Thought it was about time we had a British thread. Here's my contribution from Manchester.

Some shots from Piccadilly Station, Manchester
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/079.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/078.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/076.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/075.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/077.jpg

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f335/markydeedrop/b3e5d6a6.jpg

Some shots from the East Lancashire Railway, Bury
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/587b65f2.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/f94afd47.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/55048dae.jpg

very nice!

Hah, I just found out I haven't taken one single picture of a British train, except for the Tube.

But here are the few stations I do have pictures of:

London Waterloo. A huge station that always managed to be crowded. This is not during peak, or anything. Say hi to the couple in the front of that picture, they're friends of mine.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/244/528409452_1ced04adee_o.jpg

Kensington Olympia station, served by London Underground and trains running from Clapham Junction to Willesden Junction - so not that many, really. Will probably become a bit busier once the London Overground calls here. I sort of like how dark this picture is.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1037/528494383_367529062e_o.jpg

The view from my good-old - rundown but still lovely - local station, Harringay.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/191/448670040_4bc37bf737_o.jpg

I used to live on Wightman lane near Haringay station so it was my local one too, it didnt have a ticket machine for years meaning you'd end up in the underground system without a ticket (when the trains when to Moorgate). A bit naughty really, I used to always have to beg at the other end that I wasnt a fare evader, I just had no way to buy a ticket!

The ticket machine almost never seems to work, even now. When the ticket office isn't open that means that I'll just ride for free and touch in at Finsbury Park or Highbury and Islington, where I change for the Underground. I rarely actually see a ticket inspector that can sell me tickets on this route either.

My sister lived in Cavendish Street, Harringay when she lived in London back in the early 90s. Do you know it? Is it a good street? Is Harringay a good area?

Hah, I walk through that street all the time. I think it's an excellent area, although don't tell everyone or our rents will be going up. :)

The train station has 6tph off-peak to Moorgate or King's Cross, depending on the time of the day. It's just 90 seconds to get to Finsbury Park, where you can change for the Victoria/Piccadilly. There is no tube station in Harringay, but Manor house isn't that far a walk. Furthermore there's Harringay Green Lanes, which should be becoming a more attractive station with the frequency doubling and services all the way to Clapham Junction some time soon. And a whole bunch of buses along Green Lanes, most notably the 29, which runs every 4 minutes or so during the day, every 10 minutes all night long.

Green Lanes is the main street, and it's always alive. It's full of Polish and other Eastern-European shops that are open all night long in many cases. There's the 24 hour Sainsbury's, and 24 hour McDonald's, too.

It's a bit on the rough side, but I've never really had a problem, to be honest. The population seems to be a good mix of people from all around the world, although the focus these days is on Eastern Europeans.

National Express takes over GNER train operations
Filed 10/12/07

http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/download/10195/NatExpress-logo.jpg

http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4579

http://www.nationalexpresseastcoast.com/img/contentHeaderPhoto.jpg
New Look East Coast Trains with the New National Express Logo.

Britain's second largest transport company has taken over the operation of trains on one of the UK highest profile rail routes.

National Express East Coast succeeded GNER yesterday (9 December), gaining responsibility for running trains between London King's Cross and Aberdeen, Durham, Edinburgh, Leeds, Newcastle, Peterborough and York.

The new franchise, which is due to continue until 31 March 2015 with the last 17 months dependent on performance targets, will see National Express spend nearly £44m in an attempt to grow the business in order to pay £1.4bn back to the Department for Transport during the next eight years. The franchise is expected to generate total annual revenue of £600m in its first full year. Group chief executive Richard Bowker said: "We are privileged to be taking over inter-city East Coast, Britain's premier railway, which is known for the quality of its service by its many loyal customers. Our combined strengths of industry-leading operational performance, excellent customer service, innovation and sheer hard work give us confidence that we can make National Express East Coast a truly world class railway."

Immediate changes to the service will see WiFi internet access provided free in standard as well as first class carriages and a 100-day joint improvement plan, agreed with Network Rail, designed to significantly improve the punctuality of services. Within months of launch, on-board catering will feature a more contemporary range of dishes and snacks, complementing the option of restaurant dining, with hot food served at seat in standard class.

National Express plans innovations in ticketing and information to make it easier for customers to buy tickets and plan journeys more effectively. Proposals include real-time running information accessible by mobile phone; print at home tickets; a website which will enable total journey booking including parking and onward connection in a single visit, and smartcard ticketing. On Sunday (9 December) the GNER website, which has become familiar to customers during the past 11 years, was displaying an error message rather than forwarding visitors to the new National Express site.

From 2010, with the addition of five more trains to the East Coast fleet, there will be a further 25 services providing 14,000 extra seats each weekday. London-Leeds journeys will fall to two hours and London-York 1 hour 45 minutes, while the London-Edinburgh services journey time will be reduced to less than 4 hours 20 minutes on key services. At stations more than £10m will be spent to improve waiting rooms and information provision, increase CCTV cover, add more cycle spaces and increase car parking by 33%.

The company says it is aiming to make East Coast Britain's greenest railway. A predicted 17% reduction in fuel consumption will be targeted across the entire service and a number of stations will gain water conservation measures and wind turbines.

The business will be run by a management team based in York and led by managing director David Franks, who also retains his role as head of National Express Trains Division.

The launch of the new franchise marks the end of an era on the East Coast Main Line. GNER operated East Coast services since 1996 and became widely regarded as one of the most successful train operators created by Britain's newly-privatised rail industry. However, despite successfully winning a closely-fought new franchise term in 2005, financial problems at parent company Sea Containers and crippling subsidy payments forced it to hand back control of operations to the government, which has allowed it to run trains under a management contract until the handover to National Express.

National Express Group has also completed the purchase of Sea Containers Rail Services (SCRS) Ltd call centre at Newcastle. Under the terms of the deal more than 200 employees at the centre, in Baron House, and the assets will transfer to a new company, National Express Services Ltd, which will be a subsidiary of the National Express Group.






:)

The New National Express Website - http://www.nationalexpresseastcoast.com/











:)

To my knowledge, National Express used to own M>Train in Melbourne as part of the suburban rail network there. They didn't do a very good job apparently so lets hope they manage the east coast routes better!

To my knowledge, National Express used to own M>Train in Melbourne as part of the suburban rail network there. They didn't do a very good job apparently so lets hope they manage the east coast routes better!

National Express already run a host of other rail services in the UK such as C2C and the Gatwick Express.

More about the NXEC Rolling Srock etc- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Express_East_Coast












:)

To my knowledge, National Express used to own M>Train in Melbourne as part of the suburban rail network there. They didn't do a very good job apparently so lets hope they manage the east coast routes better!

National Express pulled out midway through the M>Train, M>Tram and V/Line contracts and probably the worst thing they did was neglect to train enough drivers, which has left Melbourne with a large shortage of train drivers. That said, they did do some good things, like unify weekday and weekend evening timetables.

Connex has done a much better job in Melbourne, as opposed to their track record in the UK though.

well lets hope they will bring in new routes and such to places with currently no rail service though

and lets hope they will manage better in a way

That livery would probably look quite good on a modern high speed train (not to be confused with a Class 43 High Speed Train!)...

well lets hope they will bring in new routes and such to places with currently no rail service though

and lets hope they will manage better in a way

The UK has quite good rail coverage, although we could do with even better coverage and high speed track on major routes.

http://www.looking-glass.org/My%20Rail%20Map%202.gif

Actually the 125's are looking great, and the new colour scheme is looking good. The whole 125 fleet has just had completely new engines fitted, and are much more enviromentally friendly
and much more economical to run. The 125 has been a great train and it will be sad to see it go during the next decade.

More Pics from Flickr

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2020/2100137581_db0058d8a3_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2025/2100918124_52eb0d559e_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2318/2105880682_9818b3f339_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2256/2105108575_187826b0de_b.jpg

Eurostar - UK

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2104/2034935105_373c587d87_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1021/1355635863_284ad05118_b.jpg

The GNER Class 90/91 Trains (picture in the large photo below) which make up the vast majority of the East Coast Fleet, will all be repainted with the new National Express Livery (small photo below).

http://www.nationalexpresseastcoast.com/img/contentHeaderPhoto.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2236/2004788503_62552c05ef_b.jpg

I like the new livery. It's clean. The nose lets it down though. It's almost like the design was only though of looking from the side, little thought was given to the front or three-quarter views.

I like the new livery. It's clean. The nose lets it down though. It's almost like the desing was only though of looking from the side, little thought was given to the front or three-quarter views.

The front of the train is always high visability yellow for safety reasons.

The 125 HST's have very squat noses and aren't the best looking trains, however they have been excellent workhorses and are prefered by passengers to the much more cramped DMU's.

The Class 90/91's always look good, and I look forward to seeing more of them repainted in the coming weeks.

Amongst the shortlist for the The Intercity Express Replacement Programme is Hitachi, who are also due to start running services in Kent in 2009
and the Olympic Services in 2012 with their Class 395 Javelin.

Hitachi Javelin

http://www.hitachi.com/New/cnews/071002.jpg







:)

Of course they must be yellow, but if you look at the classic HST nose a larger portion of the front was yellow, not just the width of the window. As NX have done it it gives it a bit of an odd visual accentuation. I prefer FGW's yellow

From wikipedia (photo by Chris McKenna):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/FGW_43009_eastbound_from_Bristol_Parkway_2006-05-03_01.jpg


The classic Intercity executive was better too. But I still love the old blue and white with a yellow end that absolutely everything had in the early 80s (just on the HSTs though)

Of course they must be yellow, but if you look at the classic HST nose a larger portion of the front was yellow, not just the width of the window. As NX have done it it gives it a bit of an odd visual accentuation. I prefer FGW's yellow

The classic Intercity executive was better too. But I still love the old blue and white with a yellow end that absolutely everything had in the early 80s (just on the HSTs though)

I can't say I have very strong views on how much yellow is on the front of the train. I agree though that the HST has been a good train and an excellent workhorse :okay:

Hehe, neither do I really!!! It's funny what you end up getting into discussions with on the internet!

I must say the new livery has grown on me. The grey actually looks quite swish.

I must say the new livery has grown on me. The grey actually looks quite swish.

I totally agree :okay:

Hehe, neither do I really!!! It's funny what you end up getting into discussions with on the internet!

Good Train though, and with a small British nose unlike those French trains with their big French Noses. :lol:

I must agree in that I think the new livery looks very swish and refreshing!

That being said the 125's do look quite good, although I hope to see the Hitachi Olympic Javelin or ICE3 running on the lines at some point soon!

The Class 90/91's should also look great when they are all repainted with the new livery :okay:

http://www.nationalexpress.com/nx_ims/nxtrains.jpg

I must agree in that I think the new livery looks very swish and refreshing!

That being said the 125's do look quite good, although I hope to see the Hitachi Olympic Javelin or ICE3 running on the lines at some point soon!
Really? The Hitachi trains might be fast, but they're commuter trains, not long distance trains. They wouldn't be comfortable enough for such a long ride.

Really? Shocking. What alternatives are there?

They won't be that bad - even the long distance (2+2) electrostars have decentish seats (though the 2+3 layouts are awful) - they won't downgarde the comfort on the IKF for commuters to pay a premium for. But Amirtaheri - if you're talking about new trains then if further 395s were to be procured for north of London routes there's no reason why they couldn't have luxury seating spec.

True. They do look like a fine train :) Though I guess the proof will be in the pudding!

The Intercity Express Programme is yet to be decided, although there is now a shortlist.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/iep/iepshortlist

As well as the valuable Southeastern contract, Hitachi was also shortlisted by the government earlier in the month to compete to build a new generation of intercity express trains for Britain's rail network that will come into full operation in 2015.

Hitachi Europe is competing against Alstom-Barclays Rail Group and the Express Rail Alliance (a consortium comprising Bombardier Transportation, Siemens, Angel Trains and Babcock & Brown) — will be invited to submit its proposal next summer, with the award of the contract scheduled for winter 2008-09.




:)

Really? The Hitachi trains might be fast, but they're commuter trains, not long distance trains. They wouldn't be comfortable enough for such a long ride.

Yes and no... They might be commuter trains but they'll be running along the fastest stretch of railway in the country and there are only two intermediate stops between Ashford and London (Ebbsfleet and Stratford).

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/7654/dsc00238sd8.jpg
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/3326/dsc00239xa2.jpg

Taken by me on 22.04.2008

Why are suburban stations so crummy compared to Tube stations?

*delete*

the majority of suburban station were built back in the 19th and early 20th centuries and have been exposed to all that british weather throws at them, add a poor maintenance and refurbishment programme and you get what we are stuck with now.

Tube stations have the protection of metres of earth around them so don't look quite so messy, as with comments on many other threads.

We need to invest in what we have but moneys is diverted to more pressing matters like the war in iraq etc..

until the government gets serious about public transport as a way to reduce our carbon footprint nothing will happen - just look at the birmingham new street debacle.

Two interesting recent reports into the recent (and historic) growth of the British railway network:

http://www.atoc-comms.org/admin/userfiles/Billion%20Passenger%20Railway%20090408.pdf

http://www.atoc-comms.org/admin/userfiles/10%20YEAR%20GROWTH%20REPORT-1.pdf

Passenger numbers are at their highest since 1946 (and when the figure goes higher this year again it will likely be the highest of all time) and freight is also massively up from 10 years ago. The network infrastructure itself may not be growing as fast (though it is growing incrementally) but numbers using the railways is soaring.

Tube stations have the protection of metres of earth around them so don't look quite so messy, as with comments on many other threads.

Overground Tube stations look tonnes better, too.

great photos of the British railway system its an honor because it was the first nation to have a Railway network in history.

Photos can be found in vast quantity on enthusiasts' sites -

http://daviddawson.fotopic.net/

www.jacksrailwayphotos.fotopic.net/

:)

At Folkstone Harbour -

http://www.railforums.co.uk/gallery/albums/userpics/11128/DSCF9055_800_600.JPG

Sadly not one of mine!

A selection of vids -

Some from the Great Western mainline, the first line in the UK to go 125mph, all diesel.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2mD4i6jxxBY&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2mD4i6jxxBY&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

This is theEast Coast Main Line at Balne, the second route to have 125mph trains. In fact some of it is 140mph, but for various reasons nthe electric trains that can do it only go 125mph.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C_NwdoVgWzQ&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C_NwdoVgWzQ&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

this is at Hensall on the east coast mainline - plenty of 125 mph trains - including 3 different diesel types. We're a stupid country having 4 or 5 different types of high speed diesels, but they're noisy and that's good :)
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2Fpool6GOzA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2Fpool6GOzA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

West Coast Mainline, showing off the tilt technology of the Pendolinos at 125mph.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D40gvPWNx1c&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D40gvPWNx1c&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Probably the most powerful steam powered train I've ever seen, powering up one the most notoriously difficult climbs - 1 in 70 for over 10 miles up to Shap summit, it passes pendolino going the other way.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6g9yCN6mjEw&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6g9yCN6mjEw&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

And last, but not least, Eurostar at 186mph in the Kent countryside.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rmeplPanYT8&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rmeplPanYT8&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

And blasting through the outskirts of Ashford.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u1nH0YPVuWs&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u1nH0YPVuWs&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

I guess there is a good thing about not having a dedicated HSR network, we get to see trains racing through level crossings and platforms at full speed...

Anyone remember this? It's a vid from 1988!

a_AsS_6klHQ

If it's not showing (as it doesn't allow embedding) the video does still exist: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=a_AsS_6klHQ

"We're sorry, this video is no longer available."

great photos of the British railway system its an honor because it was the first nation to have a Railway network in history.

Markydeep's idea to introduce a British thread was inspired since the architecture of the stations it produced were the skyscrapers of their day, and in so doing along with English churches and later cinemas and theatres provided the design and building templates without which our new creations would have a job to exist.

I think he meant "Railways in Britain" rather than the nationalised company of "British Railways" formed after the Second World War. No matter. SSC is going to run out of paper due to this forum anyway!:lol:

The thread is particularly timely since 2008 is forty years exactly since the last official steam trains ran in Britain(August 8 to be precise) so there is going to be a HUGE amount of retrospective info out there on the internet this year.

^^ to get the architectural ball rolling, here's my local station, recently refurbished and looking absolutely glorious. Built 1840, handles 12 million passengers per year on 8 platforms (although 10 can be housed the trackbed has been replaced by a service road between the 7th and 8th platforms)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Brighton_railway_station_-_Sussex_-_England_-_140804.jpg

Thanks for that Elf:)

i can see i'm not going to be able to answer everyone's post-mostly those places in my own area or international stations I have visited personally.

I presume you know about the local history website for your town www.mybrightonandhove.org.uk has mostly etchings on there from before when cameras got sophisticated!

The trains in England go pretty fast! :)

"We're sorry, this video is no longer available."

Actually it is, it just doesn't allow embedding, my mistake.

Go here and watch the 1988 commercial for British Rail. (If it's not showing (as it doesn't allow embedding) the video does still exist: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=a_AsS_6klHQ)

Particularly relevant as it shows the engineering achievements of the network including some of the most famous Victorian era bridges across Britain.

An excellent collection of recent photographs of the British railway network:

http://www.railtalk.eu/magazine/issue21.pdf

We have a great deal of heritage railways and heritage trains on the main railway lines too (and most of our railway network is "heritage" anyway as it was almost entirely built in the 19th Century!). :)

Some previous issues:

http://www.railtalk.eu/magazine/issue19.pdf
http://www.railtalk.eu/magazine/issue20.pdf

London stations, clockwise from Paddington. I've only taken the ones worth showing. Pictures taken from flickr.

Paddington

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2391/1580940627_6ee7bf9d21_b.jpg

St Pancras

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2122/2036238774_2d8eb9639f_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2173/2290626447_744b4ff7a7_b.jpg

Kings Cross (horrible green building will be gone soon)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2167/2277626276_9ec75149ff_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2387/2215930995_3069026f38_b.jpg

Liverpool Street

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3159/2346980832_a5b3ca8c74_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/219/482548980_56bf6559d3_o.jpg

Waterloo

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3119/2488920259_3d2cf51ed7_b.jpg

Victoria

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1253/1421812165_3ea51235c9_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/137/327445525_ddcf7ee482_b.jpg

Some figures I've found out for the fastest journeys out of some of the London terminii.

London - Ashford 56.5 miles - xx53 service from Charing Cross, 2 stops, 60 minutes, average speed 56.5 mph. Highest average speed for South Eastern Trains is on the same service starting from Tonbridge xx30 Tonbridge - Ashford 26.5 miles - 23 minutes speed 69 mph.

London - Brighton 51 miles - xx36 service from Victoria, 2 stops, 51 minutes, average speed 60 mph. Highest average speed for Southern is on the same service starting from East Croydon xx52. East Croydon - Brighton 40.5 miles - 35 minutes speed 69 mph

London - Southampton 79 miles - 1705 from Waterloo - 2 stops - 72 minutes, average speed 66 mph. Highest average speed for South West Trains is on the xx00 service between Woking and Winchester - 41 miles in 33 minutes, speed 75.5 mph

London - Bath - 107 miles - XX00 3 stops 95 minutes, average speed 67.5 mph (which is shockingly bad for 125 mph trains). Highest average speed same service does the 41.5 mile Reading to Swindon stretch in 29 minutes - average speed 86 mph.
The record speed on this route was set on s non-stop service on the 10th April 1979, when the same type of train did the 94 miles from Padington to Chippenham in 50.5 minutes, average speed 111.5 mph.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RDxovQF8Hms&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RDxovQF8Hms&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

How the heck do they read the numbers when the trains are going so fast?!!

A good mixture of diesels and electric trains there. Shows how in GB even on electrified lines diesels are very common.

very nice pictures wow man London Stations are really beautiful i wonder why isn't the japanese stations look like that only a few i seen are that beauitful?

anyways wow man very beautiful stations you can feel when you walk inside of them the feeling like your in greece or something about European's stations like that really give you a good feeling.

very nice pictures wow man London Stations are really beautiful i wonder why isn't the japanese stations look like that only a few i seen are that beauitful?

anyways wow man very beautiful stations you can feel when you walk inside of them the feeling like your in greece or something about European's stations like that really give you a good feeling.

hehe Greece?

We've got some magnificent stations, lots under funded but hopefully this will change. St Pancras is pretty amazing as it is right now.

The stations are indeed really beautiful. What would make them even more beautiful would be a few true HSR trains coming in and out of them throughout the day... :)

The stations are indeed really beautiful. What would make them even more beautiful would be a few true HSR trains coming in and out of them throughout the day... :)

There are HSR trains at St Pancras.

A couple of months ago, a new direct service from Shrewsbury to London started operations, 5 trains per day to and from the capital.

The operator is an open access company called the wrexham, shropshire and marylebone railway company limited which is a joint venture between renaissance trains and Laing Rail (owned by deutsche bahn).

I'm not sure how popular it will be though, the cheapest return ticket is £41 and the journey time is ridiculously slow, 3.5 hours. You can just get an existing service to birmingham then change onto a virgin pendolino and get to london in 2 hours 45 including the transfer. tickets doing it that way can often be less than the £41 that the new service offers so the only way I would use it is at peak times when virgin tickets are expensive.

A couple of months ago, a new direct service from Shrewsbury to London started operations, 5 trains per day to and from the capital.

The operator is an open access company called the wrexham, shropshire and marylebone railway company limited which is a joint venture between renaissance trains and Laing Rail (owned by deutsche bahn).

I'm not sure how popular it will be though, the cheapest return ticket is £41 and the journey time is ridiculously slow, 3.5 hours. You can just get an existing service to birmingham then change onto a virgin pendolino and get to london in 2 hours 45 including the transfer. tickets doing it that way can often be less than the £41 that the new service offers so the only way I would use it is at peak times when virgin tickets are expensive.

