Could/should HS2 Eastern leg be shelved?

[Bald Rick]

I was suggesting a connection with the Midland route from Birmingham to Derby near Tamworth, to enable a service to Sheffield via HS2 that should be quicker than the route via Leicester.

If you built just the first 5km of the eastern leg you would cross the Birmingham to Derby at Kingsbury.

But ‘just’ doing this isn’t simple. There’s no work done them, consultation, design, act of Parliament or Development Consent Order.

 

[The Planner]

The original plans for HS2 phase 1 (i.e. the one rejoining the ECML at Handsacre) included a turnout onto the Birmingham-Derby line where HS2 crosses it just East of Water Orton. That turnout got dropped from the plans in later iterations.

I remember it distinctly because the proposed track layout had an error such that a train from Curzon Street to Manchester wouldn't have been able to occupy the path on the mainline that had just been used by a train from London to Derby.

No it didn't, that was a convoluted construction depot that was connected to the Birmingham Derby line via a loop between Water Orton and Kingsbury. It got binned very early on and was only ever going to be a temporary facility, not permanent. Calvert is the only "real" depot that survived the original plans. West Ruislip got binned, so did Streethay. The one at Norton Bridge for phase 2A is still up in the air.

 

[daodao]

But ‘just’ doing this isn’t simple. There’s no work done them, consultation, design, act of Parliament or Development Consent Order.

I agree that there are quite a few steps in building even a short stretch of new line and it is not something that could be done overnight. However, building 5 km of new line to connect HS2 to the Birmingham-Derby line should be far easier and much cheaper than building the eastern leg of HS2, if that is deemed unaffordable/impractical, and would provide much of the benefit of HS2 to Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

"The papers" (and the MSM in general) have been reporting the HS2 is about to be cancelled by the next Tory Leader/PM/Chancellor/Government for 11 years. Yet if I ride a bus to Ruislip, I can see it being constructed. Having been wrong every time so far, maybe "the papers" are desperate to save face and see some aspect of HS2 cancelled so they can claim a pyrrhic victory. But they are running out of candidates.

Is there any reason to believe the latest round of "the papers" reporting what they wish to be true rather than what is actually happening has any more credibility given their track record thus far on HS2...? Until I see an announcement that 2B East is cancelled/proceeding, it's nothing more than speculation at this time. To cite Sagan's Razor - "Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence." Evidence about 2B East (either way) is distinctly lacking at time of writing. Though I note safeguarding directions continue to updated (I forget where) - most recently August 2021.

That work on 2B East Bill preparation has been "paused" is old news - IIRC is was first made public in 2020, but "the papers" missed it that time and have picked it up more recently and made a story of it.

 

[snowball]

Is there any reason to believe the latest round of "the papers" reporting what they wish to be true rather than what is actually happening has any more credibility given their track record thus far on HS2...?

The publication of the Integrated Rail Plan for the Midlands and North has been postponed several times. I take that as an indication that the govt has still not come to a final decision on some of the key questions about HS2 and NPR. Some of the speculation in the press is presumably fed by some of the warring groups within or around the govt.

On the other hand, the signals on the NW arm are consistent that the Bill for Crewe to Manchester (and Wigan though this is slightly less clear) will be published around the end of this year.

The report by the National Infrastructure Commission was seen as lukewarm about the northern part of the NE arm.

So I think it reasonable to think that right now we can't be sure about whether or, more especially, on what timescale the East Midlands to Leeds section will go ahead.

Maybe a bill for, say, Water Orton to East Midlands Parkway will be put before parliament in a couple of years, after the Crewe/Manchester/Wigan bill is passed. That will still leave the Sheffield and Leeds section a long way behind the earliest phases, even if it's still official policy to build it eventually.

 

[Greybeard33]

On the other hand, the signals on the NW arm are consistent that the Bill for Crewe to Manchester (and Wigan though this is slightly less clear) will be published around the end of this year.

