I would feel that digital signalling and some well-applied engineering could cut a sensible amount of time from Preston and Glasgow timings.

I can certainly say, that the route is not a desert, where possible improvements will be difficult to find.
I also don’t feel there are any obvious improvements, that will be controversial.

There is also the M74, which could be invaluable for camouflaging the railway.

Reducing The Journey Times On The East Coast Main Line

Much of the work to speed up the Northern section of the East Coast Main Line is laid out in Northern Powerhouse Rail – Significant Upgrades Of The East Coast Main Line From Leeds To Newcastle (Via York And Darlington) And Restoration Of The Leamside Line, a post I wrote to explain what Northern Powerhouse Rail feel is urgently needed.

Mentioned in the other post are following projects.

Full Digital Signalling
Phase 2 Of The East Coast Main Line Power Supply Upgrade
York to Church Fenton Improvement Scheme
Darlington Station Remodelling
The North Throat Of York Station Including Skelton Bridge Junction
Use Of The Leamside Line

As with the West Coast Main Line, the improvements would benefit both classic and High Speed services.

Conclusion

Improvements to both the East and West Coast Main Lines will help both classic and High Speed services between London and the North of England and Scotland.

I think that planning and design should be started as soon as possible.

Construction should start as early as possible, so that the benefits of faster trains are felt at the earliest date possible.

August 15, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Avanti West Coast, Class 390 Train, East Coast Main Line, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Annandale Depot, West Coast Main Line | 11 Comments

HS2 Utilising UK-First Pioneering 3D Concrete Printing On Project

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.

3D-Printing of concrete has been around for some time and it has been used extensively on Crossrail.

But High Speed Two are printing the heavy components on site, to avoid the problems of transport.

August 6, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel, World | 3D Concrete Printing, 3D Printing, Concrete, Construction, High Speed Two, Innovation | 2 Comments

Liverpool’s Vision For Rail

This document on the Liverpool City Region web site is entitled Metro Mayor’s Vision Of A Merseyrail for All Takes Vital Step Forward With Successful Trial Of New Battery-Powered Trains.

It makes these points in the first part of the document.

Game-changing technology paves way for Merseyrail network expansion across the Liverpool City Region and beyond
Merseyrail services could reach as far as Wrexham and Preston
City Region is at the forefront of the introduction of pioneering energy efficient technology.

The new battery-powered trains would certainly go a long way to enable, these objectives.

Battery-powered trains would need a range of 26.9 miles to go between Bidston and Wrexham stations.
Battery-powered trains would need a range of 15.3 miles to go between Ormskirk and Preston stations.

This link is to the North Cheshire Rail User Group’s Newsletter for Spring 2021.

This is said about battery range of the new Class 777 trains.

Later model Class 777’s have the ability to leave the 3rd rail and operate under battery power for 20 miles or more with a full load thus
permitting expansion of the Merseyrail network beyond its current limits.

I suspect they will also have regenerative braking to batteries, which will increase the range and allow Preston and Wrexham stations to be achieved without charge.

It certainly sounds like Preston and Wrexham and all the intermediate stations, will be added to the Merseyrail network.

As to the third point above about the introduction of pioneering energy efficient technology, I suspect this is mainly regenerative braking to batteries and replacement of elderly worn-out power supply equipment.

There is more in the Liverpool City Region document.

Expanding Merseyrail

This is said.

The game-changing technology could allow the Merseyrail network to extend across all six city region boroughs to places like Rainhill in St Helens, Woodchurch on the Wirral and Widnes in Halton.

It could also allow the new fleet to operate as far afield as Skelmersdale, Wrexham, Warrington and Runcorn.

Note.

A 25 KVAC capability could well be needed. But that is built into the Class 777 trains.
Chargers could be needed at some of these stations. I suspect Stadler have a Swiss manufacturer in mind.

In the run-up to May’s elections, the Mayor pledged to deliver ‘Merseyrail for All, a commitment to connecting under-served communities to the Merseyrail network.

New Stations

Initially the battery-powered trains, which are considerably greener, using up to 30% less energy than the existing fleet, are set to run on services to a planned new station at Headbolt Lane, Kirkby.

The wider Merseyrail for All programme could ensure every community is well served by an integrated public transport network and new and refurbished train stations are also high on the agenda.

They could include:

The Baltic Triangle in Liverpool
Carr Mill in St Helens
Woodchurch on the Wirral

Note.

The Baltic Triangle station will be built on the site of the former Liverpool St. James station.
The Carr Mill station will probably be built on the site of the former Carr Mill station.
Woodchurch station is likely to be built on the Borderlands Line between Upton and Heswall stations.

Tram-Trains And Trackless Trams

The document says this.

Tram-Train technology and trackless trams will also be looked at as potential means of extending the Merseyrail network into hard-to-reach places. The technology could benefit areas such as Liverpool John Lennon Airport and Speke, Kirkby Town Centre, Southport Town Centre, Wirral Waters and the Knowledge Quarter.

Tram-trains built by Stadler in Valencia are already running in Sheffield and in the next few years they should be deployed on the South Wales Metro.

TStadler are also building Merseyrail’s new Class 777 trains, so I suspect they’ll go together like peaches and cream.

The Belgian firm; Van Hool have a product called Exquicity. This video shows them working in Pau in France.

These tram buses run on rubber types and are powered by hydrogen.

Similar buses running in Belfast are diesel-electric.

Could these be what the document refers to as trackless trams?

Battery Train Trials

The article finishes with this summary of the battery train trials. This is said.

Under the battery trials, financed by the Transforming Cities Fund, one of the new class 777 trains fitted with the battery technology was tested on the Northern line.

The batteries exceeded expectations with the trains travelling up to 20 miles per run without the need for re-charging.

The battery trains would remove the need for the third ‘electric’ rail, enabling the trains to travel beyond the existing network without major track investment.

The units passed all tests during four weeks of trials on the City Region’s rail network in May and June.

The Combined Authority and partners are still assessing the full impact of the Coronavirus pandemic on the programme and will provide more information regarding the roll out as soon as it has been agreed.

It looks to me, if all these plans get implemented successfully, Liverpool City Region will have one of the best public transport systems of any similar-sized cities in the world.

The Full Plan As A Map

This article on the BBC is entitled Battery-Powered Trains Part Of Merseyrail Expansion Plan.

The article contains this map.

There is no key or explanation, but it appears that the pink lines are new routes, where Merseyrail will run trains.

Before I discuss each of the possible routes, I will discuss two big factors, that will affect a lot of my thinking.

The West Coast Main Line

Avanti West Coast have the following stops in trains per hour (tph) at these stations on the West Coast Main Line as its trains pass the East of Merseyside to and from London Euston.

Crewe – At least 5 tph
Warrington Bank Quay – At least 2 tph
Preston – At least 1 tph

These frequencies are in addition to these direct trains from London Euston.

1 tph to Liverpool Lime Street, which will rise to 2 tph in the December 2022, with a call at Liverpool South Parkway station.
Occasional services to Chester throughout the day.

Passengers do not have to go via Liverpool Lime Street to travel to London.

In addition. there are useful services run by TransPennine Express between Liverpool Lime Street and Scotland, that call at Preston.

In Future; High Speed Two

This will call at Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Liverpool South Parkway, Preston and Warrington.

Northern Trains

Northern Trains were in all sorts of troubles and the service is now run directly by the Government’s Operator of Last Resort. I suspect that any reasonable offer to takeover over a service will be looked at favourably.

I will now look at Merseyrail’s new routes.

Ormskirk And Southport Via The Burscough Curve

Consider.

This route has been a long term aspiration of Merseyrail.
A curve between Burscough Bridge and Burscough Junction will have to be rebuilt on a former alignment.
Southport and Ormskirk are about 13 miles apart.
Southport and Ormskirk have third-rail electrified lines to Liverpool and the South.

It would be an ideal route for battery-electric trains with a range of 20 miles.

What would it do for passengers?

It gives those living near five stations a direct link to Liverpool.
It gives Southport a town of over 91,000 people more capacity to the city of Liverpool for jobs, leisure and shopping.
Will it open up more opportunities for new housing in villages like Burscough?

It will certainly give Merseyrail operational advantages to Southport.

Ormskirk And Preston

Consider.

Takeover of this Northern Trains route has been a long term aspiration of Merseyrail.
Preston and Ormskirk are about 15.3 miles and 32 minutes apart.
Omskirk has 750 VDC third-rail electrification and Preston has 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
The Class 777 trains have been built so they can be updated to dual voltage.

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

It gives those living near the Ormskirk and Preston Line a direct link to Liverpool.
It creates a direct link in modern electric trains between North Liverpool and Preston, for onward travel on West Coast Main Line services and High Speed Two in the future.
The journey time could be reduced to under thirty minutes.

As football is so important to the Liverpool economy, would a time around forty-five minutes between Preston and Sandhills station tempt football supporters going to Anfield and Goodison Park to use the train and then perhaps a trackless tram to the stadium?

This Google map shows the location of Anfield, Goodison Park and Sandhills station.

Note.

Anfield is in the bottom-right corner of the map and is marked by a red arrow.
Goodison is in the top-right corner of the map, slightly to the West of Anfield.
Sandhills station is in the bottom-left corner of the map.

Both stadia are around a mile and a half from the station.

Southport And Preston

Once the Ormskirk and Southport and Ormskirk and Preston services are up and running, it would surely be possible to run a Southport and Preston service.

There would be a reverse at Ormskirk.
The two sections of Ormskirk and Southport and Ormskirk and Preston would both need battery power.
Whilst the driver changed ends at Ormskirk, the train would be recharged using a fast and efficient charger.
Times between Southport and Preston would be under an hour.

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

It gives those living in Southport, a direct link to Preston.
It creates a direct link in modern electric trains between Southport and Preston, for onward travel on West Coast Main Line services and High Speed Two in the future.

This service could be very valuable for passengers, but I suspect the route could be implemented with minimal infrastructure changes at Ormskirk station.

Ormskirk Station

This picture shows Ormskirk’s single platform from the Merseyrail end.

Note.

