A SCOTTISH academic has claimed the HS2 high-speed railway plans may suffer track failure and derailments if trains are allowed to travel on it at speeds of 250mph.
Professor Peter Woodward of Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh said there is a risk the lines may not be able to cope with "new problems" thrown up by the higher speeds with times between London and Birmingham cut to 49 minutes.
The UK Government has reportedly given £500,000 to Mr Woodward – professor of railway geo-engineeering – and Professor Mike Forde, of Edinburgh University, to investigate the issue.
However, in papers lodged with the Government's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Mr Woodward said the speeds proposed for the £24 billion HS2 project could trigger "significant amplification of train-track vibrations".
It added this may cause "rapid deterioration of the track, ballast and sub-ballast, including possible derailment and ground failure".
HS2's two-track core route between London and the Midlands is supposed to handle traffic currently served by three separate main lines, to destinations including Birmingham, Manchester, the East Midlands, Sheffield, Leeds and Scotland.
Business leaders say journey times between London and Edinburgh and Glasgow would be cut by 30 minutes from four hours and 30 minutes. But experts are worried about plans to run trains faster than any other line in the world, 225mph initially AND with a target speed is 250mph within a few years of opening in 2032.
Mr Woodward told The Engineer magazine he was worried about "ground waves" of vibration, known as Rayleigh waves, developing in the rail at a certain speed. "The analogy is that of an aircraft going through the sound barrier," he said.
As "critical track velocity" was approached, the track would "start to undergo strong ground vibrations", rippling visibly along the rails in front of the train.
"It is possible that, if the train was allowed to run at this critical track velocity, it would derail at high speed," he warned.
Using a test track bed, Mr Woodward is trying to find out what the danger speed is and whether HS2 will exceed it.
Emails released under Freedom of Information show Andy Went, HS2's head of track, now a senior engineer at Network Rail responsible for HS2, is closely involved in the research. They also show Hs2 chief engineer Professor Andrew McNaughton was closely involved in drawing up the new research proposal.
This HS2 involvement apparently calls into question Mr McNaughton's assurance to the Transport Select Committee that a 225mph service can run safely on current forms of track.
"We do not consider it requires technology development to achieve [the proposed service] at 225mph and we believe only limited, foreseeable development would be necessary for [250mph]," he said.
HS2 claims it will be able to run up to 18 trains an hour – one every 3min 20sec – along the core route, more than on any other such high-speed line in the world. If the trains were slower, frequencies would have to be reduced, putting at risk the promised service. Running at the industry standard of 186mph would cut scheme's benefit-cost ratio by an estimated 15%.
A spokesman for HS2 said: "It is nonsense to suggest we would design a railway that did not take into account the effects of Rayleigh waves. We are designing HS2 so that there is no possibility Rayleigh waves would lead to any problems such as derailment.
"We will continue to work closely with and support leading researchers such as Professor Woodward to develop and design safe and efficient high-speed train operations in the UK."
Mr Woodward could not be reached for comment yesterday.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article