Jump to content

HS 2


Zflyer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted by Capt Kremen on 23/02/2018 18:57:06:

Can the train enthusiast members among us advise, do modern train rolling stock carriages carry more passengers than in 'BR' days?

i.e. 'BR' a separate Loco hauling 12+ coaches (incl Dining Car), Modern stock has 6 (or often less) self powered coaches in total, these running long intercity routes.

They intend to run more of what we call coaches, with a capacity of 66 to 78 passengers, the idea being seated.

The dining car obviously has more open space. A 9 coach train would carry in the order of 550 passengers

A 5 coach, non diner could carry 230 passengers, but 2 of the 5 units are power cars, so totally inefficient.

Long trains will be back in fashion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Allan Bennett on 23/02/2018 07:55:11:

Having been involved in the construction of HS1, I would like to point out that reducing journey times is not the only aim of HS2: Most of the UK's conventional rail network is already overcrowded, with very little scope for the addition of extra trains. To run extra trains, extra tracks will be needed, so they might as well be "HS" tracks. And while we're at it, they might as well be built to European loading gauge so they can accomodate their larger carriages.

Hence HS2's oft-unappreciated objective is to free up the West Coast Main Line (and others) so that more stopping trains can be run on them. Whether or not it's still value for money I'll leave to others to debate . . .

Fair enough, build track, but why fast. It's expensive, noisy, at least more dangerous.

Only the contractors, given a long, fat feast at this trough, like the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now hang on a moment. The London undergrounds run every one to three minutes apart, so why does there need to be such a long gap between overground trains? The tracks do not exactly seem to be over used to me. If it is a power supply problem then this could easily be overcome. If they can allow aircraft to take off and land with a 45 second gap then why not trains?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Martin McIntosh on 23/02/2018 20:45:55:

Now hang on a moment. The London undergrounds run every one to three minutes apart, so why does there need to be such a long gap between overground trains? The tracks do not exactly seem to be over used to me. If it is a power supply problem then this could easily be overcome. If they can allow aircraft to take off and land with a 45 second gap then why not trains?

Good point! Mainline trains can, and do, run at one-minute intervals under favourable conditions: Speed must be the same, speed needs to be high enough that the first train can get 2 or 3 signals ahead of the following one (i.e. over about 90mph in the area I live), acceleration capabilities need to be similar, no stopping or slower trains in the way, no trains crossing the track to go onto a branch line, etc.

Underground trains can run at short intervals because they run at much slower speeds than mainline ones and they're equally matched for speed, acceleration, and braking.

Aircraft can take off at short intervals because they're not usually following the same track after they get off the runway, so won't bump into each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Well we have just signed the lease for our new site. So currently we have two locations to fly from.

http://www.scrcac.bmfa.org for more info.

RE HS2 I was recently chatting with a local farmer, apparently he and one or two others are still owed money by HS 2 I am surprised they haven't grouped together to take a 'class action' through the Court.

I have also been told, though have no veracity concerning the source, that the Treasury have let it be known there isn't funding for the project and is unlikely to be so until 2030

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scrap this white elephant and put the cash into improving the East West service in the North of England or commuter traffic into big Northern cities. A much better use of time and resources than cutting 20 mins off the journey time into an already overcrowded and congested London. WHY does everything ave to be put into London, there are other cities in the UK. angry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bercow said a long time ago that this just will not happen. I tend to believe him as he should know. Pity that so many businesses have already gone to the wall because of it, along with houses being unsalable along the proposed route. The obvious place for it should have been the M40 corridor but naturally this was out of the question because it was Cameron`s back yard. No wonder that my local MP David Livington is so anti because it would now go through his.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...