Evidence, Policy, and the Politics of Regional Development: The Case of High-Speed Rail in the United Kingdom. High Speed Rail was introduced to Britain in 1976 by the introduction of the Intercity 125, otherwise known as the HST, with a service speed of 125 MPH. High Speed 1, London, United Kingdom. High Speed 1, legally the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, is a 109km high-speed railway. Development of high speed rail in the United Kingdom Simon HUGHES Senior Area Engineer, HS2 Ltd, UK 11 July 2012 Session: Project Management. High- speed rail in the United Kingdom : Wikis (The Full Wiki)From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Only one British domestic high- speed service is allowed to run in service above 1. Southeastern High Speed Service, however several proposals put forward since construction of High Speed 1 might have seen trains like this GNER- rented Class 3. No business case, No environmental case. ![]() The international definition of high- speed rail is new lines with a speed of at least 2. The building of the line (re- branded . Costs and benefits of route options for a second dedicated high speed line, between London and the West Midlands, are to be considered by the Government at the end of 2. See High Speed Two). A mixture of 3. 00 km/h (1. Eurostar international services and 2. Southeastern domestic passenger services use High Speed 1. Attempts to increase speeds to 1. East Coast Main Line (ECML) and West Coast Main Line (WCML) have both failed, partly as train travel above 1. The term High Speed Train is currently used to refer to the British fleet of diesel- powered 1. ![]() Inter. City trains currently in use. Background. Initial High Speed services. High Speed Rail was introduced to Britain in 1. Intercity 1. 25, otherwise known as the HST, with a service speed of 1. MPH. The Advanced Passenger Train could tilt into bends to reduce cornering forces on passengers and had a high power- to- weight figure to enable rapid acceleration. The APT project first produced a self- propelled gas turbine train, but the 1. TGV) and later pre- production and production APTs were electric units. Initial experience with the trains was good. The prototype set record speeds on the GWML and Midland Main Line and the production versions vastly reduced journey times on the WCML. However, negative media coverage, technical problems and financial constraints caused the project to be cancelled. BR then proceeded to electrify the ECML and ordered a new fleet of Intercity 2. These electric trains were capable of 1. Speeds of 1. 40 mph (2. ECML by using a flashing green aspect on the signals. This indicated it was safe to proceed above 1. HMRSI eventually ruled that this practice was dangerous and speeds above 1. The 2. 25s were curtailed to 1. Meanwhile, internal studies at BR were investigating the case for a new dedicated track, but none of this work is in the public domain. High Speed 1 (HS1)Main article: High Speed 1. The CTRL was the first new mainline railway to be built in the UK for a century, and was constructed by London and Continental Railways. After a lengthy process of route selection and public enquiries in the second half of the 1. Section 1 from the Channel Tunnel to west of the Medway in 1. Section 2, continuing the line to London St Pancras, started soon after Section 1 and was opened to the public on 1. November 2. 00. 7. The complete line is now known as High Speed 1. The HS1 line was finished on time and under budget. The reduction in journey times and increase in reliability achieved through the opening of Section 1 enabled Eurostar to capture 7. London- Paris market and over 8. Section 2 has increased these figures further. Additionally, the connections provided to the WCML, MML and ECML by Section 2 may see growth of hitherto marginal markets, by finally allowing Regional Eurostars to operate, at least on the electrified ECML and WCML. Eurostar's chief executive stated that the company believes they can take 5. These proposals are discussed below. First high- speed line proposals. In 2. 00. 1, two privately- sponsored proposals were put forward to build high- speed lines in the UK. The first, from Virgin Trains, was part of its tender for the ECML franchise. The second, from First Group, was independent of the Df. T / SRA rail franchising process. Neither was welcomed by the government, who in the wake of the Hatfield rail crash were focused on - as they saw it - getting the rail network back to reliable operations. There was also a suggestion that at that time government officials overseeing the railways favoured increased nationalisation of infrastructure rather than allowing the creation of additional track operators, seemingly against the notion of public- private partnerships (PPPs) promoted elsewhere. Virgin Trains' ECML bid. When the ECML franchise (then operated by GNER) came up for its first renewal, Virgin Trains raised the idea of constructing new track and purchasing a new fleet of trains for the line. These so- called VGVs (Virgin Grand Vitesse, after the French TGV) would be capable of 3. The new track would be from Peterborough to Yorkshire and on from Newcastle to the Scottish border. This first track would have opened in 2. Northumberland. Later, if successful, further stretches would have been upgraded. Publicity material