From the New Civil Engineer on 5th August:

In a response to the 15th Residents’ Commissioner’s report, published earlier this week, [HS2 Ltd CEO Mark] Thurston revealed the timings for the western leg bill.

“As you are aware, we are also busy preparing for the deposit of the hybrid bill for the western leg of phase 2b between Crewe and Manchester, with a connection to the West Coast Main Line to serve stations en route to Scotland," he said.

"The government intend to deposit the bill in Parliament in early 2022 or sooner if possible, subject to its Integrated Rail Plan (IRP), which is due to be published this year.”

HS2 phase 2b hybrid bill scheduled for ‘early 2022’ | New Civil Engineer

Last year, the Department for Transport (DfT) announced plans to split the phase 2b bill in two, separating legislation needed to build the western and

www.newcivilengineer.com

So it seems clear that the Phase 2b western leg hybrid bill will include the Golborne spur.

 

[BrianW]

From the New Civil Engineer on 5th August:

HS2 phase 2b hybrid bill scheduled for ‘early 2022’ | New Civil Engineer

Last year, the Department for Transport (DfT) announced plans to split the phase 2b bill in two, separating legislation needed to build the western and

www.newcivilengineer.com

So it seems clear that the Phase 2b western leg hybrid bill will include the Golborne spur.

Might this not mean from HS2 at Crewe to Scotland by the WCML; rather than anything Manchester to Scotland?

 

[The Planner]

From the New Civil Engineer on 5th August:

HS2 phase 2b hybrid bill scheduled for ‘early 2022’ | New Civil Engineer

Last year, the Department for Transport (DfT) announced plans to split the phase 2b bill in two, separating legislation needed to build the western and

www.newcivilengineer.com

So it seems clear that the Phase 2b western leg hybrid bill will include the Golborne spur.

Doesnt mean they build it though.

 

[Greybeard33]

Might this not mean from HS2 at Crewe to Scotland by the WCML; rather than anything Manchester to Scotland?

No, HS2 to Crewe is covered by the Phase 2a hybrid bill, which has already been passed. Scotland trains could not use the Phase 2b line unless the Golborne spur is built.

Doesnt mean they build it though.

Deposition of the hybrid bill does not guarantee that any part of Phase 2b will be built. However, preparation of the bill is a costly process, so the Golborne spur would not be included if the government has ruled out building it.

 

[HSTEd]

Pity we won't get a Manchester-Wigan chord as part of the spur.

That would make it a partial relief for Castlefield by allowing Manchester-Scotland trains to run via the Airport without using Castlefield.

 

[HS2isgood]

Pity we won't get a Manchester-Wigan chord as part of the spur.

That would make it a partial relief for Castlefield by allowing Manchester-Scotland trains to run via the Airport without using Castlefield.

Wouldn't such a routing actually make the service slower? I personally think that the Manchester-Scotland trains are better off in Victoria, calling at Salford Crescent for connections to Castlefield.

 

[takno]

Wouldn't such a routing actually make the service slower? I personally think that the Manchester-Scotland trains are better off in Victoria, calling at Salford Crescent for connections to Castlefield.

That would certainly transform the journey from Edinburgh or Glasgow to Manchester Airport. Might even revive the fortunes of whoever is running Flybe's old routes that month

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

So I think it reasonable to think that right now we can't be sure about whether or, more especially, on what timescale the East Midlands to Leeds section will go ahead.

Maybe a bill for, say, Water Orton to East Midlands Parkway will be put before parliament in a couple of years, after the Crewe/Manchester/Wigan bill is passed. That will still leave the Sheffield and Leeds section a long way behind the earliest phases, even if it's still official policy to build it eventually.

I tend to agree with you. The information vacuum is of course leading to a lot of speculation from all sides and I cannot help thinking there is also a good degree of "newspaper diplomacy" occurring in that all sides of the argument(s) are using the media airwaves to lobby for their preferred position.

Given that "Phase 2 West" got effectively split into two Bills/Acts (of Parliament) - Lichfield/Crewe and Crewe/Manchester/Goldborne - I wonder whether something similar to that might happen to the Phase 2 East (if, for the purposes of debate, I presume it is not completely deleted,) since that leg is nearly as long as Phase 1. I could even envisage that allowing construction of P2E North-South to happen if so doing is more convenient to NPR and/or politics in "the North."

I should add the rider that I am just an aimchair fat controller and not privy to any inside information, nor am I involved in the rail industry, civil engineering, etc. etc.

 

[HSTEd]

Wouldn't such a routing actually make the service slower? I personally think that the Manchester-Scotland trains are better off in Victoria, calling at Salford Crescent for connections to Castlefield.

Doubtful, given that it takes ~37 minutes for existing TPE trains to crawl as far as Preston.

HS2 will take 7 minutes from Picadilly to the Airport, its probably unlikely to take 30 minutes from the Airport to Preston.

Hell even on the classic line it only takes 41 minutes from Crewe to Preston.

On HS2 its only 44 minutes from Birmingham Interchange to Preston!

 

[HS2isgood]

Doubtful, given that it takes ~37 minutes for existing TPE trains to crawl as far as Preston.

HS2 will take 7 minutes from Picadilly to the Airport, its probably unlikely to take 30 minutes from the Airport to Preston.

Hell even on the classic line it only takes 41 minutes from Crewe to Preston.

On HS2 its only 44 minutes from Birmingham Interchange to Preston!

Oh I must have misunderstood the timings. If HS2 is faster than via Bolton for Scotland-Manchester, would it make sense to keep the Windermere/Barrow service as a fast between Preston and Manchester, or it could pick up some extra stops?

 

[Bald Rick]

HS2 will take 7 minutes from Picadilly to the Airport, its probably unlikely to take 30 minutes from the Airport to Preston.

Golborne Jn - Preston is 17 minutes pass to stop with a clean path, a Wigan stop, and tilt. Allowing 2 minutes for an airport stop, it needs to be 9 minutes or better for the 30km Airport - Golborne to beat the current 36 minute timing via Bolton. (Ie, 7+2+9+17 = 35). Almost all of HS2 on that section is max 230km/h.

I suggest it will be broadly the same.

 

[HSTEd]

I suggest it will be broadly the same.

I would probably agree and contend that that is "good enough", the primary objective being to allow this service to run without consuming Castlefield paths.

 

[Greybeard33]

I would probably agree and contend that that is "good enough", the primary objective being to allow this service to run without consuming Castlefield paths.

But where would these Scotland trains go when they arrived at Piccadilly HS station? According to last year's Design Requirement Consultation, the six platform station design has the capacity to terminate 6tph of HS2 captive services (4tph Euston, 2tph Curzon Street) and 2tph of NPR Leeds - Manchester services; also to reverse 4tphpd of NPR Leeds - Liverpool services. That does not allow for turnaround of a Scotland train, occupying a platform for 30 minutes every hour as it currently does at the Airport.

 

[HSTEd]

But where would these Scotland trains go when they arrived at Piccadilly HS station? According to last year's Design Requirement Consultation, the six platform station design has the capacity to terminate 6tph of HS2 captive services (4tph Euston, 2tph Curzon Street) and 2tph of NPR Leeds - Manchester services; also to reverse 4tphpd of NPR Leeds - Liverpool services. That does not allow for turnaround of a Scotland train, occupying a platform for 30 minutes every hour as it currently does at the Airport.

The specimen timetables only have 3tph Euston that i've seen.

But ultimately, I point you towards the example of Fenchurch street - and it will be a long time after Phase 2b that NPR even arrives.

 

[Senex]

Golborne Jn - Preston is 17 minutes pass to stop with a clean path, a Wigan stop, and tilt. Allowing 2 minutes for an airport stop, it needs to be 9 minutes or better for the 30km Airport - Golborne to beat the current 36 minute timing via Bolton. (Ie, 7+2+9+17 = 35). Almost all of HS2 on that section is max 230km/h.

I suggest it will be broadly the same.

So if there's no significant acceleration by going that way (and I completely accept your rough calculation), then why bother? Better to continue to serve Bolton and the north of Manchester than add yet more Scotland trains for Wigan. If there's to be any real acceleration in the rather slow Manchester-Scotland trains, there needs to be some way of getting to Preston faster, not spending money on new construction to give no speed improvement.

 

[Greybeard33]

The specimen timetables only have 3tph Euston that i've seen.

But ultimately, I point you towards the example of Fenchurch street - and it will be a long time after Phase 2b that NPR even arrives.

Yes, 3tph Euston - Manchester in the baseline Timetable Service Specification, but I believe the timetable includes a "growth path" for a fourth Euston - Manchester train.

HS2 Ltd has not included the "Northern Chord" in the Phase 2b Design Refinement Consultations - not even passive provision, such as has been added for the junctions at High Legh with the NPR Liverpool branch. So the chord is unlikely to built before NPR, if ever.

 

[cle]

Yes, 3tph Euston - Manchester in the baseline Timetable Service Specification, but I believe the timetable includes a "growth path" for a fourth Euston - Manchester train.

Fiver says it is this 'Macclesfield' service... even if they'll need to stick it into the old Piccadilly shed. Stockport a far bigger market too - maybe always the plan but just not advertised as such.

 

[Greybeard33]

Fiver says it is this 'Macclesfield' service... even if they'll need to stick it into the old Piccadilly shed. Stockport a far bigger market too - maybe always the plan but just not advertised as such.

The Macclesfield service is one of the 17tph from Euston in the "Full Y Network" TSS. I believe the 4th Manchester service would be additional to that, making 18tph.

 

[daodao]

I believe the 4th Manchester service would be additional to that

I am puzzled as to the likely demand for 4 tph from London to Manchester, particularly as the service to East Cheshire (Macclesfield) and Staffordshire (Stoke and Stafford) will be provided by a separate train. That is why I have questioned the need to build HS2 north of Crewe. Committing to further major expenditure on infrastructure is unwise at this stage until it is clear that pre-Covid levels of long-distance business travel to London have returned. At present, despite the removal of the previous Covid restrictions, the Manchester-London service has been reduced to 1 tph, although I presume that it will revert to 2 tph after the summer holiday season.

 

[Bald Rick]

At present, despite the removal of the previous Covid restrictions, the Manchester-London service has been reduced to 1 tph, although I presume that it will revert to 2 tph after the summer holiday season.

It reverted to 2tph yesterday.

 

[option]

Effort needs to be put into driving down the costs - I notice there was a thread on that subject lately. Other countries produce both urban and rural railways for a fraction of th costs of the UK. What exactly is the point of the the so-called National College for Advanced Transport and Infrastructure if not for training British engineers in best practice both domestic and overseas.

It's not the actual engineering/building of things where the cost increases occur, it's the overly exacting, complex, slow, public sector procurement processes, & this expensive obsession with accounting for every penny of public expenditure. (We will spend £1 to account for 50p)

Because the processes take so long (years & years & years) then you have to deal with inflation, & the shiny new stuff that gets chucked in by politicians.
Then every few years you have to get the consultants in to check the workings on stuff that was correct when it was originally written 5 years before.


Have you ever looked at the costs of getting something done on the highway, like a zebra crossing?

"Zebra crossing (including high friction surfacing on approaches) typically costs between £21,500-£34,000.
(Costs quoted are approximate and do not include fees involved with the design and implementation of the scheme or the cost of any legal procedures involved unless stated.)"

Yet we already employ, & pay, the council officers who are doing the design etc works, so why are they being charged for again?



Now, back to the Eastern leg.

For the Eastern leg to get the go ahead, then the first phases need to be seen to be a success. So those in the area need to be positive about the first phases, so that they can then say to the politicians 'HS2 works, we would also like it'.
If all you do is put it down, then it's easier for the politicians to turn around & say 'why would you want something that doesn't work?'

 

[BrianW]

Effort needs to be put into driving down the costs - I notice there was a thread on that subject lately. Other countries produce both urban and rural railways for a fraction of th costs of the UK. What exactly is the point of the the so-called National College for Advanced Transport and Infrastructure if not for training British engineers in best practice both domestic and overseas.

Second national college officially dissolves

The new principal said he is 'looking forward to continuing to build the reputation of the college'

feweek.co.uk

It's not the actual engineering/building of things where the cost increases occur, it's the overly exacting, complex, slow, public sector procurement processes, & this expensive obsession with accounting for every penny of public expenditure. (We will spend £1 to account for 50p)

Because the processes take so long (years & years & years) then you have to deal with inflation, & the shiny new stuff that gets chucked in by politicians.
Then every few years you have to get the consultants in to check the workings on stuff that was correct when it was originally written 5 years before.


Have you ever looked at the costs of getting something done on the highway, like a zebra crossing?

"Zebra crossing (including high friction surfacing on approaches) typically costs between £21,500-£34,000.
(Costs quoted are approximate and do not include fees involved with the design and implementation of the scheme or the cost of any legal procedures involved unless stated.)"

Yet we already employ, & pay, the council officers who are doing the design etc works, so why are they being charged for again?



Now, back to the Eastern leg.

For the Eastern leg to get the go ahead, then the first phases need to be seen to be a success. So those in the area need to be positive about the first phases, so that they can then say to the politicians 'HS2 works, we would also like it'.
If all you do is put it down, then it's easier for the politicians to turn around & say 'why would you want something that doesn't work?'

Saying 'something' about costs, 'hopes', 'management', Britain, ...?

 

[WestRiding]

Look North, tonight had the two Yorkshire Mayor's on demanding it be built. Not that anyone listens.

 

[Grimsby town]

I am puzzled as to the likely demand for 4 tph from London to Manchester, particularly as the service to East Cheshire (Macclesfield) and Staffordshire (Stoke and Stafford) will be provided by a separate train. That is why I have questioned the need to build HS2 north of Crewe. Committing to further major expenditure on infrastructure is unwise at this stage until it is clear that pre-Covid levels of long-distance business travel to London have returned. At present, despite the removal of the previous Covid restrictions, the Manchester-London service has been reduced to 1 tph, although I presume that it will revert to 2 tph after the summer holiday season.

There's no point holding off with phase 2b. Manchester's railways were completely full pre-covid. TfGM want quite significant increases in rail usage in the next 20 years. Even if there is only demand for two London services, there are potentially other services that could run to use up the new capacity relieve the current lines. For example a Leeds - Piccadilly - Airport- Crewe service to relieve the Castlefield corridor. There's also the potential for a Chester - Crewe - Airport - Piccadilly service or diverting the Cardiff - Manchester service that way. All of this would free up capacity on current lines for local and freight services.

 

[Purple Orange]

There's no point holding off with phase 2b. Manchester's railways were completely full pre-covid. TfGM want quite significant increases in rail usage in the next 20 years. Even if there is only demand for two London services, there are potentially other services that could run to use up the new capacity relieve the current lines. For example a Leeds - Piccadilly - Airport- Crewe service to relieve the Castlefield corridor. There's also the potential for a Chester - Crewe - Airport - Piccadilly service or diverting the Cardiff - Manchester service that way. All of this would free up capacity on current lines for local and freight services.

I suspect this is where ‘NPR’ is heading, although not to Chester. It all depends on what is in the IRP, but I see the day where we have 4 from Leeds, but they won’t be London or Liverpool bound trains.