Rumours Grow Over Future Of HS2
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Railnews.
This is the first paragraph.
The future of HS2 appears to be increasingly in doubt, as reports suggest that the forthcoming Oakervee Review will axe Phase 2b between the West Midlands and Yorkshire and possibly cancel the project entirely.
The article also says this about the first phase of the project.
Another possibility is that Phase 1 between London and Birmingham could be built more cheaply by lowering the maximum speed from the presently-planned 250km/h. Such a reduction would reduce the new line’s capacity and lengthen journey times but still ease the pressure on the West Coast Main Line, where paths are in short supply.
There are three suggestions in these two paragraphs and before I discuss them, I’ll detail the various phases of the project as they are current proposed.
The Phases Of High Speed Two
High Speed Two will be two phases with the second phase split into two.
- Phase 1 – London and the West Midlands
- Phase 2a – West Midlands and Crewe
- Phase 2b – Crewe and Manchester and West Midlands and Leeds
The plan improves links between London and several major cities in the Midlands and North.
Northern Powerhouse Rail
I am a great believer in holistic design and in the economies of doing several similar projects together or in a well-defined sequence, that delivers benefits in a stream.
For that reason, I believe that the equally-important Northern Powerhouse Rail should be designed in conjunction with High Speed Two, to achieve the following objectives.
- A better railway, that connects more towns and cities.
- A phased delivery of benefits.
- Possible cost savings.
This report on the Transport for the North web site which is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail, advocates a much better approach.
- High Speed Two would go from Crewe to Hull via Warrington, Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds.
- Northern Powerhouse Rail would go from Liverpool to Hull via Warrington, Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds.
- There would be a double junction at High Legh between Liverpool and Manchester, that connects the two routes.
- London and Liverpool services would use the Western end of Northern Powerhouse Rail from High Legh.
- There would be improvements East of Leeds to connect to Sheffield and the East Coast Main Line.
This map shows the high speed railways between Crewe, Liverpool, Manchester and Warrington.
I discussed, what has been proposed by Transport of the North in Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North.
Cutting High Speed Two To An Affordable Budget
I’ll take the three suggestions in the Rail News article.
Suggestion One – Cancel The Project
This is actually the second suggestion, but I think the article kills it in the second paragraph, that I quoted, when it says that High Speed Two is needed to ease pressure on the West Coast Main Line.
Cancellation would probably be a vote loser and a big stick with which to beat Boris, if he brought forward any environmental proposals.
I doubt cancellation will happen, unless we get someone like Nigel Farage as Prime Minister.
Suggestion Two – Cancel Phase 2b Between The West Midlands And Yorkshire
This clip of a map from the Transport for the North report shows a schematic of the rail links to the East of Manchester.
Northern Powerhouse Rail would offer a lot of improvements, which are shown in purple.
There are also these projects that will improve trains to and from Yorkshire.
- Northern Powerhouse Rail between Liverpool and Hull via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds.
- A possible connection between Northern Powerhouse Rail and High Speed Two at High Legh.
- Midland Main Line upgrade with 125 mph bi-mode trains between London and Sheffield.
- 140 mph running on the East Coast Main Line between London and Doncaster and onward to Bradford, Hull, Leeds and York.
I’ll add a few more flesh to the points.
High Speed Two To Hull
If High Speed Two connects to Northern Powerhouse Rail at High Legh it will join everything together.
- High Speed Two trains would run between London and Hull via Birmingham, Crewe, Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds.
- Very expensive infrastructure would be shared between High Speed Two and Northern Powerhouse Rail.
- Leeds and Manchester would be just twenty minutes apart, with trains from both lines on the same tracks.
- Hull station has the space to handle the trains.
Combining the two routes should save billions.
Midland Main Line To Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, Wakefield And Leeds
This is already ptoposed for the Midland Main Line.
- New stations will be built at Rotherham and Barnsley.
- Four fast trains per hour between Sheffield and Leeds can be delivered.
- 125 mph bi-mode trains to Yorkshire via the East Midlands.
But what about the following?
- Could the Erewash Valley Line be used instead of a new High Speed Two line between the East Midlands and Sheffield?
- Could the Midland Main Line be electrified and upgraded to 140 mph running like the East Coast Main Line?
Similar connectivity to that of High Speed Two can be created at a lower cost.
Cancellation of the Eastern Leg of Phase 2b would mean there would be no improved link between the West and East Midlands.
Perhaps, the Eastern leg of High Speed Two, would run only to the proposed East Midlands Hub station at Toton.
Increasing Capacity On The East Coast Main Line
In Thoughts On A 140 mph East Coast Main Line Between London And Doncaster, I did a crude calculation to see how many extra trains could be run between London and Doncaster on a digitally signalled 140 mph East Coast Main Line.
This was my conclusion.
If something similar to what I have proposed is possible, it looks like as many as an extra seven tph can be accommodated between Kings Cross and the North.
That is certainly worth having.
Extra trains could be run between Kings Cross and Bradford, Hull, Leeds, Nottingham and Sheffield.
Estimated timings would be eighty minutes to Doncaster and under two hours to Leeds.
Suggestion Three – Reduce Speed In Phase 1
There is always a tendency for project promoters to make sure their project is the biggest and the best.
There will be an optimum speed for a London and Birmingham high speed line, which balances benefits, costs, noise and disturbance. One politician’s optimum will also be very different to another’s.
Such parameters like operating speed and capacity must be chosen with care.
Conclusion
I believe, that we need the capacity of both High Speed Two and Northern Powerhouse Rail to move passengers and freight.
So we should design them together and with other improvements like the Midland Main Line and the East Coast Main Line.
Will HS2 And Northern Powerhouse Rail Go For The Big Bore?
Different Versions Of This Post
The original post was published on the 25th August 2019.
It has been updated on the 21st November 2020 to reflect changes made to High Speed Two (HS2).
It has been updated on the 13th January 2023 for piggy-back freight trains.
The Merging Of High Speed Two And Northern Powerhouse Rail
It looks to me that there will be increasing links and merging between High Speed Two (HS2) and Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR).
This report on the Transport for the North web site, is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail.
Proposals and possibilities include.
- NPR will have a Western terminal at a new station in Liverpool City Centre.
- HS2 trains would access Liverpool and Manchester via a junction between HS2 and NPR at High Legh.
- There will be six trains per hour (tph) between Liverpool and Manchester via Manchester Airport.