The Liverpool train in the foreground.
The Preston train in the background.
The solid barrier between the trains.

I wonder if the following would be possible with the barrier removed.

The long platform would be treated as one platform divided into two.
Perhaps they will be the Liverpool and Preston/Southport platform,
Trains that will leave the station for Liverpool will stop in the Liverpool platform.
Trains that will leave the station for Preston or Southport will stop in the Preston/Southport platform.
Through trains between Liverpool and Preston or Southport would be possible.
A train between Preston and Southport could reverse in the Preston/Southport platform, whilst trains for Liverpool used the Liverpool platform.

It looks like it’s an efficient layout borrowed from somewhere else. and Stadler have probably seen it before.

Headbolt Lane Station

In Headbolt Lane Station Fly-Through, I described the new Headbolt Lane station.

This screen capture is from the video in that post,

Note.

Two platforms going away from the camera and one platform and what looks to be a siding going towards the camera.
There appears to be no direct connection between the two different sets of tracks.

Until proven wrong, I believe that the camera is looking towards Liverpool, as it would mean that Liverpool services had two platforms. But they currently make do with one at Kirkby.

There is a walk through between the tracks, which

Enables passengers to access the second platform.
Allows passengers to enter the station from the other side.
Allows non-passengers to cross the tracks on the level.
Avoids the need to build a bridge.

It is certainly an innovative design.

If occasional trains need to go through, could there be a lift-out section of the walk-through?

But as there are buffer stops on the tracks in the three platforms, that are either side of the walk-through, I suspect it will never happen, as it’s too much hassle.

In the Wikipedia entry for Headbolt Lane station this is said.

The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority announced in July 2021 that a trial of a battery electric multiple unit (BEMU) version of the new Class 777 will serve the new station, when it opens. This will not require all of the line extension to Headbolt Lane to be electrified.

Merseyrail would appear to have neatly side-stepped, the Office of Road and Rail’s policy of no more third-rail electrification.

But I’m sure Merseyrail could put an approved train-charging system in the station.

They would need one if a Class 777 train arrived with a flat battery.
They would need one to charge trains on the Headbolt Lane and Skelmersdale service, if the service were to be run by battery-electric trains.
They would need one to charge trains on the Headbolt Lane and Wigan Wallgate service, if the service were to be run by battery-electric trains.

The system could be based on a short length of overhead wire and a slim pantograph or a system like Railbaar from Furrer + Frey.

But does it give any clues as to the orientation of the station in the video?

As there are three platforms and a siding, that meet at Headbolt Lane station, all could be fitted with chargers. to make sure the services are reliable.
Liverpool services could be handled at either end, as it only needs one platform.
Skelmersdale and Wigan services could probably share a platform, but they would be better surely using two platforms.
The siding could be created into a platform for extra services to be added to the Merseyrail network

So there is no pressing reason, why the station cannot be North or South of the railway.

I suspect road layout and land use issues will eventually decide, the orientation of the station.

Headbolt Lane And Skelmersdale

Consider.

This has been a long term aspiration of Merseyrail and Lancashire County Council.
Headbolt Lane and Skelmersdale are just a few miles apart.
Direct running between Liverpool and Skelmersdale will not be possible, but it will be a step-free change between trains.

The Wikipedia entry for Headbolt Lane station seems to indicate a proposed extension of the Northern Line with the next stop being the existing Rainford station. This would surely not add greatly to costs and bring Merseyrail to more fare-paying customers.

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

Skelmersdale is a town of nearly 39,000 and is said to be one of the largest towns in England without a rail connection.
At Headbolt Lane passengers will be able to change for Liverpool or Manchester.

A lot of passengers will have received a modern train service.

Headbolt Lane And Wigan

Consider.

This service is currently run by Northern trains.
Kirkby and Wigan Wallgate stations are just over twelve miles apart.
Someone, who should know told me that by the time High Speed Two starts running through Wigan at a frequency of two tph, the two Wigan stations will have been combined.
Headbolt Lane station could be the drop-off point for those needing to go to Birmingham, Edinburgh, Glasgow and London on both the current West Coast Main Line and the future High Speed Two.

What better way to start that journey than on one of Merseyrail’s battery-electric Class 777 trains.

What would it do for passengers?

With modern battery-electric trains linking Headbolt Lane station to the combined Wigan station complex, this route could be the zero-carbon route between large parts of Liverpool and cantres of tourism and employment along and to the East of the M6 and the West Coast Main Line.

Liverpool South Parkway And Warrington Central

Consider.

This would be takeover of part of the current Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Oxford Road service.
The map shows the service going at least as far as Warrington Central station.
Stations between Hunts Cross and Warrington Central include Halewood, Hough Green, Widnes, Sankey and the new Warrington West stations.

Distances are as follows.

Liverpool South Parkway and Liverpool Lime Street – 5.5 miles
Liverpool South Parkway and Warrington Central – 12.7 miles
Liverpool South Parkway and Trafford Park – 25.4 miles
Liverpool South Parkway and Manchester Oxford Road – 28.7 miles

The following sections of the route have 25 KVAC overhead electrification.

Liverpool South Parkway and Liverpool Lime Street
East of Trafford Park.

With a bit more electrification at either end, the whole route should be in range of a battery-electric Class 777 train.

Or the Class 777 trains could be fitted with bigger batteries!

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

This is a route that has needed decent trains for years and has finally got new Class 195 trains.
But, in addition, the battery-electric Class 777 trains would decarbonise the route.

The major problem, though is not infrastructure or trains, but surely Andy Burnham, who is the outspoken Mayor of Greater Manchester and could object to Merseyrail invading his patch.

Merseyrail’s Cheshire Ambitions

This is a section of the map shown on the BBC article, showing Cheshire.

It looks like there could be as many as three routes.

Chester and Crewe
Chester and Runcorn East
Ellesmere Port and Runcorn East

I’ll now cover the routes in detail.

Chester And Crewe

Consider.

This would be a takeover by Merseyrail of the existing Trains for Wales service.
Chester And Crewe are about 21,2 miles and 25 minutes apart.
Chester has 750 VDC third-rail electrification and Crewe has 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
The Class 777 trains have been built so they can be updated to dual voltage.
There is a proposal, that Beeston Castle and Tarporley station be re-opened.

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

If trains will run between Crewe and Liverpool, this creates a second route between the two major stations.
It creates a direct link in modern electric trains between The Wirral and Crewe, for onward travel on West Coast Main Line services and High Speed Two in the future.
The journey time could be reduced by enough to increase service frequency on the route.

I This would be a very useful extension of the Merseyrail network.

Chester And Runcorn East

Consider.

This would be a takeover by Merseyrail of the existing Trains for Wales service.
Chester And Runcorn East are about 13.1 miles apart.
Two stations and five miles further on is Warrington Bank Quay station.
Chester has 750 VDC third-rail electrification and Warrington Bank Quay has 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
The Class 777 trains have been built so they can be updated to dual voltage.

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

It would enable a Merseyrail circular route from Liverpool Lime Street to Chester via Edge Hill, Wavertree Technology Park, Broad Green, Roby, Huyton, Whiston, Rainhill, Lea Green, St Helens Junction, Warrington Bank Quay, Frodsham, Runcorn East and Helsby.
After Chester, it could take the Wirral Line back to Liverpool to make it a true Mersey Circular service.

Would a Mersey Circular service be a good idea?

Ellesmere Port And Runcorn East

Consider.

This been a long term aspiration of Merseyrail.
This would be a takeover by Merseyrail of the infrequent Northern Rail service.
Ellesmere Port And Runcorn East are about 10.8 miles apart.
Two stations and five miles further on is Warrington Bank Quay station.
Ellesmere Port has 750 VDC third-rail electrification and Warrington Bank Quay has 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
The Class 777 trains have been built so they can be updated to dual voltage.

It certainly looks to be a route that could be handled by a battery-electric Class 777 train.

What would it do for passengers?

It would certainly improve rail transport along the South Bank of the Mersey from Ellesmere Port to Warrington Bank Quay or Runcorn East depending on the Eastern terminus.
If the terminal were to be Warrington Bank Quay that would sort out the charging.
It could create a direct link in modern electric trains between Ellesmere Port and Warrington Bank Quay, for onward travel on West Coast Main Line services and High Speed Two in the future.

I feel that an Ellesmere Port and Warrington Bank Quay service would be good for the area.

The Borderlands Line

I’ve left the Borderlands Line to last, as I feel it will be a lot more than commuter and leisure line between Liverpool and Wrexham.

It crosses the border between England and Wales
The line is 26.9 miles of double track, with a single-track extension of under two miles between the two Wrexham stations.
It has over twenty stations with more planned in both countries
It crosses a couple of rivers on long steel bridges.
It brings commuters to Liverpool and takes workers to the high-tech factories of companies like Airbus and Toyota on Deeside.
It connects to a lot of golf courses, one of which is the Open Championship course at Royal Liverpool.
Once in Wales it has two connections to the North Wales Coast Line, which runs between Chester and holyhead.

It is no ordinary railway and is ripe for improvement to bridge passengers to employment sites and leisure areas along its route.

The line has one big problem in that passengers need to change trains at Bidston between Liverpool and Wrexham stations.

Between Bidston and Liverpool the Merseyrail electric trains to and from Hoylake are used and they turn in the Liverpool Loop under Liverpool City Centre calling at four stations before returning.
Between Bidston and Wrexham, diesel multiple units are used.

It is a route design straight out of the 1970s of men with minds without imagination. Even British Rail were designing battery-electric trains in the 1950s, which I wrote about in Did The Queen Ever Ride In This Train?.

Merseyrail intend to right the wrongs of the past using battery-electric Class 777 trains.

As electric versions of these trains will be used on the Liverpool and Hoylake service, there would be no need to change trains at Bidston if the Liverpool and Wrexham trains were just a battery-electric version of the same train.
The Wrexham trains would drive round the Liverpool Loop tunnel as hundreds of trains do every day.
The trains would be charged on the existing third-rail electrification at the Liverpool end.
I’m fairly certain that a frequency of two tph would be possible on the route, if the Liverpool Loop tunnel signalling could cope,
Trains would need to be charged at the Wexham end of the route and I’m sure Stadler have a solution.

It would be an efficient and cost effective way to decarbonise a tricky but useful branch line.

Conclusion

Stadler are playing their full orchestra of ideas on Merseyrail.

When completed, it will be one of the best metros of any urban areas up to a million people in the world.

This metro could do for Liverpool, what the Beatles did for the city in the 1960s.

July 15, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Hydrogen, Transport/Travel | Battery-Electric Trains, Borderlands Line, Class 777 Train, Decarbonisation, Furrer + Frey, Headbolt Lane Station, High Speed Two, Liverpool, Manchester Mayor, Merseyrail, Merseyrail Northern Line, Ormskirk Station, Preston, Southport Station, Tram-Train, Van Hool ExquiCity, West Coast Main Line | 34 Comments

Should All High Speed Long Distance Services To Newcastle Extend To Edinburgh?

Look at this Google Map of Newcastle station.

Note.

It is built on a curve.
It is on a cramped site.
Platforms are numbered from 1 at the top to 8 at the bottom.
Platform 2 seems to be used for all express services going North.
Platforms 3 and 4 seem to be used for all express services going South.
Not all platforms would appear to be long enough for nine-car Class 80x trains.

I am certain, that any nation with a sophisticated railway system wouldn’t build a station on a curve with no avoiding lines like Newcastle these days.

Network Rail have a plan to sort out Darlington station and I’m sure they’d like to sort out Newcastle as well!

Current Long Distance Trains Through And To Newcastle

These include.

CrossCountry – Plymouth and Edinburgh or Glasgow via Alnmouth, Berwick-upon-Tweed and Dunbar.
CrossCountry – Southampton Central or Reading and Newcastle.
LNER – King’s Cross and Edinburgh via Berwick-upon-Tweed
LNER – King’s Cross and Edinburgh via Alnmouth
TransPennine Express – Liverpool Lime Street and Edinburgh via Morpeth
TransPennine Express – Manchester Airport and Newcastle.

Note.

All have a frequency of one train per hour (tph)
All trains call at Newcastle.
Two tph terminate at Newcastle and four tph terminate at Edinburgh or beyond.

There is also a new and Edinburgh service from East Coast Trains, that will start this year.

It will run five trains per day (tpd).
It will call at Newcastle.
It will stop at Morpeth between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

There will also be High Speed Two services to Newcastle in a few years.

There will be two tph between Euston and Newcastle
There will be one tph between Birmingham Curzon Street and Newcastle.

Note.

All services will be run by 200 metre long High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains.
There is no High Speed Two service to Newcastle, that calls at Leeds.
Only one High Speed Two service to Newcastle calls at East Midlands Hub.

I suspect High Speed Two services need a dedicated platform at Newcastle, especially, if another High Speed Two service were to be added.

Extra Paths For LNER

In the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article, which is entitled LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes.

This is the last paragraph.

Infrastructure upgrades are due to prompt a timetable recast in May 2022 (delayed from December 2021), from which point LNER will operate 6.5 trains per hour out of King’s Cross, compared to five today. As an interim measure LNER is retaining seven rakes of Mk. 4 coaches hauled by 12 Class 91 locomotives to supplement the Azuma fleet and support its timetable ambitions until new trains are delivered.

There would certainly appear to be a path available if LNER wanted to increase the frequency of trains between King’s Cross and Edinburgh from the current two trains per hour (tph) to three.

I laid out how I would use this third path to Edinburgh in A New Elizabethan.

The Possible Long Distance Trains Through And To Newcastle

These trains can be summed up as follows.

1 tph – CrossCountry – Plymouth and Edinburgh or Glasgow via Alnmouth, Berwick-upon-Tweed and Dunbar.
1 tph – CrossCountry – Southampton Central or Reading and Newcastle.
1 tph – LNER – King’s Cross and Edinburgh via Berwick-upon-Tweed
1 tph – LNER – King’s Cross and Edinburgh via Alnmouth
1 tph – TransPennine Express – Liverpool Lime Street and Edinburgh via Morpeth
1 tph – TransPennine Express – Manchester Airport and Newcastle.
5 tpd – East Coast Trains – King’s Cross and Edinburgh via Morpeth
2 tph – High Speed Two – Euston and Newcastle
1 tph – High Speed Two – Birmingham Curzon Street and Newcastle
1 tph – LNER – King’s Cross and Edinburgh – Extra service

This is ten tph and the five tpd of East Coast Trains.

Capacity Between Newcastle And Edinburgh

I wonder what capacity and linespeed would be possible on the East Coast Main Line between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

There are a few freight trains and some suburban electrics at the Northern end, but I suspect that the route could handle ten tph with some upgrades.

Edinburgh As A Terminal

Consider.

Not all trains terminate at Edinburgh, but several tpd go through to places like Aberdeen, Glasgow, Inverness and Stirling.
Edinburgh has several shorter East-facing bay platforms, that can take five-car Class 802 trains.
Edinburgh has undergone a lot of reconstruction in recent years, so that it can turn more trains.

I very much feel that Edinburgh could handle, at least ten tph from the South.

Conclusion

I think it would be possible to extend all trains to Newcastle to at least Edinburgh.

Would it increase passenger capacity between the two capitals?

It would certainly avoid the difficult and expensive rebuilding at Newcastle station.

May 30, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | CrossCountry Trains, Darlington Station, East Coast Main Line, East Midlands Hub Station, Edinburgh Station, High Speed Two, High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, Leeds Station, LNER, Lumo, Newcastle Station, The Elizabethan, TransPennine Express | 5 Comments

Department Of Transport Claims London and Sheffield Times Could Be Cut By Thirty Minutes

In this article on the BBC, which is entitled Government Announce £401m Boost For Rail Services, this is said.

The funding announcement coincided with the completion of the first phase of the £1.5bn Midland Main Line Upgrade, which has supported the launch of East Midlands Railway’s (EMR) first electric services on the route between Corby in Northamptonshire and London St Pancras.

The project will see journey times between Sheffield and London cut by up to 30 minutes, the DfT said.

So how feasible is the claim of a thirty minute cut in London and Sheffield timings?

On Monday, the 07:30 train from London to Sheffield, covered the 164.7 miles in two hours and twelve minutes at an average speed of 74.9 mph.

If that train had done the trip in one hour and forty-two minutes, that would have been an average speed of 96.9 mph.

By the time, the new Class 810 trains arrive in a couple of years, they will be able to use the new electrification to Market Harborough, when on Monday the 82.8 miles without a stop, was covered in an hour, at an average speed of 82.8 mph.

These new trains are 125 mph electric trains under the wires and they will have two separate fast lines on which to run.

Example time savings at various average speeds to Market Harborough are as follows.

100 mph – 10 minutes saving.
110 mph – 14.8 minutes saving.
125 mph – 20.3 minutes saving
130 mph – 21.8 minutes saving
140 mph – 24.6 minutes saving

Note.

The faster the average, the greater the time saving.
Faster than 125 mph would only be possible with full in-cab digital signalling, which is currently being installed on the East Coast Main Line.
I have been to Leicester in an InterCity 125, which was running at 125 mph most of the way.

But it does look like the new Class 810 trains will be able to save around twenty minutes to Sheffield, by making full use of the electrification between London and Market Harborough.

They would need to save just ten minutes between Market Harborough and Sheffield.

The Monday Train covered the 81.9 miles between Market Harborough and Sheffield in one hour and twelve minutes, which is an average speed of 68.3 mph.

To obtain the saving of ten minutes, it would need to do the journey in one hour and two minutes, which would be an average speed of 79.3 mph.

Given that the new Class 810 trains are designed to cruise at 125 mph on diesel, I don’t think this is an impossible objective.

What Will Be The Ultimate Time Between London and Sheffield On The Midland Main Line?

I believe that the following two sections of the Midland Main Line can be easily electrified.

Between Leicester and Derby without the problem of the bridge at the South end of Leicester station, which would be so disruptive.
Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield which will be electrified for High Speed Two. I doubt Derby and Clay Cross Junction will be electrified as it’s a World Heritage Site.

On my Monday train, the following are times North of Leicester.

Leicester and Derby is 29.3 miles, which is covered in 32 minutes at an average speed of 55 mph, which includes five stops. Raise this to 110 mph and the journey time is just 16 minutes or a saving of 16 minutes.
Derby and Clay Cross North Junction is 21.8 miles, which is covered in 13 minutes at an average speed of 100 mph. By averaging 120 mph, there would be a saving of 2.1 minutes.
Cross North Junction and Sheffield is 15.5 miles, which is covered in 16 minutes at an average speed of 58.2 mph.

Note.

Savings would come between Leicester and Derby because of 125 mph linespeed and faster stops because of electrification.
I believe that Hitachi battery-electric trains could sustain 125 mph on battery alone between Derby and Clay Cross North Junction, if they entered the section without electrification at full speed with full batteries. Now that is what I call a battery-electric train!
There must be a minute or two to be saved on an electrified section into Sheffield with the stop at Chesterfield.

Add up all the savings and I feel that an hour and a half is possible between London and Sheffield.

And what time is High Speed Two claiming? One hour and twenty-seven minutes!

Could A Battery-Electric Train Cruise At 125 mph?

This may seem a silly idea, but then trains don’t care where they get their electricity from.

On the 21.8 miles between Derby and Clay Cross North, a sizeable proportion of energy will be used to accelerate the train up to the linespeed for the electrified section.

When the train enters the section without electrification, it will have two sources of energy.

The electricity in the full batteries.
The kinetic energy in the train at the required speed.

As the train runs through the section air and rolling resistance will tend to slow the train and electricity from the battery will be used to maintain speed.

In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?. I estimated that for a Class 801 train to maintain 125 mph needs 3.42 kWh per vehicle mile.

A simple sum of 21.8 * 5 * 3.42 gives an energy need of 372.8 kWh to run between Derby and Clay Cross North Junction.

I’m sure than Hitachi can fit a 400 kWh battery in a five-car Class 810 train.