featuring Virgin branded TGV and ICE trains appeared and it was stated that the stock would be built in Birmingham (implying Alstom would be the supplier), although at that time the only train capable of such speeds was the German ICE3. Virgin teamed up with experienced civil engineering contractors such as Bechtel, but their tender was rejected. There were issues with the souring relationship between the Strategic Rail Authority and Virgin Trains' other operations and the possibility of creating a monopoly on Anglo- Scottish routes. Sir Richard Branson said he would give up one of their other franchises if necessary. Nevertheless, the Virgin bid started people thinking about possibilities and showed that multinational companies were prepared to get involved with privately funded UK high- speed rail projects for the first time. First Group's plans for the GWML corridor. Around the same time First Great Western, operators of lines west of London, announced a study into a 3. London to South West England and South Wales. First sponsored the study and input was given by other stakeholders in the regions to be served. Journey times from London given included: Swindon 3. Bristol Parkway 4. Cardiff Central 7. Swansea 1. 20 mins. Plymouth 1. 40 mins. Although First stated that this report would be published and given to the SRA and government, little has been heard of the plan since the initial press release. Many at the time felt that First should concentrate on day- to- day running of its services. This is in part due to the success of the CTRL project, part due to realisation that upgrades to existing infrastructure offer poor value for money and cannot hope to meet future capacity needs, and part due to increasing environmental concerns over the expansion of the short- haul airline industry. Atkins study. In 2. SRA commissioned Atkins to perform a feasibility study into the transport and business case for high- speed rail. The study, published on 2. October 2. 00. 4, looked at combinations of 1. New capacity is required to relieve the WCML by 2. Further new capacity will be required to relieve all three north- south routes by 2. Construction of the complete proposed network would cost . All three areas were found to improve the case for high- speed rail. A branch also serves Heathrow Airport. No explanation is given for this. Commission for Integrated Transport. In 2. 00. 4 the Commission for Integrated Transport commissioned Steer Davies Gleave to produce a report entitled High Speed Rail: International Comparisons. The report focused on the reasons why the costs being quoted for UK HSR routes (particularly in Atkins) were high in comparison to other countries, in addition to investigating the business case and transport case for such a network. The routes studied gave journey times from and to London as follows: The study gave the following recommendations: That the Government and SRA begin to plan now for High- Speed Rail (HSR) as part of a wider strategy to ease the anticipated capacity constraints on the existing networks. Schemes that appear to offer good value for money should be actively progressed. That costs of HSR projects are closely examined to bring them closer to the lower costs achieved in Europe. They should take account of possible reductions in underlying costs and further cost reductions if the industry structure, safety regulations and the approvals process were reviewed. That the Government examines ways of maximising private sector involvement in HSR. This should take account of the potential impact of any future national road charging scheme on passenger demand and its potential to make private sector investment more attractive. That changes in the appraisal process be considered relating to value of time, economic impact analysis, environmental assessments and risk/optimism bias allowances. Additional capacity will be required by 2. Ways to reduce the currently high cost of new rail infrastructure such as high- speed lines include. Building lines in phases rather than all at once could produce a cost saving of 2. UK project management, planning, design and legal costs can reach 2. Spanish Madrid - Lerida line) and could therefore be reduced. If these cost savings materialise, then the benefits could outweigh the costs by 3 to 1. Eddington report. British Airways' former chief executive Sir Rod Eddington produced The Eddington Transport Study, reporting on future transport strategy in November 2. The report covered all transport modes and had initially been expected to strongly recommend investment in high- speed rail. However, on 2. 9 August 2. The Times reported that Sir Rod would state that given a limited transport budget, a high- speed rail link is not the most cost- effective option to obtain higher capacity on the rail network and therefore should not be built. Most of the press continued to take this line when the report was finally published, drawing scorn from both opposition parties, Labour back- benchers and transport pressure groups alike. The report seemed to confirm this: “Significant momentum has built behind the case for a new network of very high- speed rail lines in the UK. This is often associated with new technologies, such as magnetic levitation devices, currently in very limited use in China.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2017
Categories |