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 December 8th, 2010, 07:30 PM   #601
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuraiBlue View Post
It's not about comfort, it's about safety.
The difference of cant deficiency is based on two factors one is comfort as you mentioned the other is about safety not noted by many conventional HSR advocates.
The limitation in cant for HSR compared to maglev is because when conventional HSR makes an emergency stop within a curve it faces a possibility of toppling over since center of gravity is offset by the difference in super elevation of one rail to the other. This is self explanatory by the difference of cant between freight and passenger where freight will have higher center of gravity due to stacking of freight within cabin to maximize capacity.
Maglev does not have this limitation since Transrapid system remains elevated even if there is a power shortage and JR system can just elevate the coils while maintaining horizontal grounds.
The Shanghai transrapid system has a cant of 12 degrees and no one has complained yet.
Conventional tilting high speed trains can have a cant of 6+6 = 12 also ... performance gains due to compatible active tilting can be much more cost-efective than uncompatible technologies such as dedicated maglev trackage.

Think of the continuous and all-ever refusal to adhere to the all-mighty maglev as simply as this ... what would have happened to all other major breaktroughts in railway/mass transport if they were completely oblivious to standards , compatibility and evolution ???

Motorways didn't replace the old dirt roads ... they evolved from them ...
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 8th, 2010, 07:44 PM   #602
sotavento
Registered user
 
sotavento's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,419
Likes (Received): 322

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
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....
Just demolish "current" Euston and build further back ... the 400m needed are there ... without even needing to bring down the glass towers. :grin:
__________________
"O País perdeu a inteligência e a consciência moral. Ninguém se respeita nem crê na honestidade dos homens públicos. O povo está na miséria. Os serviços públicos vão abandonados. A mocidade arrasta-se das mesas das secretarias para as mesas dos cafés. A ruína económica cresce o comércio definha, a indústria enfraquece. O salário diminui. O Estado é considerado um ladrão e tratado como um inimigo.
Neste salve-se quem puder a burguesia proprietária de casas explora o aluguel. A agiotagem explora o juro…"”
— Eça
sotavento no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2010, 10:52 AM   #603
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotavento View Post
Wimbledon-Watford-Leightonbuzzard-Roade = ~85km long section of 4 tracks ... a lot could be made to improve this section
+ fly-overs (specially north of roade where the 4 tracks Diverge to Nothingham and Rugby)
The line is four tracks from Euston all the way to Rugby and on to Tamworth and Rugely - roughly 200km. The slow pair of tracks diverge and head through Northampton, the fast ones bypass. The fast lines pass through Rugby entirely grade-separated, so I'm not sure what you're thinking - its already done.

Quote:
+ regional rail stations (its lacking astonishingly in thise)
+ speed upgrades ... a dedicated HSR signaling and trackage upgrades to 250/300 km/h in some sections ?
Would require ETRMS over the entire route. London to Rugby will have a few sections possible for 225km/h, most of it is at best 200km/h which is what it is already at. Much of Rugby to Warrington and Preston - Lancester would be upgradable to 225km/h, very unlikely anything more - any such stretches would bew too short for the train to take advantage of.

Quote:
In this section the "usual" 2 middle FAST tracks at 200/250km/h +2 outer slow tracks at 160/200km/h would void the need for a "pure breed HS2" in this area
Its (from west to east) fast-fast-slow-slow south of Rugby.

North of Rugby its fast-slow-fast slow for a bit, then slow fast fast slow, then slow-fast-fast-fast.

Quote:
Roade-Rugby (+ Roade-Northampton-Rugby) = ~35km
+ there's a NEED to build aditional tracks here ... 2x double tracks lacking in capacity ... in the direct route theres not even stations/platforms or even aditional tracks for faster trains to overtake slower traffic ...
No fast trains go via Northapton. The only things that go here are the local/regional 100mph trains, and freight. There is no need for overtaking, well, not for what you're thinking anyway.

Quote:
Rugby-coventry-Balsal-birminghamIntl = ~35km
+ here I would just simplu turn the double track into a 4 track from Rugby to the edge of Coventry(10km) ... then build a bypass in the south alongside the Coventry airport(10km) linking with the route to Lemington Spa... recover the 6km of abandoned trackage that exists there and then quaduplicating the remaining 10km into BMI

BMI-birmingham = ~12km of very few chances of quadruplication ...
This is the hardest bit, this is what HS2 will relieve, allowing much higher capacity between Birm and Coventry.

Quote:
A completellyh different aproach would be to re.quadruplicate Birmingham-solihull (the space of the 2 removed tracks is still there) and then invest a large sum in a direct connection between Solihull and Balsal (10km?) ... probably a deep tunnel under Solihull or something like that ... and the old railway terminus at Birmingham is still there and the 4x 200m long platforms would be suficient for a dedicated Birmingham-london service
Where on earth is Balsal? Is that in England?

The problem with the Solihull route is that it is going in slightly the wrong direction. Tunnels is all very well and good but a large investment to get a 100mph line, when the existing one is 125mph.

Quote:
Removing those London-Birmingham trains from the ECML as soon as possible could relieve the regional rail and some of those "up north" intercity ... thus the HS2 could proceed directly north from Coventry(bypass) or BMI.
You mean the WCML, not the ECML.

On the other hand ... if it is liberated from Lo-Birmingan and Liverpool/Manchester/Glasgow traffic then the 2/3/4 tracks ECML can start to be a realmajor regional/intercity corridor... instead of it's current state as a virgin-pendulino rush hour traffic jam (12 to 15 tph in each track) [/QUOTE]

Yes this is the point of HS2, but what you propose, to upgrade the existing tracks, would require it to be a 6-track railway to achieve any capacity gains, yet this would only be 200-225km/h. IMO utterly pointless.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 9th, 2010, 01:34 PM   #604
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten Otto View Post
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.
One option would be to run as many regional/local trains that currently terminate in Paddington through on Crossrail 1 once that is open. That would free up quite a bit of space in Paddington station.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 04:59 AM   #605
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,672
Likes (Received): 678

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
One option would be to run as many regional/local trains that currently terminate in Paddington through on Crossrail 1 once that is open. That would free up quite a bit of space in Paddington station.
Once Reading is sorted out, the extra platform space is allocated to more services to Wales and the SouthWest.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 08:48 AM   #606
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rational Plan View Post
Once Reading is sorted out, the extra platform space is allocated to more services to Wales and the SouthWest.
There are twelve main platforms. That should be enough for 48 departures per hour. Are really that many needed for Wales and the SouthWest?
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 10:33 AM   #607
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

+ the Crossrail trains and you're looking at 60 tph. That would equate to 30tph + freight for each running line out of London - basically, not possible.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 11:50 AM   #608
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
+ the Crossrail trains and you're looking at 60 tph. That would equate to 30tph + freight for each running line out of London - basically, not possible.
If you were running HS2 in to Paddington I'd asume you'd add two extra tracks for that. (But is there place for that?) The original objection I was answering was that Paddington wouldn't have room for more trains anyway.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 03:04 PM   #609
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

Paddington can't support HS2 because the platforms are 150m short of the European requirement 400m. There is no space to lengthen them, HS2 is not an option before we start discussing the number of platforms.

If there were HS2 is going to need at least 7 platforms as it will start with 14tph.

After using 3 platforms for Heathrow Express and Heathrow Connect, that would leave 2 platforms for the other long distance trains. Turnaround is 30-40 minutes on these services and this will not change as far as I can see, so Wales and South West would have to be restricted to 3-4 trains per hour.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 06:05 PM   #610
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by makita09 View Post
Paddington can't support HS2 because the platforms are 150m short of the European requirement 400m. There is no space to lengthen them, HS2 is not an option before we start discussing the number of platforms.
That's true, I don't know if that is feasible. It would be nice to use such a prestigeous station for suche a service. Look at st. Pancras for example...

Maybe what London needs is more crossrail like projects, so that all local and regional services from around London continue underneath the city RER style, freeing up space in the main terminals for long distance services.

Quote:
If there were HS2 is going to need at least 7 platforms as it will start with 14tph.
For 14tph you need no more than 4 platforms.

Quote:
After using 3 platforms for Heathrow Express and Heathrow Connect, that would leave 2 platforms for the other long distance trains.
Heathrow connect is moving to Crossrail. I think that after Crossrail's finished that Heathrow express will either become irrelevant, or will move to Crossrail too.

Quote:
Turnaround is 30-40 minutes on these services and this will not change as far as I can see, so Wales and South West would have to be restricted to 3-4 trains per hour.
Turnaround can be a lot faster. SBB specified in it's latest tender for intercity trains that a 16 car set should be able to turnaround in 4 minutes, including unloading/loading of passengers. That is why 4 tph on terminal tracks is realistic in a proper operation.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 11:01 PM   #611
Apoc89
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 287
Likes (Received): 55

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post

Heathrow connect is moving to Crossrail. I think that after Crossrail's finished that Heathrow express will either become irrelevant, or will move to Crossrail too.
I don't think it makes sense replace the Heathrow Express with Crossrail. Crossrail is a standard high-capacity commuter/suburban railway, while the Express is a 'premium' service with a high amount of seats, free Wifi, extra luggage space, First Class for those willing to pay up, and of course the most important feature is in the name: It's a direct train between Heathrow and Paddington with no stops in between. The customers who use it are different from the ones who use Connect or will use Crossrail.

Replacing the Connect with Crossrail makes sense because it's pretty much a commuter train that happens to start/end as Heathrow. The Express, not so much.
Apoc89 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2010, 10:49 AM   #612
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...s&type=article

Party politics strikes.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2010, 05:17 PM   #613
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apoc89 View Post
I don't think it makes sense replace the Heathrow Express with Crossrail. Crossrail is a standard high-capacity commuter/suburban railway, while the Express is a 'premium' service with a high amount of seats, free Wifi, extra luggage space, First Class for those willing to pay up, and of course the most important feature is in the name: It's a direct train between Heathrow and Paddington with no stops in between. The customers who use it are different from the ones who use Connect or will use Crossrail.

Replacing the Connect with Crossrail makes sense because it's pretty much a commuter train that happens to start/end as Heathrow. The Express, not so much.
I just wonder what will happen with Heathrow Express after Crossrail. The Heathrow Connect/Crossrail trains will offer so much more value at a lower price that I wonder if HEX will still be able to attract passengers.
Because even if HEX will still be faster between Heathrow and Paddington, Crossrail will be faster between Heathrow and the city...
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 12th, 2010, 04:29 PM   #614
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

HS2 was discussed on The Politics Show at lunch time today. I would have posted an alert but SSC was down.

They interviewed a couple of local campaigners. The only arguments that they could put forward were that this was just "keeping up with the French" and that "Someone should just buy Mr Cameron a train set". A Tory donor and landowner was quoted as saying he would vote Labour (I don't think so).


Philip Hammond was asked whether he thought the critics were NIMBYs. He didn't say that, but he noted that the only people he'd spoken to coming out against the project lived along the route.

We get to hear the government's preferred alignment in 8 days.


The programme may appear on iPlayer here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/politicsshow/
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 12th, 2010, 04:45 PM   #615
makita09
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,536
Likes (Received): 92

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post

For 14tph you need no more than 4 platforms.

Turnaround can be a lot faster. SBB specified in it's latest tender for intercity trains that a 16 car set should be able to turnaround in 4 minutes, including unloading/loading of passengers. That is why 4 tph on terminal tracks is realistic in a proper operation.
I think thats more than slightly optimistic. To obtain that kind of performance the UK railway industry will need to change the way it measures delays, it will need to entirely upgrade the signalling system everywhere to avoid any delays occurring, trains will need to be cleaned by magic, and it will need to build a lot more capacity to also avoid causing delays.

Whilst that is potentially achievable it certainly is not within the HS2 timeframe, and therefore not really all helpful as a suggestion.

The best you could see is 15 minutes. Plus throat entering/vacating, you are looking at 3 trains per platform per hour. Are these SBB intercity trains for journeys of 2-5 hours in length? If not then its a silly comparison.

Japan achieves this kind of performance on an entirely segregated railway. Unless this is the suggestion for Paddington?

Paddington
  • Too short
  • Not enough platforms whatever you say
  • Furthest station from the West End and the City
  • Any improvements better allocated to the railway it currently serves.
makita09 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2010, 07:01 AM   #616
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotavento View Post
Cut the crap ...

the ONLY fault of the HS2 project is that due to being 100% new trackage it will mean that OUTSIDE of the urban areas they will need to EXPROPRIATE some farmlands ...
Expropriate where you can (where there isn't massive opposition) and built it on a viaduct elsewhere. It's safer and more stable anyhow. Japan has a massive dearth of farmland (being 80% mountains) and they just built over the farms.

bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2010, 02:36 PM   #617
jandeczentar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

This whole project and the proposed timescale reminds me of an old episode of Maid Marion and Her Merry Men where the Sheriff of Nottingham decides to build a tunnel between Worksop and Scunthorpe. He tries to sell it to the sceptical, mud-eating inhabitants of medieval Worksop (who don't approve) and finds that it will take 800 years to build!

But on a more serious note, I'm with the guy(s) who said this probably shouldn't be built. The priority for the rail network in this country is to increase capacity on the over-burdened commuter lines and that can be done just by adding more carriages for a fraction of the cost of HS2. Plus, does anyone seriously believe that the cost will stay at the £34bn I saw quoted in todays papers?
jandeczentar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2010, 03:02 PM   #618
33Hz
Registered User
 
33Hz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 436
Likes (Received): 47

^ yes, because they add 60% to the real cost according to Treasury rules. It's how they can all look good by claiming it came in on budget - they true budget is much less.
33Hz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2010, 03:39 PM   #619
jandeczentar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 154
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by 33Hz View Post
^ yes, because they add 60% to the real cost according to Treasury rules. It's how they can all look good by claiming it came in on budget - they true budget is much less.
I'll believe that if I ever see it. The British government's record on delivering large projects on time and on budget has not been great lately, no matter what they said the original budget was.
jandeczentar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2010, 09:42 AM   #620
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by jandeczentar View Post
But on a more serious note, I'm with the guy(s) who said this probably shouldn't be built. The priority for the rail network in this country is to increase capacity on the over-burdened commuter lines and that can be done just by adding more carriages for a fraction of the cost of HS2. Plus, does anyone seriously believe that the cost will stay at the £34bn I saw quoted in todays papers?
What's the cost of NOT doing it? Fuel prices are NOT going down anytime soon.

Driving and flying is going to get a whole lot more expensive. If Britain wants to stay competitive and use Satellite cities effectively, HS2 is a good start.
bluemeansgo 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 03:05 PM.


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