- The route between Manchester and Manchester Airport is planned to be in tunnel.
- There will be six tph between Manchester and Leeds.
In addition, Boris has made positive noises about a high speed line between Manchester and Leeds being of a high priority.
So will the planners go for the logical solution of a High Speed tunnel between Manchester Airport and Leeds?
- There could be a theoretical capacity of perhaps 18 tph, which is the design capacity of High Speed Two.
- Speeds of up to 125 mph or more could be possible. The Gottard Base Tunnel has an operating speed for passenger trains of 125 mph.
- Stations could be at Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly/Piccadilly Gardens/Victoria, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds.
- West of Manchester Airport, the route appears easier and the tunnel would emerge close to the airport. High Speed Two is planning that the tunnel emerges just to the North of the Airport and that the station is below ground level.
- East of Leeds the tunnel would join up with existing routes to Doncaster, Hull, Newcastle and York.
- Freight trains would be allowed at speed of up to 100 mph.
I believe such a tunnel could be built without disrupting existing rail services and passengers. Remember building Crossrail’s tunnels in London was an almost invisible process.
It would result in two rail systems across Northern England.
- Upgraded Classic Rail Routes
- The Big Bore
My thoughts on the two systems follow.
Upgraded Classic Rail Routes
This could include improvements such as these,
- Extra passing loops.
- Selective electrification
- Improved stations
- Comprehensive in-cab digital signalling
- More paths for passenger and freight trains.
Which could be applied to routes, such as these.
- The Huddersfield Line
- The Chat Moss Line
- The Calder Valley Line
- The Hope Valley Line
- The Dearne Valley Line
- The Selby Line
- The Midland Main Line North Of Clay Cross
In addition, there could be the reopening of some closed or freight routes to passenger trains.
This article on Rail Technology Magazine is entitled Network Rail Reveals Detailed £2.9bn Upgrade Plans For TransPennine Route.
It is a comprehensive upgrade that includes.
- Improvement between Huddersfield and Westtown, which is near Dewsbury
- Grade separation or a tunnel at Ravensthorpe
- Rebuilding and electrification of eight miles of track.
- Possible doubling the number of tracks from two to four.
- Improved stations at Huddersfield, Deighton, Mirfield and Ravensthorpe.
This project would be a major improvement to the Huddersfield Line.
In Sheffield Region Transport Plan 2019 – Hope Valley Line Improvements, I talked about planned improvements to the Hope Valley Line, which should begin in the next couple of years.
These improvements are given in detail under Plans in the Wikipedia entry for the Hope Valley Line.
The Hope Valley Improvements will cost in the region of tens of millions of pounds and Wikipedia sums up the benefits like this.
These changes to allow three fast trains, a stopping train and freight trains each hour were also supported in a Transport for the North investment report in 2019, together with “further interventions” for the Northern Powerhouse Rail programme.
It seems like good value to me!
So could we see other multi-million and billion pound projects created to improve the classic routes across the Pennines?
Projects would be fully planned and the costs and benefits would then be assessed and calculated.
Then it would be up to the Project Managers to devise the optimal structure and order in which to carry out all the projects.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the following techniques used.
- Discontinuous electrification to avoid bridge reconstruction.
- Intelligent, hybrid diesel/electric/battery trains from Bombardier, CAF, Hitachi or Stadler, capable of 125 mph running and changing mode at speed.
- Modular digital signalling
- Factory built stations and step-free bridges.
- Removal of all level crossings.
- All stations updated for step-free access between train and platform.
The objectives would be as follows.
- More train paths, where needed.
- Faster line speed.
- Less running on diesel.
- Fast station stops.
Hopefully, the upgrading could be done without too much disruption.
Remember though, that disruption to existing users during a project, is most likely down to bad project management.
The Big Bore
The Central Core tunnel of Crossrail between Royal Oak and East London, was virtually a separate project before Crossrail’s stations and much of other infrastructure was built.
I believe that digging the tunnel first gave a big advantage, in that it could be constructed as an independent project, provided that the logistics of delivering the components and removing the junk was done efficiently.
But it did mean that travellers wouldn’t see any benefits until the project was almost complete.
HS2 and NPR are different in that they also envisage upgrading these routes.
- The Huddersfield Line
- The Chat Moss Line
- The Calder Valley Line
- The Hope Valley Line
- The Dearne Valley Line
- The Selby Line
- The Midland Main Line North Of Clay Cross
Only the Huddersfield Line is directly affected by the Big Bore.
Effectively, the Big Bore will provide a by-pass route for passenger trains between Leeds and West of Manchester Airport, to take the fast trains of HS2 and NPR underneath the congested classic lines.
In Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North I said this about a tunnel between Leeds and Manchester.
To get a twenty-five minute time between Leeds and Manchester with a ten minute frequency, which I believe is the minimum service the two cities deserve, would be like passing a whole herd of camels through the eye of a single needle.
The Swiss, who lets face it have higher hills, than we have in Northern England would create a new route mainly in tunnel between the two cities, with perhaps an underground station beneath the current Grade I Listed; Huddersfield station.
The transport for the North report suggests Bradford Low Moor station, as an intermediate station, so why not Bradford Low Moor and Huddersfield stations?
Note that the Gotthard Base Tunnel, which opened a couple of years ago, deep under the Alps, is about the same length as a Leeds and Manchester tunnel, and cost around eight billion pounds.
It would be expensive, but like Crossrail in London, the tunnel would have big advantages.
- It could be built without disrupting current rail and road networks.
- It would have a capacity of up to thirty tph in both directions.
- Unlike Crossrail, it could handle freight trains.
- It would unlock and join the railway systems to the East and West.
I believe, it would be a massive leap forward for transport in the North of England.
It would be a very big project and probably one of the longest rail tunnels in the world.
Comparison With The Gotthard Base Tunnel
But surely, if a small and rich nation like Switzerland can build the Gotthard Base Tunnel, then we have the resources to build the Big Bore between Manchester Airport and Leeds.
Consider these facts about the Gotthard Base Tunnel.
- It is two single track bores.
- Each bore has a track length of around 57 kilometres or 35 miles.
- The tunnel may be deep, but it is direct and level.
- The maximum speed is 250 kph or 160 mph.
- The operational speed for passenger trains is 200 kph or 125 mph.
- The operational speed for freight is 100 kph or 62 mph.
- It can take the largest freight trains.
To make numbers even more impressive it is joined to the shorter Ceneri Base Tunnel, to provide an even longer route.