Is this the service you are allowed to get off at Wolverhampton but not supposed to be allowed to get on?:ohno:

Travelling by steam from Shrewsbury would have been much better anyway in the days whichI recall:-

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10451717&wwwflag=2&imagepos=9

:)

The thread is particularly timely since 2008 is forty years exactly since the last official steam trains ran in Britain(August 8 to be precise) so there is going to be a HUGE amount of retrospective info out there on the internet this year.

Of all operations believe it or not London Underground were the last to use steam as a matter of course, until 1971 when the two ex-GWR pannier tank engines stationed at Neasden were withdrawn. I guess the 8th August 1968 date refers to BR passenger services?


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/LT-L95-Neasden-1961.JPG

Yes, thats it to be more precise:)

News from http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/4926.aspx



Train punctuality reaches all time high in a year of improvement on Britain's railways

Record levels of train punctuality coupled with record levels of investment and further cost cutting are the hallmarks of the past 12 months as Network Rail today published its preliminary results for the year to 31 March 2008.

Train punctuality is at its highest ever, with 89.9% of trains arriving on time in the year 2007/8, and by the end of April 2008 this figure had exceeded 90% for the first time since records began*.

Unveiling the results, chairman Ian McAllister said: "Overall, the last year has been a good one for Network Rail and the industry as a whole, with passengers seeing a better service.

"Train performance is at an all time high, a £4bn investment programme has been delivered, delays caused by the infrastructure have been cut and costs have also been reduced.

"No form of transport is safer than rail and record levels of investment are being pumped into the network, with a doubling of spending on schemes designed to build a bigger, better railway to help meet the growing demands of passengers and freight users.

"In addition, lessons have been learnt following the engineering overruns at New Year. Changes have been made to make the planning and execution of such big improvement schemes more robust.

"Alongside maintaining high levels of safety and train punctuality, Network Rail has continued to make savings, with the costs of running the railway seeing a further £178m reduction, in real terms, this year."
Performance results

* Train punctuality is at its highest level since records began with an average of 89.9% of trains arriving on-time over the period. This compares to 78.6% when Network Rail became infrastructure operator in October 2002
* The significant 90% mark was reached at the end of April 2008 when train punctuality for the previous 12 months reached 90.02%
* Network Rail attributed delays were reduced by one million minutes over the last year. A 10% reduction to 9.5m down from 10.5m - the lowest level for a decade

Financial highlights

* A profit (after tax) of £1.2bn, up from £1bn compared to 2006/7, all of which is reinvested in the railway
* Turnover was £5.96bn, an increase of £165m against the previous year
* Operating profit increased to £2.4bn, up from £2.3bn
* Operating costs (before depreciation) are down by £178m in real terms
* Net debt stands at £19.7bn, up from last year’s £18.4bn

With no shareholders, Network Rail's unique structure enables it to re-invest all of its profits back into the railway. The size of these profits are taken into account and regulated by the Office of Rail Regulation when deciding upon the funding the company needs to carry out its activities.

Group finance director Ron Henderson said: "In financial terms, this year has seen stable profits, with consistent revenues, and costs continuing on a downward trend. Strong budgetary control, together with our improved understanding of the costs bases and drivers, put us in good shape for the challenges ahead in the next control period."

Mr McAllister concluded: "Today's railway is a thriving and successful one. This success has been achieved through close working relationships with our customers - the train operators. They have our commitment to focus on improving the railway for both passengers and freight users.

"At the core of Network Rail's achievements over the past year are its people. In all my years in industry, I have never met a more dedicated and committed workforce."

Just in case anyone is interested - the entire 3000 page British timetable until December this year http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/eNRT/May08/CompleteTimetable.pdf (60Mb)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7467203.stm

Major new rail lines considered

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44767000/jpg/_44767636_railmap.jpg

Five new high-speed main lines crossing the length and breadth of the UK may be built as part of a review of the rail network, Network Rail says.

The network operator will announce on Monday it is to commission a study looking into what could be the largest track build since the 19th century.

The study will consider laying new lines alongside five of the UK's busiest routes by 2025.

They include the East Coast main line and West Coast main line.

The review will also assess the need for high speed trains similar to the French TGV to cope with Britain's growing number of rail users.

In the last decade, passenger numbers have risen by about 40% with more people travelling by rail than at any time since 1946.

In addition, numbers are expected to swell by a further 30% in the next 10 years.

The study being commissioned by Network Rail will look at the service in the post-2014 period, with all options "on the table".

If given the go-ahead, the new lines are likely to run alongside some of the UK's busiest existing routes.

They include the West Coast line to Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow, the East Coast main line to Edinburgh, the Great Western main line to Cardiff and Penzance, the Midland main line to Sheffield and the Chiltern route to Birmingham.

A spokesman for Network Rail said: "We are looking at these five strategic routes. We are possibly looking at new lines.

"There is a huge case to be made for an expansion of the rail network. All options are on the table looking at how we address capacity issues."

Richard Dyer, transport campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: "Expanding Britain's railways by building new high speed lines is potentially very exciting - and could play an important role in weaning Britain off fossil fuels and developing a low carbon economy.

"But the overall impact that this would have on local people and the environment must be carefully considered.

"The UK needs a modern, comprehensive and affordable rail network to provide a real alternative to cars, lorries and short haul flights, and help cut Britain's contribution to global climate change.

"Our creaking railway system desperately requires huge investment to bring it into the 21st century."

Ashwin Kumar, passenger director of independent watchdog for rail users Passenger Focus, said: "We welcome the study. It is extremely important the rail industry anticipates future growth."

originally posted by markydeedrop
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u180/markydeedroppics/078.jpg
Is this Virgin train a diesel pendolino, made at Bombardier, Bruges (Belgium) ?

^^ All UK Pendolinos like that one are electric I think :dunno: they are used on the West Coast Mainline between London and Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow.

Not sure where they were made.

Ok, thank you...

The Pendolino's were manufactured by Alstom in Birmingham, you might be thinking of the class 221 Voyager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_221) which were operated by Virgin (now mostly by the cross country franchise), these were tilting diesel electric trains manufactured by Bombardier.

Although there are still several traditional railway lines maintained at special sites around England, have taken the opportunity of recording that it was 40 years ago this weekend that the last official steam trains ran in this country.

Have chosen from our National Railway Archive a typical railway engineering panorama together with background information; the photo taken just a few months short of termination:-

http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10443439&wwwflag=2&imagepos=19

Maybe I might be still around in ten years time to record the big 50!:)

Some figures I've found out for the fastest journeys out of some of the London terminii.

London - Ashford 56.5 miles - xx53 service from Charing Cross, 2 stops, 60 minutes, average speed 56.5 mph. Highest average speed for South Eastern Trains is on the same service starting from Tonbridge xx30 Tonbridge - Ashford 26.5 miles - 23 minutes speed 69 mph.

London - Brighton 51 miles - xx36 service from Victoria, 2 stops, 51 minutes, average speed 60 mph. Highest average speed for Southern is on the same service starting from East Croydon xx52. East Croydon - Brighton 40.5 miles - 35 minutes speed 69 mph

London - Southampton 79 miles - 1705 from Waterloo - 2 stops - 72 minutes, average speed 66 mph. Highest average speed for South West Trains is on the xx00 service between Woking and Winchester - 41 miles in 33 minutes, speed 75.5 mph

London - Bath - 107 miles - XX00 3 stops 95 minutes, average speed 67.5 mph (which is shockingly bad for 125 mph trains). Highest average speed same service does the 41.5 mile Reading to Swindon stretch in 29 minutes - average speed 86 mph.
The record speed on this route was set on s non-stop service on the 10th April 1979, when the same type of train did the 94 miles from Padington to Chippenham in 50.5 minutes, average speed 111.5 mph.

The fastest current domestic service in the UK is London (Kings Cross) - York (188 miles or 300km) which takes 1 hour 45 minutes - average speed 107.7mph or 172.32 km/h.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7467203.stm

Major new rail lines considered

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44767000/jpg/_44767636_railmap.jpg

Five new high-speed main lines crossing the length and breadth of the UK may be built as part of a review of the rail network, Network Rail says.

The network operator will announce on Monday it is to commission a study looking into what could be the largest track build since the 19th century.

The study will consider laying new lines alongside five of the UK's busiest routes by 2025.

They include the East Coast main line and West Coast main line.

The review will also assess the need for high speed trains similar to the French TGV to cope with Britain's growing number of rail users.

In the last decade, passenger numbers have risen by about 40% with more people travelling by rail than at any time since 1946.

In addition, numbers are expected to swell by a further 30% in the next 10 years.

The study being commissioned by Network Rail will look at the service in the post-2014 period, with all options "on the table".

If given the go-ahead, the new lines are likely to run alongside some of the UK's busiest existing routes.

They include the West Coast line to Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow, the East Coast main line to Edinburgh, the Great Western main line to Cardiff and Penzance, the Midland main line to Sheffield and the Chiltern route to Birmingham.

A spokesman for Network Rail said: "We are looking at these five strategic routes. We are possibly looking at new lines.

"There is a huge case to be made for an expansion of the rail network. All options are on the table looking at how we address capacity issues."

Richard Dyer, transport campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: "Expanding Britain's railways by building new high speed lines is potentially very exciting - and could play an important role in weaning Britain off fossil fuels and developing a low carbon economy.

"But the overall impact that this would have on local people and the environment must be carefully considered.

"The UK needs a modern, comprehensive and affordable rail network to provide a real alternative to cars, lorries and short haul flights, and help cut Britain's contribution to global climate change.

"Our creaking railway system desperately requires huge investment to bring it into the 21st century."

Ashwin Kumar, passenger director of independent watchdog for rail users Passenger Focus, said: "We welcome the study. It is extremely important the rail industry anticipates future growth."

What is the likeliness of this actually being realised? I'm wondering if any of the 'experts' on here have any idea?

I know there's a lot of talk of HSR throughout Britain, and it really is inevitable that it will need to be built sooner or later. But these proposals seem to come and go, and speculation is the only thing that remains. I'd love for there to be a decent HSR system in my home country, I'm just hoping that it will be built and operating before I'm too old to use it.

With so many airlines facing hardship, thousands more passengers using rail, fuel prices going up and environmental issues to consider, any objectively thinking person would realise that this needs to be constructed.

What is the likeliness of this actually being realised?

I think there's a good chance that they will have made a start on High Speed 2 within the next 10 years - initially the London - Birmingham section, followed by an extension to Manchester.

It might be realized more there due to all the taxes on vehicles using petrol that are charged going into London. Also, with England's carbon tax, it is very high in comparison to other nations? This would lead the high-speed rail to gain support since more people might be able to eliminate vehicle usage since long distance train travel could be accomplished in a manner of hours.

Damn, those electric high speed lines should be in service TODAY, not in 17 years. This fucking Iraq War is draining resources from Britain as well I see.

No, it's transport being 17th on the list or whatever of things that voters care about - after health, education, crime, pensions, house prices, the England football results, the EU, immigration, terrorism, charisma of politicians, who killed Diana, fox hunting, who will win Big Brother, unemployment, taxation and finding Maddie* - that means that we don't have an HS2

Because the politicians don't get many votes in it, they don't see it as a priority. Iraq's not really cost that much (OK, more than the transport budget), however no one seems to want to blame funding students through post-16 education, or shoddy management of money in the NHS, or overpaying MPs, or our subsidy of projects in Spain, Ireland, Greece etc over the years. Why is it always Iraq? If we hadn't gone, the money still wouldn't have been put into transport. And we've cost cut on Iraq in shocking ways - what country sends it's troops into a war zone without proper equipment? To be honest, the Americans would have gone anyway, and we'd still be there, doing the same things - peacekeeping and handing over power to the Iraqi state.

*note some of these may not be actual things - transport is about 10th on all three main parties priority list, however - all I've done is added some hyperbole to hammer home the point that the country doesn't care that much about high speed lines - it likes the idea of them, but it's just not important enough to get politicians moving to give us a better transport system.

And if the votors put transport at the top of their agenda they'd have one less thing to maon about, and where would the British be without moaning about something? We'd all die or something. We know the government is too inept to fix the NHS, so we can hammer on at them to fix it safe in the knowledge it will never happen and we can keep moaning. If we don't have transport as well we'll only have the weather, and what with global warming we might run out of things to moan about entirely. We can't have that.

Because the politicians don't get many votes in it, they don't see it as a priority. Iraq's not really cost that much (OK, more than the transport budget), however no one seems to want to blame funding students through post-16 education, or shoddy management of money in the NHS, or overpaying MPs, or our subsidy of projects in Spain, Ireland, Greece etc over the years. Why is it always Iraq? If we hadn't gone, the money still wouldn't have been put into transport. And we've cost cut on Iraq in shocking ways - what country sends it's troops into a war zone without proper equipment? To be honest, the Americans would have gone anyway, and we'd still be there, doing the same things - peacekeeping and handing over power to the Iraqi state.



Britain did not have to send troops or any peacekeeping mission to Iraq. That was a choice the government made. Britain didn't send troops to Vietnam did it?

The money spent on Iraq should be singled out because it was an entirely unnecessary affair based on lies, fabrications, and forgeries.

If the political will existed to send troops to die in an unnecessary war and the funding could be found for it, then goddamnit the political will could have been generated to build those 5 HSR lines.

The solution? VOTE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT!!!!

Britain did not have to send troops or any peacekeeping mission to Iraq. That was a choice the government made. Britain didn't send troops to Vietnam did it?While we chose to enter the war for the offensive stages, we'd still have had to have gone in anyway. We'd have had the choice to help clean up the American's mess, but there's no way we could have said no, seeing as our armed forces are the best trained at peacekeeping (and generally). See also Afghanistan (perhaps more so, and unluckily we got the problem province).The money spent on Iraq should be singled out because it was an entirely unnecessary affair based on lies, fabrications, and forgeries.but it would have been spent anyway, maybe not all of it on defence - some of it may have built a hospital or school. Definitely not an HSR or other such 'luxury' transport item, or transport at all. There wouldn't have been the reasoning "hey, we're not spending money on a war, lets spent the money we would have spent on that on transport" - get out of you fantasy world and live in the real one! There's tons of other wastes of money out there - on over-filled middle management, on computer systems that won't work, on making sure there's profits for companies that have PPPed, etcIf the political will existed to send troops to die in an unnecessary war and the funding could be found for it, then goddamnit the political will could have been generated to build those 5 HSR lines.no it wouldn't: the political will wasn't there to get the government to give money to protect our troops sufficiently - the papers tried to get every solider out there decent body armour, but failed, partially as people like you kept crying on about how we shouldn't spend money on Iraq and partially as Her Majesty's Treasury hates spending money.The solution? VOTE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT!!!!what a group of people who have no ideology I like - a couple of their policies, but not the reasoning behind those policies and I oppose many of their policies on matters I rank higher than the ones where there's more agreement. But then again, they won't get into power anyway, so voting for them wouldn't matter.

The problem you seem to have is that we live in a democracy, and we democratically decided to go to war (and that Government was re-elected after doing that, even though we hadn't found any evidence to suggest that we weren't lied to - it was only it dragging on too long and too many soldiers dying that tipped the balance of opinion). Also that that democracy voted, repeatedly, for a government who's transport policy is basically to hit people with a stick and throw in the occasional carrot if it's really good for business or if it's unavoidable (not that it had any choice, it was that, or people who have the same view, but wear different coloured rosette) - on the basis that they don't really care about transport - they care about 'education, education, education', crime, terrorism and hospitals and so on. Transport is an issue where people feel strongly, but don't consider it important enough.

Unlike you, Average Person isn't going to have a wet dream about 5 HSLs - he might approve, but he'd want to make sure that the NHS and School system is running OK, the country sufficiently policed and defended, that the economy is in good shape and so on first.

Of course, talking about 5 High Speed Lines shows that you don't have a clue - 5 corridors will be covered by 3 lines. What would the point be in a Chiltern HSL if there's already a West Coast one, for instance? You are just a build absolutely everything, absolutely everywhere, infrastructure fetishist, who salivates at the prospect of some new transport link. Not everyone is like you - most people love to feel that children are being well educated, that if they get sick they get decent treatment, that they can feel safe from crime - they don't rank getting from A to B fast highly enough.

I see no reason why good schools, health systems, and transportation cannot be achieved. You place to much value in the knowledge of the average voter. Wasn't it your former PM Churchill who stated that "The greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"?

Why Britain even maintains such a large military is beyond me. Perhaps it is to support whatever foolhardy war America is waging. I thought the days of the British Empire were over? I guess not.

An independent, vigorously investigative, and skeptical press is necessary to keep the voter informed, but alas, the mindless tabloid rags of Rupert Murdoch and the expansion of American TV shows have dumbed down the average Brits' intellect. The UK should avoid becoming more like America. My country sucks. I reckon that Labor was re-elected in 2005 because of other issues, and the Iraq War was not one of them. In the U.S. opponents of the Iraq War were equally enraged at the lack of equipment provided for the troops. Meanwhile, politically connected contractors were receiving no-bid contracts and performing sub-standard work without repercussion. It demonstrated the cronyism of the Bush administration and its militaristic, but not pro-military policies.

Please don't call me uninformed because I erred in a minor semantic matter, not recognizing that the HSR proposal called for THREE lines on five corridors.

^^ The thing is, the WCML and the ECML already have a decent level of service and a decent speed for an "all-stop" train. It's not like there isn't a service in existance already.

All stop train?

I see no reason why good schools, health systems, and transportation cannot be achieved.ever heard of a thing called money? there's just not enough of it...You place to much value in the knowledge of the average voter. Wasn't it your former PM Churchill who stated that "The greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter"?I'm not - democracy does... You are constantly ignoring the fact that the average voter might want better transport, but they don't vote on that issue
Why Britain even maintains such a large military is beyond me.let me see - best training program, lots of peacekeeping experience - we're in demand. If we're not helping the Iraqi or Afghani governments to combat terrorism, then we're helping stop people trafficking, piracy, peacekeeping in areas such as the former Yugoslavia, etc. We're over-stretched and almost need a bigger military to cope with all these requests for our help.
An independent, vigorously investigative, and skeptical press is necessary to keep the voter informed, but alas, the mindless tabloid rags of Rupert Murdoch and the expansion of American TV shows have dumbed down the average Brits' intellect. The UK should avoid becoming more like America. My country sucks.This is getting tiring, you are bordering on racism (and I think you can be racist of your own country) with your hatred of all things American. Britian has a thriving, independent press, though most people don't bother with it, partially because the education system is failing and needs more money put into it...

A recent poll says that Britain is far more anti-American than it should be, mostly due to the media. The lies spouted by the Iranians and Bin Laden have been swallowed hook, line and sinker by Europe, who now have started a few of it's own - that America hates Muslims, that it's awful at climate change (the US has better CO2 reduction than the EU) and so on.
I reckon that Labor was re-elected in 2005 because of other issues, and the Iraq War was not one of them. In the U.S. opponents of the Iraq War were equally enraged at the lack of equipment provided for the troops.in the UK the anti-brigade refused to support our troops, and has consistantly cried "get out of there". Good to see that you also recognise that governments get elected on other issues to war - now apply that to transport, which come below defence.Meanwhile, politically connected contractors were receiving no-bid contracts and performing sub-standard work without repercussion. It demonstrated the cronyism of the Bush administration and its militaristic, but not pro-military policies.which is completely off-topic - the topic is basically at the moment "would it be the case that if the UK didn't go Iraq, these HSLs would be closer to being built" and the answer is "no" despite your protests. Hospitals would have slightly more middle managers who don't really do much and one new hospital.Please don't call me uninformed because I erred in a minor semantic matter, not recognizing that the HSR proposal called for THREE lines on five corridors.No - I used your enthusiasm that 5 lines might get built to show that you are a BAANAE - build absolutely anything near absolutely everywhere - the opposite of a BANANA (build absolutely nothing at-all near anything) - you don't think pragmatically when it comes to it, you'd consider it normal to have two new lines from London to Birmingham. You keep on failing to realise that the average joe doesn't put transport high up it's priorities when voting nationally, and so transport is rather ignored. Just because you love new infrastructure, doesn't mean everyone else is as passionate. Even so, I don't why I can't call you uninformed anyway, seeing as you get a piece of information wrong.

You are naive simply because you fail to grasp the political reality in the UK - the NHS eats all the money (it is the third largest employer in the world), and whatever is left goes into Education and local government, the loose change goes on the police and defence and the stuff down the back of sofa goes into transport. I've explained that average Joe has dictated that it's this way - that ill people get looked after, that children are taught, that the country and it's people are safe from crime and outside threats as priorities and near the bottom of the list of things that the Government should do is allow us to move about quickly and in comfort - as long as we can move about, even if slowly and standing up, it's not too bad.

Britain doesn't have to respond to where its military is "demanded", especially in areas where that demand was fabricated (Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan).

There are two motorways that connect London and Birmingham but no high speed lines? Lack of funds comes from 11 years of horrific Thatcherism and the rightward shift of the Labor Party as a result.

In what ways was my post racist? Is America a distinct color? I hate my government and my nation's culture. As a patriot, I criticize what I disagree with. The Constitution grants me that right.

And America is anti-Muslim. It arbitrarily detained and tortured thousands of Muslim men after 9/11 including U.S citizens and operates torture camps in Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe, in addition to sending suspected terrorists to Middle Eastern allies that practice torture.

There are two motorways that connect London and Birmingham but no high speed lines? Lack of funds comes from 11 years of horrific Thatcherism and the rightward shift of the Labor Party as a result.

The journey time between London and Birmingham by train is currently an hour and a half. The London - Birmingham corridor is incredibly dense as well with numerous towns en route and so there is very little to be saved by investing millions in a service which is perfectly good at present.

1hr 30min is faster than you could drive centre to centre.

Britain doesn't have to respond to where its military is "demanded", especially in areas where that demand was fabricated (Iraq, Kosovo, Afghanistan).all three the demand isn't fabricated - Iraq was initially, however you can't deny that the Iraqi government has needed outside help to counteract the opposition (also outside backed) in this civil war - we're having to bribe the government to allow us to not fight! Afghanistan is also the case that we're supporting the government. Kosovo was to stop what was becoming a genocide (against Muslims). And of course, the UK military doesn't have to answer 'yes' to requests for help. However to say that the UK military is too big is totally absurd. To say that it takes too much money is also absurd, given that it's under-funded. And finally that any money saved in defence would be spent on transport.
There are two motorways that connect London and Birmingham but no high speed lines?no there's not - there's one motorway (the M40) and one motorway that heads nearby en-route to Yorkshire that has a connecting motorway that was always to link the east 'coast' route of the M1 to the west coast route of the M5/M6 (that goes through Birmingham). There's also an HSL (WCML), plus a 100mph+ route (not currently served - Paddington via Oxford and Leamington, as it goes a long way round, and the 75mph Chiltern route is quicker from Banbury).Lack of funds comes from 11 years of horrific Thatcherism and the rightward shift of the Labor Party as a result.no it comes from a Government that sees transport as not really worth funding. Nothing to do with left and right - Thatcher (and Major)'s Government came up with far more radical transport plans - both roads and rail. Labour under Blair and Brown have been absolutely shocking on transport - they've been fighting new infrastructure from day 1. Pretty much everything that has been built in the last ten years, and that which is to be built in the next ten, was scrapped from the programme (may not have had assent, but was in the early stages of planning) in '97 and then brought back on because it just had to be. Billions of pounds were wasted on studies that failed to give the answer that Labour wanted (and therefore done again), even though these studies had been done before '97.
In what ways was my post racist? Is America a distinct color?no, but American is a nation. Racism isn't always about colour, but then you have your US press bias that it is.I hate my government and my nation's culture. As a patriot, I criticize what I disagree with. The Constitution grants me that right.You can't be a patriot if you hate your country (funnily enough, the American bad guys in 24 always use the argument "I'm a patriot" to justify mass murder of American citizens). The constitution grants you the right to oppose the government, it doesn't give you the right to slander all it's citizens.And America is anti-Muslim. It arbitrarily detained and tortured thousands of Muslim men after 9/11 including U.S citizens and operates torture camps in Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe, in addition to sending suspected terrorists to Middle Eastern allies that practice torture.Evidence - a lot of that is just propaganda from the anti-American brigade? And how can you justify such actions as Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan (in the 80s) where America has actively supported and protected Muslims from others - it's not anti-Muslim, it's anti-genocide (shame about Sudan - but that was because it was Muslims doing the genocide) and anti-aggressive-anti-Americanism. They've arrested people in Afghanistan and Iraq because they were fighting against them - it wasn't because they were Muslims, or arbitrary, it just happens to be the case that Islam hates the American way of life. It's shocking the way that many of them have been treated (though there's little evidence of torture, and the few cases that there have been have been dealt with by criminal convictions) - I totally agree with that - however to call America anti-Muslim from that is a joke, a very bad joke. Basically it's doing the same as what's happening in Camp X-ray - you're declaring them guilty before proven so. Those terrorist suspects sent to the Middle East, are returned home - if those countries torture those people, it's not the US's fault. If it were the case that they weren't sent home, you would complain that they were detained in a foreign country...

However, once again, I'm going to assert what this debate is about to try and stop you going off topic for the third time - the right and wrongs of Iraq and American (and British) foreign policy are not relevant - what's relevant is that you have completely failed to back up your argument that "This fucking Iraq War is draining resources from Britain as well I see." It's not really true - a couple of billion extra on the defence budget, and it's definitely not true that these HSRs would have been built if we hadn't gone there - the bit of the budget spent on Iraq would have been spent (if not on decent equipment for the Army, Navy and RAF elsewhere) on hospitals, schools, etc. Not some very nice, 'luxury' transport infrastructure to wizz business men about and allow commuters to have a bit more comfort. I totally want at least a London-Birmingham HSR (because it's needed), however I know that most people aren't as bothered as I am about it, so while it will happen, I'd have to wait.

Why has a thread about British Railways descended into a political discussion? It's a complete yawnfest and you could easily argue about it elsewhere.

The reason there isn't a high speed line in Britain (except for HS1) is because the government are short sighted morons that don't realise the benefits.

Sotonsi - I'd re-evaluate the bit where you say Islam hates the american way of life -I think you mean Islamic fundies - could start a flame war with that!

Not all those who call themselves Muslims follow Islam - many people just the bits that they want to and reject the bits that they don't like. And to be honest, even these liberals would come down pretty harsh on things like sleeping around not only being OK but being almost a good thing, violence being entertainment, getting wasted, greed, etc... OK, it's not quite what America is, but it's what you see from outside.

Islam hates America, most of all, because it's not in the 'house of peace' but the 'house of war' - in other words it hasn't embraced Islam. Most real Muslims, even in places like the UK would agree with that, even if they want to change that peacefully. To disagree with such a thing, while I'm not an Islamic scholar, is to basically not follow Islam. The basic creed about Allah and Mohammed defines Islam - to not say that all other world-views are wrong and declare war against Allah is to deny that creed. It is an exclusive truth-claim - there's no room for the conflicting exclusive truth-claim of relativism. 'Why can't we all get along' doesn't work - simply as you are basically forcing relativism on everyone for that work. There's going to be disagreements, there's going to be various ways in which that disagreement is manifest - the terrorist take the extreme action, others use diplomacy and non-violent protest, still more don't bother trying to resolve the difference and try to ignore it.

I don't want to start a flame war, but I'm disagreeing with many people who call themselves Muslims, but have removed the less appealing bits of Islam (quite rightly) and actually don't follow Islam. Islam clearly is against many of the things that America and the West (more so places like France than America) stand for. I'll ignore all the explanation of Koranic hermeneutics and verses that basically explain that Muslims should be opposed to the modern Western way of life, or they aren't actually Muslims, simply as this isn't the place.

Anyway, back to British Railways...

Is it me, or is Portsmouth-Southampton the most awful intercity journey for it's length? It's very, very slow.

(funnily enough, the American bad guys in 24 always use the argument "I'm a patriot" to justify mass murder of American citizens). The constitution grants you the right to oppose the government, it doesn't give you the right to slander all it's citizens.Evidence - a lot of that is just propaganda from the anti-American brigade? And how can you justify such actions as Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan (in the 80s) where America has actively supported and protected Muslims from others - it's not anti-Muslim, it's anti-genocide (shame about Sudan - but that was because it was Muslims doing the genocide) and anti-aggressive-anti-Americanism. They've arrested people in Afghanistan and Iraq because they were fighting against them - it wasn't because they were Muslims, or arbitrary, it just happens to be the case that Islam hates the American way of life. It's shocking the way that many of them have been treated (though there's little evidence of torture, and the few cases that there have been have been dealt with by criminal convictions) - I totally agree with that - however to call America anti-Muslim from that is a joke, a very bad joke. Basically it's doing the same as what's happening in Camp X-ray - you're declaring them guilty before proven so. Those terrorist suspects sent to the Middle East, are returned home - if those countries torture those people, it's not the US's fault. If it were the case that they weren't sent home, you would complain that they were detained in a foreign country...



It's clear you don't know what you are talking about and choose to read the right-wing Murdoch rags that downplay the criminal and murderous policies of the West towards the Muslim world. Do a little bit of goddamn research and you will find the evidence that corroborates my assertions. THe U.S. government knew exactly what it was doing when it sent suspects to be tortured in Middle Eastern countries. And if those men arrested in Afghanistan were guilty, why were so many later released with many others never being charged? Have you heard of habeus corpus? It is a crucial component of any free society, and both the U.S. and U.K. ignore it now. The U.S. didn't help Muslims in Afghanistan in the 80s. THey sent aid to right-wing religious anti-communist fanatics.

Fundamentalist Islam doesn't hate the American way of life as you so ignorantly claim- they hate how the U.S.: 1) supports unpopular and repressive governments in the region, notably Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan; 2) continues to meddle in the affairs in the region; 3) and steadfastly supports Israeli crimes against the Palestinians and Israeli expansion into the occupied territories.

Here are a few resources to start:

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/torture/renditions.htm

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/rendition.html

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/06/13/usint19126.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-08-09-muslim-american-cover_x.htm

Sotonsi you are being an idiot. Muslim is the participle of the same verb of which Islām is the infinitive. I have many friends who follow Islam and they do not hate America, nothing about their faith would give them cause to do so, some of them even work for an American company with me!!! What the hell are you talking about not all muslims follow Islam?

As in Christianity one the main tenets of Islam is that you do not kill. Before you continue to talk utter crap about billions of people read some history of Islam and you will find out where your misinformed ideas have developed from. I cannot believe you would go on to a public forum and declare Islam "the house of war". What a moron.

Geez.... what the heck does this have to do with Britsh Railways? Come on guys let's leave it before the mods need to hack into this thread with a chainsaw.

Before you continue to talk utter crap about billions of people read some history of Islam and you will find out where your misinformed ideas have developed from. I cannot believe you would go on to a public forum and declare Islam "the house of war". What a moron.I haven't said Islam is "the house of war" - I said that it states that those outside it are in "the house of war". Islam is "the house of peace" according to it's teaching. You are putting words in my mouth, though maybe I was a little bit inelegant and didn't make myself clear.

I also suggest that you look at the history of Islam as well - I have studied it quite a bit and, funnily enough, many of my ideas come from that. My relatively brief studies of the Koran and Hadith, and Koranic hermeneutics (ie what bits have more importance, what it actually means, etc) also have shaped my ideas. I've tried to steer away from anything that should be contraversial in there but the brainwashing of the "Islam doesn't hate us" brigade has got to you, so even asserting what is one the main teachings of Mohammed (get into "the house of peace with Allah" and hate "the house of war against Allah") is contraversial, simply as it doesn't fit in with the many who call themselves Muslims (but aren't) views.

I love Hoosier's second reason as to why the fundies hate America, which is basically "the Islamic fundamentalists hate America as it supports governments that agree with Islamic fundamentalism" :lol: Even an American like Hoosier should be able to see the irony there that shows it to be bull. The fundamentalists hate those outside Islam, simply because they are outside Islam - things like Israel and other meddling in the middle east and the suspension of habeas corpus (only really a UK/US thing - most Western countries don't even have it - I do concur that it's a bad thing) just add fuel to the big smokescreen-producing fire that legitimises the terrorists cause (though not the means) in the Western press and amongst the liberal Muslims.

However all this is by-the-by for this thread. Portsmouth-Southampton - a truly awful route that needs upgrading - sadly the plans for diverting the route via Southampton Airport haven't amounted to anything - even less news than the E-W rail link, which might go ahead in 10 years time, linking Oxford and Aylesbury to Milton Keynes. There seems to be lots of plans, but not much talk on those plans, let alone action - the British transport situation under New Labour (not that other governments were better, nor that the other parties will be better).

I've tried to steer away from anything that should be contraversial in there but the brainwashing of the "Islam doesn't hate us" brigade has got to you

You still haven't provided any proper support to your claims, even the adjusted ones that have been more eloquently phrased. You have advised that you have done some brief study on the subject - which is an appeal to authority and not therefore justification whatsoever - but can you show the anti-American doctrine in the Quran? (And yes I do know that that is a trick question. Nonetheless please back up your nonsense or withdraw it).

Then, as quoted above , you have used an ad hominem argument against me, to undermine my position, and without any basis.

That's 2 logical fallacies right there. Frankly you are the one that sounds like the fundementalist - ranting nonsense, ranting divisive rhetoric and failing to speak and communicate rationally.

Can we save politics for the skybar and get back on track.

Such as why Eurostar carriages look short in comparison to German ICEs?

yeah people take the political talks elsewhere this is about British Railways not politics so does anybody has more pictures of the Railways and metros and such?

so does anyone have pictures of HS1 and the East London Extension or something?

Can we save politics for the skybar and get back on track.

Such as why Eurostar carriages look short in comparison to German ICEs?

Because they are. They were designed for use on the classic lines out of London, and trains on these routes can only be 20m due to the curves and loading guage, whereas normally around the UK the standard is 23m. I'm not sure if that the only reason or the reason at all, but they are shorter.

What is the likeliness of this actually being realised? I'm wondering if any of the 'experts' on here have any idea?

I know there's a lot of talk of HSR throughout Britain, and it really is inevitable that it will need to be built sooner or later. But these proposals seem to come and go, and speculation is the only thing that remains. I'd love for there to be a decent HSR system in my home country, I'm just hoping that it will be built and operating before I'm too old to use it.

With so many airlines facing hardship, thousands more passengers using rail, fuel prices going up and environmental issues to consider, any objectively thinking person would realise that this needs to be constructed.

In this instance, the justification is based on indications that existing routes will not be able to cope with the projected growth in passenger numbers rather than say a desire to keep up with the Joneses. This is also coming from Network Rail which has responsibility to look at these issues rather than an outside body/pressure group.

The big problem is going to be obtaining the funding; Thameslink was originally intended to be completed by the year 2000, but budgeting and approval delays mean that it will not be completed until 2015/2016.

The CTRL was completed some 12 years after the tunnel was opened, again mainly because of the lack of funding. There was even a squabble over the £60 required to fit-out the new Thameslink box at St Pancreas with the new Eurostar station nearly opening with Thameslink trains passing through the empty box.

The British economy is bust at the moment so funding for any major rail projects will be hard to find - it is even possible that Crossrail will be further delayed, and there is still a more than £1 Billion gap in the funding for Network Rail in the next five year plan.

I think a figure of £30 Billion has been quoted as the cost for one HSR line linking London with Birmingham, Manchester, and Scotland - that is more than the existing allowed debt at Network Rail, and twice the current projected cost of Crossrail. There is a lot of work to be done to make any progress on HSR in the UK, though it is now slightly ahead of further electrification.

Because they are. They were designed for use on the classic lines out of London, and trains on these routes can only be 20m due to the curves and loading guage, whereas normally around the UK the standard is 23m. I'm not sure if that the only reason or the reason at all, but they are shorter.

I think it was specifically beacuse they needed to operate over the North London lines.

All,

Please do not rise to the bait - better to make use of the icon in the bottom left corner to report offensive and off-topic posts.

I think it was specifically beacuse they needed to operate over the North London lines.

I thought the south east London ones are more restrictive.

It's an interesting point to ask whether high-speed rail between London and Birmingham is actually worth it, if existing connections are pretty good.

London to Manchester I start to see the point, and even more so up to Scottish cities. Surely it would take longer to fly from Birmingham to London than it would to catch the train (heck especially if you ended up at Stanstead or Gatwick), so a HSR connection isn't really going to attract anyone that's not already catching the train, if that makes sense.

It's an interesting point to ask whether high-speed rail between London and Birmingham is actually worth it, if existing connections are pretty good.

London to Manchester I start to see the point, and even more so up to Scottish cities. Surely it would take longer to fly from Birmingham to London than it would to catch the train (heck especially if you ended up at Stanstead or Gatwick), so a HSR connection isn't really going to attract anyone that's not already catching the train, if that makes sense.

The best journey time, non-stop, between London and Birmingham is about 1h 10m for an approx. 170 Km journey and is configured as an inter-city service. The stopping services are much slower and serve the intermediate towns rather than Birmingham.

I think a HSR link between London and Birmingham, with services configured for commuter travel and making the journey in 30 - 45 minutes at 350 Km/h would significantly change the economic dynamics not just of London, but of a large proportion of the west midlands with its population of, I think, 5 million or so (sorry I do not have any of the figures). I would think it would alleviate the economic pressures on London and be of economic advantage to the run-down midlands.

Birmingham has to be the first step in the construction of any route going to the north west, and will cost in the region of at least 5 - 6 £billion so we have to make the best use of it with new commuter services until the long-distance routes open up.

P.S. I do not think there are any air links between Birmingham and the London airports.

P.P.S.
This is the link to the GreenGauge21 group which is pushing for the HSR services in the UK:
http://www.greengauge21.net/

There is an interesting article here (PDF):
http://www.railpro.co.uk/issues/pdfs/high_speed_hopes.pdf

... with a discussion on this thread:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=595169

That is very irritating how it is commented that HSR is not environmentally friendly. I am very sure that extra flights that burn quite a bit of fuel and output carbon are friendlier than a full electric train that could possibly be run off of renewable energy resources.

The competition for the Chunnel will be good for passengers. It perhaps will allow trains of faster speeds to go into the UK and force better HSR throughout the UK.

That is very irritating how it is commented that HSR is not environmentally friendly. I am very sure that extra flights that burn quite a bit of fuel and output carbon are friendlier than a full electric train that could possibly be run off of renewable energy resources.


That comes from one of the rail ministers, and it has surprised a large proportion of the rail industry - I believe they are busy collecting the evidence to demonstrate otherwise.



The competition for the Chunnel will be good for passengers. It perhaps will allow trains of faster speeds to go into the UK and force better HSR throughout the UK.

Even were existing services were good, that is not the question that ought to be the topic of debate. The reason why the HSR option should be pushed is because of capacity. The West Coast Mainline, as it is is suffering from a severe lack in capacity. The number of services can't really increase on the line and as a result, the only option to increase capacity is to build new lines. By having a HSR line going up to Birmingham and then up to Manchester/Liverpool, you can reduce demand on existing lines and thus free up capacity by moving it elsewhere, plus commuters have a faster connection from Birmingham to London.

Even were existing services were good, that is not the question that ought to be the topic of debate. The reason why the HSR option should be pushed is because of capacity. The West Coast Mainline, as it is is suffering from a severe lack in capacity. The number of services can't really increase on the line and as a result, the only option to increase capacity is to build new lines. By having a HSR line going up to Birmingham and then up to Manchester/Liverpool, you can reduce demand on existing lines and thus free up capacity by moving it elsewhere, plus commuters have a faster connection from Birmingham to London.

The study announced by Network Rail is wholly based on the need to boost capacity and not primarily on the need for HSR services, so I am not sure what the issue is.

Yeah, HSR is being looked into for providing capacity as much as anything else. NR projects that the WCML will run out of capacity in 5-10 years. The ECML in about the same time. Segregating high speed services will effectively double capacity and bring wider economic benfits including a significant increase in passengers.

The govt's position about HSR not being environmentally friendly has been blown out of the water. Firstly because oil is going up in price so there is no reason for the govt to find an excuse to stick to diesel, secondly figures have since come out showing the HSR is (and will get better) actually more efficient than the incorrect facts they had, and thirdly power from the national grid is due to get cleaner as they replace/upgrade power stations and introduce renewables.

It's an interesting point to ask whether high-speed rail between London and Birmingham is actually worth it, if existing connections are pretty good.

London to Manchester I start to see the point, and even more so up to Scottish cities. Surely it would take longer to fly from Birmingham to London than it would to catch the train (heck especially if you ended up at Stanstead or Gatwick), so a HSR connection isn't really going to attract anyone that's not already catching the train, if that makes sense.

I think there is a possibility for HSR between Birmingham and London though it would have to be managed properly.

Take Germany's equivalent for example, the Frankfurt to Cologne leg which is about the same distance as London to Birmingham. This was completed a few years ago to big fanfare as the fasted train line in Germany. I think it was the first to reach 300km/hr in normal use. The buildup suggested 50minutes travel time between the two cities and I have travelled this a few times. Never however have I seen that 50minutes originally stated. Usually it is 1hr 11minutes to 1hr 20minutes depending on stops. The main problem was politics as it passed through a state which the state government demanded that there should be a stop as compensation. So now, the train slows down and stops at a tiny station with empty platforms to please the politicians and slows the whole service down.

To be honest, that 1hr 20min service of HSR is not much better than the 1hr 30minutes of your "slower" line.

If this link is built it should aim for a 45-50minute journey between the two cities. This is possible, as long as politics don't get in the way.

The best journey time, non-stop, between London and Birmingham is about 1h 10m for an approx. 170 Km journey and is configured as an inter-city service. The stopping services are much slower and serve the intermediate towns rather than Birmingham.

I think a HSR link between London and Birmingham, with services configured for commuter travel and making the journey in 30 - 45 minutes at 350 Km/h would significantly change the economic dynamics not just of London, but of a large proportion of the west midlands with its population of, I think, 5 million or so (sorry I do not have any of the figures). I would think it would alleviate the economic pressures on London and be of economic advantage to the run-down midlands.

Birmingham has to be the first step in the construction of any route going to the north west, and will cost in the region of at least 5 - 6 £billion so we have to make the best use of it with new commuter services until the long-distance routes open up.

P.S. I do not think there are any air links between Birmingham and the London airports.

P.P.S.
This is the link to the GreenGauge21 group which is pushing for the HSR services in the UK:
http://www.greengauge21.net/

If that is true, that there are 1hr 10minutes journeys between Birmingham and London, then that is better than the Frankfurt to Cologne link whose best is 1hr 11minutes and is considered one of the fasted HSR lines in Germany. Of cause then it's the stops that makes the difference.

Would it be worth it for the population? Why yes, London is much bigger than Frankfurt or Cologne, and although you can include the large population of the Rhein Ruhr, then you have equivalentswith Frankfurt and Birmingham and the Rhein Ruhr and London. However, one advantage is that after Cologne, the line does continue to other cities in the north like Berlin or Hamburg, so to make it profitable, you would need some links north East or West of Birmingham.

I think there is a possibility for HSR between Birmingham and London though it would have to be managed properly.

Take Germany's equivalent for example, the Frankfurt to Cologne leg which is about the same distance as London to Birmingham. This was completed a few years ago to big fanfare as the fasted train line in Germany. I think it was the first to reach 300km/hr in normal use. The buildup suggested 50minutes travel time between the two cities and I have travelled this a few times. Never however have I seen that 50minutes originally stated. Usually it is 1hr 11minutes to 1hr 20minutes depending on stops. The main problem was politics as it passed through a state which the state government demanded that there should be a stop as compensation. So now, the train slows down and stops at a tiny station with empty platforms to please the politicians and slows the whole service down.

To be honest, that 1hr 20min service of HSR is not much better than the 1hr 30minutes of your "slower" line.

If this link is built it should aim for a 45-50minute journey between the two cities. This is possible, as long as politics don't get in the way.

I am surprised.

The service I was looking at is the Virgin London to Birmingham inter-city service on the existing WCML which has a top speed of 200 Km/h (but not throughout its route).

The current best journey time (that I can find) for the 170/180 Kms is 1h 29 mins which includes three intermediate stops. This will be cut to about 1h 10mins when the new timetable goes into operation in December 2008 (which may be achieved by also eliminating one of the stops) with three trains per hour. It can take up to 3 hours at the weekend due to extra intermediate stops.

The Greengauge21 proposal is for HSR services to run on new LGV 300km/h class lines for most of the route, but to use up-rated conventional lines at each end of the London/Birmingham sector in the initial phase. The service pattern is for a non-stop services on the line, with stopping services to be handled by the 200/225Km/h trains similar to those planned for use on the HS1 route to Kent from 2011.

They are currently quoting a best journey time of 55 mins end to end, but with extra funding they could take the line to 350Km/h and have dedicated HSR track all the way through (as per requirement for HSR services beyond Birmingham) thus making 35/45 mins journey possible.

So yes, I think you have a right to be disappointed with the service DB is offering.

If that is true, that there are 1hr 10minutes journeys between Birmingham and London, then that is better than the Frankfurt to Cologne link whose best is 1hr 11minutes and is considered one of the fasted HSR lines in Germany. Of cause then it's the stops that makes the difference.

Would it be worth it for the population? Why yes, London is much bigger than Frankfurt or Cologne, and although you can include the large population of the Rhein Ruhr, then you have equivalentswith Frankfurt and Birmingham and the Rhein Ruhr and London. However, one advantage is that after Cologne, the line does continue to other cities in the north like Berlin or Hamburg, so to make it profitable, you would need some links north East or West of Birmingham.

I quite agree.

The point I was making was that an HSR service would significantly change the economics of London and the West Midlands if the service was treated as a fast commuter rather than premium, cum inter-city service.

Going beyond Birmingham, we have Greater Manchester with about 4 million, and Leeds with 2-3 million plus other near-by population centres all within 30 mins or so HSR travelling time of Birmingham.

So in the UK, the dynamics and potential customer base is quite different from that in France for example.

The current best journey time (that I can find) for the 170/180 Kms is 1h 29 mins which includes three intermediate stops. This will be cut to about 1h 10mins when the new timetable goes into operation in December 2008 (which may be achieved by also eliminating one of the stops) with three trains per hour. It can take up to 3 hours at the weekend due to extra intermediate stops.

There's one train in the morning, the 0745 from New Street, does it in 1 hr 22 minutes by eliminating the stop at Coventry. Once Rugby station is finished it won't slow down the through trains but still I can only concieve of the 1hr 10 minute time being achieved by having less stops.

With a new HSL Brimingham would be under an hour from London. I doubt to begin with the line would go all the way to Birmingham, most concepts opt for a phased approach. I'm also unsure that the eventual London to Scotland line would go directly through Birmingham as that would be costlier than bypassing it which the WCML does now. That would leave Birmungham on spurs to the north and south. It will be interesting to see Arup's proposals when they publish them.

There's one train in the morning, the 0745 from New Street, does it in 1 hr 22 minutes by eliminating the stop at Coventry. Once Rugby station is finished it won't slow down the through trains but still I can only concieve of the 1hr 10 minute time being achieved by having less stops.


The December 2008 timetable takes advantage of all the work that has been carried out on the WCML over the last few years with improvements to the line speed and the removal of bottle-necks to improve the journey times and line capacity. The 1h 10mins is the figure quoted by Virgin (I'm not sure if they take out Coventry or not, but I think all Birmingham services will stop at Milton Keynes with the introduction of the new timetable).



With a new HSL Brimingham would be under an hour from London. I doubt to begin with the line would go all the way to Birmingham, most concepts opt for a phased approach. I'm also unsure that the eventual London to Scotland line would go directly through Birmingham as that would be costlier than bypassing it which the WCML does now. That would leave Birmungham on spurs to the north and south. It will be interesting to see Arup's proposals when they publish them.

Yes, in Greengauge21's proposal the route will follow conventional lines in London and Birmingham with the new LGV sections rated at 300Km/h - the 30/35mins headway is only possible if the route is LGV all the way and rated at 350Km/h. The Greengauge21 proposals see the Scottish link going via Birmingham and continuing over the WCML from Stoke (or there abouts) onwards.

The Network Rail report will look at a few options, one of which is for a North of England and Scottish link going via Cambridge.

Regarding the Arup proposal; the consensus seems to be that it was half-baked, and did not go into sufficient detail beyond Heathrow. I think though they are planning to publish a more detailed proposal. See issue 146 of Rail Manager for their comments on the proposal:

http://91.186.0.3/~keepingt/railmanager/RMOL_2008.htm

The December 2008 timetable takes advantage of all the work that has been carried out on the WCML over the last few years with improvements to the line speed and the removal of bottle-necks to improve the journey times and line capacity. The 1h 10mins is the figure quoted by Virgin (I'm not sure if they take out Coventry or not, but I think all Birmingham services will stop at Milton Keynes with the introduction of the new timetable).

Of which the only change left that will benfit the west midlands services is the Rugby remodelling which will reduce journey time by about 3 minutes at most. As far as I can tell the trains are already doing 125mph on all sections able to do it south of Rugby, so unless there are any further improvements I'm unaware of any reductions to save that extra 15 minutes will have to come from less stops or using less slack in the timetabling - which may well be possible as a serious amount is built in at the moment to cope with all the works and historical poor performance of the WCML.

Regarding the Arup proposal; the consensus seems to be that it was half-baked, and did not go into sufficient detail beyond Heathrow. I think though they are planning to publish a more detailed proposal. See issue 146 of Rail Manager for their comments on the proposal:

http://91.186.0.3/~keepingt/railmanager/RMOL_2008.htm (http://91.186.0.3/%7Ekeepingt/railmanager/RMOL_2008.htm)

It was quite obvious it wasn't the final proposal, Arup are an engineering firm, yet they hadn't even provided any (non topological) route maps. They won't finish until they've done some surveying and put together a complete risk/cost/time calculated strategy, like they did for the CTRL.

Of which the only change left that will benfit the west midlands services is the Rugby remodelling which will reduce journey time by about 3 minutes at most. As far as I can tell the trains are already doing 125mph on all sections able to do it south of Rugby, so unless there are any further improvements I'm unaware of any reductions to save that extra 15 minutes will have to come from less stops or using less slack in the timetabling - which may well be possible as a serious amount is built in at the moment to cope with all the works and historical poor performance of the WCML.


Services are not yet using the line to its full capabilities - the December 2008 timetable change takes advantage of changes to the running times.



It was quite obvious it wasn't the final proposal, Arup are an engineering firm, yet they hadn't even provided any (non topological) route maps. They won't finish until they've done some surveying and put together a complete risk/cost/time calculated strategy, like they did for the CTRL.

I do not know the reason why they released the work, but whatever it was, it not particularly robust, and it was surprising that it was published into teh public domain when it was incomplete.

Services are not yet using the line to its full capabilities - the December 2008 timetable change takes advantage of changes to the running times.

You've said this already. The timetable improvement is only going to be achieved by taking up slack south of Rugby. Otherwise you are telling me there are going to be further linespeed improvements south of Rugby. Are there?

I do not know the reason why they released the work, but whatever it was, it not particularly robust, and it was surprising that it was published into teh public domain when it was incomplete.

I don't find it surprising at all. If it was exact it would cause all sorts of political problems, for example from people living in the path of the proposed route. The government would not have thanked Arup at all if it started having to deal with campaign groups for a proposal it wasn't even close to signing up to. That info should come out at the public consultation stage only. Arup are one the world's leading engineering firms, I find it very hard to believe they would make a schoolboy error over a £4.5bn project.

You've said this already. The timetable improvement is only going to be achieved by taking up slack south of Rugby. Otherwise you are telling me there are going to be further linespeed improvements south of Rugby. Are there?


Get a life or take it up with Virgin and Network Rail.



I don't find it surprising at all. If it was exact it would cause all sorts of political problems, for example from people living in the path of the proposed route. The government would not have thanked Arup at all if it started having to deal with campaign groups for a proposal it wasn't even close to signing up to. That info should come out at the public consultation stage only. Arup are one the world's leading engineering firms, I find it very hard to believe they would make a schoolboy error over a £4.5bn project.

Rubbish - the work was shoddy and is an embarrasement to the company - someone slipped up.

Get a life or take it up with Virgin and Network Rail.

I don't take kindly to having the same thing said to me over and over when its quite plain that I already knew it and it has no bearing on the validity of my point. You tell me to get a life but can you honestly say you weren't enjoying being the all-knowledgable-teacher in this forum, but the moment you are questioned look how you react?

Just to be petty I would like to point out your incorrect use of the term "headway", which in railway terms means the time distance between two trains which is likely to be 3 minutes on HS2, not the length of the journey.

And do you really think you know better than one of the world's finest engineering firms?

I don't take kindly to having the same thing said to me over and over when its quite plain that I already knew it and it has no bearing on the validity of my point. You tell me to get a life but can you honestly say you weren't enjoying being the all-knowledgable-teacher in this forum, but the moment you are questioned look how you react?


As I said, if you have a problem with the 1h 10m, take it with Virgin and Network Rail who published the information and whom are better informed than you or I on the matter. Once again - get a life.



Just to be petty I would like to point out your incorrect use of the term "headway", which in railway terms means the time distance between two trains which is likely to be 3 minutes on HS2, not the length of the journey.

And do you really think you know better than one of the world's finest engineering firms?

Thank you - you are correct - I used the wrong terminology.

Arup - that was not my opinion, but that of commentators on the industry who know Arup better than you or I - see above.

As I said, if you have a problem with the 1h 10m, take it with Virgin and Network Rail who published the information and whom are better informed than you or I on the matter. Once again - get a life.

Did I say I had a problem with the 1hr 10 mins? No, I didn't. Did I speculate on how that would be achieved? Yes. Where on earth did you get the idea that I was arguing with NR? Besides the fact that I already know about the high frequency virgin timetable and that unlike you I'm not in the habit of thinking I know better than large organisations, I didn't actually say anything to contradict you. You have bent this completely out of shape, and telling me to get a life because you don't understand what you're reading and getting all huffy is pathetic

When will we find out whether or not the HSR will be built from London to Birmibgham? Its probaly been asked loads of times so sorry!

When will we find out whether or not the HSR will be built from London to Birmibgham? Its probaly been asked loads of times so sorry!

There is no firm plan to build HSR lines in the UK. The main activity at the moment is to justify it on costs vs benefits. Network Rail is looking at options to tackle projected overcrowding on a number of routes, but not specifically to look at the introduction of HSR services. Its analysis will probably not be completed until next year at teh earliest.

Did I say I had a problem with the 1hr 10 mins? No, I didn't. Did I speculate on how that would be achieved? Yes. Where on earth did you get the idea that I was arguing with NR? Besides the fact that I already know about the high frequency virgin timetable and that unlike you I'm not in the habit of thinking I know better than large organisations, I didn't actually say anything to contradict you. You have bent this completely out of shape, and telling me to get a life because you don't understand what you're reading and getting all huffy is pathetic

You seem to be attempting to take the thread off topic again. You should perhaps review your attitude when you post.

You seem to be attempting to take the thread off topic again. You should perhaps review your attitude when you post.

No, I think you did the moment you resorted to pathetic personal insults ;)

No, I think you did the moment you resorted to pathetic personal insults ;)

I suggest you go back and read the thread and posts.

I suggest you go back and read the thread and posts.

And read the bit where you tell someone to "get a life"?

Magellan - You took it off topic when you thought I was arguing about the 1hr 10mins. And then you started the insults. Maybe you should review your attitude to your postings.

Twice this thread has gone off-topic and yes I responded to it (technically it was Hoosier who took the thread off topic, then Sotonsi, then me), but I am not going to sit idly by whilst people make unfair comments about sections of the human race. I also think I have the right to correct people when they misunderstand my posts, and when my posts are perfectly clear in the first place I won't make any apologies for it either.

You seem to be attempting to take the thread off topic again. You should perhaps review your attitude when you post.

A typical response from someone without humility - how about answering to the point? Did I argue with you over the 1hr 10 minute thing? No. Are you going to respond when I put it to you that you therefore have taken this off topic?

Well I have taken it up with Virgin and it appears there won't be very large time savings for Brum to London services anyway. It turns out I should have argued! Much ado about nothing. The fastest service will be 1 hr 12 minutes, and that will be achieved by being non-stop - as I thought. The rest of the services will take 1 hr 22 minutes.

http://www.virgintrains.com/img/aboutus/downloads/WC_2009_Timetable_Commentary.pdf
2009 Timetable Commentary
Introduction
This commentary gives an overview of the timetable plans for 2009, which follow the principles outlined in the Department for Transport’s May 2006 Progress Report on the West Coast Main Line. The finer detail is being worked through, and we will share that at the earliest opportunity. It is also important that the finer detail is seen in the context of other operators’ timetables. It is our intention to share the detail as widely as possible when we are able to do so.
The commentary here is specifically about the weekday service on the West Coast route, and will we hope be useful. The timetable itself is just one part of the picture for 2009. There are other other strands of activity, including more than 4,000 more parking spaces at our stations. The majority of these are planned to be ready for the start of the new timetable. You will also be aware of the significant amount of engineering work Network Rail needs to complete to enable the 2009 timetable change to happen, and the effect this has on weekend and bank holiday services.

Euston – Preston / Carlisle / Glasgow / Edinburgh
• 13 Glasgow to Euston services and 13 Euston to Glasgow services operate. No Euston to Edinburgh service operates in either direction.
• The typical end-to-end journey time will be 4hrs 26 mins.
• The fastest train of the day is the 1630 Euston – Glasgow which completes the journey in 4hrs 10 mins. It is planned that this service will call at Preston only.
• An hourly service will operate throughout the day between London Euston and Preston with some additional services in the peaks. The fastest journey time is 2hrs.
• Trains depart from London Euston at xx30 past each hour with additional Euston – Glasgow trains in the evening peak at 1657 and 1757.
• The 1030,1230 and 1430 services from London Euston terminate at Lancaster.
• The majority of services run non stop between London Euston and Warrington Bank Quay, then call at Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme or Penrith (generally alternate services call at one or the other), Carlisle then Glasgow Central.
• The 1430 Euston – Lancaster and 1737 Lancaster – Euston to be operated by class 221 Voyagers.
• Two northbound and one southbound service to call at Lockerbie.
• In the morning peak there is an 0535 departure from Lancaster (Class 221 Super Voyager) which couples to the 0447 Holyhead – Euston at Crewe.
• This is followed by a 0430 Glasgow – Euston service calling at Carlisle, Penrith, Oxenholme, Lancaster, Preston, Wigan and Warrington, then non stop to Euston.

Euston – Birmingham – Wolverhampton
• A 20 minute frequency throughout the day between Euston and Birmingham, with one train an hour running through to Wolverhampton.
• Typical off peak journey times are 1hr 22 mins from Birmingham New Street to London Euston and 1hr 47 mins from Wolverhampton to London Euston.
• A fast 0704 Wolverhampton to London Euston service is to operate calling at Sandwell and Dudley and Birmingham New St only. This service will run express from Birmingham New St to London Euston in 1hr 12 mins.
• A fast 0741 Birmingham International to London Euston service also operates calling at Coventry only.
• Off peak all services call at Birmingham International and Coventry - with services calling at either Rugby, Milton Keynes Central and Watford Junction to give Birmingham New Street a clockface hourly service to each.
• The 0510 and 0530 Birmingham – Euston and 2223 and 2343 Euston – Wolverhampton to be operated by class 221 Voyagers to avoid diesel hauling when services are diverted via Nuneaton.
• The 0510 Birmingham New St to London Euston and 2343 Euston – Birmingham services to be routed via Nuneaton.

Euston to Chester / Holyhead
• All services to be operated by class 221 Voyagers. An hourly service operates throughout the day between Euston and Chester calling at Milton Keynes Central and Crewe only. Typical journey times between London Euston and Chester are 2hrs.
• Holyhead services are generally formed of 2 x Voyagers between London Euston and Chester where the 1st set goes forward to Holyhead.
• Through services to / from North Wales operate at the following times:
447 Holyhead to London Euston
0550 Holyhead to London Euston
0650 Holyhead to London Euston
0850 Holyhead to London Euston
1217 Bangor to London Euston
1350 Holyhead to London Euston
2017 Bangor to Birmingham New St
0530 Birmingham New St to Holyhead
0810 London Euston to Bangor
0910 London Euston to Holyhead
1610 London Euston to Bangor
1710 London Euston to Holyhead
1810 London Euston to Holyhead
1910 London Euston to Holyhead

Euston to Manchester
• Services operate every 20 mins throughout the day.
• The xx00 ex London Euston services call at Stoke, Macclesfield and Stockport.
• The xx20 ex London Euston services call at Milton Keynes Central, Stoke and Stockport.
• The xx40 ex London Euston services call at Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport.
• The xx15 ex Manchester Picc services call at Stockport, Stoke and Milton Keynes Central.
• The xx35 ex Manchester Picc services call at Stockport, Macclesfield and Stoke.
• The xx55 ex Manchester Picc services call at Stockport, Wilmslow and Crewe.
• Typical journey times are 2hrs 5 mins from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly with the fastest train completing the journey in 1hr 58 mins.
• The fast “headline” train from Manchester will be the 0700 departure which will call at Stockport only.

Euston to Liverpool
• Services to operate hourly throughout the day at xx07 from Euston and at xx48 from Liverpool. Additional trains operate at 1733 and 1833 from London Euston to Liverpool Lime Street and at 0527, 0605 and 0700 from Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston.
• A new earlier train will operate from Euston to Liverpool Lime St at 0535 and the last train will be at 2107.
• A new late train will operate from Liverpool Lime St to London Euston departing at 2048 calling at Runcorn, Crewe, Stafford, Lichfield, Tamworth, Nuneaton, Rugby, Milton Keynes and Watford.
• Typical journey times are 2hrs 7 mins from Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston with the fastest train taking 2hrs 1 min. The fast “headline” train from Liverpool will be the 0700 departure which will call at Runcorn only.
• The standard calling pattern is at Stafford and Runcorn only.
Birmingham – Glasgow / Edinburgh
• As part of the revised franchise mapping, Virgin West Coast will take over the operation of the hourly Birmingham – Scotland via Preston services as follows. All trains to be worked by 221 Voyagers.
• Trains will operate hourly from Birmingham to Carlisle (departing at xx20 past each hour), continuing forward to either Edinburgh or Glasgow. All services will call at Wolverhampton, Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, (then either Oxenholme or Penrith) and Carlisle.
• Southbound services depart from Edinburgh at 2 hourly intervals departing xx52 and from Glasgow Central at 2 hourly intervals at xx00
• In addition a 0557 Crewe – Glasgow Central and a 2010 Glasgow Central – Crewe will operate.
• Intermediate stations between Preston and Carlisle, and also Lockerbie will be served by Manchester Airport – Glasgow / Edinburgh services operated by First TransPennine Express. An evening peak Virgin Trains departure from Glasgow Central will call at Lockerbie.
2009 Timetable Commentary
Further Information

Trent Valley
• Virgin West Coast services will call at Lichfield, Tamworth and Nuneaton only during the morning and evening peaks, and during the evening when Trent Valley local services do not operate.
• In between, an hourly London Euston to Crewe “West Midlands Franchise” class 350 “Desiro” stopping service will operate.
• Nuneaton is served by “Desiros” only during the off peak.
• Nuneaton calling VWC trains are:
04.55 Manchester Picc – London Euston
05.55 Manchester Picc – London Euston
04.47 Holyhead – London Euston
07.35 Manchester Picc – London Euston
19.48 Liverpool Lime St – London Euston
20.48 Liverpool Lime St – London Euston
17.10 London Euston – Holyhead
18.10 London Euston – Holyhead
19.07 London Euston – Liverpool Lime St
20.07 London Euston – Liverpool Lime St
21.07 London Euston – Liverpool Lime St
22.00 London Euston – Manchester Picc
• Lichfield and Tamworth calling VWC trains are:
05.34 Preston – London Euston
06.05 Liverpool Lime St – London Euston
20.48 Liverpool Lime St – London Euston
16.57 London Euston – Glasgow Central
17.57 London Euston – Glasgow Central
20.30 London Euston – Preston
22:00 London Euston – Manchester Picc
Crewe
• London Euston to Glasgow Central and Liverpool Lime Street services no longer call at Crewe. However, Crewe is still served by two trains an hour to/from London Euston (these being a Manchester and the Chester service).
• Customers from Crewe to Glasgow Central to travel by Virgin West Coast Birmingham – Glasgow services. Customers from Nuneaton and Stafford to Crewe and from Crewe to Liverpool Lime Street to travel by “West Midlands Franchise” services.

Why has a thread about British Railways descended into a political discussion? It's a complete yawnfest and you could easily argue about it elsewhere.

The reason there isn't a high speed line in Britain (except for HS1) is because the government are short sighted morons that don't realise the benefits.

:ohno:

Can we save politics for the skybar and get back on track.

Such as why Eurostar carriages look short in comparison to German ICEs?

Because they are. They were designed for use on the classic lines out of London, and trains on these routes can only be 20m due to the curves and loading guage, whereas normally around the UK the standard is 23m. I'm not sure if that the only reason or the reason at all, but they are shorter.

I think it was specifically beacuse they needed to operate over the North London lines.

^^ The "TGV" family vehicles (of wich Eurostar is a member) use shorter cars suported by pairs tru a common bogie:


There are no "high speed" lines in britain because the "standard speed" lines are up to 125mph/201km/h so they sufice as fast railway routes ... and there are too many "upgradeable" routes to choose from for a "brand new" HSL to even be considerable as "doable" ... both in terms of economic cost of that construction and in terms of trying to bypass the "moronic" (no ofense here) and "predatorial" (take ofense here) local authorities/against-anything-groups along the way of the not-even-proposed-but-already-oposed route.

:lol:

For the given example (London-Birmingham) ... out of 3 or four possible routes for a new HSL ... theres already a railway built in everyone of them ... and it's an "upgradeable" railway in every case. :ohno:

Let me see how it is nowadays:

London-Bedford-Wigston-Nuneaton-(Coventry)-Birmingham
London-MiltonKeines-(Northampton)-Rugby-Coventry-Birmingham
London-Aylesbury-(closed railway)-...-Birmingham
London-H.Wycombe-Banbury-LeamingtonSpa-birmingham
London-Reading-Oxford-Banbury/Gloucester-Worcester-Birmingham

^^ The fact that only one of these routes is being "upgraded" to 125mph (and one is even closed) should make some light on the matter. :ohno:

Well if they can be upgraded, they might as well to allow speeds of 300 km/h (186 mph) or greater. It would be good for the London 2012 games. The faster, the more attractive the option becomes.

I think there is a growing industry consensus that with even conservative growth rates the main approaches to London are already full and more and more trains will see more standing passengers. The government has already had to perform a u-turn on electification as it's excuses not to electrify began to face ever greater ridicule.

Everyone knows that the first section of line will run from London to Birmingham. Most of the proposed routes all take a Western approach into London, because of the spare land running alonside the Central line, and link up with the newly expanded Trent Valley lines North of Birmingham. This section has been recently widened so should have a few years capacity still in it. All that differs on how they access Moor Street in Birmingham and how or whether they interface with Heathrow.

Conspiracy theorists (or realists) have suggested the sudden plethora of studies is a way to delay as long as possible the building of a new high speed line. The Department of transport was supposedly worried because the proposed HS2 line was gaining to much support too quickly, within the industry.

It's a long standing technique in the UK to string along a project, not wanting to to cancel a popular proposal but not actually commit any money to it. Most of the time it is quietly strangled, sometimes though it becomes to powerful to stop, and usually some deformed scheme lurches to life with so many changes, sometimes for the better, but often pared down in capacity to save money that as soon as it opens they have to start looking at upgrading it.

For the given example (London-Birmingham) ... out of 3 or four possible routes for a new HSL ... theres already a railway built in everyone of them ... and it's an "upgradeable" railway in every case.

Let me see how it is nowadays:

London-Bedford-Wigston-Nuneaton-(Coventry)-Birmingham
London-MiltonKeines-(Northampton)-Rugby-Coventry-Birmingham
London-Aylesbury-(closed railway)-...-Birmingham
London-H.Wycombe-Banbury-LeamingtonSpa-birmingham
London-Reading-Oxford-Banbury/Gloucester-Worcester-Birmingham

^^ The fact that only one of these routes is being "upgraded" to 125mph (and one is even closed) should make some light on the matter. :ohno:

They are not upgradable for a couple of reasons (except the GWML). To upgrade them will bring forward the date when capacity runs out on the existing routes. Having faster long distance passenger services reduces the remaining capacity for other services, services which also are projected to expand. The only viable long term option is new lines, and as such they may as well be high speed. Also, as the West Coast Route Modernisation has proven to the industry, upgrading such heavily used lines is expensive and disruptive, for an outcome that isn't a breathtaking advance. 125mph is a welcome improvement on 100/110mph, but it the industry is now thinking that the £8bn could have been spent differently to more effect. Similar plans for the ECML seem to have been quietly shelved a few years ago.

Also - the Bedford - Nuneaton route is only used for freight, no passenger services go between these two stations, all passenger services from both stations go to Leicester and I'm not certain there would be a market otherwise. The MML is only capable of 125mph maximum with tilt if it were to be upgraded. The Chiltern line is not a high priority (except to the relevant TOC) and is being slowly upgraded anyway. Much more important than the routes you've quoted is the ECML and the GWML, and perhaps the south west - north east cross country route, and the trans-penine.

Some good news:


Rail strategy plans track dualling in north west
Filed 01/09/08

Rail tracks in Carlisle are to be redoubled and Cumbrian coast train frequencies increased under plans contained within Network Rail's latest route utilisation strategy.

The Lancashire and Cumbria RUS sets out the forecast growth in population, employment and housing and estimates rail usage over the next 10-15 years setting out Network Rail's strategy to meet this demand. The publication, which will now be submitted to the Office of Rail Regulation, follows a three month consultation period with key stakeholders and additional analysis. The ORR has 60 days to consider this after which it will become an established strategy.

The strategy to increase peak capacity in the period 2009-2014 includes:

-Line speed improvements between Burnley and Hebden Bridge to shorten journey times on the Leeds-Blackpool route. The current speed limit of 45mph could be raised to at least 55mph and as much as 70mph where suitable

-Re-doubling of the tracks at London Road junction in Carlisle to improve performance of freight and passenger services on the Settle-Carlisle line

-More regular trains into Sellafield

-More regular train services between Preston and Ormskirk, and an improved service between Preston and Southport

-Sunday services from Carlisle to Whitehaven to increase from three to four a day

-Improving the Settle-Carlisle timetable to give a regular two-hourly service, with targeted additional services where passenger requirements and space in the timetable coincide

-The proposal to lengthen trains and platforms on the Manchester-Clitheroe line is already included in Network Rail’s Strategic Business Plan but it is now recommended that the peak time services between Manchester and Blackburn are extended to Clitheroe

-Minor alterations on Platforms 1 and 2 at Preston to improve passenger flow and ability to get connections. This would include relocating the buffet and staff accommodation from their present position to elsewhere on the platform, and improving passenger facilities

-For the period 2014 to 2019 Network Rail is proposing the resignalling scheme already planned for the Whitehaven-Maryport line should include a remodeling of the track layout in Maryport and the provision of an additional platform. The creation of a new Maryport signalling centre and the performance improvements that will bring may mean the possibility of running additional Sunday services.

Peter Strachan, route director for Network Rail said: "After a successful consultation process, I am convinced that we now have a robust and purposeful strategy for delivering a rail network in Lancashire and Cumbria that can handle the expected increase in use over the next decade or so. This is an exciting time for the rail industry. The changes ahead will improve the reliability, capacity and connectivity of routes across the north west."

Alloa rail reopening success prompts extension study
Filed 01/09/08

The recent introduction of rail services to and from Alloa in Clackmannanshire has proved so successful that regional transport body SEStrans is to examine options for extending the service.

SEStrans - the South East Scotland Transport Partnership - intends to commission a feasibility study early next year investigating the possibility of running trains between Alloa and Edinburgh. The investigation will consider possible routes as well as options for funding the necessary infrastructure upgrades.

To reach Edinburgh, services from Alloa, which currently travel through Stirling to Glasgow Queen Street station, could run via Falkirk or alernatively be routed over the reopened freight line to Kincardine and on to Edinburgh via Dunfermaline and the Forth Bridge. It is understood this is SEStrans' preferred option.

The feasibility work will investigate the cost of improving infrastructure on the Dunfermaline route, including building a south-facing chord at Charlestown Junction, which would avoid the need for trains to reverse, and building passing loops between there and Alloa.

A spokesman for SEStrans said: "This is essentially about the possibility of restoring a passenger link across south east Scotland, which has been made more realistic by the recent Alloa–Kincardine project. There are a number of potential benefits."

Alloa railway station was reopened earlier this year after a 13-mile stretch of disused line between Stirling and Longannet Power Station in Kincardine was reinstated (Transport Briefing 19/05/08). Since its re-opening, the number of passengers using the service has exceeded the expectations of train operator First Scotrail, which said it has been carrying nearly 35,000 passengers a week.


Network Rail picks Mace for Birmingham New St work
Filed 03/09/08

Construction services and engineering company Mace has been selected by Network Rail as delivery partner for the Gateway Plus project to overhaul and expand the concourse and platforms at Birmingham New Street station.

A member of staff at Mace confirmed the contract win this week ahead of an official announcement in a fortnight's time when Network Rail will reveal details of the companies that will be responsible for delivering the separate components of the £600m scheme, which will double passenger capacity at the West Midlands rail hub.

Balfour Beatty Management and Carillion are understood to have competed against Mace for the delivery partner role.

Work on the Gateway Plus project is scheduled to begin next year and will be split into two phases for completion in 2013. The station concourse will be doubled in size and platforms 8 and 9 - the station's busiest - will be widened. New escalators and lifts will be installed and the number of entrances to the station will be increased from two to five.

The scheme is being funded by the Department for Transport, the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and the New Street Gateway Partnership - a consortium of local authority partners.

Eurostar kicks off six-year train refurbishment programme
Filed 03/09/08

Cross-Channel train operator Eurostar is to embark on a major refurbishment of its high speed trainsets in an attempt to encourage more travellers to use the High Speed 1 rail link between London and Continental Europe.

The six-year overhaul programme is intended to improve the standard of carriage accommodation with cutting edge design that will help Eurostar lure passengers from airlines. The interiors of the company's 28 Class 273 trains, which were built in 1992 and have been operating services through the Channel Tunnel since 1994, are looking increasingly shabby alongside the recently opened St Pancras and Ebbsfleet International stations.

Eurostar has divided the refurbishment work into three lots focusing on concept design, manufacturing integration and fit out/delivery and is inviting expressions of interest from suppliers which feel they can handle one or more lots. For the concept design work Eurostar says it is "looking for a partner that can help us define the next generation of high speed rail travel, who has the breadth of knowledge to be able to address all the different facets of the brief, from customer insights, environmental concerns, service design, maintenance issues, cleaning regimes and statutory requirements to ultimately deliver a unique brand experience that is both aspirational for our travellers and ownable by Eurostar".

The remit of the integrator includes responsibility for ensuring that each interior component is produced in accordance with the selected design, on time and on budget. Concept and engineering designs must be validated by the manufacturing integrator, which must also take ownership of those designs, carrying out their own engineering designs if necessary.

Finally, the fit out/delivery work includes the management of all staff involved in this phase of the refurbishment and the supplier must be able to work at third party premises in parallel to the technical mid-life overhaul of the Eurostar fleet, which may be carried out in-house. Tenders for all three lots must be submitted by the end of this month.

Link.
http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/

Great news about Birmingham New Street :)

The Eurostar trains were refurbished a few years ago, IIRC. I suppose that someone has now decided that it wasn't good enough.

FINALLY! New Street is going to get a major overhaul! It desperately needs it - what a disgusting station.

Any pictures of New Street's interior, platforms etc?
I can only remember seeing the photo thats on wikipedia.

There should be loads of vids on youtube and loads of pics on various fotopic pages. Not sure about renders for the new redevelopment though.

And read the bit where you tell someone to "get a life"?

You might actual want to join your friend.

Magellan - You took it off topic when you thought I was arguing about the 1hr 10mins. And then you started the insults. Maybe you should review your attitude to your postings.

Twice this thread has gone off-topic and yes I responded to it (technically it was Hoosier who took the thread off topic, then Sotonsi, then me), but I am not going to sit idly by whilst people make unfair comments about sections of the human race. I also think I have the right to correct people when they misunderstand my posts, and when my posts are perfectly clear in the first place I won't make any apologies for it either.



A typical response from someone without humility - how about answering to the point? Did I argue with you over the 1hr 10 minute thing? No. Are you going to respond when I put it to you that you therefore have taken this off topic?

So you are still persisting in this line. You need to stop lecturing others and sort your attitude out. You may want to go away and practice your interpersonal skills if you do not like the criticism.

Well I have taken it up with Virgin and it appears there won't be very large time savings for Brum to London services anyway. It turns out I should have argued! Much ado about nothing. The fastest service will be 1 hr 12 minutes, and that will be achieved by being non-stop - as I thought. The rest of the services will take 1 hr 22 minutes.

http://www.virgintrains.com/img/aboutus/downloads/WC_2009_Timetable_Commentary.pdf

The 1h 12m service is the one Virgin has been referring to. So I do not see how that is substantially different from the what I said which was based on Virgin's press releases. You see to like creating arguments out of nothing.

:ohno:







^^ The "TGV" family vehicles (of wich Eurostar is a member) use shorter cars suported by pairs tru a common bogie:


There are no "high speed" lines in britain because the "standard speed" lines are up to 125mph/201km/h so they sufice as fast railway routes ... and there are too many "upgradeable" routes to choose from for a "brand new" HSL to even be considerable as "doable" ... both in terms of economic cost of that construction and in terms of trying to bypass the "moronic" (no ofense here) and "predatorial" (take ofense here) local authorities/against-anything-groups along the way of the not-even-proposed-but-already-oposed route.


:lol:

For the given example (London-Birmingham) ... out of 3 or four possible routes for a new HSL ... theres already a railway built in everyone of them ... and it's an "upgradeable" railway in every case. :ohno:

Let me see how it is nowadays:

London-Bedford-Wigston-Nuneaton-(Coventry)-Birmingham
London-MiltonKeines-(Northampton)-Rugby-Coventry-Birmingham
London-Aylesbury-(closed railway)-...-Birmingham
London-H.Wycombe-Banbury-LeamingtonSpa-birmingham
London-Reading-Oxford-Banbury/Gloucester-Worcester-Birmingham

^^ The fact that only one of these routes is being "upgraded" to 125mph (and one is even closed) should make some light on the matter. :ohno:


There is the Channel Link, or HS1 as it is now called.

I think you will find that Network Rail has come to the conclusion that it is neither economically viable nor practical to make significant upgrades to the existing lines which will in most cases be required to cope with projected growth in commuter and freight traffic.

The Greengauge study has already identified viable paths for most of the route between London and Birmingham making use of existing alignments in some instances, and new links in others.

There will be difficulties with the planning process, but the process may have changed, under current proposals, by the time any such project gets off the ground.

I think there is a growing industry consensus that with even conservative growth rates the main approaches to London are already full and more and more trains will see more standing passengers. The government has already had to perform a u-turn on electification as it's excuses not to electrify began to face ever greater ridicule.

Everyone knows that the first section of line will run from London to Birmingham. Most of the proposed routes all take a Western approach into London, because of the spare land running alonside the Central line, and link up with the newly expanded Trent Valley lines North of Birmingham. This section has been recently widened so should have a few years capacity still in it. All that differs on how they access Moor Street in Birmingham and how or whether they interface with Heathrow.

Conspiracy theorists (or realists) have suggested the sudden plethora of studies is a way to delay as long as possible the building of a new high speed line. The Department of transport was supposedly worried because the proposed HS2 line was gaining to much support too quickly, within the industry.

It's a long standing technique in the UK to string along a project, not wanting to to cancel a popular proposal but not actually commit any money to it. Most of the time it is quietly strangled, sometimes though it becomes to powerful to stop, and usually some deformed scheme lurches to life with so many changes, sometimes for the better, but often pared down in capacity to save money that as soon as it opens they have to start looking at upgrading it.

I agree with most of what you are say. I think a big issue though is the difficulty of making funding available. There is opposition from the Rail regulator to HSL, but there is also a problem with finding the money which is a significant delaying factor even if there was a change of opinion at the ORR.

I think £30 Billion was quoted for a full HSL link to Scotland, but this exceeds NR's current level of debt. There are also funding difficulties with existing projects, namely Crossrail, and the £1billion+ gap in NR's estimates of its requirements for the next control period.

They may also feel that they can not afford HSL and large-scale electrification at the same time, with teh latter winning out in the light of high fuel costs.

New St renders

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x13/mikeyfox23/Buildings/Eastern_view_from_Bullring_night1.jpg

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x13/mikeyfox23/Buildings/View_from_South_West.jpg

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x13/mikeyfox23/Buildings/Southern_view.jpg

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x13/mikeyfox23/Buildings/Inside_atrium1.jpg

^^^ isnt the current place a dump?

yeah, its a bit of a hell hole. I'll try and find some pics.

Current station from above. The middle right of the pic is the main entrance to the station - which is what the first render is showing.

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/11186-1/birmingham-new-st-air-aa08355b.jpg?g2_GALLERYSID=37add3ee2d2c807c30c68453835a2921

Main entrance shown here from ground

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/79/257032523_a0eb737658.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/116/257032517_87c094b573.jpg?v=0

(Photos by brianjackson.art on Flickr)


An example of one of the platforms:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/217/521885307_721937d552.jpg?v=0

(photo by abrinsky on Flickr)

The 1h 12m service is the one Virgin has been referring to. So I do not see how that is substantially different from the what I said which was based on Virgin's press releases.

You shouted at me when I proposed this exact 10 minutes could only be shaved off with less stops, or extra engineering works that I didn't know of. Which was it?

Less stops. I thank you good night.


You see to like creating arguments out of nothing.

You created this argument out of nothing.

Was it right to privatize British Railroads? Here in Turkey, TCDD is to be privatized and many people say that this will increase train crashes.

It did increase train crashes here. Specifically the issue was the privatisation of the actual track. It was under the control of the private company Railtrack, who ended up cutting corners. As a result the track eventually ended up in a terrible state. After a couple of terrible accidents that were down to points failing or rails literally falling apart under the wheels big changes were enforced. Railtrack was forced to start a massive repair regime and for years there thousands of temporary speed restrictions all over the network. On the 10 minute journey to my college at the time there were three reducing the speed from 90mph to 20mph. It was actually quite scary how bad it became. Railtrack eventually folded under the costs and was dissolved by the government, and a psuedo-government "not for profit" organisation Network Rail was set up to take over Railtrack's mess. Since then things have drastucally improved.

In my opinion safety is not now adversely affected by the fact that the railways are privatised, though other people may disagree.

The current station looks hideous - worst than Euston!

^^ Yes, it has to be the crappiest major station in the country imo, I Ihave to use it every working day :cry:

Ian Hislop on BBC3, available for this week.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00drtpj/

British trains rule!

UK commuters face more crowding and higher fares

LONDON, Oct 15 (Reuters) - British rail commuters face increased crowding at peak times until planned investment in new carriages and longer stations is completed, the government's spending watchdog said on Wednesday.

They can also expect to pay higher fares, the National Audit Office (NAO) said in a report on rail company franchises.

The government announced plans last year for 1,300 extra carriages as well as investment to alter junctions and lengthen platforms to allow operators to run longer trains.

Taken together, these measures aim to increase rail capacity by a fifth by 2014 but until then long-suffering commuters, particularly in London, face a peak time crush, the watchdog said.

Fares will also rise as operators seek to encourage passengers to travel outside peak hours and the increasingly crowded "shoulder peak" times.

Last year, for example, Stagecoach South West Trains increased by 20 percent fares for passengers travelling to London after the morning peak but arriving before 11 a.m.

Fares regulated by the Department for Transport -- 43 percent of the total -- are also set to rise on average one percentage point above inflation, as measured by the retail price index.

"Travelling by rail is still too often an unpleasant experience," said Edward Leigh, chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts, to which the NAO reports.

"The news that fares are likely to rise above inflation in these difficult times will infuriate many passengers who have no alternative but to travel day after day on packed trains."

A spokeswoman for rail consumer body Passenger Focus said operators should use lower fares to encourage passengers to travel at quieter times, rather than penalising them with high rates for journeys during busy periods.

The Department for Transport said there had been record levels of rail passenger growth over the last decade and that increasing capacity was a priority.

"That is why over 10 billion pounds is being invested to tackle the crowding problems currently experienced by passengers," it said.

Are there any double-decker British trains?

Are there any double-decker British trains?

Nope:ohno:

There used to be on the south east lines out of London. It didn't last long.

It was too cramped. Double decker train are really only viable where you can make them big enough to be comfortable. And that's anywhere in the world apart for the UK pretty much - the loading guage is often too small.

http://dart75.tripod.com/bddshis.htm

For those seriously interested in the British rail network and trains -

http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/

Free weekly magazine available to download (and all previous editions are available still to download). Happy reading/viewing! :)

There used to be on the south east lines out of London. It didn't last long.

It was too cramped. Double decker train are really only viable where you can make them big enough to be comfortable. And that's anywhere in the world apart for the UK pretty much - the loading guage is often too small.

http://dart75.tripod.com/bddshis.htm

Ive seen those before, and although they definitely looked cramped, they dont appear to be split-level (ie the lowest floor is platform level). It would seem like you could get an extra 2 ft or so of height by lowering the lower level, which might just make them viable (maybe). Would still be pretty cramped of course.

I went on a double decker in Germany - the top deck had me very nearly ducking, at about 5' 3" - I think the height must have been 1.6m of that deck.

Britain needs to quit being so bloody stingy and make the investments necessary to have a top rate rail system. CHina is going apeshit in expanding its rail network. The West needs to follow CHina's lead.

You can't really compare the railway networks or the situation of China and Great Britain*! The British network is historic (something like 90% built pre-1880 or so) and the population density of the country (as well as limitations regarding historic structures, protected landscapes, etc) mean that upgrading and expanding the railways is expensive and troublesome. China is a rapidly industrialising nation - Britain went through that phase over a century ago and built its railway network accordingly. Since then the country and its railways have changed massively as the country has de-industrialised. There has been enormous investment in the past decade in Great Britain, both for passenger and freight, and the numbers using the network, and the freight moved, is up to near all-time record highs. Lines previously closed in the 1950s and '60s are re-opening or are planned to. Scotland and Wales are leading the way in this regard.

*note that Great Britain has a railway network and Ireland has a separate network with a different gauge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_gauge_in_Ireland

Question being here is whether new railway lines these days, are they being built to the W6 Loading gauge, ie, the Berne Loading Gauge or are they still being built to UK Loading gauge spec? Reason being is that I would love to see something like the Australian Millenium train or the TGV Duplex come to the UK. For those trunk routes like London-Manchester or London-Birmingham, where additional capacity would be nice! :)

Another question is whether with any rail replacement/track relaying, is there any effort being made into relaying them to the Berne Loading Gauge?

I think I read a report somewhere that put the cost of the entire network being put to Berne Loading gauge at the region of £150 billion, which I think makes a wholesale conversion unviable, but I've always wondered whether doing it piecemeal on the mainlines would be financially viable.

I'm not sure whether or not I'd like to see the Millenium train being run on British rails - it's an okay train, but I wouldn't say it stands out from its class. The TGV Duplex, however, I agree 100% - I'd love to see them running!

Question being here is whether new railway lines these days, are they being built to the W6 Loading gauge, ie, the Berne Loading Gauge or are they still being built to UK Loading gauge spec? Reason being is that I would love to see something like the Australian Millenium train or the TGV Duplex come to the UK. For those trunk routes like London-Manchester or London-Birmingham, where additional capacity would be nice! :)


The most important issue is catering for demand that exists - and that is high cube deep sea containers which cannot operate on most of the network. At present there are no double decker trains that need this extra size but there are freight wagons that do. I think NR are taking a progressive approach to increasing guage on the mainlines, but from a freight perspective. Upgrades when renewals take place is only done where it would have a future as they are under pressure to cut costs and converting a little used branch line to Berne guage would be folly of course. They are required to give provision for future electrification however, especially when re-doing signalling.

I haven't checked for any specifics but these two documents should have some answers in there for you.

(watch out 13Mb) http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/freight/freight%20rus.pdf


http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/Update/Strategic%20Business%20Plan%20April%20update.pdf

The W6 loading gauge is the most wide spread and rolling stock built to that gauge should be able to run on most of the network.

There are a few diagrams of different UK and European loading gauges here (http://www.btinternet.com/~joyce.whitchurch/gauges/text.htm) that might be of interest.

W6 is pretty tight really - in fact very similar to the New Zealand standard loading gauge - which meant that all those ex-British Rail carriages exported to NZ didn't require much work clearance wise to run (narrow gauge bogies lowered the height a little). Some even went into service with British Rail "No Smoking" and "First Class" signs still stuck inside the double glazed window units and still fitted with BR seats.

I went on a double decker in Germany - the top deck had me very nearly ducking, at about 5' 3" - I think the height must have been 1.6m of that deck.
They certainly offer than 1,80 m. I can comfortably stand there. And I'm 1,80 m tall.

funny, I distinctly remember that I was one of the few in our group that could stand without problems. Then again, a lot of the group were rather tall, but it was more than just the giants that had to stoop to get a seat. It was easily bearable (and rather funny - I love it when people who are tall have problems because of it, as normally they make fun of my smallness), but rather claustrophobic compared to what I was used to (then again, that was A stock - the largest, most spacious, trains in the UK!) Then again it was 8 years ago.

CREWE

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/26521-1/crewelocoworks-aa13238b.jpg

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/26525-1/railwayage-aa13240b.jpg

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/26537-1/crewestationaerial-ba16737.jpg

And another railway mecca in Britain - Doncaster:

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/doncaster/aerial-doncaster.htm

Old documentary from about 15 years ago called "Old, Dirty & Late" about the problems of commuting in south east London. A lot has changed since then, the railways have been privatised, all the old trains have bee replaced and even more trains are now using these tracks.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=J-peIDOiTt8&NR=1

Congested UK railways costing passengers dear

LONDON, Nov 18 (Reuters) - Increasing congestion on the British railways is magnifying the effect of disruptions and leaving passengers facing costly delays, the government spending watchdog said on Tuesday.

The warning comes at a time when Network Rail, which owns and operates Britain's rail infrastructure, is under pressure to avoid a repeat of last year's Christmas getaway period, when they were fined 14 million pounds after engineering works overran, delaying the journeys of 200,000 people.

"Rail passengers pay handsomely to travel on trains and yet, through incidents on the network, are still suffering expensive delays," said Edward Leigh, chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts.

The Committee, which published a report into how incidents on the rail network are managed, found the reliability of trains has only just returned to levels that existed before the Hatfield train crash in October 2000.

The crash, which killed four people, led to widespread engineering work to replace sections of track.

During 2006-2007, over 1.2 billion passenger journeys were made in Britain, but the committee says this number is growing and greater congestion on the network means greater disruptions when problems occur.

The committee found that nine out of 10 services in 2006-2007 arrived on time but delays still cost passengers, who already paid a total of 5.1 billion pounds in fares, an extra 1 billion pounds in terms of lost time.

It also said the rail industry, which last year received more than 5 billion pounds in subsidies, needs to improve communications with the emergency services to minimise disruptions to the network. It found fire and rescue services often did not even know who to contact.

The report also found passengers whose trains are delayed are not kept properly informed by train operators. This finding was echoed by Passenger Focus, the national rail watchdog, who said only 34 percent of passengers are satisfied with the way train companies deal with delays.

"Passengers are rightly angered when their train comes to a halt for a lengthy period and nobody in the train crew can give them any information," Leigh said.

Britain needs true 300 + km/h HSR. For such a developed and wealthy nation, with so many kilometers of track and so many people traveling via rail, to not have more than just one high speed rail line (London-Paris) is very sad.

Then again, it is a shame that the richest country in the world, America, has such a shitty rail system as well.

Britain needs true 300 + km/h HSR. For such a developed and wealthy nation, with so many kilometers of track and so many people traveling via rail, to not have more than just one high speed rail line (London-Paris) is very sad.

Then again, it is a shame that the richest country in the world, America, has such a shitty rail system as well.

This argument has been used before. High speed rail won't necessarily result in that great an advantage in journey times unless built on a completely segregated network due to the frequency of stops along the main rail corridors. Considering the journey from London to Manchester can be done in ~2 hours by rail I wouldn't complain too much about the state of British railways with regards to speed nor frequency (as that route is being bumped up to a 20 minute frequency). I'd hardly put Britains railways in the same bag as American passenger rail services by any stretch of the imagination though.

If you were to moan about the price, however, I'd agree with you 100%.

High speed rail won't necessarily result in that great an advantage in journey times unless built on a completely segregated network due to the frequency of stops along the main rail corridors.

I don't understand, where has high speed rail not been segregated?
I'm not sure about your point about the frequency of stops either, London - Glasgow trains are slowed down by many stops yes, but if Virgin didn't stop at these places there would almost be no one stopping there as the line is at capacity. HSL is as much to relieve capacity, have intermediate places served by intermediate services and make long distance travel separate as it is about decreasing journey times. Source Netwrok Rail.

Britain needs true 300 + km/h HSR. For such a developed and wealthy nation, with so many kilometers of track and so many people traveling via rail, to not have more than just one high speed rail line (London-Paris) is very sad.

Then again, it is a shame that the richest country in the world, America, has such a shitty rail system as well.

The building of high speed railway lines in the UK is very costly - either new lines would have to be built, which is nearly impossible in such a densely populated and urban country like ours, or existing lines would have to be upgraded, which would cause massive disruption and cost loads as existing tunnels, bridges, stations, etc would have to be replaced or altered.

The UK has a large existing network, which due to a long period of neglect and recent huge rises in passenger and freight use, needs investment, renewing and upgrading. I think it is right, for now at least, to concentrate on bringing the existing network up to scratch, before creating new long distance, high speed lines, which after all the majority of rail users in the UK wouldn't necessarily use.

Anyway, although we only have one 186mph/300kmph line, there are the East and West Coast Mainlines, which are 140mph and 125mph respectfully. Okay, the ECML is only 125mph as there isn't the approved signalling for 140mph running (though the track actually supports 140mph running). Many other lines in the country have 100 or 110 mph linespeeds. In a country that's not very big, with a high density of stations and junctions, those linespeeds are actually reasonable. Considering that the network was built mainly in the 1830s/1840s and which was almost left to ruin at times during the 20th century (1940s, 1960s, 1980s and 1990s), it's not doing too badly... ;)

I don't understand, where has high speed rail not been segregated?

Germany - The ICE network isn't totally segregated yet it is regarded as high speed rail.

As an example of what's possible at the moment in the UK - you can go from the centre of Manchester to the centre of London in 2 hours, with a train every 20 minutes (this is with the new winter timetable as from 14th December) via the West Coast Mainline. Building a high speed line between the two cities would only cut the journey time to 1 hour 30 mins - is the 30 minute saving really worth the billions of pounds of cost?

Germany - The ICE network isn't totally segregated yet it is regarded as high speed rail.

Yes thats true, although they still built new lines for it. They didn't just upgrade existing routes for v. high speed services, although they have done that on certain sections. The point I'm trying to make is that actually there is no reason for any HSL we build to be totally segregated either. HS1 isn't in theory, it will have domestic services on it that under EU regs don't count as high speed, and it is also designed to accept freight. In fact, the class 375 southeastern use are also designed with using HS1 in mind, although the purchase of 395s has put paid to that. So segregation, if it occurs, would be down to other considerations that would cause it, and not be a central tenet of the proposal.

As an example of what's possible at the moment in the UK - you can go from the centre of Manchester to the centre of London in 2 hours, with a train every 20 minutes (this is with the new winter timetable as from 14th December) via the West Coast Mainline. Building a high speed line between the two cities would only cut the journey time to 1 hour 30 mins - is the 30 minute saving really worth the billions of pounds of cost?

In terms of long distance high speed services on their own, probably not. Add in to the equation a doubling of freight, local and regional capacity (varied stopping patterns and vehicle speeds brings inefficient use of a network), an increase in TOC performance that a less diverse service mix always brings (local and regional trains don't spread any disruption so far throughout the network, and freight trains aren't too bothered about being kept on a loop for other things to pass if they are delayed so again they don't propogate delays in the same way), and suddenly the equation looks very different. This is what NR have said in the Network RUS.

More pix please!

Freight locomotives (all diesel):

Class 37 - these legends were built c. 1960 and are still going!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/37674_%27Saint_Blaise_Church_1445-1995%27_at_Westbury.JPG/800px-37674_%27Saint_Blaise_Church_1445-1995%27_at_Westbury.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/68/37038_at_Crewe_Works.jpg/800px-37038_at_Crewe_Works.jpg

Class 57 - many of these are used to haul passenger services too
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/57012_%27Freightliner_Envoy%27_at_Ipswich.JPG/800px-57012_%27Freightliner_Envoy%27_at_Ipswich.JPG

Class 60
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fd/60040_60065_60022PeakForest.jpg/800px-60040_60065_60022PeakForest.jpg

Class 66 - the most numerous locos in use at the moment for freight in Britain
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/CLASS66LOCOMOTIVE.JPG/800px-CLASS66LOCOMOTIVE.JPG

Class 08 (Shunter)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fd/08032_merehead_050507_d.adkins.jpg/800px-08032_merehead_050507_d.adkins.jpg

The very recently built Tornado is the first new steam locomotive built in Britain since 1960 and will be used for special trains on the national mainline and on heritage lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LNER_Peppercorn_Class_A1_60163_Tornado

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/60163_Tornado_1.jpg/800px-60163_Tornado_1.jpg

She will be painted soon. Currently undergoing extensive safety checks so that she can run at full speed on the mainline!

Class 45 on the Great Central Railway
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Great_Central_Railway_D123_Kinchley_Lane.jpg

(Electric) Class 87 on the West Coast Mainline
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/03/WCML_near_Ansty.jpg

(Electric high speed train) Virgin Pendolino and EWS Class 66 on the West Coast Mainline
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/37/Pendolino_and_Freight_train.jpg

Class 143 unit at Bristol Temple Meads
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ad/GB_Class_143_dmu_143603_(uncropped).jpg/800px-GB_Class_143_dmu_143603_(uncropped).jpg

Class 323 (electric multiple unit) at Manchester Piccadilly
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/323225_at_Manchester_Piccadilly.JPG/800px-323225_at_Manchester_Piccadilly.JPG

Class 175 (diesel multiple unit) at Newport
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/175008_at_Newport.jpg/800px-175008_at_Newport.jpg

As you can gather, there's quite a bit of variety in Britain!

There are a few electric locomotives used for freight, though freight is generally hauled by diesel as only a third of the network is electrified.

Class 90 (in a very clean EWS livery)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/90017_at_Norwich.JPG/800px-90017_at_Norwich.JPG

Class 92 hauling container traffic through Stafford (this is a very common sight in Manchester)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/01/92027_George_Eliot_at_Stafford.jpg/800px-92027_George_Eliot_at_Stafford.jpg

A contrast - two recently built lines...

The London-Paris (via the Channel Tunnel) line in Kent
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Eurostar_on_CTRL.jpg

The Welsh Highland Railway in North Wales
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/138andgoods.jpg/800px-138andgoods.jpg

The Welsh Highland Railway will connect with the Ffestiniog Railway in spring 2009.

:D

Is that a real revenue freight or just a ballast replacement? A steam locomotive hauling something that isn't an old timey passenger car full of tourists with cameras, how insanely cool is that?

Anyways, when are they gonna roll out those Shinkansen-type CTRL trains?

Alas, only ballast replacement.

The Welsh Highland Railway is primarily a tourist/heritage railway, though it is newly built (completion next year) and will serve the national park it runs through in a commercial way. (Note that in the UK a "national park" isn't a park as such..) It will connect with the Ffestiniog Railway at Portmadog. Both are private railways, though with certain national rail tickets you can use the Ffestiniog line as part of a longer journey which otherwise uses national lines (the Ffestiniog Railway connects the Cambrian Coast line with the Llandudno Junction-Blaneau Ffestiniog line). The Welsh Highland Railway runs across from the Welsh north coast to its West coast, starting at Carnarvon. It may be possible to extend it to Bangor, where it would connect with the Chester-Holyhead line. So you see, these narrow gauge railways do form part of the wider network.

Both the Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland are 2ft narrow gauge.

http://whr.bangor.ac.uk/whrroute.htm

25 miles long. Its objective is... "As well as being a magnet for rail enthusiasts, the rebuilt line will also offer a new way to reach the communities and countryside en route, and offer an alternative to motor transport in an ecologically sensitive area, particularly for the tens of thousands who visit Snowdonia every Summer." It wouldn't surprise me if the national park authority use the line to move materials in and out of the park, as there is little road access in parts.

The Ffestiniog Railway is 14 miles long, so the combined railways are 39 miles - quite a long narrow gauge railway network! Maps of the Ffestiniog and Welsh Highland Railways:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Ffestiniog_Railway_map_(en).svg/800px-Ffestiniog_Railway_map_(en).svg.pnghttp://whr.bangor.ac.uk/maps/whr-map.jpg

Up-to-date construction photos can be found here (scroll down):
http://www.isengard.co.uk/

Anyways, when are they gonna roll out those Shinkansen-type CTRL trains?

These beauties?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_395

Next year. :D

aWnCldAMORA

That steam train powered up the main line a few days back, looks like afew spotters were lining the route as it came past at 75mph. Bit strange seeing a steam train going up the ECML in 2008! Apparently it can go up to 90mph.

Maybe not on the ECML, but steam is surprisingly common on the national lines in Britain, especially at weekends. There are a lot of chartered/special trains running, some of which are diesel and some steam. Every fortnight or so a steam loco hauled train passes through Manchester Victoria.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/42/106685952_412e7d0746.jpg

Do british suburb trains share tracks with mainline trains or they have dedicated tracks?

Theres no big differentiation - they are all part of the national rail system. Some have local only services, some have local and long distance on the same lines, some will have 4 tracks with the inner two for express.

Theres no big differentiation - they are all part of the national rail system. Some have local only services, some have local and long distance on the same lines, some will have 4 tracks with the inner two for express.or the right two, or the left two, or the outer two. In fact, I think the paired-by-speed arrangement is perhaps more common than the paired-by-direction. Often there's a flyover switching between the two types (Ilford, Wimbledon).

or the right two, or the left two, or the outer two. In fact, I think the paired-by-speed arrangement is perhaps more common than the paired-by-direction. Often there's a flyover switching between the two types (Ilford, Wimbledon).

To expand on this, in the South East (of London) its nearly always paired by speed. Out to Orpington, Shortlands to Swanley, Victoria to Three Bridges on the Brighton mainline. The latter is like this I think because the second fast set of tracks was added later. I think thats often the reason for that type of operation. I know the SouthWest mainline from Waterloo is paired by direction after Wimbledon, but I think that maybe down to the flyover works done on that route in the late 19th century to speed it up. Do you think the Ilford flyover may have been an 'upgrade' too? Paired by speed seems to make more sense with flat junctions, paired by direction makes more sense if there are semi-grade separated junctions, so you don't have situations where one train has to cross three other tracks in one go.

The Welsh Highland Railway is primarily a tourist/heritage railway, though it is newly built (completion next year) and will serve the national park it runs through in a commercial way. (Note that in the UK a "national park" isn't a park as such..) It will connect with the Ffestiniog Railway at Portmadog. Both are private railways, though with certain national rail tickets you can use the Ffestiniog line as part of a longer journey which otherwise uses national lines (the Ffestiniog Railway connects the Cambrian Coast line with the Llandudno Junction-Blaneau Ffestiniog line). The Welsh Highland Railway runs across from the Welsh north coast to its West coast, starting at Carnarvon. It may be possible to extend it to Bangor, where it would connect with the Chester-Holyhead line. So you see, these narrow gauge railways do form part of the wider network.

That sounds like a damn cool project actually. Most of the time those "old" railway lines are just an isolated piece of track, but this one sounds great.

The Welsh Highland extension involves goes through great scenery - I went along part of the route at Easter en-route to Pwllheli. It's very, very cool. Definitely worth a ride when it opens.

Some photos of the Class 395 "Javelin" trains at their rather shiny and new depot!

http://paulbigland.fotopic.net/c1599018.html

What are the frequencies like on the suburban rail systems in cities like Birmingham, Manchester & Liverpool? Do they made for good mass transit systems - or are the too irregular for that?

Basically, do they operate in an S-bahn type fashion?

I can't believe I've never even wondered about this before...

The City Line in Birmingham operates 6tph for it's central section. The other lines are in the 2tph range, IIRC.

The Wirral Line is made up of three 4tph services (Liverpool-West Kirby, Liverpool-New Brighton, Liverpool-Hooton splitting to 2tph Chester, 2tph Ellesmere Port). The Northern line is also made up of three 4tph services (Central-Kirkby, Central-Ormskirk, Hunts Cross-Southport).

Outside London the major cities don't really have dedicated suburban networks as such - the stations and lines in the suburbs are basically part of the national network that just happen to be within the urban area! There are dedicated commuter/suburban services and ticketing though, its just they run as part of the wider network and on national lines.

Greater Manchester's railway network:
http://www.gmpte.com/pdfmaps/GMPTERaildiagA4.pdf

The frequencies vary from line to line and I find that these days it's pretty good. They vary from 2 trains per hour up to about 4 or 5. It's not amazing but then the demand isn't that high as Manchester has a good bus network as well as trams and much of the employment is towards Trafford Park, etc where people commute generally by car.

The map above also includes the city's tram network ("Metrolink"), which is growing and is of course a dedicated network specifically for more local transit. Manchester's trams are quite heavily engineered and the infrastructure resembles actual railway lines/stations (probably because much of the network is ex-railway!) and frequencies are good with trams around every 8 minutes or so usually.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Sale_Metrolink_station.jpg

toot!

Whilst on the subject of the Metrolink - it's being rebranded over the next few years and the first station to have received the new branding is Piccadilly.

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/2439/metrolink003jm8.jpg

The network is to be expanded in the next two years with 4 additional lines (one long one, two medium length ones and one very tiny extension!) -
http://www.gmpte.com/pdfmaps/Geo_Metrolink_Extensions.pdf - new map of the network, come 2011 or so.

And the new trams will look like this:

http://www.designweek.co.uk/assets/getasset.aspx?uiAssetID=5313af97-8c1e-43ac-846d-16b5d01dc56b

Dots are the new racing stripe of trams! ;)

Looks good though! I have to agree with your comment about commuter rail in the UK. I do wish we had more discernable suburban services like the continent, but at least routes are operated on a fairly frequent basis on the whole.

Outside London the major cities don't really have dedicated suburban networks as such - the stations and lines in the suburbs are basically part of the national network that just happen to be within the urban area! There are dedicated commuter/suburban services and ticketing though, its just they run as part of the wider network and on national lines.

Greater Manchester's railway network:
http://www.gmpte.com/pdfmaps/GMPTERaildiagA4.pdf

The frequencies vary from line to line and I find that these days it's pretty good. They vary from 2 trains per hour up to about 4 or 5. It's not amazing but then the demand isn't that high as Manchester has a good bus network as well as trams and much of the employment is towards Trafford Park, etc where people commute generally by car.

The map above also includes the city's tram network ("Metrolink"), which is growing and is of course a dedicated network specifically for more local transit. Manchester's trams are quite heavily engineered and the infrastructure resembles actual railway lines/stations (probably because much of the network is ex-railway!) and frequencies are good with trams around every 8 minutes or so usually.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Sale_Metrolink_station.jpg

toot!

Thanks for the information!

When I was growing up in the UK, both cities I lived in had metros (London & Newcastle) so I'd never really thought about other cities and their rail systems. It seems strange that the heavy rail systems of Britain's largest cities haven't really been utilised to their full potential - sure 4 trains an hour is good - but considering how dense cities like Brum, Manchester and Liverpool are, S-bahn type rail systems seem like they'd work really well. Even though [I presume] that the national rail lines going through the cities would be so congested that billions of pounds would have to be spent on signaling and track work to prepare them.

I also find it astounding how well the bus systems of the UK work. Australian cities would crumble to pieces without their suburban rail systems - and Britain copes brilliantly with buses, narrow streets and bigger populations, not to mention a lower rate of car ownership. I guess decentralisation might be a factor working in the UK's favour in this respect?

