Critics of HS2 propose reopening of former Great Central line

[editor]

Sorry, it's the Mail, but...

Critics of the HS2 rail project have put forward an alternative route using a train line which was closed in the 1960s.

The rival scheme would see the reopening of the former Great Central line, which ran from London to Nottingham, with links to Leeds and Manchester.

Supporters of the proposal claim it would cost around £6billion, instead of the £42.6 billion which the HS2 project is set to cost.

It was madness that the line was closed in the first place, mind, but I'm not convinced it can provide a practical alternative, sdo maybe they should just reopen it anyway

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ternative-route-using-track-closed-1960s.html

 

[Puddy_Tat]

I'm fairly sure that significant chunks have been built over.

Bits of the former line in south Nottingham are currently being turned into tramway

And while the idea of dynamiting the bloody awful Victoria Centre (on the site of Nottingham Victoria Station) is appealing, I can't help thinking it will be expensive...

 

[lazythursday]

I can't help feeling that this is likely an impractical idea that is just being put forward to see off HS2 that will be quietly binned afterwards.

I feel really torn about HS2. I think there is probably better ways for the money to be spent transport-wise - electrification and modernisation across the north is desperately needed - but it seems highly unlikely we'll get any of that if HS2 is cancelled. The money will just vanish into the coffers (or perhaps go towards some other bit of 'vital infrastructure' in London as usual).

 

[SikhWarrioR]

I'm fairly sure that significant chunks have been built over.

Bits of the former line in south Nottingham are currently being turned into tramway

And while the idea of dynamiting the bloody awful Victoria Centre (on the site of Nottingham Victoria Station) is appealing, I can't help thinking it will be expensive...

The Great Central's right of way though both Nottingham and Leicester have been royally trashed and you have the GCR and GCR[N] presivation groups on the twenty miles between Leicester and Nottnigham so you are gonna need 30/40 miles of new railway there for a start

 

[Crispy]

It's not a practical idea. Too much of it's been built on already. Also, it doesn't go to Birmingham. And you'd have to build new stations for it anyway, just like HS2. And new approaches into all the cities it calls at. The only "benefit" is that you'd have a fairly flat route ready for you out in the open countryside. That's not the expensive bit of a railway.

 

[Wolveryeti]

Yep - one of the alternatives tested against HS2 was the same route but a non-high speed railway. DfT concluded that it would only save about £1.4 bn, but wipe out approximately £6.2bn of benefits.

 

[bi0boy]

A line from London calling only at Rugby and Sheffield. No wonder it closed.

Oh wait, it also stops at East lake, Annesley and Aylestone. That's got to be a popular route.

 

[Dogsauce]

Seem nonsense, though HS2 is already using bits of the formation near London anyway.

I reckon as far as a line up here to Leeds goes, upgrading of the ECML route with faster lines built in parallel to the existing wouldn't be as expensive as the Birmingham-Leeds branch section of HS2, as it's mostly flat and farmland for most of the way. It'd certainly be a more direct and quicker route, but not necessarily any good for serving other cities. Maybe I just resent being on a branch from a line to the smaller city of Manchester rather than vice-versa. Yorkshire isn't exactly awash with transport investment money.

 

[Crispy]

Maybe I just resent being on a branch from a line to the smaller city of Manchester rather than vice-versa. Yorkshire isn't exactly awash with transport investment money.

Leeds gets just as good a deal as Manchester: City center terminus and three trains an hour.

 

[davesgcr]

Not the GC "herring" again - ....no access into London (bar the Met line or Chiltern which is busy enough thank you) , or Leicester , Nottingham and Manchester.

Apart from that a great idea. However - following this through might mean the end of all commuter services from leafy Amersham / Gerrards Cross etc - which would be just a bit of an own goal for the Chilterns. Much as a mate of mine suggested that no HS1 in Kent could mean no domestic services bar maybe a token 0420 Dover- Victoria and 2245 return - all stations of course.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

A line from London calling only at Rugby and Sheffield. No wonder it closed.

Oh wait, it also stops at East lake, Annesley and Aylestone. That's got to be a popular route.

The GC main line (as was) was a bit more than that :

Aylesbury, Rugby, Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield etc

All of these (apart from Aylesbury) had other lines to London, though - the GC was the least well used of the main lines to the north.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Unworkable due to overdevelopment on large stretches of the route and leaving out Brum.

a better approach in my view would be to improve the ECML and the WCML and Transpenine and CrossCountry lines with more tracks at various points, and a more joined up approach to suburban rail to create more regional versions of London Overground/extend services like the Tyne and Wear and Liverpool metros.

 

[Crispy]

Literally half the cost of the last round of improvements to the WCML was the compensation paid due to disruption to regular services. 10bn or so the whole thing cost wasn't it? And to what great benefit? Nothing like the sort of step change in capacity a new line can bring.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Some ponce in the Standard today was saying why not make the Marylebone-Snow Hill line 4 lanes again (after Dr. B made it 2). Could that work to relieve congestion?

Further he proposed high speed between Leeds, Manchester and Birmingham.

Does he have a point?

 

[davesgcr]

There were only 4 lines from Snow Hill towards Lapworth in the Warwckshire gin belt.

 

[Crispy]

Some ponce in the Standard today was saying why not make the Marylebone-Snow Hill line 4 lanes again (after Dr. B made it 2). Could that work to relieve congestion?

Further he proposed high speed between Leeds, Manchester and Birmingham.

Does he have a point?

the chiltern line is winding and slow. It's not going to relieve the WCML, because people would rather take a jam packed fast train.
High speed isn't really needed between those three cities, they're close together. Like it or not, London is the hub of the UK and it makes no sense to pass it by.

 

[lt35]

My Dad's theory is that they should be using the M1 or M40 corridors + the M6 as these areas of countryside have already been blighted. Surely it would work out a lot cheaper too?

 

[Crispy]

My Dad's theory is that they should be using the M1 or M40 corridors + the M6 as these areas of countryside have already been blighted. Surely it would work out a lot cheaper too?

No, because motorways have much tighter curves than railways, you either have to build loads of bridges so the tracks can pass over the road as it weaves around (and also creating big strips of no-mans-land between road and rail), or build the railway off to one side to avoid that problem, by which point you may as well be building it in open country.

The M1 runs through built-up areas, which prevents you running a railway alongside it for much of its length without bulldozing swathes of Luton and Milton Keynes. The M40 is particular would be a terrible choice, as it is very wiggly and cuts across hills and valleys rather than following them. It would be very expensive to follow. Both these options were considered back at the beginning and were quickly discounted as being impractical.

 

[lt35]

Thank you for your very informative post, at least they haven't missed the bleeding or anything like that!

What are your views on operating speed? Britain is not a very big country - do you think they could save by lowering speeds from the claimed 225 mph I have read about. Maybe even down to the Spanish AVE operating speeds?

 

[Crispy]

The lower the speed, the more trains you need for the same throughput. 220 is the top sped of trains being built for new HS lines in France and is not unreasonable. However, with a lower speed, you can build the railway with tighter curves and narrower tunnels. It is possible that they could trade off the cost of more trains (and longer journeys) against the savings in track construction. The amounts are small, however. A billion here and there. If we're going to do this, we'll only do it once. It makes sense to build a good, future-proof railway, so it should be designed for high speed and high capacity. Ideally it should be 4-tracked to Birmingham, but that really would add a lot to the cost.

 

[Bungle73]

The GCR was built the continental loading gauge so it would have been very useful now. This was because the idea was to have it as a route leading to a channel tunnel! It was also the last mainline railway to be built on this country, before HS1 came along.

 

[davesgcr]

The GCR was built the continental loading gauge so it would have been very useful now. This was because the idea was to have it as a route leading to a channel tunnel! It was also the last mainline railway to be built on this country, before HS1 came along.

Indeed - but not to today's Continental loading gauge ! - great idea , but about 60 years too late - old adage of "last in , first out" - it never carried any really worthwhile traffic if the truth be known. (though much loved - old company was the Manchester , Sheffield and Lincolnshire which became the Great Central - both referred to as "Money Sunk and Lost - then Gone Completely" ...

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

The M1 runs through built-up areas, which prevents you running a railway alongside it for much of its length without bulldozing swathes of Luton and Milton Keynes.

Hold on, surely that's a + point?

 

[Dogsauce]

It was also the last mainline railway to be built on this country, before HS1 came along.

Nope, that was the Selby diversion, circa 1980 </pedant>

 

[Dogsauce]

Not the GC "herring" again - ....no access into London (bar the Met line or Chiltern which is busy enough thank you) , or Leicester , Nottingham and Manchester.

However - following this through might mean the end of all commuter services from leafy Amersham / Gerrards Cross etc - which would be just a bit of an own goal for the Chilterns.

You think the opponents of HS2 in the Chilterns actually lower themselves to travelling on trains? I suspect that isn't the case.