A Second HS1?

[Sad Sprinter]

This is by no means a serious proposal, so don't crucify me. I was reading about the high track fees on HS1 that's contributing to Eurostar's high ticket pricing the other day. I was wondering, whether if it was theoretically possible another company, say GetLink, to create their own HS1 routing in order to charge lower access charges than the current route? I expect the costs in construction alone would be a massive problem and immediately make the answer a "No", but if you could somehow build a route with lower access fares and somehow by err...a magic junction somewhere, shift Eurostar onto the new route, could that potentially be a viable proposal? I expect not, but would like to know why.

 

[Intercity110]

I think if built it would be freight only, from near Dollands moor to the tunnel.

 

[zwk500]

No. The classic lines would not have the capacity and be too slow to compete, while building a new HS Line into London would be far too expensive.

Also, Eurostar is part-owned by the owners of HS1 Ltd. They're not going to be moving onto somebody else's route.

 

[yorksrob]

No. The classic lines would not have the capacity and be too slow to compete, while building a new HS Line into London would be far too expensive.

Also, Eurostar is part-owned by the owners of HS1 Ltd. They're not going to be moving onto somebody else's route.

Actually a service of around an hour from Ashford to Charing Cross would be extremely competitive for many parts of London.

This is perfectly feasible with the current infrastructure.

 

[zwk500]

Actually a service of around an hour from Ashford to Charing Cross would be extremely competitive for many parts of London.

This is perfectly feasible with the current infrastructure.

The domestic services already do this. International services (which is what this thread is about) won't be competitive if you add an extra 30-40 minutes to the journey. Not to mention the amount of trains you'd need to move out of the international services way as the 400m train takes forever to clear junctions, headways and such like. I'd also love to see how you get a 400m platform at Charing Cross.

 

[JonathanH]

The domestic services already do this.

I think the OP has a long held desire to see services restored from Charing Cross to the East Kent Coast which stop solely at Tonbridge and Ashford after London Bridge, which they don't do since the HS1 services started.

I'm not so sure they are concerned about international services.

 

[zwk500]

I think the OP has a long held desire to see services restored from Charing Cross to the East Kent Coast which stop solely at Tonbridge and Ashford after London Bridge.

Indeed they do, but is the 1h20 of the stopping services really that bad in the scheme of things? In any case, this thread is about competing with Eurostar, and so domestic services aren't really in scope.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I think the OP has a long held desire to see services restored from Charing Cross to the East Kent Coast which stop solely at Tonbridge and Ashford after London Bridge, which they don't do since the HS1 services started.

I'm not so sure they are concerned about international services.

Are you talking about me or Yorksrob?!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jul 2023 ==

Indeed they do, but is the 1h20 of the stopping services really that bad in the scheme of things? In any case, this thread is about competing with Eurostar, and so domestic services aren't really in scope.

It's not. I did London Bridge to Dover last year on a 375, 90 mins but a comfortable and interesting journey.

 

[Bald Rick]

The access charges on HS1 are high because they are paying for the cost of construction, maintenance and operation of HS1.

Therefore, a new competitor to HS1 would have to be built, maintained and operated much more cheaply than the current one. And there is no reason to believe that that is possible. Quite the opposite in fact.

Also, if there were two competing routes, the amount of traffic on them would be split, meaning the charges would have to be higher still to pay the bills and debts…

 

[Sad Sprinter]

The access charges on HS1 are high because they are paying for the cost of construction, maintenance and operation of HS1.

Therefore, a new competitor to HS1 would have to be built, maintained and operated much more cheaply than the current one. And there is no reason to believe that that is possible.

Also, if there were two competing routes, the amount of traffic on them would be split, meaning the charges would have to be higher still to pay the bills and debts…

Perhaps I'm a communist, but I believe HS1 should be a public good and it's costs absorbed by the government, not by the rail passenger

 

[JonathanH]

Are you talking about me or Yorksrob?!

Sorry, yes 'yorksrob' in this instance. Does OP stand for original poster, or other poster?

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Sorry, yes 'yorksrob' in this instance. Does OP stand for original poster, or other poster?

Original poster, i.e the one who created the thread. But for what it's worth I too share @yorksrob's desire for a fast Charing Cross to East Kent service again

 

[zwk500]

Perhaps I'm a communist, but I believe HS1 should be a public good and it's costs absorbed by the government, not by the rail passenger

Unfortunately, it's now owned as a commercial entity by a Canadian Teacher's pension fund, courtesy of Messrs. Cameron and Osborne.