I also have to commend Manchester on it's Metrolink - brilliant system. I spent a week in Manchester a few years ago and used it extensively. Manchester has to be one of my top three cities on earth for sheer coolness!

It seems strange that the heavy rail systems of Britain's largest cities haven't really been utilised to their full potential - sure 4 trains an hour is good - but considering how dense cities like Brum, Manchester and Liverpool are, S-bahn type rail systems seem like they'd work really well. Even though [I presume] that the national rail lines going through the cities would be so congested that billions of pounds would have to be spent on signaling and track work to prepare them.

Yeah you've hit the nail on the head. the best example is Birmingham, the route there between new street and Wolverhampton has a pathetic service for the locals, primarily due to the route being a two track line in a very densely built area, and that it is mainly used up by intercity and inter-regional services. This is part of the argument for HSR, in that having many of these services removed would allow a better local service giving benefits all round. the unfortunate truth for the UK is that many of the railways were designed and built primarily for freight operation, especially in the industrial heartlands, and so are not at all what any sensible railway planner would wish to have as passenger railway infrastructure. Still, we have to make do and where possible ake improvements. Slowly this will happen, and I think in 20 years time the local services in the cities will be much better due to infrastructure changes like Birmingham New st redevelopment and (fingers crossed) HSR.

I'm getting pretty certain that high speed lines will begin to be built within a decade.

Yeah me too but I don't like to tempt fate!

crap! sorry.

I tried to postsome phtoso but it went wrong (moderators delete!)

Britain needs true 300 + km/h HSR. For such a developed and wealthy nation, with so many kilometers of track and so many people traveling via rail, to not have more than just one high speed rail line (London-Paris) is very sad.

Then again, it is a shame that the richest country in the world, America, has such a shitty rail system as well.

I don't understand, where has high speed rail not been segregated?
I'm not sure about your point about the frequency of stops either, London - Glasgow trains are slowed down by many stops yes, but if Virgin didn't stop at these places there would almost be no one stopping there as the line is at capacity. HSL is as much to relieve capacity, have intermediate places served by intermediate services and make long distance travel separate as it is about decreasing journey times. Source Netwrok Rail.

A problem with building completely new HSR in the UK is precisely that everywhere that seems to be a good plasce to build one already has a double track railway that can be upgraded at a fraction of the cost.

:shake:

Padington-Reading = 55km = 4 tracks ... why are 2 of them not at least at 140mph/250kph ??? (actually the speed there is of 125mph)

Padington-Reading-Didcot = 4 tracks ... 80km of underused "possible" HSR ... something like 20 minutes of travell time ??

Didcot-Swindon = 40km of more 125mph/200kph
Swindon-Bath = 40km more of 125mph/200kph
Bath-Bristol = 20km
Bristol-Exeter = 120km of 125mph/250kph


London-Bristol is only 190km ... well under the 1h travel time in a nonstop train ... or even with a stop at reading ... reported to be 1h21 currently

London-Exeter is 210km ... roughly 1h30 with a couple of intermediate stops at bristol , reading and somewhere else ... reported to be 2h40 currently

From bristol there are also possible HS trains to Wales and east of Exeter

^^ Just one of "way too many" examples of WHY HSR (at more than 125mph) is not such a great improvement over the current HSR (at 125mph) network ... :cheers:

Being a little bit liberal about it:

London-Swindon = 4 track 2 of wich could easily be put at "above" 125mph if desired

Swindon-Bristol = there are two concurrent double track routes (one via bah and one via Yate?) .. if both were at 125mph and a section of 8km near Swindon were quadrupled then we could claim that there was a 4 track route all the way

an hourly service under the 1h travel time would be very competitive
a couple of aditional services with some intermediate stops would also be competitive at the 1h travel time

Pay the price to upgrade to 300kph ??? to gain some 10/20 minutes ???

London-Birmingham is operated with half hourly frequencies by two different companies ... one in the express 1h30 time and another in a regional 2h30 time.

Yes thats true, although they still built new lines for it. They didn't just upgrade existing routes for v. high speed services, although they have done that on certain sections. The point I'm trying to make is that actually there is no reason for any HSL we build to be totally segregated either. HS1 isn't in theory, it will have domestic services on it that under EU regs don't count as high speed, and it is also designed to accept freight. In fact, the class 375 southeastern use are also designed with using HS1 in mind, although the purchase of 395s has put paid to that. So segregation, if it occurs, would be down to other considerations that would cause it, and not be a central tenet of the proposal.

In terms of long distance high speed services on their own, probably not. Add in to the equation a doubling of freight, local and regional capacity (varied stopping patterns and vehicle speeds brings inefficient use of a network), an increase in TOC performance that a less diverse service mix always brings (local and regional trains don't spread any disruption so far throughout the network, and freight trains aren't too bothered about being kept on a loop for other things to pass if they are delayed so again they don't propogate delays in the same way), and suddenly the equation looks very different. This is what NR have said in the Network RUS.

People easily neglect the fact that HS1 was only necessary due to the souteastern railways having an ultra-restrictive gauge. :ohno:

Firstly, I dont think that upgrades of existing lines will be cheaper - the WCML upgrade to 140mph was cut bacxk because it cost £8-10bn to get it up to 125mph.

Also, its not just about speed. Its capacity, the existing lines are full or close to it. With passengers expected to rise by 40% in the near future, we need new lines. The capacity of the old lines will then increase as the fast trains which use most time on the lines due to their speed will be gone.

New ski train goes from downtown London to the footsteps of the Austrian Alps

November 9, 2008

http://www.skirebel.com/magazine/archives/1923

An overnight rail service between the UK and Austria’s ski area is being promoted as an alternative to the hassles of flying for British skiers.

The Bergland Express train travels overnight direct to famous Austrian ski resorts such as St Anton, Kitzbuhel, Innsbruck and Zell am See. In many cases you arrive ready to hit the slopes at 9am.

This winter the Bergland Express will stop at Aachen every Friday after a short connection with the Eurostar in Brussels at 14:34 local time.

Double and three-berth sleepers are available, as well as four- and six-berth couchette compartments.

The train returns a week later on Saturday evening for a mid-morning London arrival on Sunday.



Bergland Express Austrian Sleepers sound like good news for the ski crowd :)

The very recently built Tornado is the first new steam locomotive built in Britain since 1960 and will be used for special trains on the national mainline and on heritage lines.

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LNER_Peppercorn_Class_A1_60163_Tornado

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/15/60163_Tornado_1.jpg/800px-60163_Tornado_1.jpg

She will be painted soon. Currently undergoing extensive safety checks so that she can run at full speed on the mainline!

This is indeed interesting:

Additionally, to meet with current safety and operation standards, Tornado includes:
Up-rated electrical supplies
Primary air (not steam) brakes[7]
Vacuum brakes[7] (for heritage railway stock)
1 inch reduction in overall height[27] (for OLE regulations[27])
Automatic Warning System (AWS),
Train Protection & Warning System (TPWS).
Data recorder
European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) compatible GSM-Railway (GSM-R) cab radio

ERTMS and TPWS on a steamer while 1/2 de NEW locomotives around the world can't claim the same. :cheers:

Deutsche Bahn refuses to slow down.

The Guardian
November 25 2008

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/nov/25/europe-germany

"More Germans believe the banks should be nationalised than Deutsche Bahn should be privatised," admitted Alexander Hedderich, head of DB's corporate development, as pouring rain darkened the depressed mood in the federal capital.

The state-owned rail group has pulled its long-promised stockmarket float of a 24.99% state in its passenger and freight/logistics business. This was due to go ahead in late October and raise up to €5bn (£4.25bn): with equal thirds of the proceeds going to the federal budget, the network of track, signals and stations and "future growth".

The planned IPO was always controversial, not least because it came with prospective bonuses for the DB executive team headed by Hartmut Mehdorn, and because it was heavily opposed by members of Transnet, the main rail union. The union, which is shedding its pro-privatisation general secretary, reaffirmed this at its congress this week.

But DB, which wants to become top dog when the EU market for passenger services is fully liberalised in 2010 and overtake France's state-owned SNCF, is undaunted. It knows it has perhaps just six or seven months to revive the IPO next year. There are federal elections in September and much uncertainty about the outcome, notably for the deeply divided grand coalition of centre-right CDU and centre-left SPD.

The political scene in Germany is frozen – and the capital markets even more so in the unfolding financial and economic crisis. The worst recession since 1993 is taking hold. But Hedderich insists DB's business model remains intact and forecasts a small increase in passenger traffic next year as the car and aviation markets slump. At most he can envisage a 1% decline on the rails.

Even so, nobody outside DB's headquarters near the Potsdamer Platz believes the float will go ahead next year. So Mehdorn and his team have developed an alternative strategy and claim the backing of chancellor Angela Merkel and her CDU, attracting capital from sovereign wealth funds in an initial stage. Mehdorn has spoken about DB being "an ice-breaker" in a Germany highly wary of state-controlled foreign investors.

Andreas Hamprecht, head of international business at DB Long-distance, insisted during a high-speed ICE journey from Hanover to Berlin that talks with funds in the Middle East, Russia, China and elsewhere in the Far East, including Singapore, have gone down well. "It gives us the perspective of fulfilling our growth strategy," he said.

Hedderich added that much less than the 25% equity stake in the "mobility and logistics" business for sale in the IPO was on offer, with no single investor offered more than 10% and, most likely, no more than 5%. It could be the Saudis, for instance, as they're planning enormous investments in rail and need European (preferably German) expert help.

But there's considerable scepticism about the wisdom of accepting capital from state-owned Russian Railways even though Hedderich insisted no investor was excluded a priori. DB is working with the Russians on speeding up journey times on the 20-day rail transit for container trains from China to Hamburg, an expansionist project already used by PC-makers Fujitsu Siemens and designed to offer a cheaper, more eco-friendly service than sea or air freight.

Hedderich suggested DB could, in a second stage of its capital raising, return to the postponed IPO. Either way, the group wants to raise capital rather than increase its €15bn debt to finance its expansion, including in the UK, France and eastern Europe.


DB paid around £130m in January for Chiltern Railways, which operates services from London to Birmingham and Aylesbury, after previously buying freight company EWS. It has half of the new service to Shropshire and Wrexham and 50% of Lorol, the above-ground former North London Line expanding to the east.

Executives made plain that the Chiltern acquisition was a springboard to bidding for more franchises when they become available, probably including the west coast mainline operated by Virgin. There's even the distant possibility of running ICE trains through the Channel tunnel in competition with Eurostar, but that would require huge investment in compatible traction, safety and security controls at German stations.

What is certain is that EWS, which already runs a pilot freight service from Wembley to Cologne, is the front-line force for an assault against SNCF in France's freight market. Axel Marschall, an executive vice-president at DB Schenker, the freight and logistics business, said the goal was to capture up to 25% of the French market. Through its holding in Spanish freight operator Transfesa, DB plans to dominate the north-south European axis from Britain — and Denmark/Sweden — to Spain.

We're witnessing a new front in the Franco-German battle for supremacy in Europe's rail network. SNCF, the leader in passenger services, collaborates with DB in running nine daily services between Paris and Frankfurt/Stuttgart and, through Thalys, between Cologne and Brussels/Amsterdam. But the pair, both members of Railteam, are more likely to end up as sparring partners, not least in Britain.

Firstly, I dont think that upgrades of existing lines will be cheaper - the WCML upgrade to 140mph was cut bacxk because it cost £8-10bn to get it up to 125mph.

Also, its not just about speed. Its capacity, the existing lines are full or close to it. With passengers expected to rise by 40% in the near future, we need new lines. The capacity of the old lines will then increase as the fast trains which use most time on the lines due to their speed will be gone.

That depends on how you analyse the actual british High Speed network:

CTRL1 can be divided into different sections:

channel Tunnel = 15km of conventional rail double track (the tunnel itself)
folkestone-Ashford = 20km quadruplication of the OLD route (yes ... simply quadrupled) ... adding 2 new HSR tracks to the existing ones
Ashford-Northfleet = 50km of HSR built alongside an existing motorway (not that expensive)
The thames tunnel = 3km?
TTT-Barking(?) = 12km of track quadruplication
Barking(?)-St.Pancras = 20km of tunneling (where most of the cost went?)



Looking back at the WCML upgrade program (with the same argumentation that was used upon the local HSR upgrade here in portugal) we clearly see that the gamble on Pendular trains was a faulse money saver ...

It would be better if 2 aditional tracks were added alongside the route (or on a more direct route)

Due to the british "standards" that are made to 125mph the jump to 140mph or even to anything below 187mph/300kph is suposed to be considered nonsense

For an example we over here (portugal) made the jump from 140kph to 220kph in the current railways precisely because it was an enormous speed jump with lots of gains at minimal costs.

Brand NEW pure HSR are only considered when adding more tracks or just upgrading the old routes in not viable ...

WCML south from Manchester/Liverpool/Bristol and the ECML should have 4 tracks (At least) ... and theres abundant space for upgrading.

And it's ridiculous (both there in the UK and everywhere else) that railways with 125mph speed limits still have stations with passing double track layouts and with no side platforms other than those on the main tracks. :ohno:

People easily neglect the fact that HS1 was only necessary due to the souteastern railways having an ultra-restrictive gauge. :ohno:err, not entirely - capacity was a big issue (otherwise why not just make the railway a bigger gauge from the Maidstone area to Cheriton, where lines run side by side), as was having to have dual voltage, restricting stock.A problem with building completely new HSR in the UK is precisely that everywhere that seems to be a good plasce to build one already has a double track railway that can be upgraded at a fraction of the cost.err, upgraded at a fraction of the cost - did you see the cost of the WCML upgrades? Do you even understand the problem? You could, I guess, 4 track the Chiltern ML, however why follow the alignment through towns, why not avoid having to demolish stations and buildings when isn't necessary, and there's a shorter alignment without the noise, etc problems. Capacity is clearly needed, speed is a bit more optional. Upgrades will do nothing but cause delays for years and provide little benefit, especially considering the GWML example you give below.
Padington-Reading = 55km = 4 tracks ... why are 2 of them not at least at 140mph/250kph ??? (actually the speed there is of 125mph)signalling rules, mixed traffic (90mph and 100mph trains also run on the fasts.London-Bristol is only 190km ... well under the 1h travel time in a nonstop train ... or even with a stop at reading ... reported to be 1h21 currentlyapproaches to stations and stops and pad out time and you can easily make up a good 15-20 minutes. I don't think Paddington has full 200km/h (surely, as someone who would work with metric all the time, you'd know that there's no such thing as kph) until quite a way out, especially heading townbound. Add to that the slower trains that might hold stuff up and you have an answer.
London-Swindon = 4 track 2 of wich could easily be put at "above" 125mph if desiredreally? at the cost of a good couple of billion, even ignoring signalling, plus another load for electrification (£8 billion or so) as no diesel train does more than 125mph. Not to mention the loss of flexibility, the problems of Reading-London capacity on both fasts and slows and the fact that the benefits will certainly not justify the cost - it would be nearly as cheap to have a new 300kph line, doubling the difference in speed and freeing up a shed load of capacity between Reading and Paddington.
an hourly service under the 1h travel time would be very competitive
a couple of aditional services with some intermediate stops would also be competitive at the 1h travel timeLOL - do you have a clue?
It's getting on for two hours by car - there's no competition for speed. Add to that half-hourly services via Bath, and half-hourly services to Wales (stopping at Bristol Parkway) and 1tph is a complete and utter joke!Pay the price to upgrade to 300kph ??? to gain some 10/20 minutes ???almost cheaper to build a new line and certainly less hassle and more flexibility and capacity... Look at the WCML upgrades, think about the fact that it costs as much per mile to add a forth lane on a motorway as to build a parallel motorway. Stuff like closing the railway for weekends over the course of several years cause all sorts of problems and financial penalties. A new Western HSL would be done quicker. The thing is is that it's not really needed. For capacity reasons, I can see plans for a Reading-Heathrow (plug into HSL network there) line to give more capacity, with trains going on to Portsmouth, Southampton, Swansea and Bristol via Bath (maybe Plymouth and Penzance, though that would involve lots of work around Dawlish)London-Birmingham is operated with half hourly frequencies by two different companies ... one in the express 1h30 time and another in a regional 2h30 time.Virgin will be 3tph very soon, and you've forgotten either Chiltern or London Midland. It's much more like 6 or 7 rather busy trains, with the problem of further up being busy and also further in needing more trains (Bedford will get at least 10tph to London at peaks in 7 years time, Milton Keynes looks set for about 6tph, despite being bigger) Any London-Birmingham HSL would be for capacity, as it's very limited at the moment.

In summary, you have no idea what you are talking about and have made no effort to read what has been said before.

^^ Just let me say that YOUR problems in the UK are also OUR problems here in Portugal ... and we just took the easy way out ... and are to build a completely new HSR network due to the same problems that you have over there.

- bad planing that mixes HST and regional/freight traffic on the fast tracks
- little upgrades that turn into full railway reconstruction
- major infraestructure renewal to acomodate a simple "tilt" that cost as much as the building of an adjoining track
- etc , etc , etc


About the HS1 ... welll ... if the tracks from Ashford continued to follow the old railway alignement the 1st little obstacle would be at Tonbridge some 40km away ... considering that the current layout exits Ashford tru a 600m tunnel , has half a dozen smaller ones and 35km due north has a 3km long tunnel ... and has a bridge at every 500m or so ... this of course without even getting 1km away from the old railway for most of its course. :cheers:

err, not entirely - capacity was a big issue (otherwise why not just make the railway a bigger gauge from the Maidstone area to Cheriton, where lines run side by side), as was having to have dual voltage, restricting stock.

^^ IT all cames in the package of the ultra restrictive gauge. :ohno:

err, upgraded at a fraction of the cost - did you see the cost of the WCML upgrades? Do you even understand the problem? You could, I guess, 4 track the Chiltern ML, however why follow the alignment through towns, why not avoid having to demolish stations and buildings when isn't necessary, and there's a shorter alignment without the noise, etc problems. Capacity is clearly needed, speed is a bit more optional. Upgrades will do nothing but cause delays for years and provide little benefit, especially considering the GWML example you give below.

The HS1 is a bad example because it is one of those cases where a completely different railway in a completely different alignement is used to replace another railway that would not gain as much from having a HSR nearby. :cheers:

If the new HSL would follow the route to Waterloo there would be not enough gains as to justify it ... this considering the old route vs. new route aproach.

In this chosen alignement it is indeed a great adiction to the existing network.

signalling rules, mixed traffic (90mph and 100mph trains also run on the fasts.

4 tracks , room to improvements on both fast and slow ... actualy it seems to be the easiest place to create an aditional HSL in the hearth of england.

approaches to stations and stops and pad out time and you can easily make up a good 15-20 minutes. I don't think Paddington has full 200km/h

I considered the optimal timings using 2 out of the 4 tracks at speeds of 140mph (or above) ... it's a prime candidate

(surely, as someone who would work with metric all the time, you'd know that there's no such thing as kph)

I just checked and I don't know why but halfway thu this evening i started to write kph after i corrected a km/h/mph in a random post somewhere ... must bee either the booze , too much booze or not enough booze. :lol:

until quite a way out, especially heading townbound. Add to that the slower trains that might hold stuff up and you have an answer.
really? at the cost of a good couple of billion, even ignoring signalling, plus another load for electrification (£8 billion or so) as no diesel train does more than 125mph. Not to mention the loss of flexibility, the problems of Reading-London capacity on both fasts and slows and the fact that the benefits will certainly not justify the cost - it would be nearly as cheap to have a new 300kph line, doubling the difference in speed and freeing up a shed load of capacity between Reading and Paddington.

Either you remove the need for capacity by not calling at intermediate stops or you remove the gains to traffic other than HST by not upgrading the route ... none seem to be of much gain in a "feeder" stile network such as the GWR.

London-Newbury
London-Oxford
London-Gloucester
London-Cn-Sodbury-Bristol
London-Bath-Bristol
London-Southampton(*)
London-Exeter

^^ By themselves neither would justify a completely new route. :ohno:

LOL - do you have a clue?
It's getting on for two hours by car - there's no competition for speed. Add to that half-hourly services via Bath, and half-hourly services to Wales (stopping at Bristol Parkway) and 1tph is a complete and utter joke!

1tph DIRECT NONSTOP from Paddington to Bristol ... and much more than half hourly to any of the destinations named above. :lol:

almost cheaper to build a new line and certainly less hassle and more flexibility and capacity... Look at the WCML upgrades, think about the fact that it costs as much per mile to add a forth lane on a motorway as to build a parallel motorway. Stuff like closing the railway for weekends over the course of several years cause all sorts of problems and financial penalties. A new Western HSL would be done quicker. The thing is is that it's not really needed. For capacity reasons, I can see plans for a Reading-Heathrow (plug into HSL network there) line to give more capacity, with trains going on to Portsmouth, Southampton, Swansea and Bristol via Bath (maybe Plymouth and Penzance, though that would involve lots of work around Dawlish)

London-Reading-Bristol = 4 tracks 125mph
London-Ascot-Reading-Newbury-bath-Bristol
London-Basingstoke-Salisbury-Bath-Bristol/Exeter
etc etc etc

^^ the capacity is there ... just need to use it properly.

And the notion that just adding another parallel railway will solve the problem seems to stop being a solution more than 100 years ago ... when they run out of places to build new ones in the UK.

Virgin will be 3tph very soon, and you've forgotten either Chiltern or London Midland. It's much more like 6 or 7 rather busy trains, with the problem of further up being busy and also further in needing more trains (Bedford will get at least 10tph to London at peaks in 7 years time, Milton Keynes looks set for about 6tph, despite being bigger) Any London-Birmingham HSL would be for capacity, as it's very limited at the moment.

