daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 16th, 2010, 12:00 AM   #481
endrity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,501
Likes (Received): 720

I think it would have been great if the UK invested in Maglev technology. They have to build a high speed network from scratch to begin with, and I don't think there will be much need for connections to Europe from cities other than London.

Anyway, I hope the works on this begin asap, the UK already is a bit too behind investing in this new technology.
endrity no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 16th, 2010, 02:21 AM   #482
Maarten Otto
Registered User
 
Maarten Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Almere (Greater Amsterdam)
Posts: 464
Likes (Received): 24

It's not needed. The money could be better invested in other rail projects, like the doubling of the Welwyn viaduct plus tunnels and gauge enhancements on the WCML, The cross City routes through Brum, the third rail network from London to the Southwest, South and Southeast, The Anglia mainline to Ipswich and the Midland Mainline to Bedford.

This will allow all those lines to accomodate double decker trains and gain a 40 to 45 percent capacity increase.
Maarten Otto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 03:06 AM   #483
endrity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,501
Likes (Received): 720

It was needed 10 years ago, let alone now.
endrity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 04:04 AM   #484
Maarten Otto
Registered User
 
Maarten Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Almere (Greater Amsterdam)
Posts: 464
Likes (Received): 24

Why? capacity on long distance isn't the issue... capacity on those inter urban connections is. And where do you want to terminate those services in the London area.... Paddington? If you need 8 platforms for the HS2 services.... you can no longer handle that many trains on the Great Western mainline simply becouse the space is requred by a toy train the UK can not afford.

And I don't expect the Pendolino services to/from Euston to be suspended once HS2 opens....
Maarten Otto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 04:05 AM   #485
Stainless
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pyeongnae
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 34

I cannot believe this is taking so long. Seriously 30 years to build about 200 miles of track? At this rate it would have taken us 1500 years to build what we have now. We need this to link London to Scotland with an Eastern and a Western link within the next 10 years. The problem with the countryside resisting this is difficult, as everywhere in the UK is historic and scenic, this is a very crowded isle and that is why this is needed.
Stainless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 04:12 AM   #486
Maarten Otto
Registered User
 
Maarten Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Almere (Greater Amsterdam)
Posts: 464
Likes (Received): 24

The fact that it takes almost 30 years is showing they actually don't have the money or perhaps don't want it at all. Especially not now HS1 services are subsidised by the tax payer and the value of the WC franchise will melt as snow for the sun. And... there is still Eastcoast... Once the line goes into public use... that particular franchise will also gt a value hit.
Maarten Otto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 09:12 AM   #487
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
It's not needed. The money could be better invested in other rail projects
Totally disagree that it isn't needed. We've had endless studies into the options and they all agree that this gives the best return for capacity and a modal shift on north-south routes. The other projects you mention are not near the top of the list for investment either.

Quote:
This will allow all those lines to accomodate double decker trains and gain a 40 to 45 percent capacity increase.
Not without significant work to increase the loading gauge in all these areas.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
And where do you want to terminate those services in the London area.... Paddington? If you need 8 platforms for the HS2 services.... you can no longer handle that many trains on the Great Western mainline simply becouse the space is requred by a toy train the UK can not afford.

And I don't expect the Pendolino services to/from Euston to be suspended once HS2 opens....
This was already dealt with in the first HS2 report - they will extend Euston.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
Especially not now HS1 services are subsidised by the tax payer
Please explain?


Regarding whether this is or isn't needed:

If you look at the data for September (the last month for which it is available), there were 803,000 passengers flying between London and airports en route of the eventual planned network. That's the equivalent of over 60 typical HSR trains every day.

This ignores any shift that could come from road and the increasing traffic growth on existing railways.

If we are serious about reducing transport emissions, we need to reduce air traffic on these routes and that will not be done with more of the same four and a half hour journeys, as the current pathetic market share of rail shows.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 10:19 AM   #488
AlexNL
Registered User
 
AlexNL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,629
Likes (Received): 537

I think HS2 is an interesting project, and the fact that the government is seriously looking into HS2 shows their commitment for High Speed Rail. However, they're much, much too late. The French started with HSR in the seventies, the Germans in the eighties, the Spanish since the nineties.