Would a slightly larger battery and in-cab signalling allow battery-electric trains to run at 140 mph? If the track allowed it, I don’t see why not!

Conclusion

I believe the Department of Transport’s statement of saving thirty minutes between London and Sheffield is feasible.

But so is a time of an hour-and-a half, which will give High Speed Two a run for its money!

May 26, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Class 810 Train, Clay Cross North Junction, Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Electrification, Digital Signalling, Discontinuous Electrification, East Midlands Railway, High Speed Two, Sheffield Station, St. Pancras Station | 14 Comments

A New Elizabethan

I can remember The Elizabethan, which was a steam-hauled non-stop express between London and Edinburgh between 1953 and 1961.

The steam-hauled train took six-hours-and-a-half.
It used to be the longest non-stop railway service in the world.
Today, the service could be run by the current or refurbished Azumas or perhaps a new flagship train, built for the service.
It could be easily under four hours.

It could be an interesting concept, to increase capacity between London and Edinburgh.

The Fastest Rail Journey Between London King’s Cross And Edinburgh

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.

Seconds under three-and-a-half-hours was an amazing time nearly thirty years ago, from a short-formation InterCity 225, that went on to become the mainstay of the services on the route.

It makes High Speed Two’s proposed time of three hours and forty-eight minutes appear to lack ambition.

But to be fair to High Speed Two, train services have historically been faster on the the East side of Great Britain.

What Time Could Be Possible Between London King’s Cross And Edinburgh?

In What Is Possible On The East Coast Main Line?, I took a hard look at times on the route, taking into account improvements of the last thirty years and those that will happen in the next few.

This was my 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?

I believe that timings will decrease significantly on the East Coast Main Line with the current trains.

Extra Paths For LNER

In the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article, which is entitled LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes.

This is the last paragraph.

Infrastructure upgrades are due to prompt a timetable recast in May 2022 (delayed from December 2021), from which point LNER will operate 6.5 trains per hour out of King’s Cross, compared to five today. As an interim measure LNER is retaining seven rakes of Mk. 4 coaches hauled by 12 Class 91 locomotives to supplement the Azuma fleet and support its timetable ambitions until new trains are delivered.

There would certainly appear to be a path available if LNER wanted to increase the frequency of trains between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh from the current two trains per hour (tph) to three.

What Would Be The Route?

I feel there could be three possible simple routes.

A direct non-stop London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service.
A London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service with a single stop at Newcastle.
A London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service with stops at Leeds and Newcastle.

Each route would have its own advantages and drawbacks.

Route 1

My thoughts about Route 1.

This would be the fastest route.
It would be a serious challenge to the airlines on the London and Edinburgh route.

It would be a marketing man’s dream.

Route 2

My thoughts about Route 2.

This would be the second fastest route.
It would be a serious challenge to the airlines on the London and Edinburgh route.
It would give Newcastle a third hourly service to the capital.
It would give Newcastle a non-stop train to London every hour.
It would probably be the fastest train between King’s Cross and Newcastle.
It would beef up the challenge to the airlines on the London and Newcastle route.

Serving Newcastle may generate extra passengers.

Route 3

My thoughts about Route 3.

This would be the slowest route as it is 23 miles longer.
It would be a challenge to the airlines on the London and Edinburgh route.
It would give Newcastle and Leeds a third hourly service to the capital.
It would give Leeds a non-stop train to London every hour.
It would probably be the fastest train between London and Leeds.
It would beef up the challenge to the airlines on the London and Newcastle and London and Leeds routes.
There could be an extra call at York

Serving Leeds and Newcastle may generate extra passengers.

Obviously, passenger numbers will determine the best route.

Conclusion

I very much feel that properly thought through, this service could be a success.

May 16, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | East Coast Main Line, Edinburgh Station, High Speed Two, InterCity 225, King's Cross Station, LNER, The Elizabethan | 4 Comments

Would A Mutant Many-Parent Child Help To Solve London’s Transport Problems?

London needs to increase the capacity of its public transport system, as the City continues to get larger and larger.

Current Major Projects

There are only three major rail projects ongoing in London at the present time.

The Bank Station Upgrade

The Bank Station Upgrade appears to be progressing well, albeit perhaps it’s a bit late due to the pandemic.

It is a complex project and from what I have heard and observed, it has been well designed and planned.

The Barking Riverside Extension

As with the Bank Station Upgrade the Overground extension to the new Barking Riverside station, appears to be going reasonably well.

But compared to that project, it is a relatively simple project, built mainly in the open air, with no tunneling.

Crossrail

Crossrail is in trouble, after what many believe was a very good tunnelling phase of the project.

But then tunnels under London usually seem to go well. I can remember the Victoria Line tunnelling and many other under London since the 1960s and all of these tunnels seem to have been dug without trouble. As I write, there don’t seem to be any tunneling problems with the Thames Tideway Tunnel.

Crossrail now has been reduced to a series of station builds and rebuilds, some of which are as large as the Bank Station Upgrade, with other ongoing projects like the testing of trains and systems.

So why are some of these stations running late in their delivery?

If you walk along the route of Crossrail in the City of London and through Clerkenwell and the West End, it is one massive building side as developers raise massive clusters of new developments around and above the Crossrail stations.

The picture shows Farrington station’s Eastern entrance, with a new development on top.

This one wasn’t a big one, but it went up in record time.

These buildings are often funded by Sovereign Wealth Funds, who want their buildings finished ASAP and as they have bottomless pockets, they are prepared to pay more to get the builders and tradesmen they need.

And where did they get the workers from? Other projects, including Crossrail.

This problem happened in Aberdeen at the height of the oil boom in the last century.

I also think that Brexit worsened the problem, as workers from mainland EU moved to large projects closer to home, like Stuttgart 21 and the new Berlin Brandenburg airport, that were both very much in trouble and could have been offering premium salaries as well!

The solution would have been to phase developments so that the limited pool of workers was not exhausted.

But that probably wouldn’t have suited the developers and politicians for all sorts of reasons.

An uncompleted building doesn’t bring in money and jobs.
Early completion must improve chances of letting the building.
Delaying the building would probably have meant fewer holidays for politicians in exotic locations.

Hopefully, a comprehensive enquiry into the lateness of Crossrail will provide answers.

High Speed Two

High Speed Two is to my mind a London local project. But only in a secondary way!

Rebuilding Euston station will improve Underground connections and interchange at Euston and Euston Square stations.
It is claimed by High Speed Two, that the rebuilt Euston station will create 16000 jobs and 2200 homes.
High Speed Two will enable massive development at Old Oak Common, with tens of thousands of homes and jobs.
Old Oak Common station will be a very important rail hub in North-West London.

With seventeen trains per hour (tph) between Euston and Old Oak Common will High Speed Two attract local traffic?

I suspect High Speed Two between Manchester Airport and Manchester Piccadilly and between Birmingham Interchange and Birmingham Curzon Street will also attract local traffic.
I’ve used TGVs between Nice and Antibes.
Tourists might visit, just like they did and still do at the Olympic Park.
Many Londoners will join High Speed Two at Old Oak Common.

Some wag will suggest putting it on the Tube Map. But is it such a stupid idea?

Where Does London Need More Rail Services?

Having lived in London on and off for over seventy years, I feel the worst areas for rail links are probably.

North West London
South East London
South Central London between Wimbledon and Croydon.
South West London

Note.

Over the years, there is no doubt that East and North London have improved considerably, with the development of the East London, North London and Gospel Oak to Barking Lines.
Thameslink has been improved in North London and now it is being supported with improvements to the Northern City Line. Both routes now have new Siemens trains, which give a whole new dimension to using ironing-boards as seats.
Crossrail will produce major improvements in West, East and South East London.
Building of a new Penge Interchange station, which I wrote about in Penge Interchange could improve routes to and from South East London.
Hopefully the work in recent years at Waterloo will improve suburban services out of Waterloo. In An Analysis Of Waterloo Suburban Services Proposed To Move To Crossrail 2, I showed that four tph could be run to Chessington South, Epsom, Hampton Court and Shepperton stations.

It looks like North West and South Central London are missing out.

How Can Services Be Improved In North West London?

There are radial routes from the centre of London to the suburbs.

Starting from the North and going to the West, there are the following lines.

The High Barnet branch of the Northern Line
The Mill Hill East branch of the Northern Line
The Midland Main Line to St. Albans, Luton, Bedford and the East Midlands.
The Edgware branch of the Northern Line
The Jubilee Line to Stanmore
The West Coast Main Line to Watford, Milton Keynes, the West Midlands, the North West of England and West Scotland.
The Bakerloo Line to Harrow & Wealdstone.
The Watford DC Line of the London Overground
The Amersham, Chesham and Watford branches of the Metropolitan Line
The Chiltern Route to Aylesbury.
The Chiltern Main Line to High Wycombe, Banbury, Bicester, Birmingham and Oxford.
The West Ruislip branch of the Central Line.
The Uxbridge branch of the Metropolitan and Piccadilly Lines

When I used to live at Cockfosters as a child, to visit my many cousins in North West London, there was no alternative but to use a bus and take well over an hour each way.

There are now some circular rail routes in London but nothing in the North West of the capital.

The Dudding Hill Line And The West London Orbital Railway

But there is the little-used freight route called Dudding Hill Line.

It runs between Cricklewood on the Midland Main Line and Acton Central on the North London Line.
It is four miles of double-track railway.

This YouTube video shows a cab ride from Acton to Cricklewood.

Plans exist to turn it into the West London Orbital Railway, which will run two services.

West Hampstead and Hounslow via Cricklewood, Neasden, Harlesden, Old Oak Common Lane, Acton Central, South Acton, Lionel Road, Brentford, Syon Lane and Isleworth
Hendon and Kew Bridge via Brent Cross West, Neasden, Harlesden, Old Oak Common Lane, Acton Central, South Acton

Note.

The proposed frequency of both services is four tph.
There would be some stations to be built, but the track exists.
There would be no new tunnels.
The route is technically feasible.
The route would connect West London to High Speed Two.
There would be little disruption whilst it was built.
The services could be run by dual-voltage battery-electric trains charged on the electrification at both ends of the route.
The scheme represents a high value for money, with a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of 2.2.

On the other hand, the scheme has two serious problems, as far as the current London Mayor is concerned.

Transport for London has no money, partly because of London’s Fare Freeze.
The project is not in South London.

This important and value-for-money project will not be built, whilst Sadiq Khan is still Mayor of London.

Harlesden Interchange

I believe that if we get the interchanges right on the West London Orbital Railway correct we can do things like.

Increase the benefit cost ratio.
Link the route to South London to make the Mayor a bit happier about the North London Scheme.

This Google Map shows Harlesden station.

Note.

The Bakerloo Line/Watford DC Line running North-West/South-East through Harlesden station.
The West Coast Main Line in the Southern section of the map.
The Dudding Hill Line running North-South across the map.

Platforms will be built on the Dudding Hill Line to connect that would probably be new or extended platforms in the current Harlesden station to enable interchange between the West London Orbital and the Watford DC Lines.

I also think there is a possibility that platforms could be added to the slow tracks of the West Coast Main Line, so that suburban services into London Euston can also connect to the West London Orbital Line.

It would also enable a connection between Southern’s Clapham Junction and Milton Keynes service and the West London Orbital Railway.

Looking at this from various angles, I think that an architect good at designing three-dimensional structures could develop a quality Harlesden Interchange station.

Neasden Interchange

Like Harlesden, Neasden is another possibility for a comprehensive interchange.

This Google Map shows Neasden station.

Note.

There are a lot of lines going through Neasden station.
The Dudding Hill Line goes across the South-East corner of the map.
There is plenty of space in the area.

This map from cartometro.com shows the lines in the area.

Note.

The Dudding Hill Line is indicated by the former Dudding Hill station.
The red tracks are Metropolitan Line tracks.
The silver tracks are Jubilee Line tracks.
The Southerly pair of lines through Neasden and Dollis Hill stations are Chiltern’s lines into Marylebone.
The Chiltern tracks divide to the West of Neasden station, with the Aylesbury line following the other tracks and the Chiltern Main Line diverging to the West.
London’s largest Underground Depot at Neasden, lies to the North-West in an area of London noted for few merits with the North Circular Road passing through.

I wonder, if the station and the depot offers a unique opportunity to offer large scale additions to London’s housing stock over the top of a rebuilt station and depot.

This Google Map shows the wider area.

Note.

Much of the depot appears to be open-air stabling for trains.
The North Circular Road passes North-South between the depot and Neasden station.
The Dudding Hill Line cuts across the South-East corner of the map.
This corner of the map is labelled as Dudden Hill.
According to Wikipedia, Dudding Hill is considered a more genteel spelling of Dudden Hill and could be as old as 1544.

It looks as if it would be relatively easy to develop over the top of the depot to create housing, industrial or commercial properties.

But why stop there and cover both the North Circular Road and the six tracks through Neasden station?

Neasden station could be rebuilt into a station with platforms on the following lines.

Metropolitan Line
Jubilee Line
Chiltern Lines
Dudding Hill Lines

Note.

I estimate that Chiltern has a train about every six minutes, so some could stop.
There might be space for a bay platform for Chiltern.

Neasden could be a major housing and transport hub.

There could be large amounts of parking.
Road access would be good.
It would have good rail connections.
It could have a bus interchange.
London needs housing.

It might even be an alternative to Chiltern’s plan for a West Hampstead Interchange.

The Mayor of London, Transport for London and the Borough of Brent need to be bold!

Improvements To Chiltern’s Routes

Chiltern Railways have some plans that could improve services in North West London.

Using The Acton-Northolt Line

Wikipedia says this about using the Acton-Northolt Line to access new platforms at Old Oak Common station.

Upgrading the Acton–Northolt line (formerly the “New North Main Line”) to new platforms at Old Oak Common. This upgrade will also extend to London Paddington to increase capacity on the Chiltern Main Line as there is no room to expand the station at Marylebone.

This scheme has merit.

The platforms would be connected to the Chiltern Main Line along the route of a partly-disused railway.
The route could be double-tracked.
There must be space for at least two new platforms.
The new platforms could easily handle four tph.
There may be a case for some new stations.

The scheme could add valuable extra capacity for Chiltern.

A Chiltern Metro

Wikipedia says this about a proposed metro service between Marylebone and West Ruislip stations.

The Metro would have a frequency of four tph.
It would call at Wembley Stadium, Sudbury & Harrow Road, Sudbury Hill Harrow, Northolt Park and South Ruislip.
The service would require a reversing facility at West Ruislip.
There would need to be passing loops at Sudbury Hill Harrow, and Wembley Stadium.

Given that the Chiltern Metro was first proposed over a decade ago, perhaps the concept could be increased in scope.

Housing and other developments along the route may suggest that a station further out like High Wycombe might be a better terminal.
ERTMS in-cab digital signalling is likely to be installed at some time, which would decrease headways between trains and allow more services.
Electrification is likely in some form before 2040 and this will improve train performance.
If Neasden station were to be rebuilt, as a comprehensive transport and residential development, I believe that this Metro service should also call at Neasden, as it would complement the West London Orbital Railway.

I believe that a review of the Chiltern Metro may mean, that an improved version is worth building.

Improvements To The Milton Keynes And Clapham Junction Service

I feel that this service could be key in improving services between North London and South London via the West London Line and High Speed Two’s station at Old Oak Common.

Currently, this service is as follows.

It runs between Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction stations.
It has a frequency of one tph.
It calls at Bletchley, Leighton Buzzard, Tring, Berkhamsted, Hemel Hempstead, Watford Junction, Harrow & Wealdstone, Wembley Central, Shepherd’s Bush, Kensington (Olympia), West Brompton and Imperial Wharf stations.
The service used to extend to South Croydon via Wandsworth Common, Balham, Streatham Common, Norbury, Thornton Heath, Selhurst and East Croydon.
It uses Class 377 trains.
It shares parts of the route with the London Overground.

I also think it has various issues and questions with respect to the future.

The Class 377 trains are only 100 mph units, whereas the outer suburban trains on the West Coast Main Line are 110 mph Class 350 trains, which will soon be replaced by 110 mph Class 730 trains. Do the slower trains cause timetabling problems?
Is one tph enough?
The route doesn’t serve High Speed Two at Old Oak Common station.
Is the service run by the right operator?
What is the ideal Southern terminal?

These are my thoughts on the various issues.

The Service As A North-South Link

A friend, who lives in South London has told me, that if you go to an event at Wembley stadium the route is busy.

On the other hand, I’ve used it at midday on a Tuesday and found the trains empty.

But developed properly it could connect the following.

Milton Keynes Central
Bletchley for the East West Rail Link
Watford for the West Coast Main Line to the North
Wembley Central for Wembley Stadium and other entertainments
Willesden Junction for the North London Line
Hythe Road for High Speed Two, Crossrail and the Great Western Railway
Shepherd’s Bush for the shopping.
Clapham Junction for most of South London and the South of England

It would be a very useful cross-London route to complement Thameslink and the East London Line.

The Frequency

The current Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction has a frequency of one tph.

This may be enough for some parts of the route, as other services also provide services.

But many would argue, that perhaps South of Watford Junction, the service needs to be increased to connect the area to Old Oak Common and Clapham Junction.

I feel that High Speed Two, Crossrail and the Great Western Railway give so much connectivity, that between Clapham Junction and Willesden Junction needs a frequency of at least eight tph.

As the North London Line and the Watford DC Line are working at a frequency of four tph, this could indicate that a four tph direct service Watford Junction and Clapham Junction be ideal. Perhaps, it could continue North to Milton Keynes with a frequency of two tph.

The Trains

I am absolutely certain, that the full service needs to be operated by dual voltage trains, that are capable of running at 110 mph.

The Class 350/1 trains of West Midlands Trains would probably be ideal for the full service.

They are dual voltage trains.
They are 110 mph trains.
They have a long distance interior.

They are being replaced with new Class 730 trains, so would be available.

If some services were running only as far North as Watford Junction, these could be either Class 378 or Class 710 trains of the London Overground.

The Connection To The West London Line And High Speed Two

This map from Wikipedia by Cnbrb shows the latest iteration of the lines at Old Oak Common station.

Note.

The green route is taken by the Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction trains.
The bright blue is High Speed Two.
The purple is Crossrail.
The orange is the Overground
Hythe Road station is proposed for the West London Line to connect to Old Oak Common station for High Speed Two.
Hythe Road station will have a bay platform to turn trains from the South.
Old Oak Common Lane station is proposed for the North London Line to connect to Old Oak Common station for High Speed Two.

But where is the connection between the Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction service and Old Oak Common station for High Speed Two?

Access from the South is not a problem as the Overground can be used to Hythe Road station.
Extra services from the South can be run to and from the bay platform at Hythe Road station.
Access from the East is not a problem as the Overground can be used to Hythe Road station.
How do passengers go between say Wembley Central and Heathrow?

In addition for access from the West is the Overground can be used to Old Oak Common Lane station.

But as things stand at the moment the Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction service bypasses Hythe Road station and the only ways to go from Milton Keynes to Old Oak Common station for either High Speed Two, Crossrail or the Great Western is to do one of the following.

Change to the Watford DC Line at Watford Junction, Harrow & Wealdstone or Wembley Central and then change to the Overground at Willesden Junction for either Old Oak Common Lane or Hythe Road station.
Continue South to Shepherd’s Bush station, cross over to the other platform and then come back to Hythe Road station.
Go via Euston station. OK for High Speed Two, but not for Crossrail or the Great Western.

They cannot be serious!

I hope that there is a cunning plan to enable the Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction service to connect.

Whilst on the subject of connections at Old Oak Common, where is the promised connection of Crossrail to the West Coast Main Line?

Were all these connections just kicked into the long grass and quietly forgotten, as they were deemed too difficult and/or expensive?

I think serious questions need to be asked about the design of Crossrail and High Speed Two at Old Oak Common.

Why weren’t Crossrail and High Speed Two designed to connect directly to the London Overground at Willesden Junction station perhaps by the use of a North South people mover serving the following lines?

Bakerloo, Watford DC, West Coast Main and West London Orbital Lines at a rebuilt Harlesden station.
London Overground at the high-level Willesden Junction station.
High Speed Two
Crossrail and the Great Western Railway
The new Chiltern platforms.
Central Line at East Acton station.

Note.

Hythe Road and Old Oak Common stations would not be needed.
The Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction service would call additionally at the rebuilt Harlesden station.

The current design of Old Oak Common stinks like a horse designed by a committee!

The Northern Terminal

I suggested earlier that some trains use Watford Junction and others use Milton Keynes Central.

Both stations have the capacity and the connectivity.

The Southern Terminal

In the last ten years, South Croydon, East Croydon and Clapham Junction have been used as the Southern terminal.

Thameslink seems to have chosen its various terminals to satisfaction of the travelling public, so perhaps the same method or personnel should be used.

The Operator

The Gibb Report said that this service should be transferred to the London Overground and I wrote about this proposal in Gibb Report – East Croydon – Milton Keynes Route Should Be Transferred To London Overground.

This is one suggestion, but I do wonder, if it should be transferred to West Midlands Trains and run in conjunction with their West Coast Main Line services.

The service needs 110 mph trains.
Timetabling and operation should be easier.
London Overground trains don’t have a long-distance interior.

On the other hand, trains running between Watford Junction and Clapham Junction would probably be better if they were London Overground trains.

Conclusion

I believe that by using the current network and some modern trains and signalling, the passenger services to the West of the capital can be substantially improved.

May 1, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Transport/Travel | Aylesbury Line, Bakerloo Line, Barking Riverside Station, Brexit, Central Line, Chiltern Main Line, Chiltern Metro, Chiltern Railways, Crossrail, East London Line, Euston Station, Great Western Railway, Harlesden Station, High Speed Two, Hythe Road Station, Jubilee Line, London Mayor, London Overground, Metropolitan Line, Midland Main Line, Milton Keynes And Clapham Junction Service, Milton Keynes Central Station, Neasden Station, North London Line, Northern City Line, Northern Line, Old Oak Common Lane Station, Old Oak Common Station, Piccadilly Line, Sadiq Khan, Sadiq Khan Fare Freeze, Stuttgart Hauptbahnhof, Thames Tideway Tunnel, Thameslink, Transport for London, Watford DC Line, West Coast Main Line, West London Line, West London Orbital Railway | 12 Comments

High-Speed Low-Carbon Transport Between Great Britain And Ireland

Consider.

According to Statista, there were 13,160,000 passengers between the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic in 2019.
In 2019, Dublin Airport handled 32,907,673 passengers.
The six busiest routes from Dublin were Heathrow, Stansted, Amsterdam, Manchester, Birmingham and Stansted.
In 2018, Belfast International Airport handled 6,269,025 passengers.
The four busiest routes from Belfast International Airport were Stansted, Gatwick. Liverpool and Manchester, with the busiest route to Europe to Alicante.
In 2018, Belfast City Airport handled 2,445,529 passengers.
The four busiest routes from Belfast City Airport were Heathrow, Manchester, Birmingham and London City.

Note.

The busiest routes at each airport are shown in descending order.
There is a lot of air passengers between the two islands.
Much of the traffic is geared towards London’s four main airports.
Manchester and Liverpool get their fair share.

Decarbonisation of the air routes between the two islands will not be a trivial operation.

But technology is on the side of decarbonisation.

Class 805 Trains

Avanti West Coast have ordered thirteen bi-mode Class 805 trains, which will replace the diesel Class 221 trains currently working between London Euston and Holyhead.

They will run at 125 mph between Euston and Crewe using electric power.
If full in-cab digital signalling were to be installed on the electrified portion of the route, they may be able to run at 140 mph in places under the wires.
They will use diesel power on the North Wales Coast Line to reach Holyhead.
According to an article in Modern Railways, the Class 805 trains could be fitted with batteries.

I wouldn’t be surprised that when they are delivered, they are a version of the Hitachi’s Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, the specification of which is shown in this Hitachi infographic.

Note.

I suspect that the batteries will be used to handle regenerative braking on lines without electrification, which will save diesel fuel and carbon emissions.
The trains accelerate faster, than those they replace.
The claimed fuel and carbon saving is twenty percent.

It is intended that these trains will be introduced next year.

I believe that, these trains will speed up services between London Euston and Holyhead.

Currently, services take just over three-and-a-half hours.
There should be time savings on the electrification between London Euston and Crewe.
The operating speed on the North Wales Coast Line is 90 mph. This might be increased in sections.
Some extra electrification could be added, between say Crewe and Chester and possibly through Llandudno Junction.
I estimate that on the full journey, the trains could reduce emissions by up to sixty percent compared to the current diesel trains.

I think that a time of three hours could be achievable with the Class 805 trains.

New trains and a three hour journey time should attract more passengers to the route.

Holyhead

In Holyhead Hydrogen Hub Planned For Wales, I wrote about how the Port of Holyhead was becoming a hydrogen hub, in common with several other ports around the UK including Felixstowe, Harwich, Liverpool and Portsmouth.

Holyhead and the others could host zero-carbon hydrogen-powered ferries.

But this extract from the Wikipedia hints at work needed to be done to create a fast interchange between trains and ferries.

There is access to the port via a building shared with Holyhead railway station, which is served by the North Wales Coast Line to Chester and London Euston. The walk between trains and ferry check in is less than two minutes, but longer from the remote platform 1, used by Avanti West Coast services.

This Google Map shows the Port of Holyhead.

I think there is a lot of potential to create an excellent interchange.

HSC Francisco

I am using the high-speed craft Francisco as an example of the way these ships are progressing.

Power comes from two gas-turbine engines, that run on liquified natural gas.
It can carry 1024 passengers and 150 cars.
It has a top speed of 58 knots or 67 mph. Not bad for a ship with a tonnage of over 7000.

This ship is in service between Buenos Aires and Montevideo.

Note.

A craft like this could be designed to run on zero-carbon liquid hydrogen or liquid ammonia.
A high speed craft already runs between Dublin and Holyhead taking one hour and forty-nine minutes for the sixty-seven miles.

Other routes for a specially designed high speed craft might be.

Barrow and Belfast – 113 miles
Heysham and Belfast – 127 miles
Holyhead and Belfast – 103 miles
Liverpool and Belfast – 145 miles
Stranraer and Larne – 31 miles

Belfast looks a bit far from England, but Holyhead and Belfast could be a possibility.

London And Dublin Via Holyhead

I believe this route is definitely a possibility.

In a few years, with a few improvements on the route, I suspect that London Euston and Holyhead could be fairly close to three hours.
With faster bi-mode trains, Manchester Airport and Holyhead would be under three hours.
I would estimate, that a high speed craft built for the route could be under two hours between Holyhead and Dublin.

It certainly looks like London Euston and Dublin and Manchester Airport and Dublin would be under five hours.

In A Glimpse Of 2035, I imagined what it would be like to be on the first train between London and Dublin via the proposed fixed link between Scotland and Northern Ireland.

I felt that five-and-a-half hours was achievable for that journey.
The journey would have used High Speed Two to Wigan North Western.
I also stated that with improvements, London and Belfast could be three hours and Dublin would be an hour more.

So five hours between London Euston and Dublin using current technology without massive improvements and new lines could be small change well spent.

London And Belfast Via Holyhead

At 103 miles the ferry leg may be too long for even the fastest of the high speed craft, but if say the craft could do Holyhead and Belfast in two-and-a-half hours, it might just be a viable route.

It might also be possible to run the ferries to a harbour like Warrenpoint, which would be eighty-six miles.
An estimate based on the current high speed craft to Dublin, indicates a time of around two hours and twenty minutes.

It could be viable, if there was a fast connection between Warrenpoint and Belfast.

Conclusion

Once the new trains are running between London Euston and Holyhead, I would expect that an Irish entrepreneur will be looking to develop a fast train and ferry service between England and Wales, and the island of Ireland.

It could be sold, as the Greenest Way To Ireland.

Class 807 Trains

Avanti West Coast have ordered ten electric Class 807 trains, which will replace some of the diesel Class 221 trains.

They will run at 125 mph between Euston and Liverpool on the fully-electrified route.
If full in-cab digital signalling were to be installed on the route, they may be able to run at 140 mph in places.
These trains appear to be the first of the second generation of Hitachi trains and they seem to be built for speed and a sparking performance,
These trains will run at a frequency of two trains per hour (tph) between London and Liverpool Lime Street.
Alternate trains will stop at Liverpool South Parkway station.

In Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours?, I came to the conclusion, that a two-hour journey time was possible, when the new Class 807 trains have entered service.

London And Belfast Via Liverpool And A Ferry

Consider.

An hour on the train to and from London will be saved compared to Holyhead.
The ferry terminal is in Birkenhead on the other side of the Mersey and change between Lime Street station and the ferry could take much longer than at Holyhead.
Birkenhead and Belfast is twice the distance of Holyhead and Dublin, so even a high speed craft would take three hours.

This Google Map shows the Ferry Terminal and the Birkenhead waterfront.

Note.

The Ferry Terminal is indicated by the red arrow at the top of the map.
There are rows of trucks waiting for the ferries.
In the South East corner of the map, the terminal of the Mersey Ferry sticks out into the River
Hamilton Square station is in-line with the Mersey Ferry at the bottom of the map and indicated with the usual red symbol.
There is a courtesy bus from Hamilton Square station to the Ferry Terminal for Ireland.

There is a fourteen tph service between Hamilton Square and Liverpool Lime Street station.

This route may be possible, but the interchange could be slow and the ferry leg is challenging.

I don’t think the route would be viable unless a much faster ferry is developed. Does the military have some high speed craft under development?

Conclusion

London and Belfast via Liverpool and a ferry is probably a trip for enthusiasts or those needing to spend a day in Liverpool en route.

Other Ferry Routes

There are other ferry routes.

Heysham And Barrow-in-Furness

,These two ports might be possible, but neither has a good rail connection to London and the South of England.

They are both rail connected, but not to the standard of the connections at Holyhead and Liverpool.

Cairnryan

The Cairnryan route could probably be improved to be an excellent low-carbon route to Glasgow and Central Scotland.

Low-Carbon Flight Between The Islands Of Great Britain And Ireland

I think we’ll gradually see a progression to zero-carbon flight over the next few years.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel

Obviously zero-carbon would be better, but until zero-carbon aircraft are developed, there is always sustainable aviation fuel.

This can be produced from various carbon sources like biowaste or even household rubbish and disposable nappies.

British Airways are involved in a project called Altalto.

Altalto are building a plant at Immingham to turn household rubbish into sustainable aviation fuel.
This fuel can be used in jet airliners with very little modification of the aircraft.

I wrote about Altalto in Grant Shapps Announcement On Friday.

Smaller Low-Carbon Airliners

The first low- and zero-carbon airliners to be developed will be smaller with less range, than Boeing 737s and Airbus A 320s. These three are examples of four under development.

Aura Aero Era – 19 passengers – 500 miles
Eviation Alice – 9 passengers – 620 miles
Faradair Aerospace BEHA – 19 passengers – 1150 miles
Heart Aerospace ES-19 – 19 passengers – 400 km.

I feel that a nineteen seater aircraft with a range of 500 miles will be the first specially designed low- or zero-carbon airliner to be developed.

I believe these aircraft will offer advantages.

Some routes will only need refuelling at one end.
Lower noise and pollution.
Some will have the ability to work from short runways.
Some will be hybrid electric running on sustainable aviation fuel.

They may enable passenger services to some smaller airports.

Air Routes Between The Islands Of Great Britain And Ireland

These are distances from Belfast City Airport.

Aberdeen – 228 miles
Amsterdam – 557 miles
Birmingham – 226 miles
Blackpool – 128 miles
Cardiff – 246 miles
Edinburgh – 135 miles
Gatwick – 337 miles
Glasgow – 103 miles
Heathrow – 312 miles
Jersey – 406 miles
Kirkwall – 320 miles
Leeds – 177 miles
Liverpool – 151 miles
London City – 326 miles
Manchester – 170 miles
Newcastle – 168 miles
Southampton – 315 miles
Southend – 344 miles
Stansted – 292 miles
Sumburgh – 401 miles

Note.

Some airports on this list do not currently have flights from Belfast City Airport.
I have included Amsterdam for comparison.
Distances to Belfast International Airport, which is a few miles to the West of Belfast City Airport are within a few miles of these distances.

It would appear that much of Great Britain is within 500 miles of Belfast City Airport.

These are distances from Dublin Airport.

Aberdeen – 305 miles
Amsterdam – 465 miles
Birmingham – 199 miles
Blackpool – 133 miles
Cardiff – 185 miles
Edinburgh – 208 miles
Gatwick – 300 miles
Heathrow – 278 miles
Jersey – 339 miles
Kirkwall – 402 miles
Leeds – 190 miles
Liverpool – 140 miles
London City – 296 miles
Manchester – 163 miles
Newcastle – 214 miles
Southampton – 268 miles
Southend – 319 miles
Stansted – 315 miles
Sumburgh – 483 miles

Note.

Some airports on this list do not currently have flights from Dublin Airport.
I have included Amsterdam for comparison.

It would appear that much of Great Britain is within 500 miles of Dublin Airport.

I will add a few long routes, that someone might want to fly.

Cork and Aberdeen – 447 miles
Derry and Manston – 435 miles
Manston and Glasgow – 392 miles
Newquay and Aberdeen – 480 miles
Norwich and Stornaway – 486 miles.

I doubt there are many possible air services in the UK and Ireland that are longer than 500 miles.

I have a few general thoughts about low- and zero-carbon air services in and around the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

The likely five hundred mile range of the first generation of low- and zero-carbon airliners fits the size of the these islands well.
These aircraft seem to have a cruising speed of between 200 and 250 mph, so flight times will not be unduly long.
Airports would need to have extra facilities to refuel or recharge these airliners.
Because of their size, there will need to be more flights on busy routes.
Routes which are less heavily used may well be developed, as low- or zero-carbon could be good for marketing the route.

I suspect they could be ideal for the development of new routes and even new eco-friendly airports.

Conclusion

I have come to the conclusion, that smaller low- or zero-carbon are a good fit for the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

But then Flybe and Loganair have shown that you can make money flying smaller planes around these islands with the right planes, airports, strategy and management.

Hydrogen-Powered Planes From Airbus

Hydrogen-powered zero-carbon aircraft could be the future and Airbus have put down a marker as to the way they are thinking.

Airbus have proposed three different ZEROe designs, which are shown in this infographic.

The turboprop and the turbofan will be the type of designs, that could be used around Great Britain and Ireland.

The ZEROe Turboprop

This is Airbus’s summary of the design for the ZEROe Turboprop.

Two hybrid hydrogen turboprop engines, which drive the six bladed propellers, provide thrust. The liquid hydrogen storage and distribution system is located behind the rear pressure bulkhead.

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.

It certainly is a layout that has been used successfully, by many conventionally-powered aircraft in the past. The De Havilland Canada Dash 8 and ATR 72 are still in production.

I don’t think the turboprop engines, that run on hydrogen will be a problem.

If you look at the Lockheed-Martin C 130J Super Hercules, you will see it is powered by four Rolls-Royce AE 2100D3 turboprop engines, that drive 6-bladed Dowty R391 composite constant-speed fully-feathering reversible-pitch propellers.

These Rolls-Royce engines are a development of an Allison design, but they also form the heart of Rolls-Royce’s 2.5 MW Generator, that I wrote about in Our Sustainability Journey. The generator was developed for use in Airbus’s electric flight research program.

I wouldn’t be surprised to find the following.

, The propulsion system for this aircraft is under test with hydrogen at Derby and Toulouse.
Dowty are testing propellers suitable for the aircraft.
Serious research is ongoing to store enough liquid hydrogen in a small tank that fits the design.

Why develop something new, when Rolls-Royce, Dowty and Lockheed have done all the basic design and testing?

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the front view of the plane.

From clues in the picture, I estimate that the fuselage diameter is around four metres. Which is not surprising, as the Airbus A320 has a height of 4.14 metres and a with of 3.95 metres. But it’s certainly larger than the fuselage of an ATR-72.

So is the ZEROe Turboprop based on a shortened Airbus A 320 fuselage?

The ATR 72 has a capacity of 70 passengers.
The ZEROe Turboprop has a capacity of less than a hundred passengers.
An Airbus A320 has six-abreast seating.
Could the ZEROe Turboprop have sixteen rows of seats, as there are sixteen windows in front of the wing?
With the seat pitch of an Airbus A 320, which is 81 centimetres, this means just under thirteen metres for the passengers.
There could be space for a sizeable hydrogen tank in the rear part of the fuselage.
The plane might even be able to use the latest A 320 cockpit.

It looks to me, that Airbus have designed a larger ATR 72 based on an A 320 fuselage.

I don’t feel there are any great technical challenges in building this aircraft.

The engines appear to be conventional and could even have been more-or-less fully developed.
The fuselage could be a development of an existing design.
The wings and tail-plane are not large and given the company’s experience with large composite structures, they shouldn’t be too challenging.
The hydrogen storage and distributing system will have to be designed, but as hydrogen is being used in increasing numbers of applications, I doubt the expertise will be difficult to find.
The avionics and other important systems could probably be borrowed from other Airbus products.

Given that the much larger and more complicated Airbus A380 was launched in 2000 and first flew in 2005, I think that a prototype of this aircraft could fly around the middle of this decade.

It may seem small at less than a hundred seats, but it does have a range of greater than a 1000 nautical miles or 1150 miles.

Consider.

It compares closely in passenger capacity, speed and range, with the De Havilland Canada Dash 8/400 and the ATR 72/600.
The ATR 72 is part-produced by Airbus.
The aircraft is forty percent slower than an Airbus A 320.
It looks like it could be designed to have a Short-Takeoff-And Landing (STOL) capability.

I can see the aircraft replacing Dash 8s, ATR 72s and similar aircraft all over the world. There are between 2000 and 3000 operational airliners in this segment.

The ZEROe Turbofan

This is Airbus’s summary of the design.

Two hybrid hydrogen turbofan engines provide thrust. The liquid hydrogen storage and distribution system is located behind the rear pressure bulkhead.

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the front view of the plane.

The aircraft doesn’t look very different different to an Airbus A320 and appears to be fairly conventional. It does appear to have the characteristic tall winglets of the A 320 neo.

I don’t think the turbofan engines, that run on hydrogen will be a problem.

These could be standard turbofan engines modified to run on hydrogen, fuelled from a liquid hydrogen tank behind the rear pressure bulkhead of the fuselage.

If you want to learn more about gas turbine engines and hydrogen, read this article on the General Electric web site, which is entitled The Hydrogen Generation: These Gas Turbines Can Run On The Most Abundant Element In the Universe,

These are my thoughts of the marketing objectives of the ZEROe Turbofan.

The cruising speed and the number of passengers are surprisingly close, so has this aircraft been designed as an A 320 or Boeing 737 replacement?
I suspect too, that it has been designed to be used at any airport, that could handle an Airbus A 320 or Boeing 737.
It would be able to fly point-to-point flights between most pairs of European or North American cities.

It would certainly fit the zero-carbon shorter range airliner market!

In fact it would more than fit the market, it would define it!

I very much believe that Airbus’s proposed zero-carbon hydrogen-powered designs and others like them will start to define aviation on routes of up to perhaps 3000 miles, from perhaps 2035.

The A 320 neo was launched in December 2010 and entered service in January 2016. That was just five years and a month.
I suspect that a lot of components like the fuselage sections, cockpit, avionics, wings, landing gear, tailplane and cabin interior could be the same in a A 320 neo and a ZEROe Turbofan.
Flying surfaces and aerodynamics could be very similar in an A 320 neo and a ZEROe Turbofan
There could even be commonality between the ZEROe Turboprop and the ZEROe Turbofan, with respect to fuselage sections, cockpit, avionics and cabin interior.

