Rethink urged over 'absurd' HS2-HS1 link

[paul1609]

I travel frequently between the N-W and Kent. The walk from Euston to St P is NOT 10 minutes platform to platform. If my train is a few minutes late into Euston, I miss the St P connection and my journey takes a half-hour longer. It gets tedious.

There is 15 minutes to get from one to t'other so if VT arrives on time I can just walk it via Phoenix Way, Brill Place and the middle concourse at St P. Using the Victoria line is slightly quicker, IF a train comes immediately. Otherwise, the wait is 5-7 minutes and it's burst a blood vessel and chances are 50:50. Not the way to go.

Through domestic sevices to Stratford or Ebbsfleet would be ideal. There's even a couple of turn-around sidings already in existence in the quarry beyond Ebbsfleet.
It seems a lack of imagination in not contemplating the regional to regional possibilities of HS1 and HS2 connected properly and future proofing to provide for them.
London is an obstruction to my journey. OK, I'm only one but I've been surprised how the Javelins have filled up over the last three years as pax' travel patterns have changed to use the new service. And, there is more pressure to put on further services. BGI!

I also do the journey fairly frequently and if you are using an official nr connection time you are very very unlikely to miss your connection walking down Euston Road. Southbound you are more than likely to be able to catch the service 30 mins earlier from St Pancras.
Service frequency though is likely to kill off any prospect of a through service. 3 trains an hour from Birmingham or Manchester conecting in to 2 an hour to Ashford, with a change is likley to be far more attractive than a through train 3 times a day. This is basically what has killed off every XC through service to the south-east HS2 wont be any different.

 

[transmanche]

This is basically what has killed off every XC through service to the south-east HS2 wont be any different.

What killed off XC through services to the south east was the fact they went via Birmingham, Reading and Olympia - and they were very slow.

Even now, if travelling from Newcastle to Reading (which I do a fair bit) I travel via London rather than take the direct XC train - as it's quicker!

 

[paul1609]

What killed off XC through services to the south east was the fact they went via Birmingham, Reading and Olympia - and they were very slow.

Even now, if travelling from Newcastle to Reading (which I do a fair bit) I travel via London rather than take the direct XC train - as it's quicker!

For a while the Brighton service ran via the WCML but mostly ran empty as people used the more frequent service via Euston, it was diverted via Reading in an attempt to attract more passengers.

 

[Muzer]

Are the people in Brighton all rich, or was the "not via London" saving not as much as usual? I don't quite see why a slower but significantly cheaper train to places people wanted to go wouldn't have attracted more customers. The Bournemouth to Manchester route is certainly pretty popular, and it's still slower than the via London route and much more delay-prone.

 

[mr_jrt]

Are the people in Brighton all rich, or was the "not via London" saving not as much as usual? I don't quite see why a slower but significantly cheaper train to places people wanted to go wouldn't have attracted more customers. The Bournemouth to Manchester route is certainly pretty popular, and it's still slower than the via London route and much more delay-prone.

I suspect when you're only making the trip once or twice a year, a tiny saving isn't worth the inconvenience. I can only comment on the Southern service that now operates, but going via Olympia means you have one train per hour due to the missing platforms at Willesden Junction (disregarding LO as it's so much slower to the next stop at Harrow/Watford), versus about (depending on your destination, naturally) 2-4 tph from Euston.

 

[Muzer]

...but it's the same in the Southampton, Bournemouth and Basingstoke area AFAIK - normally one train per hour, usually quite short (4 or 5 coach Voyagers), and slower than the London services, yet these trains get a lot of use. I'm just trying to understand the differences in passenger numbers.

 

[Holly]

... I'm just trying to understand the differences in passenger numbers.

Doesn't it come down to luggage?

A faster connecting service is more attractive unless you have luggage in which a slower through service is attractive. Who wants to lug two suitcases and a small bag through the London tubes (or queue up for a taxi)?

 

[paul1609]

Bouremouth is a fair way from London around the same as Birmingham I believe by rail. im not convinced that there is all that much long distance travel by this xc service most of the trains I have travelled on practically empty and refil at Reading. Even what through traffic there is will be typically travelling say Southampton to Oxford.