FWIW I don't really see why what is essentially a luxury item should be subsidised by the taxpayer. HS1 provide economic value to the UK as a commercial entity.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Unfortunately, it's now owned as a commercial entity by a Canadian Teacher's pension fund, courtesy of Messrs. Cameron and Osborne.

FWIW I don't really see why what is essentially a luxury item should be subsidised by the taxpayer. HS1 provide economic value to the UK as a commercial entity.

I don't know, I'm not a Brexiteer but I think that keeping a flow of mobility as open as possible between here and Europe, without high cost barriers, can only be a good thing.

Neoliberalism really is soulless

 

[zwk500]

I don't know, I'm not a Brexiteer but I think that keeping a flow of mobility as open as possible between here and Europe, without high cost barriers, can only be a good thing.

I totally agree with you, but HS1 is only 1 part of the UK's connections. If you were determined to build specifically rail infrastructure (rather than investing in, say, the Port of Dover which is far more important to the UK), then a second set of Channel Tunnels is probably a better investment than a 2nd HS line from London to the existing Tunnels.

Neoliberalism really is soulless

I don't believe the rail network as a whole should be a commercially viable entity. There are plenty of places where the role of the railway in facilitating access to major cities for economic, social and environmental value absolutely justifies public support to keep the fares accessible. But those markets are things like deprived towns (e.g. former seaside resorts, North Kent) that need access to London as a market to adjust their economies. London to Paris is not a market that requires public subsidy for a train connection, it can sustain itself.

 

[mike57]

Its not just the track, you also need all the security and border checks at the London end, with segregated and secure platforms, i.e. another St Pancras. Waterloo as the old terminal would be the obvious choice, and I believe there were plans for a high speed tunneled route across south London to Waterloo before the St Pancras option became the prefered solution, but the costs would be prohibitive.

Even assuming 2 trains per hour each way on the new route I cannot see how that would produce enough revenue to pay back the money required to complete a project of this scale.

The government of the day, of I would suggest any forseeable political make up, are not going to subsidise it because in most peoples eyes travel outside the UK borders is not an essential service.

I agree that Eurostar having the monopoly on London - Europe rail is not ideal, they can cherry pick and not have to bother with less profitable routes, but as has been aired in other threads the issues are capacity at the London end, and without substantial investment this isnt going to change, Eurostar are not going to make that investment, they wouldn't get their money back, and the government are not going to subsidise it (quite rightly in my opinion)

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps I'm a communist, but I believe HS1 should be a public good and it's costs absorbed by the government, not by the rail passenger

FWIW I don't really see why what is essentially a luxury item should be subsidised by the taxpayer.

HS1 is, of course, heavily subsidised by the taxpayer, in the form of the subsidy paid to Southeastern for the track access charges they pay HS1.

It’s not just a rail thing, though: The best example of infrastructure that should be supported by the taxpayer rather than entirely by the user is the M6 toll.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

At present, HS1 isn't being used to full capacity so that's another reason not to consider a rival route.

If lots of additional capacity was ever needed, wouldn't they just four track large parts of HS1 instead anyway?

 

[Speed43125]

I thought this post was referring to the planned W9a upgrade of the route out of Dollands Moor in CP7....

 

[yorksrob]

I think the OP has a long held desire to see services restored from Charing Cross to the East Kent Coast which stop solely at Tonbridge and Ashford after London Bridge, which they don't do since the HS1 services started.

I'm not so sure they are concerned about international services.

I note that you were referring to me rather than the OP, but yes, you are correct.

Charing Cross is ideal for the West End, Waterloo is Waterloo and London Bridge always seems busier as an interchange every time I pass through. There'd be plenty of demand for a good express service from Kent.

 

[30907]

Charing Cross is ideal for the West End, Waterloo is Waterloo and London Bridge always seems busier as an interchange every time I pass through. There'd be plenty of demand for a good express service from Kent.

It was of course planned for the next franchise (remember them?)
If the Javelins are getting overloaded it might be a quick-fix solution.
But it's not a duplicate HS1

 

[yorksrob]

It was of course planned for the next franchise (remember them?)
If the Javelins are getting overloaded it might be a quick-fix solution.
But it's not a duplicate HS1

True, it's not, but it would be a quality express service.

I'd see it more as a long term improvement of the passenger service, rather than a quick fix.

 

[HSTEd]

If lots of additional capacity was ever needed, wouldn't they just four track large parts of HS1 instead anyway?

Doubtful, that would be extremely disruptive and expensive.

You'd likely build a second line along a different route into the South East - probably Brighton and then proceeding east along the coast. That way you can serve more places directly and construction does not interfere with the operation of the existing railway.