There also must be the possibility, that if a ZEROe Turbofan is a hydrogen-powered A 320 neo, that this would enable the certification process to be simplified.

It might even be possible to remanufacture a A 320 neo into a ZEROe Turbofan. This would surely open up all sorts of marketing strategies.

My project management, flying and engineering knowledge says that if they launched the ZEROe Turbofan this year, it could be in service by the end of the decade on selected routes.

Conclusion

Both the ZEROe Turboprop and ZEROe Turbofan are genuine zero-carbon aircraft, which fit into two well-defined market segments.

I believe that these two aircraft and others like them from perhaps Boeing and Bombardier could be the future of aviation between say 500 and 3000 miles.

With the exception of the provision of hydrogen refuelling at airports, there will be no need for any airport infrastructure.

I also wouldn’t be surprised that the thinking Airbus appear to have applied to creating the ZEROe Turbofan from the successful A 320 neo, could be applied to perhaps create a hydrogen-powered A 350.

I feel that Airbus haven’t fulling disclosed their thinking. But then no company would, when it reinvents itself.

T also think that short-haul air routes will increasing come under pressure.

The green lobby would like airlines to decarbonise.

Governments will legislate that airlines must decarbonise.

The rail industry will increasingly look to attract customers away from the airlines, by providing more competitive times and emphasising their green credentials.

Aircraft manufacturers will come under pressure to deliver zero-carbon airliners as soon as they can.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see a prototype ZEROe Turbofan or Boeing’s equivalent fly as early as 2024.

Short Term Solutions

As I said earlier, one solution is to use existing aircraft with Sustainable Aviation Fuel.

But many believe this is greenwash and rather a cop out.

So we must do better!

I don’t believe that the smaller zero- and low-carbon aircraft with a range of up to 500 miles and a capacity of around 19 seats, will be able to handle all the passengers needing to fly between and around the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

A Boeing 737 or Airbus A 320 has a capacity of around two hundred passengers, which would require ten times the number of flights, aircraft and pilots.
Airports would need expansion on the airside and the terminals to handle the extra planes.
Air Traffic Control would need to be expanded to handle the extra planes.

But the smaller planes would be ideal for the thinner secondary routes.

So I tend to think, that the greens will have to lump it, as Sustainable Aviation Fuel will increasingly be the only viable solution.

This will increase the need for Airbus or Boeing to develop a viable A 320 or 737-sized aircraft as soon as possible.

Air Bridges

I said earlier, that I believe using ferries between Ireland and Holyhead and new bi-mode Class 805 trains between London Euston and Holyhead could be a competitor to airlines.

The ferries would be high speed craft capable of Holyhead and Ireland in around 90-100 minutes.
The ferries would be zero-carbon.
The trains would have a sixty percent reduction in carbon emissions compared to current trains on the route.

If we can skim across the water in a zero-carbon high speed craft, are there any reasons we can’t cross the water in a low- or zero-carbon aircraft.

In the next few sub-sections, I’ll suggest a few air bridges.

Glasgow

Glasgow Airport could be an ideal airport for a low or zero-carbon air bridge to Northern Ireland.

A rail link could eventually be built.
There is a reasonable amount of traffic.
The distance to Belfast City Airport is only 103 miles.

As the airport serves islands and other places that could be ideal low- and zero-carbon routes, I could see Glasgow becoming a hub for battery and hydrogen-powered aircraft.

Heathrow

Heathrow must prepare itself for an uncertain future.

It will be some years before a third runway is both needed and will have been constructed.

I believe the following will happen.

Smaller up to nineteen seat low- or zero-carbon airliners will be in service by 2025.
From around 2024, Heathrow will get requests to refuel or charge low- or zero-carbon airliners.
Low- or-zero- carbon A 320-size airliners will be in service by 2030.
Most ground equipment at Heathrow like tugs and fuel bowsers will be zero-carbon.

If I were Boris or Prime Minister, I would say that Heathrow could have its third runway with the following conditions.

All aircraft using the third runway must be zero-carbon
All air-side vehicles must be zero-carbon.
All vehicles bringing passengers on the last mile to the airport must be zero-carbon.
All aircraft using the airport that are not zero-carbon must use sustainable aviation fuel.

I suspect that the conditions would be met by a large margin.

When an airport knows it is effectively going to be closed, it will make sure it survives.

Liverpool

Liverpool Airport could be an ideal airport for a low or zero-carbon air bridge to the island of Ireland.

There is a nearby Liverpool South Parkway station, with frequent services to both the local area and places further away.
An improved London train service starts in 2022 or 2023.
There would need to be a people mover between the station and the airport.
The airport can probably have piped hydrogen from across the Mersey.
There is already significant traffic to and from the island of Ireland.
Flight times Between Liverpool and Dublin and Belfast would be under an hour.

I also feel that Liverpool could develop lots of other low- and zero-carbon routes to perhaps Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Norwich, Southampton and the Isle of Man.

I could even see Liverpool having a Turn-Up-And-Go shuttle service to Dublin and Belfast, with small zero-carbon planes running every fifteen minutes or so.

Manston

I wouldn’t rule out Manston as a low- and zero-carbon airport for flights to the Benelux countries and Northern France and parts of Germany.

These are a few distances from Manston Airport.

Amsterdam – 160 miles
Brussels – 134 miles
Cologne – 253 miles
Dusseldorf – 234 miles
Frankfurt – 328 miles
Geneva – 414 miles
Hamburg – 396 miles
Le Touquet – 59 miles
Lille – 49 miles
Luxembourg – 243 miles
Ostend – 66 miles
Strasbourg – 339 miles

Manston’s position on the tip of Kent gives it an advantage and I think low- and zero-carbon services could reach Cologne, Frankfurt, Geneva, Hamburg and Strasbourg.

The airport also has other advantages.

A big electrolyser to produce hydrogen is being built at Herne Bay.
The area is rich in wind and solar energy.
I suspect the airspace to the East of the airport isn’t very busy and short hops to the Continent could be easy to slot in.

There is a new station being built at Thanet Parkway, which is on the Ashford and Ramsgate Line, which has regular services to London, including some services on High Speed One.

This Google Map shows the location of the airport and the station.

Note.

The runway of Manston Airport.
The Ashford and Ramsgate Line running across the South-East corner of the map.
The station could be built to the West of the village of Cliffsend, which is indicated by the red arrow.
I’m sure, a people mover or a zero-carbon bus could be built to connect the station and the airport.

There would need to be improvements in the frequency of services to and from London, but I’m sure Manston Airport could become an ideal airport for low- and zero-carbon aircraft serving the near Continent.

Southampton

Southampton Airport could be the ideal design for an airport to serve an air bridge.

The Southampton Airport Parkway station is connected to the terminal.
The station has numerous rail services, including a fast service to and from London.
The airport is expanding and could make sure all works are compatible with a low- and zero-carbon future.

Southampton is not ideally placed for services to Ireland, but with low- and zero-carbon aircraft it could be ideal for running services to the Channel Islands and Western France.

Other Airports

I suspect other airports will go the low- and zero-carbon route.

Conclusion

I started this post, with the intention of writing about writing about low- and zero-carbon transport between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

But it has grown.

I have now come to the conclusion that there are several low- and zero-carbon routes that could be developed.

The most promising would appear to be.

London Euston and Belfast by new Class 805 train to Holyhead and then zero-carbon high speed ferry.
London Euston and Dublin by new Class 805 train to Holyhead and then zero-carbon high speed ferry.
Glasgow and Belfast by train to Cairnryan and then zero-carbon high speed ferry.
Point-to-point air routes using new small nineteen seat low- or zero-carbon airliners with a range of 500 miles.
London Euston and Belfast by new Class 807 train to Liverpool Airport and then smaller low- or zero-carbon airliner.
London Euston and Dublin by new Class 807 train to Liverpool Airport and then and then smaller low- or zero-carbon airliner.
Other air bridges will develop.

But I am fairly certain by the end of the decade, there will be A320-size airlines powered by hydrogen taking us to Ireland and Western Europe.

I believe that the survival and ultimate prospering of Airbus and Boeing depends on the development of a range of zero-carbon airliners.

For this reason alone, they will succeed.

April 22, 2021 Posted by AnonW | Hydrogen, Transport/Travel | Airbus, Airbus A 320, Airbus A 320 neo, Altalto, ATR 72, Avanti West Coast, Aviation, Belfast, Belfast City Airport, Belfast International Airport, Boeing, British Airways, Class 805 Train, de Havilland Canada Dash 8, Dublin, Dublin Airport, Electric Aircraft, Flybe, Global Warming/Zero-Carbon, Hamilton Square Station, High Speed Two, Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, Holyhead, Hydrogen-Powered Aircraft, Liverpool Airport, Liverpool Lime Street Station, Liverpool South Parkway Station, Loganair, Manston Airport, North Wales Coast Line, Scotland And Northern Ireland Fixed Link, Southampton Airport, Sustainable Aviation Fuel, Zero-Carbon Routes Between The UK And Ireland, ZEROe Turbofan, ZEROe Turboprop | 4 Comments

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

About This Blog

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

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

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

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

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

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

Email Address:

Join 1,898 other subscribers

The Anonymous Widower

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

Could High Speed Two Serve Holyhead?

Should Improvement Needed For High Speed Two On The East And West Coast Main Lines Be Given High Priority?

HS2 Utilising UK-First Pioneering 3D Concrete Printing On Project

Liverpool’s Vision For Rail

Should All High Speed Long Distance Services To Newcastle Extend To Edinburgh?

Department Of Transport Claims London and Sheffield Times Could Be Cut By Thirty Minutes

A New Elizabethan

Would A Mutant Many-Parent Child Help To Solve London’s Transport Problems?

High-Speed Low-Carbon Transport Between Great Britain And Ireland

About This Blog

Charities

Useful Links

Top Posts

WordPress Admin

Email Subscription

Archives

Categories

Tweets

Site info