Manchester Airport And Leeds Direct
Now consider Manchester Airport and Leeds.
- The current rail distance is 56 miles.
- There are stops at Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Oxford Road, Manchester Victoria and Huddersfield stations.
- Journey time is eighty minutes.
But the direct distance is only 68 kilometres or forty-three miles.
Surely if the Swiss can blast and dig two 57 km. single-track rail tunnels through solid rock, we can go eleven kilometres further with all the recent experience of tunnelling around the world.
The lengths of the various legs would be as follows.
- Manchester Airport and Manchester – 14 km.
- Manchester and Huddersfield – 35 km.
- Huddersfield and Bradford – 17 km.
- Bradford and Leeds – 13 km
Trains running on the various legs at 200 kph, which is the cruising speed of a 1970s-built InterCity 125, could take the following times for the various legs.
- Manchester Airport and Manchester – 4.2 minutes
- Manchester and Huddersfield – 10.5 minutes
- Huddersfield and Bradford – 5.1 minutes
- Bradford and Leeds – 13 km – 3.9 minutes
Leeds and Manchester Airport would be under thirty minutes apart, even allowing two minutes each for the three stops.
Looking at NPR between Liverpool and Hull, times could be as follows.
- Liverpool and Manchester – 26 minutes
- Manchester and Leeds – 20 minutes
- Leeds and Hull – 38 minutes
Or a Coast-to-Coast time of under ninety minutes.
Train Frequencies
HS2 is being designed to handle eighteen tph, although slower intensive railways in the UK can handle up to twenty-four tph.
At the current time or certainly in a few years time, the theoretical maximum frequency through the Big Bore should be between these two figures. I will assume at least eighteen tph in this post.
The At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail report talks about the following frequencies.
- Liverpool and Manchester via Manchester Airport – Six tph.
- Manchester and Leeds – Six tph
- Leeds and Hull – Two tph
This is all so lacking in ambition. It is like building a new high capacity road and only allowing those with status to use the road.
If Leeds and Manchester Airport can handle eighteen tph, why not use some of it to create an Express Metro under the Pennines?
To me, if the Big Bore is built, nothing short of twelve tph or a train every five minutes is acceptable, at Liverpool, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds stations.
The extension to Hull could be reduced to perhaps six tph, but with the upgrading of the Hull and Leeds Line to perhaps 140 mph, I’d be bold and create a true TransPennine Express;
Hull and Liverpool every five minutes would be the ultimate Marketing Man’s dream.
The Underground Stations
Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds would all be through stations deep underground.
- They would be connected to the surface by lifts and escalators.
- Some entrances to the stations would connect to existing stations and others might emerge in City squares like Manchester’s P:iccadilly Gardens.
- Most stations would be just two platforms, as all trains would pass through on either side of a large underground concourse.
- Bay platforms could be added as required.
- All stations would have platform edge doors.
- Passengers would be able to reverse direction by just walking across the concourse.
Stations would build on the lessons learned from Crossrail. But then NPR is closer to Crossrail than a Classic High Speed Line.
Weston Williamson’s Vision For Manchester Piccadilly Station
I wrote about this in The Rival Plans For Piccadilly Station, That Architects Say Will ‘Save Millions’.
I believe that this is the way to create an underground station.
The Terminal Stations
The two main terminal stations for NPR and trains running through the Big Bore would be the proposed High Speed station at Liverpool and the existing Hull station.
But one other terminal station is being created; Edinburgh.
I have been going to Edinburgh station to and from England for perhaps thirty years and the capacity of the station has constantly increased.
Recent developments have been an extended Platforms 5 and 6, that can take the longest LNER trains.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that with the application of digital signalling, that there is capacity for at least eight tph between Edinburgh and Newcastle.
There would certainly be capacity for at least two tph between Liverpool and Edinburgh via Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford, Leeds, York and Newcastle.
In the East the other possibilities for terminals are Doncaster, Newcastle and York.
- I would discount Newcastle, as it lacks capacity and its location would make it difficult to add more.
- Doncaster has good connectivity and space, but do Leeds and Hull offer similar connectivity?
So that leaves Hull, Edinburgh and York, as the only Eastern terminals.
In the West, there is probably a need to connect to the Northern section of the West Coast Main Line (WCML).
- Glasgow Central is probably the obvious terminal, but it would need an extra connection at the junction of HS2, NPR and WCML at High Legh.
- If necessary Preston could be used, as it has space and lots of connectivity.
- Why not use Blackpool North, as it sits on a large site and is fully electrified. It could certainly take four tph?
- A lot of the things I said for Blackpool, also apply to Chester, which would give a gateway to Mid and North Wales!
The trains through the Big Bore could fan out at both the East and West.
Tunnel Size
As Manchester will be served by High Speed Two’s Full-Size trains from Birmingham and London, both Manchester stations will need to be built to accept these trains.
I feel that the whole tunnel between Manchester Airport and Leeds, should be built to the High Speed Two size, so that it can accept the largest possible passenger and freight trains, in the future.
That would obviously include the ability to handle piggy-back freight trains.
Integration Of HS2 and NPR
The At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail report is proposing this and it looks that the following HS2 services could be possible between Euston and Manchester.
- Two tph – Euston and Hull via Old Oak Common, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds
- Two tph – Euston and Edinburgh via Old Oak Common, Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford, Leeds, York and Newcastle.
Note.
- Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds would all have four tph to and from London, by the Western arm of HS2’s Y.
- If in addition there were two tph between Liverpool and Hull and Liverpool and Edinburgh, this would mean four tph from the Big Bore of NPR to both Hull and Edinburgh.
- None of these core services need to terminate in the Big Bore.
I very much feel that integrating HS2 and NPR is the way to go.
Could We See A High Speed Northern Metro?
If we assume that the Big Bore could handle the HS2 frequency of at least eighteen tph, then it would be possible to create a high speed service across the Pennines with the following Metro-like frequencies.
- Liverpool and Hull – 4 tph
- Liverpool and Edinburgh – 2 tph
- Glasgow and Hull – 2 tph
- London Euston and Hull – 2 tph
- London Euston and Edinburgh – 2 tph
- London Euston and Glasgow – 2 tph
This would result in the following frequencies
- Liverpool – 6 tph
- Glasgow – 4 tph
- London Euston – 4 tph
- Manchester Airport – 12 tph
- Manchester – 12 tph
- Huddersfield – 12 tph
- Bradford – 12 tph
- Leeds – 12 tph
- Hull – 8 tph
- York – 4 tph
- Newcastle – 4 tph
- Edinburgh – 4 tph
What would these frequencies do for train travel in the North of England?
Freight
The Gotthard Base Tunnel has been designed so that both freight and passenger trains can use the route.
There is a need for extra freight capacity across the country and I wonder if freight trains could use the Big Bore.
I estimate that the Big Bore would be 68 kilometres if bored straight and level between West of Manchester Airport and Leeds.
Lets assume it is seventy kilometres or 43.5 miles.
So times, through the tunnel at various average speeds would be.
- 125 mph – 21 minutes
- 110 mph – 23.7 minutes
- 100 mph – 26.1 minutes
- 90 mph – 29 minutes
- 80 mph – 32.6 minutes
- 62 mph (Gotthard Base Tunnel speed for freight) – 42 minutes.
Could it be mandated that freight trains can use the tunnel, if they could maintain a particular speed?
Consider.
- A 125 mph train with stops at Manchester Airport, Manchester, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds would probably take thirty minutes to transit the tunnel.
- A freight train running at 90 mph would take more or less the same time.
- Fifteen tph would mean a train every four minutes.
- Automatic control of all trains in the tunnel would be a possibility. It appears to work on the much more complicated Thameslink.
I think with the following conditions, one or even two freight trains per hour, in addition to the passenger trains, can pass through the Big Bore in each direction.
- The locomotives have the performance of at least the Class 93 locomotive, which is currently being built.
- Freight trains can be hauled through at a minimum speed, which could be between 90 and 110 mph.
- The passenger trains and train and platform staff work together to produce very short station dwell times.
- All passenger trains are identical.
- Station platforms are designed so that passengers can leave and enter the trains rapidly.
It will be a Big Bore with a capacity to match!
What About Sheffield?
I haven’t forgotten Sheffield, but I think it could be linked across the Pennines by another route.
Under the upgrades for Northern Powerhouse Rail, it is proposed that services between Sheffield and Leeds become 4 tph in 25 minutes along the Dearne Valley Line.
Does Boris Know More Than He Lets On?
The headline on the front cover of Issue 885 of Rail Magazine is Boris Backs New Pennine Railway.
There is also a sub-heading of PM commits to Leeds-Manchester line.
Boris didn’t apply any substance to the speech, except to say that it will be funded.
Conclusion
I believe that my naïve analysis in this post shows that a TransPennine tunnel is possible.
But I believe that the right tunnel could have one big advantage.
Suppose it was built to handle the following.
- A capacity of eighteen tph, which is the same as High Speed Two.
- An operating speed of 140 mph or more. The Gotthard Base Tunnel has a maximum operating speed of 160 mph.
- High Speed Two’s Full-Size trains.
- The largest freight trains.
It would be future proofed for longer than anybody could envisage.
There are also other smaller advantages.
- It would by-pass a lot of difficult areas.
- It would cause very little aural and visual disruption.
- If it were designed with care, it would not affect the flora and fauna.
- As with the Swiss tunnel, it could be dug level, which would save energy and allow trains to run faster.
- It could be running twelve tph between Leeds and Manchester Airport via Bradford, Huddersfield and Manchester Piccadilly.
- Existing surface railways at the Eastern end could serve Cleethorpes, Darlington, Doncaster, Edinburgh, Hull, Middlesbrough, Newcastle, Scarborough, Sheffield and York
- Existing surface railways at the Western end could serve Barrow, Blackpool, Carlisle, Chester, Glasgow, Liverpool. North Wales, Preston and Wigan.
It would be more like Thameslink for the North turned on its side, rather than Crossrail for the North.
The Future Of TransPennine Express
TransPennine Express operates services across the Pennines.
In Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North, I explored the possibilities of merging the infrastructure of High Seed Two and Northern Powerhouse Rail, as proposed by this report on the Transport for the North web site, which is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail.
In my post, I proposed this service pattern across the Pennines, after sketching it on one of the 5 x 3 inch cards, that I use for notes.
- High Speed Two – Two tph between London and Hull via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly and Leeds
- High Speed Two – One tph between London and Edinburgh via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Leeds, York and Newcastle.
- Northern Powerhouse Rail – One tph between Liverpool and Edinburgh via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Leeds, York and Newcastle.
- Northern Powerhouse Rail – Two tph between Liverpool and Sheffield via Manchester Airport and Manchester Piccadilly
- Northern Powerhouse Rail – Two tph between Liverpool and Hull via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly and Leeds
- Northern Powerhouse Rail – One tph between Liverpool and Sunderland via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly, Leeds, York and Middlesbrough.
But how do proposed services across the Pennines like these, fit with the current TransPennine Express services?
Manchester Airport And Middlesbrough
The Liverpool and Sunderland service covers the same route. at the same frequency of one tph.
Manchester Airport And Newcastle
The London and Edinburgh and Liverpool and Edinburgh services cover the same route, at a doubled frequency of two tph.
Liverpool And Newcastle
The Liverpool and Edinburgh service covers the same route, at the same frequency of one tph.
Liverpool And Scarborough
I didn’t put this in thew original proposed schedule, so it would need to be added at one tph.
Manchester Piccadilly And Hull
The London and Hull and Liverpool and Hull services cover the same route, at an increased frequency of four tph.
Manchester Piccadilly And Huddersfield And Huddersfield And Leeds
These two services, either side of Huddersfield, are effectively local services and could either stay with TransPennine Express or be moved to Northern.
Manchester Airport And Cleethorpes
The Liverpool and Sheffield service covers the same route, at a doubled frequency of two tph, as far as Sheffield.
One tph could be extended to |Cleethorpes.
Manchester Airport And Glasgow Central
If there is a connection between the Northbound West Coast Main Line and Westbound Northern Powerhouse Rail then this service will be possible at the current frequency of one tph.
There would need to be a West-facing terminating platform at Manchester Airport.
Alternatively, this could remain a Classic service.
Manchester Airport and Edinburgh
The London and Edinburgh and Liverpool and Edinburgh services cover the same route, at a doubled frequency of two tph.
Liverpool And Glasgow Central
If there is a connection between the Northbound West Coast Main Line and Eastbound Northern Powerhouse Rail then this service will be possible at the soon-to-be-introduced frequency of one tph.
It could use Liverpool’s High Speed station.