Trains run at 3 minutes intervals in most places ... that would mean 20 trains each direction on 2 tracks only ... WCML has how many tracks to spare for the rest ??? and the routes via Banbury Oxford and Kettering are deplected of throught services ...

In summary, you have no idea what you are talking about and have made no effort to read what has been said before.

:lol:

Considering only what I learned by looking around while I travelled over there I guarantee you that there is a lot of room to improvements on the current infraestructure alone ... let the building of new HSL for another century ... :lol:

Just found another lapse here ... 250km/h is not 140mph as I erroneously stated back there ... its 156mph

..

..

Hello all :)

It's been a while since I lived in England (for about six months in 2002 - Loughborough, Leicestershire) and I have a couple of questions I was hoping you could answer.

1) Has the quality of rail travel in the UK improved? I remember there was a lot of talk in the media back then about the necessity to do something about the country's rail infrastructure. Has it happened yet? I remember the frequency and connectivity (being able to get to where you need to be via train) didn't strike me as particularly poor. The cost-quality (ride comfort) ratio however, did. Did it at least get cheaper? :D

2) Why do all plans for a high speed network include two North-South links? One via the East coast and one via the West coast. It seems to me if all those plans keep failing to gather enough support to actually be carried out; wouldn't a single line alternative stand a better chance? If you were to use France's vision with spread out TGV stations per 'region' where you can transfer to a high-quality regional network - then how about one high speed line from London to Scotland with stops at St Pancras - Birmingham - Manchester - Leeds - Newcastle - Edinburgh (possible extention to Glasgow)?

..

A problem with building completely new HSR in the UK is precisely that everywhere that seems to be a good plasce to build one already has a double track railway that can be upgraded at a fraction of the cost.


No, not at all. Not in the slightest. :ohno:

One of the main reasons, as I have just stated, is capacity increase.

Upgrades do not come at a fraction of the cost either, just look at the £8bn required to get a 13.6% linespeed increase on the WCML.

People easily neglect the fact that HS1 was only necessary due to the souteastern railways having an ultra-restrictive gauge. :ohno:

Even though HS1 opened a decade after the CTRL? Gauge was not a problem. eurostar ran on southeastern tracks, as does (still) all channel tunnel freight. I've told you this before as well.



About the HS1 ... welll ... if the tracks from Ashford continued to follow the old railway alignement the 1st little obstacle would be at Tonbridge some 40km away ... considering that the current layout exits Ashford tru a 600m tunnel , has half a dozen smaller ones and 35km due north has a 3km long tunnel ... and has a bridge at every 500m or so ... this of course without even getting 1km away from the old railway for most of its course. :cheers:

The problem is there is no space. Tonbridge station would have to be demolished. that line was built in the 1840s and there are lots of picturesque villages with listed cottages right next to the track. Its ano brainer. Add to that the existing tracks can not be upgraded because there is a train every 5 minutes in th erush hour between Tonbridge and London via Sevenoaks - its just not feasable.

Just let me say that YOUR problems in the UK are also OUR problems here in Portugal ... and we just took the easy way out ... and are to build a completely new HSR network due to the same problems that you have over there.



Didn't you just argue that the best thing for the UK to do was not to build HSR? Make your mind up.





London-Reading-Bristol = 4 tracks 125mph
London-Ascot-Reading-Newbury-bath-Bristol
London-Basingstoke-Salisbury-Bath-Bristol/Exeter
etc etc etc

^^ the capacity is there ... just need to use it properly.



You are so misinformed its funny.

2 tracks 125 mph. Slow lines typically 75 - 90 mph.

NOT 4 tracks Didcot to Swindon, mainly only 2, actually.

The capacity is not there. Are you factoring in freight?

1) Has the quality of rail travel in the UK improved? I remember there was a lot of talk in the media back then about the necessity to do something about the country's rail infrastructure. Has it happened yet? I remember the frequency and connectivity (being able to get to where you need to be via train) didn't strike me as particularly poor. The cost-quality (ride comfort) ratio however, did. Did it at least get cheaper? :D

Overall things are improving regarding the railways, though there is now the problem of capacity as the number of passengers and the amount of freight have both shot up in the past 5 years.

Ticket prices remain expensive and are nearly always rising above the rate of inflation. They can get away with that as the demand for rail travel is there. And there still needs to be much financial investment of course.

You are so misinformed its funny.Indeed, using the via Ascot route as a main route to beyond Reading? Having trains going via Salisbury to Bristol... OK, both have been done in the last ten years - the former a diversion, the latter services dropped due to long journey times and lack of through routes.

I also love the idea of having Exeter-London services via Bristol - completly potty as a fast route, though not as potty as a via Kettering route to Birmingham. :lol:

And the complete ignorance of freight and heavy commuter workings on these lines, plus the completely rubbish assertion that there is no route to build another two track railway - there are several! It was indeed done in the past - the only problem being that they ended up as slow lines. However HSL wouldn't, and the classic lines tend to be 4 track anyway now.

It doesn't help that his English is so hard to deal with as he seems to be under the influence when writing (by his own admission).

In the GW corridor, I can only see electrification to Swansea/Bristol/Banbury/Bedwyn (because of Dawlish and because that has a decent lot of benefits). The plans for HSL in that corridor also only cover that area (and were a completely new line, with some interchange with the old line). I reckon HSL on that corridor is only worth it to give more capacity between London and Reading.

Hello all :)

It's been a while since I lived in England (for about six months in 2002 - Loughborough, Leicestershire) and I have a couple of questions I was hoping you could answer.

1) Has the quality of rail travel in the UK improved? I remember there was a lot of talk in the media back then about the necessity to do something about the country's rail infrastructure. Has it happened yet? I remember the frequency and connectivity (being able to get to where you need to be via train) didn't strike me as particularly poor. The cost-quality (ride comfort) ratio however, did. Did it at least get cheaper? :D


Its got much better. The only problem now is that non profit making routes dissapear and so are late night trains. They are geared towards profit making now so any public service thoughts are out the window. Some places dont have trains after 9pm - utterly useless. I cant get a train back up the ECML after 7pm from london sometimes. And local services tend to stop pretty early too. I think they should go til at least midnight everywhere. Ride comfort - well on some of the new trains its much improved. On others we need more capacity increases to stop the sardine can problem. Prices - they have apparently only gone up with inflation overall since privatisation. There are dirt cheap advance fairs, but anyone wanting to hop on or off whenever they like needs some serious cash.

Indeed Sotonsi.

For anyone wishing to argue that there is plenty of capacity, and speaking from a misinformed perspective, Network Rail, the owners of the railway infrastructure in the UK, have loads of accessible documents going into very fine and studied details about every part of the country.

Business plans - yearly, every area.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/4451.aspx
Great Western route http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2008/Route%2013%20-%20Great%20Western%20Main%20Line.pdf
Wessex Routes http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2008/Route%204%20-%20Wessex%20Routes.pdf
Kent business plan that includes a map of gauge, route availablility etc. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2008/Route%201%20-%20Kent.pdf

Route Utilisation Studies - more in depth, not all have been completed yet.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/4449.aspx

Freight RUS - study into usage of freight on entire network. Useful guides about gauge in there too. http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/freight/freight%20rus.pdf

Its got much better. The only problem now is that non profit making routes dissapear and so are late night trains. They are geared towards profit making now so any public service thoughts are out the window. Some places dont have trains after 9pm - utterly useless. I cant get a train back up the ECML after 7pm from london sometimes. And local services tend to stop pretty early too. I think they should go til at least midnight everywhere. Ride comfort - well on some of the new trains its much improved. On others we need more capacity increases to stop the sardine can problem. Prices - they have apparently only gone up with inflation overall since privatisation. There are dirt cheap advance fairs, but anyone wanting to hop on or off whenever they like needs some serious cash.

That's too bad and reveals the problem with for profit rail service- the public interest is replaced with the profit motive and rail services that would help the commuting public are scuttled because they don't make enough money.

Fucking bastards Thatcher and Major. I wish that bitch would just die already.

Dying is a bit harsh.

Yeah, Major and thatcher didn't do the railways many favours, but they did give us the channel tunnel, and if it wasn't for that we wouldn't have any HSR! Anyway, Labor have done their fair share of f'ing things up. They micro manage everything to the point where its not actually privatised in essence. The lack of late night trains is mainly down to department for transport requirements, and engineering works. Some local routes in the regions have suffered the worst sporadic services, but nearly everywhere else has seen better services pretty much.

No, not at all. Not in the slightest. :ohno:

One of the main reasons, as I have just stated, is capacity increase.

the capacity doesn't increase if you just make a route on another alignement ... the majority of the traffic usually doesn't follow to the new alignement ... you just have another corridor with another traffic.

Upgrades do not come at a fraction of the cost either, just look at the £8bn required to get a 13.6% linespeed increase on the WCML.

thats precisely why it is a failure as an upgrade ... you need more than track improvements to have increased capacity ... speed upgrades actualy DECREASE capacity ... L.Norte and WCML both suffer now from that failed view.

the faster the Intercity trains the fewer the total amount of trains you can squeeze in between them. :cheers:

Even though HS1 opened a decade after the CTRL? Gauge was not a problem. eurostar ran on southeastern tracks, as does (still) all channel tunnel freight. I've told you this before as well.

Loading Gauge ... ;)

The problem is there is no space. Tonbridge station would have to be demolished. that line was built in the 1840s and there are lots of picturesque villages with listed cottages right next to the track. Its ano brainer. Add to that the existing tracks can not be upgraded because there is a train every 5 minutes in th erush hour between Tonbridge and London via Sevenoaks - its just not feasable.

There are more complicated works in HS1 than those that would be needed to bypass tonbridge

A southern london exit would take no more mileage that the 20km of tunnels of HS1 ... most of it could use the current alignements.

that leaves only some 25km between Farnborough(?) and Tonbridge to deal with (the rest of the route could have simply be quadrupled) ... a simpe 1500m tunnel under tonbridge would solve almost all the problems in that sector ...

Compare it to the 3,2km tunnel neal rochester , the tunnel under the Thames and many other major engineering works on the HS1.

Anyway ... what I just said is another good adition to the network if someone decides to build it ... but in the end HS1 also is a good route and that can't be denied.

Didn't you just argue that the best thing for the UK to do was not to build HSR? Make your mind up.

In my point of view the decision that was taken over here was a lowsy one ... they just decided half way to give up on one mistake and do another mistake instead. :lol:

You are so misinformed its funny.

2 tracks 125 mph. Slow lines typically 75 - 90 mph.

I just said 4 tracks and top speed on the corridor. ;)

NOT 4 tracks Didcot to Swindon, mainly only 2, actually.

The capacity is not there. Are you factoring in freight?

Did you read my previous post ???

the capacity is there ... just need to use it properly.

And the notion that just adding another parallel railway will solve the problem seems to stop being a solution more than 100 years ago ... when they run out of places to build new ones in the UK.

You have enough room to put aditional tracks in that particular section ...

Indeed, using the via Ascot route as a main route to beyond Reading? Having trains going via Salisbury to Bristol... OK, both have been done in the last ten years - the former a diversion, the latter services dropped due to long journey times and lack of through routes.

London-Reading-Bristol = 4 tracks 125mph
London-Ascot-Reading-Newbury-bath-Bristol
London-Basingstoke-Salisbury-Bath-Bristol/Exeter
etc etc etc

the capacity is there ... just need to use it properly.

Notice the difference:

London-Reading Bristol = 125mph
the remaining are just alternative routes. ;)

I also love the idea of having Exeter-London services via Bristol - completly potty as a fast route, though not as potty as a via Kettering route to Birmingham. :lol:

who ever spoke about a route to birmingham via Kettering ??? does the WCML only run to birmingham nowadays ???


I just said that the WCML has some nearby routes that tottaly lack trought services. :ohno:

And the complete ignorance of freight and heavy commuter workings on these lines, plus the completely rubbish assertion that there is no route to build another two track railway - there are several! It was indeed done in the past - the only problem being that they ended up as slow lines. However HSL wouldn't, and the classic lines tend to be 4 track anyway now.

I can tell you that I'm well aware of the tons of freight and commuter on the premices ... you lack big time in capacity management in british rails. :bash:

It doesn't help that his English is so hard to deal with as he seems to be under the influence when writing (by his own admission).

How hard can it be??? 1/2 the people here on SSC can't even spell in english and you guys wan't me to speak in oxbridge ??? :nuts:

In the GW corridor, I can only see electrification to Swansea/Bristol/Banbury/Bedwyn (because of Dawlish and because that has a decent lot of benefits). The plans for HSL in that corridor also only cover that area (and were a completely new line, with some interchange with the old line). I reckon HSL on that corridor is only worth it to give more capacity between London and Reading.

If you say so ...

He was meaning loading guage you tool. Eurostar is a HSR train. It went on the existing tracks, slower. (i see you just edited that bit out)

You quote people and reply with a line trying to justify you comment, but more often than not the comment doesnt do that, yet oyu seem to think it does.

A new line increases capacity. The WCML cost a lot and did increase capacity. It increased speeds by 25mph for 8bn. Old lines have level crossings and smaller guages, they are totally outdated and hence a lot of money to upgrade. Building a new track increases capacity much more than tacking on another two lines to an existing route. It also would result in faster trains.

Oh and as i have said before, your english is hard to comprehend that i dont think you even know what you are saying, you write in a fragmented form - i suspect you do this in portugese too.

the capacity doesn't increase if you just make a route on another alignement ... the majority of the traffic usually doesn't follow to the new alignement ... you just have another corridor with another traffic.

Not in any of the proposals we have made in this country. If you want to argue with this point you are arguing with Network Rail, read the PDFs I posted and you will see that NR wants new routes to increase capacity on the old ones. Stop arguing over this, you are misinformed.


thats precisely why it is a failure as an upgrade ... you need more than track improvements to have increased capacity ... speed upgrades actualy DECREASE capacity ... L.Norte and WCML both suffer now from that failed view.

So what is your point?

the faster the Intercity trains the fewer the total amount of trains you can squeeze in between them. :cheers:

I know. The wcml upgrade however does have more capcity because it included capacity improvements.



Loading Gauge ... ;)

Yes loading gauge, that is what I was talking about. Do you think I'm so stupid as to think you mean southeastern is a narrow gauge!? :rofl: Eurostar and channel freight can go along the classic lines via Tonbridge, via Redhill, via Sevenoaks, via Orpington, via Maidstone and even via Bat & Ball. You are so wrong its funny.

There are more complicated works in HS1 than those that would be needed to bypass tonbridge

A southern london exit would take no more mileage that the 20km of tunnels of HS1 ... most of it could use the current alignements.

that leaves only some 25km between Farnborough(?) and Tonbridge to deal with (the rest of the route could have simply be quadrupled) ... a simpe 1500m tunnel under tonbridge would solve almost all the problems in that sector ...

Compare it to the 3,2km tunnel neal rochester , the tunnel under the Thames and many other major engineering works on the HS1.

Anyway ... what I just said is another good adition to the network if someone decides to build it ... but in the end HS1 also is a good route and that can't be denied.

So what are you going on about it for then? I actually don't understand your point here at all.

In my point of view the decision that was taken over here was a lowsy one ... they just decided half way to give up on one mistake and do another mistake instead. :lol:

Whatever.

I just said 4 tracks and top speed on the corridor. ;)

Which makes no difference to the fact that there isn't the capacity. Again you are wrong.


Did you read my previous post ???

What I could understand of it....

You have enough room to put aditional tracks in that particular section ...

So we need to build more tracks? OK, so thats what was proposed. I'll leave it to the engineers to decide whether that should go next to the existing track or somewhere else.

I can tell you that I'm well aware of the tons of freight and commuter on the premices ... you lack big time in capacity management in british rails. :bash:

OK, so we all have to suffer your nonsense because of your misinformed opinion of it do we? You've just gone on my ignore list. Go away.

When Eurostar first started it used the classic lines, here's an old vid below. It used this route until 2003. This vid is from around the mid 90s. All Eurostars went from the Channel tunnel, to Ashford, then via Tonbridge, Sevenoaks, Orpington and Bromley South, except two trains that coincided with the rush hour in the morning, these went from Ashford to Bromey via Maidstone East, Otford and Swanley and took a good 10 minutes longer because of it.

At Headcorn;
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/f5Muf_dcuvo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/f5Muf_dcuvo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Channel tunnel freight train going through Maidstone East

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/c11174gklAY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/c11174gklAY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

He was meaning loading guage you tool. Eurostar is a HSR train. It went on the existing tracks, slower. (i see you just edited that bit out)

You quote people and reply with a line trying to justify you comment, but more often than not the comment doesnt do that, yet oyu seem to think it does.

A new line increases capacity. The WCML cost a lot and did increase capacity. It increased speeds by 25mph for 8bn. Old lines have level crossings and smaller guages, they are totally outdated and hence a lot of money to upgrade. Building a new track increases capacity much more than tacking on another two lines to an existing route. It also would result in faster trains.

Oh and as i have said before, your english is hard to comprehend that i dont think you even know what you are saying, you write in a fragmented form - i suspect you do this in portugese too.

"guage you tool"

^^ Certainly I'm the one hard to read over here ... you guys kill english in every sentence you write. :ohno:

and you mean to say that my one-liner responses to their one-liner kunning remarks are hard-to-read and theirs are not ??? :lol:

And just compare the 8bln of the 560km WCML to what you will be getting for the price-per-mile of the HS1 and say that it's in the same general price tag. :cheers:

Not in any of the proposals we have made in this country. If you want to argue with this point you are arguing with Network Rail, read the PDFs I posted and you will see that NR wants new routes to increase capacity on the old ones. Stop arguing over this, you are misinformed.

So what is your point?

I know. The wcml upgrade however does have more capcity because it included capacity improvements.

Yes loading gauge, that is what I was talking about. Do you think I'm so stupid as to think you mean southeastern is a narrow gauge!? :rofl: Eurostar and channel freight can go along the classic lines via Tonbridge, via Redhill, via Sevenoaks, via Orpington, via Maidstone and even via Bat & Ball. You are so wrong its funny.

So what are you going on about it for then? I actually don't understand your point here at all.

Whatever.

Which makes no difference to the fact that there isn't the capacity. Again you are wrong.

What I could understand of it....

So we need to build more tracks? OK, so thats what was proposed. I'll leave it to the engineers to decide whether that should go next to the existing track or somewhere else.

OK, so we all have to suffer your nonsense because of your misinformed opinion of it do we? You've just gone on my ignore list. Go away.

Yah ... I just know that I'm totally missinformed in everything related to british railways and londo nunderground ... what else is new ... the earth is squared and british rail rules the waves and whatever ... or so it seems from reading your postings. :cheers:

And by the way ... you go away with your misconseptions and other nonsense.

You are the ones that should go away ... you and your beloved network rail that puts ex.GNRER trains on hold on a sideline to allow half a dozen coal trains to overtake it in the middle of nowhere. :bash:

"guage you tool"

^^ Certainly I'm the one hard to read over here ... you guys kill english in every sentence you write. :ohno:

My sentence was 'He was meaning loading guage you tool'. Maybe you dont know that tool means idiot?

Killing English my arse.

You get nearly everything wrong in relation to grammar, spelling and sentence construction, to the point where its difficult to know what you actually mean. Add to that being arrogant and antagonistic and you have the perfect ingredients for a forum troll.

British railways are far from perfect, nobody has said otherwise. You always come out with some example of something bad about them though, brisavoine style. Maybe you have an inferiority complex too?

Well if we're going to be picky it could have been "He was meaning gauge, you tool" but then I think that would have needed an exclamation mark and changed the inflection. Or, to keep it without the comma it may have been better to say "He meant gauge you tool."

Now type it out 100 times ;)

My sentence was 'He was meaning loading guage you tool'. Maybe you dont know that tool means idiot?

Killing English my arse.

You get nearly everything wrong in relation to grammar, spelling and sentence construction, to the point where its difficult to know what you actually mean. Add to that being arrogant and antagonistic and you have the perfect ingredients for a forum troll.

British railways are far from perfect, nobody has said otherwise. You always come out with some example of something bad about them though, brisavoine style. Maybe you have an inferiority complex too?

^^ By "tool" do you meant to be offensive to me ??? that is anwered simply by pointing one's mouse over the little triangle wich cames attacked to every post. :ohno:

From now on I'm just going to refrain to answer people that are as low as you.
Just point and click are the solution.

does anybody else hate the class 185s run by First TransPennine Express?

does anybody else hate the class 185s run by First TransPennine Express?

If you hate them, god help you on a pacer or another crap Northern Rail train! Manchester to Preston line now has some alright trains running on it and quite afew of the trains run in doubles(6 car) so you have a good chance of a seat.

If you hate them, god help you on a pacer or another crap Northern Rail train! Manchester to Preston line now has some alright trains running on it and quite afew of the trains run in doubles(6 car) so you have a good chance of a seat.

I was on East Midlands Trains with use the class 158s (which first transpennine used to use) and they are so much better, seats are softer, there are no doors in the middle of the passenger area, the toilets don't open out into where people are seated and they are not and noisy or bumpy...:nuts:

I was on East Midlands Trains with use the class 158s (which first transpennine used to use) and they are so much better, seats are softer, there are no doors in the middle of the passenger area, the toilets don't open out into where people are seated and they are not and noisy or bumpy...:nuts:

^^ Weird ... spaceous and acessible doors in the passenger area , acessible toilets , eficient but not bumpy suspensions and not overly soft seating (hets call it ergonomics) are fundamental features of modern regional trains. :dunno:

does anybody else hate the class 185s run by First TransPennine Express?

^^ What s there to hate ???

Last time I was in one it felt the same as any other modern DMU in britain. :dunno:

If you hate them, god help you on a pacer or another crap Northern Rail train! Manchester to Preston line now has some alright trains running on it and quite afew of the trains run in doubles(6 car) so you have a good chance of a seat.

:ohno::throwup: