High Speed Trains in the UK

Why might one say the UK is behind Europe

The UK's national rail speed record is 162mph (260km/h). In France the national rail speed record is double that. Trains in Germany, Spain, France and Japan reach speeds over 162mph on a daily basis. The fastest train in the UK is the Inter City 225 which runs at 140mph but only for a short stretch between Peterborough and Stoke, the rest of the time it is limited to 125mph. The Inter City 125 is the UK's main high speed train which may run at 125mph (200km/h) however because it is a diesel with only 4,500hp it takes a long time to reach its top speed, which means average speeds of the Inter City 125 don't get above 100mph (160km/h). Not very good considering on the continent with high speed lines average speeds in excess of 125mph (200km/h)

Is there any reason for this?

There is one key factor. The UK has not built any dedicated high speed lines. All British high speed trains run on tracks that were laid over 100 years ago, at a time where trains went a lot more slowly and relatively tight curves appeared a lot on mainlines. It is simply not possible to run at speed down a track with tight curves, it is uncomfortable and dangerous, trains have to slow down to go round the curve and speed up, but by the time they have speeded up there is a new curve. This is why high speed lines have been built in Europe to get around this problem, but Britain has not followed and there are no high speed lines in the UK.

Why are there no high speed lines?

France was the first country to build high speed lines in 1981 between Paris and Lyon. This was the time when the conservative party in the UK came into office, with Margret Thatcher, a monetarist who strongly believed everything should be left to market forces, and as a result public transport in general received little help, on the basis that if there were any social benefits of good public transport this would be taken into account for by market forces. This is really non-sense but it meant throughout the 80s and early 90s with the Conservative government in power the absolute minimum was provided for railways, the sort of capital needed for high speed railways was certainly not there.

The second reason is that the situation in the UK is a little different to that on the continent, building a new high speed line would not have such a dramatic affect on speeds because most mainlines are cleared for running at speeds over 100mph (160km/h) for the majority of their length

Why might one not say the UK is so far behind

It is important to remember that on continental Europe high speed lines make up a very small proportion of inter city railway routes. High speed lines do not go all over France, the majority of TGV services run on non-high speed railway. On non-high speed railway TGV trains are no faster than British ones, limited to 220km/h (138mph). The ICE is limited to 125mph (200km/h) on non-high speed railway too. In reality although trains in Europe do go faster the actual numbers are very limited and the vast majority do not go any faster than trains in the UK (non-high speed lines out number high speed lines by about 50 to 1)

Also there is the question of average speed. The best average speed in France is 252km/h or 158mph. The best average speed in the UK is between London and York 192miles where at a Journey time of 1hour 43 minutes a speed of 112mph (180km/h) is averaged, with scope to increase this by eliminating speed restrictions along the mainline. This puts the UK in 6^th place for fast rail services and remarkably is only just behind the German best average speed of 125mph (200kmh) along a high speed line. Also an average of about 100mph (160km/h) is made along the East Coast since the London-Edinburgh journey is less than 4 hours (just under 400miles). In terms of the schedules offered the UK is clearly not so far behind, especially considering Italy has a 300km/h (186mph) train but only averages 165km/h (103mph) along the section of high speed line between Firenze and Rome.

Will things get better?

The West Coast mainline is to be upgraded for 140mph (225km/h) running with tilting trains. Average speeds along it will be over 100mph (160km/h). Also 125mph diesel services are being extended with new high speed DMUs and locomotives. However by the time the West Coast is running at 140mph (225km/h) in 2005 the TGV NG will be running at 225mph (360km/h). Without new high speed lines it is unlikely anything much above 140mph will be achieved because of the curves in the railways. Also trains in Britain will never go above roughly 250km/h or 160mph even on straight lines because the distance between tracks is not enough for two trains to pass safely at closing speeds of over 500km/h or 320mph.

Will the UK ever have its own high speed lines?

The only high speed line planned for the UK is the channel tunnel rail link, 68 miles (108km) of line from London to the Channel Tunnel. However financial problems exist; the Eurostar isn't providing enough profit to finance the line, and Eurotunnel is charging large fees for trains running through the Channel Tunnel to try pay off debts much larger than predicted. However the government has committed £1.5billion, enough to build 2/3rds of the planned route, but not the tunnels under London. A full £3.5 billion would be needed for the whole thing. This would be the first major new railway in the UK for over 100 years.

The Channel tunnel rail link is a key link to Europe. However in domestic UK with many train companies it is unlikely that any single company would have the capital, or be prepared to take the risk of a major new high speed rail construction. With the government looking to keep spending low it is unlikely high speed rail lines will be backed by government money (the channel tunnel rail link is the exception because of the prestige factor involved).