It's great that the Brits have InterCity 125 (200 km/h) and InterCity 225 (225 km/h), but their development shouldn't have stopped there. Had there been more investments in the past (as opposed to the huge amounts of cost savings and the eventual break up of British Rail) then Britain could've come along easily with the French and the Germans instead of playing catch-up.

But 30 years to build 200 miles of high speed route... seriously? That's way too long. Even building the Dutch HSL-Zuid (a third the length of HS2) didn't take 10 years... construction started in 2000 and the physical infrastructure was completed in 2006 (it took until 2008 for the track to be completed because of ERTMS problems, but the physical infrastructure was there).

If Britain is serious about HS2 and High Speed Rail in general, they should speed up. 300 km/h or even 350/360 km/h trains is what can make the modal shift on the long distance happen. Whether it's Alstom, Siemens, Bombardier or (god forbid) AnsaldoBreda doesn't matter, nor who runs the trains - SNCF, DB, HSA, Virgin, Arriva (oh wait, that's DB too) - as long as they run.
AlexNL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 10:20 AM   #489
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
It's not needed. The money could be better invested in other rail projects, like the doubling of the Welwyn viaduct plus tunnels and gauge enhancements on the WCML, The cross City routes through Brum, the third rail network from London to the Southwest, South and Southeast, The Anglia mainline to Ipswich and the Midland Mainline to Bedford.

This will allow all those lines to accomodate double decker trains and gain a 40 to 45 percent capacity increase.
Thats what many people said decades ago. As a result we 'upgraded' the WCML instead of building a new line. As a result of the lessons learned by doing that, they have decided to build a new line and plans for an upgrade of the ECML have been scrapped.

Upgrading existing infrastructure to allow high speed-ish passenger, regional, local and freight use it necessitates poor use of potential capacity and does not provide very high returns on investment. The WCML upgrade was extremely expensive considering the outcome - 10% speed increase on the fastest services. £9bn. Great.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 10:31 AM   #490
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

^ agreed. The Intercity 225 never got to 225 km/h though, it's also stuck at 200. The Health and Safety Executive ruled that it needed cab signalling to go faster.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 11:12 AM   #491
YesToHS2
Registered User
 
YesToHS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by 33Hz View Post
IMHO the pro-HSR lobby is now going to have to get a whole lot more vocal because some influential people are now starting to be noticed and are spreading FUD about this project.
The pro HSR lobby have a voice. It is just unfortunate that you haven't heard of Yes To HS2 yet. I have set up a campaign on an individual basis, I have nothing to gain from HS2. The campaign has only been running a few weeks but I have already had many conversations with the anti HS2 lobby and have dispelled a lot of the myths that the critics are spreading about HS2. Check out my signature for full links (I don't want to be posting direct links on my first post)
YesToHS2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 11:56 AM   #492
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

Welcome to the site and thread.

I'm glad someone has taken the initiative to create a focal point for a 'yes' campaign, you've saved me the trouble...

I also see the anti-campaign has found your site, exactly the reason why the members of this site who are in favour need to mobilise.

Well done.


[EDIT] I've now added your site links to the original post.

Last edited by 33Hz; November 16th, 2010 at 12:28 PM.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 02:13 PM   #493
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by 33Hz View Post
exactly the reason why the members of this site who are in favour need to mobilise.


Will do.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 05:41 PM   #494
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

It sounds like fighting talk, I know, but we need to counter any of the rubbish that gets put out by the anti campaign. I suggest the following…

- Letters to the editors of any national or local paper that prints unsubstantiated myths as fact in their stories.
- Comment on blogs or the comments of any of the anti-campaign.
- Write to any Green Party organisation which is spreading misinformation about HSR environmental credentials.
- Write to the Transport Secretary seeking assurances that the project still has cross-party support.