 

[Morgsie]

Students like myself use the Manchester-Bournemouth XC service

 

[junglejames]

Problem is that there is very little demand for services from Ashford and Ebsfleet to the Midlands thats not already met by HS1 and a ten minute walk to Euston. I live near Ashford, the only reason that I have travelled to Birmingham in the past ten years was to travel on the SVR if I wasnt a rail enthusiast I doubt that I would have ever travelled there. I cant see personally that there would be much demand at all.

Not a very good check for whether there is demand or not. Going by the same method as you have.
I live near Ashford as well. I very rarely go to London by train. If I do, its usually to travel up North, say to Crewe, to head out on a railtour. If I wasnt an enthusiast, my trips to London by train would probably be very very rare. Nearly as rare as your trips to Birmingham would be. So I honestly dont think there is a very large demand for services between Ashford and London.

And an even better one, again using the same method that you have. Most of my trips by train are only because I feel like a trip out on the train. If I wasnt an enthusiast, my usage of trains nowadays would be very very small. I would have very little need for them. I honestly dont see that there is a large demand for a rail netword in the UK!!

As to whether there is demand? I have no idea. I havent checked any figures. I would suggest greengauge would have more idea than most people on here, as they have likely done a lot more research.

 

[steevp]

Doesn't it come down to luggage?

A faster connecting service is more attractive unless you have luggage in which a slower through service is attractive. Who wants to lug two suitcases and a small bag through the London tubes (or queue up for a taxi)?

And kids - if you have a family to herd, it is far easier with a through train

 

[paul1609]

Students like myself use the Manchester-Bournemouth XC service

Then you will know what Ive said is true, what percentage of passengers do you think travel through Reading?
Id have said is probably less than 20 % of passengers arriving from either direction.




--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not a very good check for whether there is demand or not. Going by the same method as you have.
I live near Ashford as well. I very rarely go to London by train. If I do, its usually to travel up North, say to Crewe, to head out on a railtour. If I wasnt an enthusiast, my trips to London by train would probably be very very rare. Nearly as rare as your trips to Birmingham would be. So I honestly dont think there is a very large demand for services between Ashford and London.

And an even better one, again using the same method that you have. Most of my trips by train are only because I feel like a trip out on the train. If I wasnt an enthusiast, my usage of trains nowadays would be very very small. I would have very little need for them. I honestly dont see that there is a large demand for a rail netword in the UK!!

As to whether there is demand? I have no idea. I havent checked any figures. I would suggest greengauge would have more idea than most people on here, as they have likely done a lot more research.

I think you are being silly, There will clearly be a demand to a capital city 60 miles away but the reasons to travel to provincial cities some distance the other side of what is a Global City are rather few and far between and will be after HS2 is complete. Dont forget that Manchester is further away and has rather less attractions from Ashford than Paris. Brussels on a par with Birmingham. There will be a demand between the kent Coast and the HS2 destinations but that will be met by a change in London. I stand by what I said earlier that no through services will be fianancially viable without a large subsidy.

 

[Holly]

... I think you are being silly, There will clearly be a demand to a capital city 60 miles away but the reasons to travel to provincial cities some distance the other side of what is a Global City are rather few and far between and will be after HS2 is complete. ...

The report didn't say there isn't more demand for London.

It only said that there is more domestic (i.e. non-international) demand for HS1 - HS2 through trains than a single track provides for. Possibly they were thinking of Ashford and Ebbsfleet to OOC?

Ebbsfleet to OOC, change for Heathrow or Reading would take how long?

 

[paul1609]

As Heathrow Central will only be 42 minutes from Stratford on crossrail i still cant see there would be sufficent demand for a through HS1 to 2 service for many years to come

 

[HSTEd]

What's your source for that claim?

Well to start with there is the fact that it was, for the longest time, referred to as the "Channel Tunnel Rail Link" rather than as "HS1" or the "Kent High Speed Line" or something of the sort.
Infact, when did "HS1" enter into common use in official documentation?

Is this Independent article incorrect?

That fraction of the money spent on the project could perhaps be justified on the basis of the supposed regional benefits, but the fact remains the project was only even proposed as a result of the embarrasment caused by the fact that a trip through the Chunnel on Eurostar before it opened consisted of a tour of Kent followed by a mad dash through the Chunnel and across France.
It was almost as if you were approaching Paris when you entered the Chunnel because the train was so much faster on LGV Nord.

I would also note that the domestic train services did not even commence for two years after the opening of Phase 2, whereas if they were the point of the service they probably would have been prepared in advance of opening. (WHat would it be like if HS2 opened and the only trains on it for 2 years were some kind of regional eurostar?).

While the promise of domestic services were used as some sort of sop for the NIMBYs in the area, it is clear that they did not make a significant contribution to the creation of the business case that led to the decision to commence construction.
As such I believe that such a contribution can be ignored, although I may have used overly strong language.

 

[junglejames]

The main reason i believe for the CTRL, was for International services. However it was mentioned from day 1, that the line would also benefit locals in Kent, and that local high speed services would be introduced at some stage. So yes, the local services may have been later on, but they were envisaged from the outset.

 

[pablo]

JJ,
Wrong. CTRL was supposed to be viable finacially on international services alone. No subsidy. Thacher era, remember?
But L&C R were throwing in the towel when costs rose and expectations dimmed. John Prescott was then the man who had to tackle the mess. The fudge for a government bail-out of £90m (IIRC) was domestic services for North-Kent.
The short-sightedness of this expedient fix is the dead-end HS service into St P that we have today. Could have been an HS Crossrail.

 

[Metrailway]

Chris Green promised in 1989 that there would be High Speed services for Kent commuters. IIRC they were intended to be worked by the proposed Class 342.

 

[pablo]

Did Chris Green have the wherewithal? I think it was mooted a lot but there was no wonga until the L&C R rescue excuse cropped up. For most of that time it was a tenet of govenmint that things should stand on their own feet.

BR seemed to have a lot of forward ideas at that time; even got some of them built. Nightstar and NoL come to mind. But unless the commecial viability and political will is there, they fail.

 

[Stats]

JJ,
Wrong. CTRL was supposed to be viable finacially on international services alone. No subsidy. Thacher era, remember?
But L&C R were throwing in the towel when costs rose and expectations dimmed. John Prescott was then the man who had to tackle the mess. The fudge for a government bail-out of £90m (IIRC) was domestic services for North-Kent.
The short-sightedness of this expedient fix is the dead-end HS service into St P that we have today. Could have been an HS Crossrail.

Wrong (as you put it). The Government announced it had reserved paths on CTRL for domestic services in July 1995, before LCR had even been announced as winning the contract for CTRL.
Sir George Young in his statement on awarding the tender to LCR on 29 February 1996, said

Domestic rail travellers will also benefit from the new line. As we announced in July last year, the Government will be reserving capacity on the new line for up to eight domestic trains an hour in the peak period. The new services should start as soon as CTRL is open, and will dramatically improve journey times from many parts of Kent. The increase in overall rail capacity will help ease congestion and improve reliability on existing Railtrack lines.

The awarding of the tender to LCR was a public-private partnership with the Government providing £1.4bn of the £3bn cost (at the time of the announcement). Provision of domestic services was even built in to the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Act 1996. In introducing the second reading of the Bill on 16 January 1995, the SoS for Transport said

In the south-east, the new line provides other important benefits, particularly for Kent. Express commuter services will be taken on the new line, transforming the travelling lives of rail users from an area that is currently served, by the slowest of London's commuter trains. Gravesend will see journey times to London cut from 50 minutes to 20, and Ashford from 75 minutes to 40.

The Government are keen to see the rail link act as a focus for regeneration, particularly of the Thames gateway and east Kent.

 

[HSTEd]

Wrong (as you put it). The Government announced it had reserved paths on CTRL for domestic services in July 1995, before LCR had even been announced as winning the contract for CTRL.

Reserving paths means nothing when the line is never going to be full using international services alone.
What is the provision at now? about 3tp2h for Eurostar services?

The line is about half full now, and that is with them deliberately wasting paths by ordering the High Speed Domestic trains as 140mph capable instead of 180mph or 200mph.

 

[yorkie]

The line is about half full now, and that is with them deliberately wasting paths by ordering the High Speed Domestic trains as 140mph capable instead of 180mph or 200mph.

With the frequent station calls, running at faster speeds only saves a few seconds, yet it disproportionately increases costs.

It would have been madness to order 200mph units for SouthEastern. That's not a serious criticism, is it?

 

[HSTEd]

With the frequent station calls, running at faster speeds only saves a few seconds, yet it disproportionately increases costs.

It would have been madness to order 200mph units for SouthEastern. That's not a serious criticism, is it?

The Class 395 service covers the 53km between Ashford International and Ebbsfleet International in 19 minutes according to NRE.
An N700 series Shinkansen covers the 55.1km between Shin-Yokahama and Odawara in 15 minutes according to the 2010 Tokaido/Sanyo Shinkansen timetable.
The units in question are limited to 170mph on that section of the route, so capturing another minute would probably be feasible at 200mph.

4 minutes is hardly a "few seconds", and translates to atleast one wasted path per hour as a result.
When you run 2tph that means you consume 4 paths instead of 2.

The line is so empty that these paths don't matter but had serious domestic operations been planned those paths would probably have mattered.
Also note the fact that the platform capacity at St Pancras is completely insufficient for any serious operations of domestic trains.

 

[tbtc]

Reserving paths means nothing when the line is never going to be full using international services alone.
What is the provision at now? about 3tp2h for Eurostar services?

...and yet people think that there'll be a huge demand for continental services to/from Manchester/ Birmingham etc...

 

[pablo]

Well, I stand corrected statistically.
BTW, foreshadowing is a favourite politicians' passtime. Several anouncements of the same thing over a period. They never have to deliver because their promises are deliverable so far in the future that no-one remembers what they said, unless you are an avid reader of Hansard that is. But they get the kudos here and now.

 

[cle]

Is it not a good thing that we actually have some breathing space on a line in this country.

If SNCF, DB, Trenitalia etc... want to run trains, combined with more e* due to e320, possible trains from the north, sleepers, domestic service growth etc... - we can actually accommodate some of that, for once!

 

[pablo]

Hear, hear, or here, here, and through the HS2 - HS1 link as well......... full circle.

 

[transmanche]

I find it strange that so many people are so negative in this thread. "There's no market for it... (based on current travel patterns)" or "Well people can just change at Stratford and Old Oak Common - or walk from St Pancras to Euston" and so on.

Surely the point of HS2 is not merely to replicate today's travel patterns, but to grow traffic and provide new journey opportunities. A regular service linking HS2 and HS1 destinations will provide (some of) those new journey opportunities.

Remember how the M25 changed travel patterns in SE England. People could commute to/from places that just would not have been practical before the M25. An HS2-HS1 link will do something similar - it makes rail competitive with other forms of transport for journeys where it is currently uncompetitive. It makes it possible to make journeys that would not even be considered with the current infrastructure.

This really is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to change travel patterns in this country. We should seize all the opportunities it provides.

 

[tbtc]

I find it strange that so many people are so negative in this thread. "There's no market for it... (based on current travel patterns)" or "Well people can just change at Stratford and Old Oak Common - or walk from St Pancras to Euston" and so on.

Surely the point of HS2 is not merely to replicate today's travel patterns, but to grow traffic and provide new journey opportunities. A regular service linking HS2 and HS1 destinations will provide (some of) those new journey opportunities.

Remember how the M25 changed travel patterns in SE England. People could commute to/from places that just would not have been practical before the M25. An HS2-HS1 link will do something similar - it makes rail competitive with other forms of transport for journeys where it is currently uncompetitive. It makes it possible to make journeys that would not even be considered with the current infrastructure.

This really is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to change travel patterns in this country. We should seize all the opportunities it provides.

I can believe that HS2 will attract decent numbers of passengers as it's a "game changer" that could take people from cars/ planes/ coaches onto train services.

But, given that London to Paris is still just a roughly-hourly train service (plus every two hours to Brussels), I don't think that the market for continental services from other parts of the UK is going to be that significant - certainly a single track chord should be able to cope for the first few decades.

Sorry for the cynicism, but I think that any Birmingham/ Manchester service to the continent is only going to be a fraction of the demand from London to the continent, and the maturing market for such services still isn't that great.

 

[transmanche]

But, given that London to Paris is still just a roughly-hourly train service (plus every two hours to Brussels), I don't think that the market for continental services from other parts of the UK is going to be that significant - certainly a single track chord should be able to cope for the first few decades.

But (as I stated upthread), it's not just about international services. There's also the possibility of direct services from the North/Midlands to Stratford and Kent - even for commuters.