HS2 and capacity on classic lines - Spectator Debate

[The Decapod]

Now it's been announced that there will be no direct link between HS1 and HS2, ruling out the possibility of direct high-speed services between the north of England and Europe.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26717518

 

[HowardGWR]

Now it's been announced that there will be no direct link between HS1 and HS2, ruling out the possibility of direct high-speed services between the north of England and Europe.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26717518

I think most of us see this as positive news. The link as envisaged was 'a miserable compromise' whereas a really effective link bringing Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester within a competitive journey time of Paris and Brussels needs something much better.

 

[jon0844]

Now it's been announced that there will be no direct link between HS1 and HS2, ruling out the possibility of direct high-speed services between the north of England and Europe.

For now.

I am sure there will be a link at some point in the next 30, 40 or 50 years.

 

[cjmillsnun]

For now.

I am sure there will be a link at some point in the next 30, 40 or 50 years.

I would hope so.

It's not really worth building the foundations of a high speed network without joining them up!

 

[All Line Rover]

I would hope so.

It's not really worth building the foundations of a high speed network without joining them up!

I disagree. Euston and St Pancras need to be merged into one giant complex ('Euston Road', say - better than 'Euston Kings Cross St Pancras') to allow easy interchange between high speed services whilst allow Britain to maintain its quirky political views.

In any case I remain sceptical about demand for continental high speed rail travel north of London.

 

[po8crg]

I disagree. Euston and St Pancras need to be merged into one giant complex ('Euston Road', say - better than 'Euston Kings Cross St Pancras') to allow easy interchange between high speed services whilst allow Britain to maintain its quirky political views.

Given the need to demolish Somers Town, the British Library and the Francis Crick Institute, I regard that as very unlikely.

A connection of some sort (elevated walkway, subway) between Euston and St Pancras, sure - but it won't become a single complex.

In any case I remain sceptical about demand for continental high speed rail travel north of London.

Change at Old Oak Common. Would also pick up demand from West London and be a much better option for GWML passengers than the tube from Paddington to Euston.

Some of those trains might then be extended back to Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds, but if you just guaranteed the connections at OOC that would probably do very nearly as well - ie you take the 18:00 from Manchester, arrives OOC at 19:01. Guaranteed connection to the 19:40 from OOC, arrive Paris 23:02. If the train from Manchester is late, then either the OOC train will be held for it (and pax from Manchester can be put through security and passport control much faster than the usual 30 mins if needed) or you will be transported on the 20:40, or given a seat on Heathrow express, on a flight, and on the Express RER from Charles De Gaulle to Gare du Nord.

Because of the security/passport process, there is some inherent slack in the timetable that allows what would otherwise be a tight connection (ie, a through train from Manchester would have been the 18:40, for which you'd need to arrive at 18:10; you wouldn't normally dare a four minute connection at OOC, but because of the check-in, its a 40 minute connection at OOC and can be accelerated for a few passengers on a late-arriving connection).

Of course, you could do the same at Euston/St Pancras, but passengers from Bristol or Cardiff have an additional change (at OOC to HS2 for Euston, though OOC-Euston will have turn-up-and-go frequencies) and you have to deal with the 10-15 minute walk from Euston HS2 platforms on the West side of the station to Eurostar check-in in St Pancras.

 

[transmanche]

A connection of some sort (elevated walkway, subway) between Euston and St Pancras, sure - but it won't become a single complex.

The connection will be the 'Euston St Pancras' station on Crossrail 2. Problem solved.

 

[HowardGWR]

Change at Old Oak Common. Would also pick up demand from West London and be a much better option for GWML passengers than the tube from Paddington to Euston.

Some of those trains might then be extended back to Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds, but if you just guaranteed the connections at OOC that would probably do very nearly as well - ie you take the 18:00 from Manchester, arrives OOC at 19:01. Guaranteed connection to the 19:40 from OOC, arrive Paris 23:02.

I don't understand this. What is this train from OOC to Paris? On what line does it run?

 

[po8crg]

I don't understand this. What is this train from OOC to Paris? On what line does it run?

That's if we built the link between HS1 and HS2.

I doubt there would be more than a parliamentary service from north of London if the link was built, but there probably is enough demand for a real service from OOC.

 

[transmanche]

I doubt there would be more than a parliamentary service from north of London if the link was built, but there probably is enough demand for a real service from OOC.

Or quite possibly from Heathrow. Airlines might take the opportunity to "save" landing slots by transferring short-haul passengers onto the train - as Air France have done between Brussels and Paris CDG.

 

[TheKnightWho]

That's if we built the link between HS1 and HS2.

I doubt there would be more than a parliamentary service from north of London if the link was built, but there probably is enough demand for a real service from OOC.

I really don't understand this idea that no-one from north of London wants to go to Europe, or vice versa.

Those planes from Manchester, Newcastle etc. must all be flying completely empty...

 

[jon0844]

For the convenience over flying, I'm sure a lot of people would take the train even if it was slightly slower.

Don't get me wrong, I like flying but it's been a lot more 'testing' since having a baby. It certainly makes you consider other options, or perhaps not travelling at all at the moment.

That, and many other reasons, makes me think it would see reasonable usage in the future, as well as people coming from abroad to visit more than just London as a result of direct, hassle free, rail services.

 

[po8crg]

I really don't understand this idea that no-one from north of London wants to go to Europe, or vice versa.

Those planes from Manchester, Newcastle etc. must all be flying completely empty...

Take every single passenger on a plane from Manchester to Paris and transfer them to rail. You can now fill 1.5 Eurostars a day. Do the same for Brussels and you don't even fill one. Combine Leeds-Bradford, Robin Hood and EMA and you get about the same. Birmingham is about the same again. So that's 7-8 to Paris and 2-3 to Brussels total. Assume that the generated travel is equal to the people who insist on continuing to fly (that works out about right).

It's not that the planes are flying empty, it's that they don't have that many seats in the first place, compared to an 18-coach 400m train.

 

[HowardGWR]

Take every single passenger on a plane from Manchester to Paris and transfer them to rail. You can now fill 1.5 Eurostars a day. Do the same for Brussels and you don't even fill one. Combine Leeds-Bradford, Robin Hood and EMA and you get about the same. Birmingham is about the same again. So that's 7-8 to Paris and 2-3 to Brussels total. Assume that the generated travel is equal to the people who insist on continuing to fly (that works out about right).

It's not that the planes are flying empty, it's that they don't have that many seats in the first place, compared to an 18-coach 400m train.

There is an argument that uses the following anecdote.

An American shoe salesman and an English one visit a backward country in the 50s. The English salesman wires his office 'It's hopeless, no one wears shoes here'. The American salesman wires 'It's a great market here, no one is wearing shoes yet'.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I really don't understand this idea that no-one from north of London wants to go to Europe, or vice versa.

Those planes from Manchester, Newcastle etc. must all be flying completely empty...

The thing is could you ever see large numbers of people using the train to travel overseas for a family holiday? I'm 47 and fit and healthy but in my life time I can't imagine families taking the train to Greece or Spain for a holiday. The journey would simply take too long, especially given that annual leave is finite.

 

[NotATrainspott]

The problem with the HS1-HS2 link as planned was that it would either be a complete white elephant, with no NoL Eurostar services, or it would be a victim of its own success and need to be completely replaced (resulting in the £400m investment being completely wasted). If a fully-tunnelled link were practical, especially if the second tunnel bore could be added later, then it would likely have not suffered the same fate because it would have use forever while the NLL viaduct solution is really a compromise too far.

The political opposition to further HSR, especially when running through AONBs or otherwise pretty places, will drop once Phase 1 is completed and the wild accusations of the Chiltern NIMBYs are proved to be nothing but hot air. As a result there will without doubt be a chance to design a better link which would likely be able to exist somewhat on its own merits rather than relying upon travel to the Continent.

 

[RichmondCommu]

For the convenience over flying, I'm sure a lot of people would take the train even if it was slightly slower.

The problem is once you get north of the Midlands the timings become a lot more than "slightly slower". My wife and I travelled round France last summer and in terms of London - Nice the train couldn't compete on price let alone time!

 

[transmanche]

The thing is could you ever see large numbers of people using the train to travel overseas for a family holiday? I'm 47 and fit and healthy but in my life time I can't imagine families taking the train to Greece or Spain for a holiday.

Not all families want to go to Greece or Spain on holiday. Plenty of British families go on holiday to places on (or close to) the TGV network in France

 

[RichmondCommu]

Not all families want to go to Greece or Spain on holiday. Plenty of British families go on holiday to places on (or close to) the TGV network in France

Now that’s very true however the TGV network will now take you into Catalonia but sadly I can't see there being many takers from the UK. As mentioned earlier my wife and I discovered last summer that with London to Nice I'm afraid the plane wins on price and timings. Suffice to say we flew from Gatwick.

 

[jon0844]

Flying is likely to win on pricing for some time when comparing air to rail to destinations within mainland Europe. That really needs to change.

More trains, and competition from DB through the tunnel, might help that happen.

I've travelled by train across Europe and taken a boat from Harwich to Esbjerg, then a train to Sweden - and up to Stockholm. Rest assured, it's far quicker to fly (2hr 45mins) but on the boat there were plenty of families who had obviously chosen sea over air. And the boat isn't cheaper than flying either.

Not everyone wants to fly, for a range of reasons.

Eurostar is so nice. Board at leisure, then just relax all the way. Flying can be a great experience at times, but also a nightmare with clearing security and all the faffing about (especially when wearing boots, a thick jacket, carrying a laptop and other bits and pieces). Then sitting waiting for the plane, and the fun of boarding when people who probably have travelled many times try as hard to make it look like its their first time.

Being able to continue using devices during takeoff and landing is nice, but most planes I go on still don't have Wi-Fi (and even that doesn't work all the time) so that's another reason I quite like being on a train - either Wi-Fi or mobile data.

I could go on - but I can't see why people from Birmingham, Manchester or further afield wouldn't use the train even if it's longer - assuming the price was right and it was as easy as possible. Stepping on a train at a station you usually use, then getting off in the heart of a city.

Likewise, people in Paris or Brussels can now travel to other parts of the UK just as easily.

You might even be able to offer a normal walk up service, which will really beat the airlines. All of our travel by air is booked well in advance, and at busy times of the year (like going to Sweden for Easter or Christmas, we invariably have no choice but to pay extra because of increased demand or have to fly on a service that's extremely inconvenient - like a 7am flight or one that brings us back at 10-11pm, with the need to get to/from the airport at silly o'clock).

In fact, if there's capacity to allow people to just turn up and not pay a fortune, it makes travel abroad so much more enticing. You could almost wake up on Saturday morning and decide to have a weekend in Paris - then go (assuming you can book a cheap hotel at short notice).

Finally, if trains could run through the night...

Anyway, I've waffled on enough, but I do think that we will definitely need to link HS2 to HS1 eventually - but let's get it right. I can see it being very well used in the end, so a half-assed link with restricted capacity would be pointless.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I could go on - but I can't see why people from Birmingham, Manchester or further afield wouldn't use the train even if it's longer - assuming the price was right and it was as easy as possible. Stepping on a train at a station you usually use, then getting off in the heart of a city.

The problem is the majority of people only get 28 days annual leave per annum which means time is of the essence. In all honesty the vast majority of people would rather have more time on the beach than on the train.

To give another example, Prague is a popular destination but I'm afraid the airlines would win every time. London to Amsterdam is a potential winner by train but from the Midlands a weekend break would only work if you took a flight.

 

[jon0844]

For sure, travel further afield wouldn't be practical by rail unless we get some big speed increases both in the UK and mainland Europe.

For the maximum time on a beach, I think those destinations are probably a bit too far - but city breaks in France, Belgium, Netherlands or Germany are all doable. And for those there to come to the UK. Not everyone just wants a week on a beach do they?

And you've obviously got those that will city hop on an InterRail pass, making the travel and new destinations part of the holiday - spending a day or night in each place before carrying on. While some trains demand reservations in Europe, most don't and I think that's going to be a big advantage if you can turn up for a train back to Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds and take the next available service.

I think there's demand, but obviously have no way of knowing - but if we look at the increase in rail usage in the UK alone as services have improved, then there's a good chance that a well planned timetable and good pricing (possible with the increased capacity) will generate demand and it will gradually become known as a viable option for travel to a number of cities.

 

[po8crg]

The problem is once you get north of the Midlands the timings become a lot more than "slightly slower". My wife and I travelled round France last summer and in terms of London - Nice the train couldn't compete on price let alone time!

London-Nice is doable for £62 if you get the cheapest advance tickets, but I'll concede that it's ten hours.

Part of the problem is that Nice isn't on the LGV network - LGV PACA would save about an hour - but the time you lose in Paris (or the rather poor connections at Lille for the trains that use the Paris bypass) is a bigger problem.

If you could teleport from Gare du Nord to Gare de Lyon, then it would be about seven-and-a-half hours, six-and-a-half with PACA.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Finally, if trains could run through the night...

You could run sleepers from Lille.

Build some nice restaurants in Lille-Europe, run a shuttle service to Lille from London and from HS2 stations (when the link is in place) and then have sleepers leaving Lille at 10-11pm.

On current timings (ie the fastest daytime train on these routes), before there are any more line upgrades, a 22:00 departure could arrive as follows:
Vienna 08:08, Budapest 11:08
Copenhagen 09:09
Berlin 05:47, Warsaw 11:15
Prague 08:49
Madrid 10:21 (via Valldolid, and I know that's impossible because you'd need a gauge-changing TGV)
Barcelona 06:18
Bologna 06:39, Florence 07:23, Rome 08:45, Naples 09:55
Milan 05:34, Venice (Mestre) 08:09, Trieste 09:53

Obviously many of these are being speeded up.

Coming back, most of these have reasonable departure times for, say, an 07:00 arrival, which would give you time to clear security in Lille and board an 08:00 shuttle arriving St Pancras at 08:30.

Offer breakfast on the shuttle and dinner in Lille before departure so you don't need a dining car on the sleeper.

 

[RichmondCommu]

London-Nice is doable for £62 if you get the cheapest advance tickets, but I'll concede that it's ten hours.

Part of the problem is that Nice isn't on the LGV network - LGV PACA would save about an hour - but the time you lose in Paris (or the rather poor connections at Lille for the trains that use the Paris bypass) is a bigger problem.

If you could teleport from Gare du Nord to Gare de Lyon, then it would be about seven-and-a-half hours, six-and-a-half with PACA.

We flew out to Nice in the last week of July last year and at the time London-Nice was nothing like as cheap. Now ok we travelled during the peak season so fares would have naturally been more expensive but the train was twice the cost of flying! As much as I love travelling by train we simply couldn't justify spending that kind of money.

 

[po8crg]

We flew out to Nice in the last week of July last year and at the time London-Nice was nothing like as cheap. Now ok we travelled during the peak season so fares would have naturally been more expensive but the train was twice the cost of flying! As much as I love travelling by train we simply couldn't justify spending that kind of money.

£62 each way, not return.

 

[RichmondCommu]

For the maximum time on a beach, I think those destinations are probably a bit too far - but city breaks in France, Belgium, Netherlands or Germany are all doable. And for those there to come to the UK. Not everyone just wants a week on a beach do they?

I agree that beach holidays are not for everyone. However unless you are retired or a student most people only have limited amount of annual leave which means that even on a city break time is still important. And in fact if you are planning a weekend away time becomes even more important.

And you've obviously got those that will city hop on an InterRail pass, making the travel and new destinations part of the holiday - spending a day or night in each place before carrying on. While some trains demand reservations in Europe, most don't and I think that's going to be a big advantage if you can turn up for a train back to Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds and take the next available service.

I concur that in terms of InterRail adventures time is not quite so important. However I'm pretty sure that all the high speed networks in Europe require reservations but I will happily be corrected!

I think there's demand, but obviously have no way of knowing - but if we look at the increase in rail usage in the UK alone as services have improved, then there's a good chance that a well planned timetable and good pricing (possible with the increased capacity) will generate demand and it will gradually become known as a viable option for travel to a number of cities.

I would agree with this to a certain extent as services between London and Paris have proved to be popular. However on the flip side there is every danger that DB may never go ahead with its planned London services so I would question how much demand there actually is. Obviously DB have suffered from technical difficulties but I think that if they really thought there was a strong market they would still press ahead.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

£62 each way, not return.

I wonder how that compares to taking a flight in terms of cost? That's a serious question as I haven't looked by I bet there isn't much in it. Listen I'm a huge fan of rail travel but in terms of travelling from London it’s hard to see how things are going cheaper and quicker anytime soon. Which I think is a real shame.