Alternatively, this could remain a Classic service.
New Services
I could also throw in a few other services.
Liverpool And Nottingham
Could a service between Liverpool’s new High Speed station and Nottingham be introduced with a frequency of one tph?
The route would be via Manchester Airport, Manchester Piccadilly and Sheffield on Northern Powerhouse Rail before reversing at Sheffield and travelling to Nottingham via Chesterfield and Alfreton.
Scarborough And Llandudno
Why not?
If the demand is there various services might be viable.
Extra Stations
I think we will also see more station calls, by both High Speed and TransPennine Express trains.
Conclusion
TransPennine Express will be a very different franchise in the future.
Puzzled By New Fleets For TransPennine Express
TransPennine Express (TPE) are replacing all their trains, but their choice of three different new fleets puzzles me.
The new fleets and their routes are as follows.
Nova1
This is a fleet of nineteen five-car bi-mode Class 802 trains.
According to Wikipedia, they will work the following routes, with probably a frequency of one tph
Liverpool Lime Street and Edinburgh via Newcastle, which I estimate will take 4:15 hours
Manchester Airport and Newcastle, which takes around 2:45 hours
These two services would probably need nine for the Edinburgh service and six for the Manchester Airport service.
This means that there are four extra trains.
If there is a spare or one in maintenance, that means that two trains are available to boost capacity on busy services if needed, by running a ten-car train.
I doubt that ten-car services to Manchester Airport could be run through the Castlefield Corridor due to the inadequate stations, but Liverpool and Edinburgh might be a route for longer trains.
I have some observations on Nova1.
- The trains are 125 mph trains, that can be upgraded to 140 mph with in-cab signalling.
- The trains will share the East Coast Main Line with LNER’s Azumas, which are other members of te same family of Hitachi trains.
The trains have been authorised to start running services.
Nova2
This is a fleet of twelve electric Class 397 trains.
According to Wikipedia, they will work the following routes,
- Manchester Airport and Glasgow Central, which takes around 3:30 hours.
- Manchester Airport and Edinburgh, which takes around 3:15 hours.
- New route – Liverpool Lime Street and Glasgow Central, which could take around 3:30 hours.
Currently, the two existing routes run at a frequency of one train per two hours, which would probably need at least seven trains.
This probably means that there will be four trains left for the service between Liverpool and Glasgow, if it assumed there is one train spare or in maintenance.
As a round trip between the two cities, would probably take eight hours, it looks like the frequency will be one train per two hours.
This would give the following services, all with a frequency of one train per two hours.
- Manchester Airport and Glasgow Central via Manchester Piccadilly
- Manchester Airport and Edinburgh via Manchester Piccadilly
- Liverpool Lime Street and Glasgow Central
Passengers wanting to go between Liverpool Lime Street and Edinburgh should keep reading.
I have some observations on Nova2.
- They are 125 mph trains that are replacing the 110 mph Class 350 trains.
- In the next few years, these 125 mph trains will be sharing the West Coast Main Line with faster trains like Class 390 trains and the trains of High Speed Two, both of which should be capable of 140 mph, when running using in-cab signalling.
- I would assume that the trains can be similarly upgraded, otherwise they will have to be replaced.
- There was an option for more trains, but I suspect the success of Class 802 trains on the Great Western Railway led to it not being taken up.,
The trains should come into service later this year.
Nova3
This is a fleet of five-car rakes of Mark 5A coaches, hauled by a Class 68 diesel locomotive.
There are fourteen locomotives and driving van trailers, with enough coaches for thirteen rakes.
I would suspect that TPE are aiming to have twelve trains available for service.
According to Wikipedia, they will work the following routes, which both have a frequency of one train per hour (tph)
- Liverpool Lime Street and Scarborough via Manchester Victoria, which takes around 2:45 hours.
- Manchester Airport and Middlesbrough, which takes around 2:45 hours.
So with turnround at both ends, I suspect that a six hour round trip is possible. So to provide the two hourly services across the Pennines, TPE will need six trains for each route.
This explains a fleet size of twelve operational trains.
I have two observations on Nova3.
- They are diesel-powered and will be running at times on electrified lines. But I suspect the diesel Class 68 locomotive could be replaced in the future with an electro-diesel Class 88 locomotive.
- Questions have been raised about the speed of exit and entry from the coaches through single end doors of the coaches.
- They have an operating speed of only 100 mph, but opportunities for higher speeds on the routes are limited to perhaps thirty to forty miles on the East Coast Main Line.
At least they should be in service within a couple of months.
Why Didn’t TPE Order A Unified Fleet?
To summarise TPE have ordered the following trains.
- Nova1 – Nineteen Class 802 trains
- Nova2 – Twelve Class 397 trains.
- Nova3 – Thirteen trains consisting of four coaches topped and tailed by a a Class 68 locomotive and driving van trailer.
All forty-four trains are five cars.
Surely, it would have been easier for TPE to have a fleet, where all the trains were the same.
I suspect that all routes can be run using Class 802 trains, so it as not as if there are any special requirements for the trains.
So why didn’t TPE order a fleet of Class 802 trains?
I can only think of these reasons.
- Hitachi couldn’t supply the required number of trains in the appropriate time-scale.
- ,CAF made an offer that TPE couldn’t refuse.
It should also be born in mind that Great Western Railway and Hull Trains, which like TPE are First Group companies, went down the Class 802 route.
The Future
There are various issues, that will arise in the future.
Nova2 And West Coast Main Line Operating Speed
The new Nova trains are running on TPE’s Northern and Scottish routes and as I indicated earlier, the Nova2 trains might not be fast enough in a few years time for the West Coast Main Line, which will have Class 390 trains running at 140 mph using in-cab signalling.
High Speed Two will surely make this incompatibility worse, unless CAF can upgrade the Nova2 trains for 140 mph running.
Replacing the Nova2 trains with Class 802 trains, which are being built for 140 mph running, would solve the problem.
Nova3 And Class 68 Locomotives
There are powerful reasons to replace diesel locomotives on the UK’s railways, with noise, pollution and carbon emissions at the top of the list.
As Northern Powerhouse Rail is created, there will be more electrification between Manchester and York, adding to the pressure to change the traction.
- There could be a change of locomotives to Class 88 or Class 93 locomotives, which would run using the overhead electrification, where it exists.
- The trains could be changed to Class 802 trains.
The Class 68 locomotive is increasingly looking like an interim solution. At least, it’s a less polluting locomotive, than the dreaded and ubiquitous Class 66 locomotive.
Class 185 Replacement
TPE will still have a fleet of diesel three-car Class 185 trains.
- They are running on routes between Manchester and Hull and Cleethorpes via Huddersfield, Leeds and Sheffield.
- These are best described as just-about-adequate trains and are one of The Treasury’s boob-buys.
- As Northern Powerhouse Rail is created, they will be increasingly running under wires.
- Could it be likely that more capacity will be needed on routes run by these trains?
- The capacity of a Class 185 train is 169 seats, as opposed to the 342 seats of a five-car Class 802 train.
I think it could be very likely that instead of running pairs of Class 185 trains, TPE will replace them with five-car Class 802 trains.
Conclusion
I very much feel, that over the next few years, TPE’s fleet will change further in the direction of a one-unified fleet!
An Alternative View On HS3
This article on CityMetric is entitled Is Crossrail For The North The Biggest Priority For The North?
The article presents a lot of information and finishes with this paragraph.
None of which is to say that HS3 (I’m sticking with that name) is a bad idea: the existing trans-pennine links are shocking, and it’s pretty gross that transport secretary Chris Grayling scrapped plans to invest in rail in the north in literally the same week he called for another £30bn railway line for London. But if money is scarce, there may be better things we can do with it.
In Lord Adonis On Crossrail Of The North, I came to this conclusion.
Improvements are much-needed in the North, which could include.
- A short/medium term plan to deliver the best possible service with the new trains ordered by Northern and TransPennine Express.
- A long term plan to deliver a genuine 140 mph service across the North of England.
- A plan to improve the Calder Valley and Hope Valley Lines across the Pennines.
- A plan to improve some of the poor connections across the North.
- A strategy to make the best use of the two connections with HS2 at Manchester and Leeds .
A detailed plan is needed that lays down what should be done in the next ten to twenty years.
The plan is also needed as soon as possible.
Perhaps, a high speed route or routes across the North of England could be paired with improved local rail, tram and bus services in all urban areas.
Lord Adonis On Crossrail Of The North
There has been a lot of talk recently about HS3, Northern Powerhouse Rail or Crossrail Of The North.
On Radio 5 Live, this morning, Lord Adonis said a lot of sensible things about the high speed line from Liverpool to Hull via Manchester and Leeds.
His plea was for a plan for a start and he suggested that an objective would be to halve the journey time from Manchester to Leeds and have a train every few minutes.
He suggested it could be probably built using a mixture of new track alignments and existing railways.
I agree with what he said, but the problem is that every Tom, Dick and Harriet has their own ideas of what they want.
How Would I Design Crossrail Of The North?
I can at least look at this without favouring any one of the North’s great urban area.
Urban Areas Of The North
I will list those with populations of over 200,000,, from this list in Wikipedia.
- Manchester – 2,553,379
- West Yorkshire – 1,777,934
- Liverpool – 864,122
- Tyneside – 774,891
- Nottingham – 729,977
- Sheffield – 685,368
- Teeside – 376,633
- Stoke-on-Trent – 372,775
- Sunderland – 335,415
- Birkenhead – 325,264
- Hull – 314,018
- Preston – 313,322
- Blackpool – 239,409
- Barnsley – 223,281
Urban areas with populations between 100,000 and 200,000 include Wigan, Mansfield, Warrington, Doncaster, York, Burnley, Blackburn, Grimsby, Accrington, Burton, Lincoln and Chesterfield.
Some of the connections between pairs of these areas are truly dreadful despite being only fifty or so files apart.
Northern Connect
I would think it reasonable that all these centres of population have good, preferably direct, connections between them.
Northern obviously think this way as they are creating a concept called Northern Connect, using new Class 195 trains to connect many of these areas with a quality service.
The North TransPennine Routes
TransPennine operate these North Pennine routes.
- 1 train per hour (tph) – Liverpool Lime Street to Newcastle
- 1 tph – Manchester Airport to Middlesbrough
- 1 tph – Manchester Airport to York
- 1 tph – Liverpool Lime Street – Scarborough
- 1 tph – Manchester Piccadilly to Hull
Note that the opening of the Ordsal Chord iin a few months, might change the routing of some of these services.
All of these services use the Huddersfield Line between Manchester and Leeds, stopping at both Huddersfield and Leeds stations.
Manchester Victoria To Leeds
As Lord Adonis said, the important section is between Manchester Victoria and Leeds stations.
I’ll start with a comparison of a series of rail journeys, all of which are about the same length.
- The fastest trains between Manchester Victoria and Leeds take forty-nine minutes, with a stop at Huddersfield, and are just 1 tph
- Norwich to Ipswich in a couple of years, will take 30 minutes at a frequency of 3 tph.
- Glasgow to Edinburgh currently takes about fifty minutes, at a frequency of 4 tph.
- Cardiff to Swansea currently takes 52-54 minutes, at a frequency of 2 tph.
It does seem that the North has a point if two of East Anglia’s larger cities get a better service than Leeds and Manchester.
The Huddersfield Line And The Great Eastern Main Line Compared
It is also enlightening to compare the Manchester to Leeds Line via Huddersfield to Ipswich To Norwich section of the Great Eastern Main Line.
It should be noted that I’m comparing these two lines, as both have lived on scraps from Central Government for decades. I also know the Great Eastern Main Line well!
- Both lines are double-track.
- Norwich-Ipswich is flat.
- The Huddersfield Line is rather hilly
- Norwich-Ipswich has only two stations and only the occasional slower service.
- The Huddersfield Line has numerous stations and local services.
- Norwich-Ipswich is electrified to a robust standard.
- On the Huddersfield Line, only Manchester to Stalybridge is scheduled for electrification.
- Norwich-Ipswich has a 100 mph speed limit, that could possibly be raised in places.
- I can’t find the speed limit on the Huddersfield Line, but suspect it could be less than 100 mph.
It is truthful to say that the Huddersfield Line is a much more challenging route than the Norwich to Ipswich.
The Effect Of Electrification On The Great Eastern Main Line
It might appear that the electrification of the Great Eastern Main Line makes for the difference in times.
But it should also be remembered that Ipswich to Norwich wasn’t electrified until the mid 1980s and if I remember correctly before that date, the fastest expresses were timed at two hours from Norwich to London with just two stops. The fastest services now are ten minutes under two hours with four stops.
With the introduction of the new Class 745 trains, timings of ninety minutes have been promised to the Department for Transport.
Timings did not drop significantly with the electrification in the mid-1980s, Services just became more reliable with more stops, as electric trains can accelerate better.
The decrease in timings over the next few years will be down to the following.
- Removal of bottlenecks like Trowse Bridge.
- Increase in speed limits.
- Trains with a shorter dwell time at stations.
- Trains with better acceleration and braking.
- Improved track and signalling.
- All passenger trains on the line will have the same performance.
I will be very interested to see what timings, the Class 745 trains eventually achieve!
Electrifying Between Leeds And Manchester Victoria Stations
It looks like the electrification between Manchester Victoria and Stalybridge stations will be complete by the end of this year.
The central section of the route is problematical with the Grade 1 Listed Huddersfield station and large numbers of bridges.
In TransPennine Electrification And Piccadilly Upgrade Now Also In Doubt, I came to these conclusions about electrifying the route.
-
Electrification would not go anywhere near Huddersfield, as the heritage lobby and their lawyers would have a field day.
-
Standedge and Morley tunnels are over 2,000 metres long, double track and Standedge is level. If they needed refurbishment in the future, perhaps they could be electrified with an overhead rail, so that bi-modes could have a couple of miles of electricity.
-
Electrification might be extended at the Manchester and Leeds ends of the line, so that the two cities could improve their local suburban electric networks.
-
An alternative would be that the Leeds and Manchester suburban electric networks were provided with a few Class 769 trains or even some brand new four-car bi-modes.
-
Services between Leeds and Manchester would be run by fast bi-modes.
Is there a more difficult stretch of possible electrification in the UK?
The Ultimate Bi-Mode Train
Currently four bi-mode trains are planned for introduction into the UK.
- Hitachi Class 800 trains and Class 802 trains.
- Stadler Class 755 trains
- Porterbrook Class 769 trains
Note.
- Two hundred and eleven bi-mode trains have been ordered.
- Nineteen Class 802 trains have been ordered for TransPennine routes.
In Do Class 800/801/802 Trains Use Batteries For Regenerative Braking?, I look at the prospect of using energy storage in Hitachi’s bi-mode trains.
The Class 802 train is probably something like the ultimate bi-mode train.
- 125 mph using electrification.
- 100 mph under diesel power
- Regenerative braking at all times using energy storage.
- Automatic pantograph raising and lowering.
- Sophisticated in-cab signalling.
Obviously, interior fitment would be up to the operator.
Class 195 Trains
Northern is acquiring 25 x two-car and 30 x three-car Class 195 trains.
These are 100 mph trains, so it must be a good idea to make sure all Northern services that use the same routes as TransPennine services are run by these faster trains.
Short/Medium Term – A Classic Manchester Victoria To Leeds Route
TransPennine Express are already planning to run Class 802 trains between Liverpool and Newcastle via Manchester and Leeds. It looks to me, that whoever plans their train policy, saw the electrification crisis coming.
I wonder what times they can achieve between Leeds and Manchester Victoria, if the following were to be done.
- Stalybridge to Manchester Victoria electrification is complete.
- Track and signalling is the best it can be.
- The route has a 100 mph operating speed.
- All trains on the route are 100 mph capable.
- Northern replaces their scrapyard specials with Class 195 trains.
The reason for the same operating speed of 100 mph, enables trains to follow each other in a stream. It could be 90 mph, if that was easier for the route.
Station dwell times can also be reduced.
Due to overcrowding, the TransPennine dwell times, must currently be some of the worst in the UK.
This is typical at Huddersfield.
Not even the Japanese with their pushers could get this to work.
But a modern train like the Class 802 train with wide lobbies and adequate capacity should cope.
So what time could be possible, if everything goes as planned?
If Norwich to Ipswich which is about the same distance as Leeds to Manchester, can be achieved in thirty minutes, I believe it is possible that the Northern route could be achieved in the same time or perhaps thirty-five minutes.
Thirty-five minutes should be adequate for a few years, if say there was a train every ten minutes!
Long Term – A Genuine High Speed Manchester Victoria To Leeds Route
I’ve flown my virtual helicopter between Manchester and Leeds and it is not flat agricultural land like seventy percent of the route of HS2.
I believe that creating a genuine high speed route, with say a 140 mph top speed across the Pennines will be a major engineering challenge that will make Crossrail in London look easy.
It may even be more economic to develop 140 mph hydrogen-powered tilting trains, that can run on the classic route at 125 mph.
Only one thing matters to passengers; a fast reliable and very comfortable and affordable train service across the country.
Manchester Victoria To Manchester Airport
When the Ordsall Chord opens any Leeds to Manchester Victoria service can continue to Deansgate, Oxford Road, Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport stations.
Manchester Victoria To Liverpool
Currently, services between Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Victoria stations take a few minutes over half-an-hour.
I would suspect that thirty minutes is achievable, if the following is done.
- The four-tracking at Huyton is completed.
- Track and signalling is the best it can be.
- The route has a 100 mph operating speed.
- All trains on the route are 100 mph capable.
- Northern replaces their scrapyard specials with Class 195 trains.
I suspect all of this is in progress.
Note, this is very similar work, to that needed between Manchester and Leeds.
Leeds To Hull
Currently, services between Leeds and Hull stations take a few minutes under an hour.
A few thoughts on the route.
- The Selby Line from Leeds to Hull is double-track and not electrified.
- From my virtual helicopter, it appears to be straight in very flat country, so it is no wonder Hull Trains offered to electrify the line.
- If the Selby swing bridge were to be sorted, it could become a 100 mph line with trains to match.
- Northern replaces their scrapyard specials with Class 195 trains.
- Modern in-cab signalling.
I suspect quite a few minutes could be taken off this route which is about fifty miles.
I suspect this line will eventually be electrified, as it could give sound time savings and it looks relatively easy.
York To Scarborough
Currently, services between York and Scarborough stations take forty-nine minutes, with one tph.
- Similar improvements to the double-track unelectrified line as for the Leeds to Hull route, could be made.
- But if the line has a problem , it is that it has 89 level crossings, although Network Rail intends to close them all before 2025.
I wonder, if the time can be reduced between York and Scarborough, such that two tph can be timetabled.
I doubt York to Scarborough will be electrified.
Northallerton To Middlesbrough
This short line is quite heavily used and is a valuable diversion route, so I suspect nothing urgent needs to be done.
Like Leeds to Hull, I suspect this line will eventually be electrified.
Conclusions
I have come to the following conclusions.
- Manchester Victoria to Leeds is achievable in half-an-hour with the new trains on order and no major infrastructure, other than that already planned.
- Any line where TransPennine Express services run needs to have the highest possible operating speed and no slow trains.
- Northern need to get their Class 195 trains into service as soon as possible.
Improvements are much-needed in the North, which could include.
- A short/medium term plan to deliver the best possible service with the new trains ordered by Northern and TransPennine Express.
- A long term plan to deliver a genuine 140 mph service across the North of England.
- A plan to improve the Calder Valley and Hope Valley Lines across the Pennines.
- A plan to improve some of the poor connections across the North.
- A strategy to make the best use of connections with HS2.
A detailed plan is needed that lays down what should be done in the next ten to twenty years.
The plan is also needed as soon as possible.
HS2 Potential To Northern Connectivity Not To Be Underestimated, Says Percy
This is the title of an article in Rail Technology Magazine.
Rail and road connectivity is not a simple matter.
Although there is a need for East-West routes across the North, there is also the need for better High Speed Rail connections between pairs of cities like.
- Newcastle and Leeds
- Leeds and Nottingham
- Sheffield and Nottingham
- Birmingham and Manchester
- Leeds and Sheffield
- Birmingham and Leeds.
- Birmingham and Preston
All these connections will be provided by HS2.
Of the other major links that are needed.
- Manchester and Sheffield
- Manchester and Leeds
- Blackpool and Leeds
- Leeds and Hull
- Liverpool and Manchester
The first three are very difficult because of the terrain.
Because Leeds has good High Speed Rail connectivity to the cities East of the Pennines via HS2, the Leeds-Manchester route is probably the most important.
As High Speed Rail is a long term project, it will tend to grow, where the returns and needs are greatest.
Expanding Manchester Piccadilly Station
This announcement on the Government web site is entitled Put HS3 at the heart of a High Speed North – Adonis.
This is an extract.
Recommendation six: Proposals for the redevelopment of Manchester Piccadilly station should be prepared jointly by TfN, Transport for Greater Manchester, Manchester City Council, Network Rail, DfT and HS2 Ltd.
These organisations should work to together to deliver:
a) Detailed plans for the new east-west platforms 15/16 to facilitate delivery early in Control Period 6 and unlock the development potential of the Mayfield site;
b) A masterplan for the longer-term development of Manchester Piccadilly station as a whole, incorporating capacity for HS2 services and options for the delivery and timing of platform capacity for HS3; and
c) Proposals for funding and financing the station redevelopment, including for private sector and local contributions.
I know Manchester Piccadilly station well and it has multiple space problems. These pictures illustrate some of the problems on the North side of the station.
You have lots of short trains and long platforms, which means the following.
- Passengers have to walk long distances.
- There is confusion of which train to take with more than one in the platform.
- It must be a nightmare for train operators and their staff.
Surely some reorganisation could improve this mess, that was probably designed by Topsy.
On the South side of the station, there are two of the most crowded platforms in the UK. Platforms 13/14 need a serious sorting out.
Currently, services from Platform 13 seem to go to the following.
- Huddersfield
- Leeds
- Manchester Airport
- Norwich
- Scarborough
- Sheffield
- York
And from Platform 14 to the following.
- Blackpool
- Edinburgh
- Liverpool
- Southport
Most of the services seem to be provided by TransPennine Express and I think it is true to say, that when and if the Ordsall Chord is opened, there will be a sorting out of services on these two platforms.
But I do feel that the solution is Network Rail’s preferred one of adding platforms 15/16. They can’t be built soon enough, to ease the overcrowding.
This Google Map shows the layout of Manchester Piccadilly station.
The current Platforms 13/14 are along the bottom of the station, connected to the main station by the two small bridges. I would assume that the two new platforms will go on the south side of 13/14.
Wikipedia gives more details of developments related to the Northern Hub and HS2.
It is going to be a tight fit to get all the lines and platforms into the area.
The more I look at the station, the more I tend to think that the Picc-Vic Tunnel might have been a good solution.
It makes me wonder if it would be more efficient for HS2 and HS3 to share a route through Manchester from the Airport to Victoria and on to Huddersfield and Leeds. It would need to be mainly in tunnel and could go right under the city with underground stations. I wrote about it in Rethinking HS2 And HS3.
Surely, if two high speed lines are to go through Manchester, they should share a route?
I have also received this image from a reader; Ben.
Ben’s plan illustrates some advantages of a cross-city tunnel, which probably include.
- Less demolition at stations served by HS2.
- HS2 and HS3 could probably share platforms.
- Release of platforms at Piccadilly.
- A station in the centre of the city.
- Better links to the trams and local train services
- Ability to continue in tunnel towards Huddersfield and Leeds.
Remember that we’ve improved our tunnelling capability by a large amount in recent years.
Crossrail in London has also developed station designs and layouts, that could be used in Manchester.
- Massive double-ended stations to effectively serve two separate locations.
- Lines and station layouts to ease and encourage same platform interchange.
- Moving walkways and inclined lifts, where necessary to ease passenger movement.
- Island platforms to ease interchange between directions and branches, as at Whitechapel.
So could the most passenger friendly station, just called Manchester, be built under the city?
I don’t think that the current plans for Piccadilly, which are just so much conservative dross will be realised, as someone will come up with something much better. But then recommendation six encourages that!
Rethinking HS2 And HS3
There is an article on the Rail News web site entitled Sheffield-Leeds HS2 route ‘to be shared with HS3’.
The article bases their article on a document called Rolling Stock Perspective, published by the Department of Transport and comes to the conclusion, that HS2 and HS3 may share tracks between Leeds and Sheffield.
In a post, which I called Whither HS2 and HS3?, I suggested HS2 and HS3 shared tracks between Manchester Interchange (Airport), Manchester and Leeds, and also said that both HS2 and HS3 should serve Leeds and Sheffield. So I might have got it right!
The one thing, I did get right in that post was the last statement.
The one thing we mustn’t do is build HS2 as it is currently designed, as we can do much better than is proposed.
Certainly, it appears that there is a lot of serious thinking going on in the design of HS2 and HS3. Today it was about linking HS2 and HS3, whereas yesterday it was about linking HS1 and HS2.
Who knows what idea will turn up next?