The kind of myths that we need to look out for are :

- That HSR is not green. This seems to be their new favourite line of attack. It breaks down into two areas.

a) HSR uses more energy than convention rail. While true (we cannot escape the laws of physics, after all) it ignores the fact that it is still less energy than other modes of transport. Furthermore, we want rail to take market share from other modes of transport such as road and air. This will not happen if journey times remain as high as they are. As has been posted in another thread, HSR uses 4 times less energy per seat than air and 6 times less than a typical car. Additionally, this energy is electricity and thus can be supplied from non-CO2 producing primary sources. Even with today’s UK grid mix, emissions are still substantially lower than with other modes.

b) That the whole lifecycle emissions from HSR are no better than air. This falsehood has arisen because of the CO2 emissions given off in the production of aluminium and the curing of concrete. It is true that both of these materials do produce significant amounts of CO2 during the construction period; however these are more than compensated for by the lower emissions produced in operations compared to air. The initial amount depends on the amount of concrete used – bridges and tunnels will significantly increase this and there probably is a good case to re-examine the emissions from lines like those the Chinese have been building where a significant proportion is elevated or underground. However, taking per km figures published by Network Rail in their recent proposal, I calculated that the lifecycle emissions from HS2 (amortised over the lifetime of each element of the civil engineering, in addition to the emissions from their predicted train movements on such a line) are around 15% of those of air (using emissions data from the airlines).


- That HSR is not cost effective.

a) This ignores multiple studies by interests both within and outside the rail industry that have shown the opposite, concluding that cost:benefit ratios of 1:3 are realistic and achievable. Furthermore, it has been said that HSR does not cover its operating costs, yet alone construction costs. This is demonstrably not true, not least in Japan where they are planning to self-finance a $45bn maglev line from operating profit.

b) Additionally, it has been said that because HS1 was leased to the Canadian consortium for £2.1bn, this is a subsidy due to the £5.8bn it cost to construct the line. What this forgets is that the £2.1bn is for a 30 year operating lease. There will be many more opportunities to extract £2.1bn from operators over the lifetime of this asset; it will not be worthless in 30 years time.


- That there is no room for HSR in the UK. This is patently rubbish and contradictory when used in the context of the other “anti” arguments about ruining the countryside. Any aerial photograph of the UK shows how empty most of the proposed route is. It is certainly nowhere near as crowded as Japan, the south Netherlands or the Ruhr area of Germany. We built multiple motorways on the route of HS2, so a two-track railway can easily be accommodated.


- That it should be slowed down to 200mph, as this is the speed of most other HSR. This was put forward as a suggestion to enable the route to parallel the M40 motorway, yet anyone who has driven on this road through the High Wycombe area will tell you how twisty and hilly it is. Furthermore, it comes as the Chinese demonstrate a 380km/h train and as the AGV nears service – a train that was designed to give the same impact on rails (and hence maintenance costs) at 360 km/h as the TGV does at 300 km/h. It is totally realistic to expect 400km/h rolling stock by 2025 and hence to design the line for anything less would be short sighted and a waste of public money.



I do not think we should be stating that a 20 minute time saving between London and Scotland thanks to the first leg of this route will produce a modal shift away from air: It won’t. This is about the same amount of time as the padding that has been put into the timetables over the last few years. Instead, we should emphasise that this is just the start of time savings that will be produced as the network reaches further north, and that a two hour London to Edinburgh journey time is realistic and achievable. It requires less than the proportional average speed being planned for Beijing – Shanghai next year.



Hopefully that gives people some ammunition. I will add references to sources for this material as I go back through to find it.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 06:07 PM   #495
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

Another example of why this is needed:

http://www.birminghampost.net/news/w...5233-27658949/

Quote:
Joe Rukin, convenor of the Stop High Speed 2 campaign, said: “We welcome this opportunity to present the facts to the Transport Select Committee and find it extremely encouraging that, following the success of the Stop High Speed 2 Lobby Day in Parliament last month, that such a high level respected committee is taking the opposition to HS2 seriously.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 06:18 PM   #496
YesToHS2
Registered User
 
YesToHS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35
Likes (Received): 0

Thanks for the support. I have been tackling issues one by one and have tried to emphasize the 20 minute time saving from all northern stations served by HS2 even after the 1st leg is built.

I am just about to start my second paper on the subject that will tackle in particular the environmental aspects and I want to try and once and for all dispel some of the myths the anti HS2 critics have been stating. It is quite clear to me now that the critics will say anything to get the public on their side.

I'm glad I started this campaign, I can seen that it was vital that something was done by an independent member of the public to try and redress the balance. For too many months now the critics have had it all their own way.

It's early days but I think 2000 hits in a few weeks for a campaign that started from nothing is good going. I have even had responses too all my correspondence to Philip Hammond (Although no direct from him), the Dft, HS2 Ltd and my own local MP. So Yes To HS2 is being taken seriously. And the critics mocked not so long ago.

It was pointed out to me by a member of greengauge21 that I am always polite to the critics and my points are always well researched. This is vital when arguing a case to protesters as they will always try and find a weakness. I have spent the last week simply trying to prove that I DO NOT work for the rail industry or the government and I think I finally proved my point. When asked am I such a person from some company, I pointed out that he has been working for longer than I have been alive, a truce was quickly called.

Rant over. Please support the Yes To HS2 campaign. You can either sign the petition anonymously if you wish or you can join in the debate on the blog. Please remember to be polite though .
YesToHS2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 06:23 PM   #497
Stainless
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pyeongnae
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 34

It is such a shame that such a battle is needed to do anything in the UK. I agree with all the points made here.

I would add that aircraft emissions probably don't include the building of the airport, a mile of concrete on each end and quite a few acres to move about on the ground must add up, especially on short haul flights.

I do think that planning for 400km/h is a bit high, but if you can't parallel the motorways you might as well make it as straight as you can, if anything it would make it a tiny bit shorter.
Stainless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 06:36 PM   #498
YesToHS2
Registered User
 
YesToHS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35
Likes (Received): 0

It is a shame. I just know the protesters will fight this every step of the way. Every CPO will be met with a lengthy court battle to get the most money out of the government and to prolong the inevitable. That is why it is so important that the people of the UK show as much support as possible. It is always the case that the critics and protesters will always shout loudest, it is time that supporters shouted back. One last thing it will cost £17bn not £30bn, please critics stop misrepresenting the "facts" to scare the public.
YesToHS2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 06:55 PM   #499
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stainless View Post
I do think that planning for 400km/h is a bit high, but if you can't parallel the motorways you might as well make it as straight as you can, if anything it would make it a tiny bit shorter.
While 400 km/h may seem high to us now, one only has to look back at previous milestones in HSR development to see how we might reach this before HS2 comes into service. Historically, HSR has increased in speed by approximately 30 km/h every decade: First there was Japan in the early 1960s with 200 km/h, then by 1980 the first TGVs were running at 270 km/h. By 1990 this was up to 300 km/h and by 2000 the ICE3 was able to run at 330km/h. In 2010 we have Siemens, Alstom and the Chinese manufacturers all offering 360 km/h capable trains, with 380 km/h coming into service in China over the coming year and also soon to be available from Bombardier.

Korea is working on a 400 km/h product and the Chinese have stated that they want to go faster still, so I think 400 km/h 15 years from now is perfectly reasonable to expect, if not even conservative. We may well see increased use of lightweight carbon fibre in train structures and harder steel in rails and wheels that together are able to make maintenance at this speed acceptable.

But the overarching point is that this is about a once in a lifetime chance to secure the permanent way, and any compromise on the route now means we are stuck with what we get for the next 100 years.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2010, 07:15 PM   #500
YesToHS2
Registered User
 
YesToHS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 35
Likes (Received): 0

According to what I've read so far, trains will travel inertially at 225mph which I believe will be more than achievable by 2025. It makes good economic sense though to design the line to be able to accommodate faster speeds. If you look at the detailed map though the line is not exactly straight, early mitigation by HS2 Ltd sees the track diverted even further around small towns and even houses. They are already on their 3rd version of the route and that is before the full plans are unveiled in Feb next year.

The straighter a track is the shorter it is, cutting down on building costs and environmental damage. It also makes the trains more efficient as the simply act of going around a bend reduces efficiency, it also reduces rail and wheel life.
YesToHS2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
high speed rail, hs2, railways, scotland, trains

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium