HS-GB: Another armchair rail planner's HSR masterplan no one asked for

[Sad Sprinter]

I've had an idea for a theoretical high speed railway system that has been percolating in my mind for the past err...very long time - which I will now share with you all. Stop groaning in the back.

First of all, this is entirely a thought experiment, so before you turn up at my house with pitchforks demanding to know "Where's the funding coming from!?!" The answer is going to simply be "magic" - it's simply "in a perfect world exercise".

So first of all, I'll get rid of the current numerical method of naming our high speed rail lines (HS1, HS2) etc - purely as a branding exercise to get past the whole HS2 debacle. Instead, I'd give them wishy washy names. For example, HS1 will be renamed "High-Speed Southern England", which I think has some bite to it.

So the first route I would build would not be London to Birmingham, but "High Speed Metropolitan" (that name needs some work).

HSM would essentially run from an underground junction on HS1 somewhere under Canonbury, to a Euston Cross station, through Old Oak Common and out to Heathrow as per the old Heathrow Hub HSR routing. From LHR, it would then either run to Woking to connect onto the SWML or down the M3 to connect with the SWML at Basingstoke.

This line would take the Javelin services away from St. Pancras and continue them onto the SWML via Heathrow in a sort of Uber-Thameslink. Whilst it would link up Heathrow with Hampshire/Surrey/Dorset by rail, as well as Kent, it'll feed in those areas directly onto the main-northern HSR spine via Birmingham at OOC - which I'll christen "High Speed North West" (a bit more limp that name).

High Speed North West is essentially HS2, but running in full to Manchester Victoria (through station) via another through station at Birmingham Moor Street. In this scenario, London to Manchester trains will stop at my new Moor Street high-speed station. The goal would be to have as high a load factor as possible for each train by providing the premier London-Birmingham-Manchester service as well as important regional links that will act as feeder services to the HS route. So for instance:

OOC will connect with trains from the South West
Moor Street will be the hub for passengers coming from Bristol/Cardiff
New HS regional routes from Birmingham to Nottingham and Oxford will also connect with the London to Manchester services.

I envision this route alone would have 6tph - a train from London to Manchester every 10 mins. The purpose of this is largely a psychological one, to demonstrate that the core cities of the nation can be traversed as if it were a rapid transit route. Barely any waiting at all, ticketing done entirely through contactless payments. And a near predictable stopping pattern. Aside from 1 or 2 an hour that will call at Birmingham Airport. 6tph from Birmingham to Manchester Airport would also connect a metropolitan region of almost 3 million people in with an airport about 20 mins from the city centre - a game changer for regional productivity.

A transpennine line from Liverpool to Leeds via Bradford would of course be built, as well as the Eastern "Y" arm (along with a Manchester to Sheffield high speed line). Again, this would link Liverpool, Leeds, Hull, Sheffield and Newcastle straight into Manchester Airport with frequent HS trains. The airport would undoubtedly become the UK's second national hub - bolstering Manchester's profile as a European commercial hub.

The next grand line would be "High Speed Caledonia" (again, needs work), a line from the Manchester Airport area to the Central Belt. Aside from London services, this line would accommodate regional services from:

Liverpool/Manchester - Manchester Airport (combine) - Preston Glasgow/Edinburgh
Nottingham - Sheffield-Manchester-Manchester Airport-Preston-Glasgow Edinburgh

But again, the beauty of a through station at Birmingham is that London to Scotland services could call there to pick up passengers coming in from Bristol/Wales/East Midlands to help bolster the passenger numbers. In threads regarding high speed 2's potential extension to Scotland, there's always a bit of ambiguity over whether such a route would attract enough passengers from London to make it worthwhile. But with my system, a London to Scotland line would also efficiently soak up passengers from Southampton's Metro area as well as the Bristol/Cardiff Metro area into one train. I envision with such a system, a half-hourly London to Scotland service could be entirely plausible.

When a high speed line from Birmingham down to Bristol and the South West inevitably is planned, I imagine these trains would exclusively serve the North East axis. Again, this would be to funnel as much passengers as possible onto London to Manchester/Scotland trains. Birmingham Moor Street High Speed would be designed to be as interchange friendly as possible from the start.

Oh and of course a London to East Midlands HS Line running via the M11 corridor - allowing Cambridge to Heathrow regional services.

Anyway this is a potential, comprehensive high speed rail system for the UK, not scoped for increasing capacity on the WCML south, but to aggressively boost national productivity as much as a single mode of transport can do. Obviously you'd need a huge upgrade to local, regional and rapid transit rail system to feed into the HS and lastly distribute passengers around the Metro Areas of their destinations. So it would be an entire package of rail investments rather than just a single HS line.

Rolling Stock

I imagine due to the possible high loadings on London to Manchester trains, you'd need as high capacity trains as possible. I would specify for this route double decker trains, if possible. Using the previous Shinkansen Max double decker trains, a quick calculation confirms that by using that 8 car train as a template and doubling the length, a unit of over 1,600 seats could be produced at roughly 400 meters long. I do not know whether it would be possible to accelerate such a large and heavily loaded train to speeds of up to 225 mph as quickly as a single decker train, but I imagine it would need incredibly powerful traction motors regardless.

I would also, invest several billion into a High Speed Rail Rolling Stock Research Centre, so that such trains could be designed at built in Britain. Stimulating a British production line for high-speed rail vehicles for export for further HS lines across the globe.

Anyway, if at least one person likes the idea, I will be pleased. Back to the real world...

 

[Snow1964]

I see where you are coming from regarding numbering, the French used names Sud Est, Atlantique, Nord etc.

I personally think the Conservative Government went wrong with descoping North Eastern Eastern leg to East Midlands, and removing HS1-HS2 link. And whoever's idea was to end at a random field in South Staffordshire rather than getting phase 1 beyond the Staffordshire 2 track bottleneck needs shooting.

But I also think they should have made it 4 tracks from the Delta Junction to Birmingham International (interchange) and added a south western spur towards Cheltenham (even if it had lower speed of say 150mph), then reinstating the wartime widening to where the Cardiff / South Wales routes split from Bristol direction. The inability to get to South, South West and South Wales (an area with over 10m inhabitants) without changing at Old Oak was bad masterplan.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I see where you are coming from regarding numbering, the French used names Sud Est, Atlantique, Nord etc.

I personally think the Conservative Government went wrong with descoping North Eastern Eastern leg to East Midlands, and removing HS1-HS2 link. And whoever's idea was to end at a random field in South Staffordshire rather than getting phase 1 beyond the Staffordshire 2 track bottleneck needs shooting.

But I also think they should have made it 4 tracks from the Delta Junction to Birmingham International (interchange) and added a south western spur towards Cheltenham (even if it had lower speed of say 150mph), then reinstated the wartime widening to where the Cardiff and South Wales routes split from Bristol direction. The inability to get to South, South West and South Wales (an area with over 10m inhabitants) without changing at Old Oak was bad masterplan.

Sure, I think people would be far more onboard with the project if there could at least have been a way to run SW-NW trains via the HS2 Eastern Arm. Building a new HSR system and terminating regional trains at Birmingham, disconnected from the rest of the network was a decision I don't think I could ever agree with.

And yes, line names, it just seems like the more British approach.

My route would reintroduce a HS1-HS2 route by proxy by creating a small, Crossrail size underground station for Javelin trains. International trains could I suppose pass through non-stop. They could stop at OOC if they really need a London stop.

 

[eldomtom2]

Sure, I think people would be far more onboard with the project if there could at least have been a way to run SW-NW trains via the HS2 Eastern Arm.

Honestly I'm not sure that would have made much of difference. What really killed most of HS2 was the cost.

 

[Bald Rick]

When I were a lad, and wielded pencil crayons (when I was about 17) I devised a line, which I dubbed the LGV Nord West Angleterre. It ran from Euston, in tunnel to Old Oak Common (for interchange with a link to Heathrow), then up to Ruislip, across the Chilterns to Birmingham International, thence central Birmingham and on to Manchester via the Airport, with a seperate line from south of the airport to the WCML near Wigan.

(And then from Wigan to near Uddingston).

This is completely genuine, and I still have the pencil crayoned map!

 

[ainsworth74]

This is completely genuine, and I still have the pencil crayoned map!

Well you can't say that and not provide proof...

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Honestly I'm not sure that would have made much of difference. What really killed most of HS2 was the cost.

Ultimately though, it never had the full ideological support of the Conservative Party because, well, apart from the fact they're not actually Conservatives but Libertarians in disguise, I think they and the rest of the public, couldn't "buy into" what persistently was seen as a London-centric project. A route connecting to the existing XC network couldn't even be called "HS2", because it would be an entirely new railway system in itself.

By plan, at the basic level, would provide a highly connectable spine from London to Manchester, taking on several different regional cross-country flows as well as the London bound Intercity flow.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I personally think the Conservative Government went wrong with descoping North Eastern Eastern leg to East Midlands, and removing HS1-HS2 link. And whoever's idea was to end at a random field in South Staffordshire rather than getting phase 1 beyond the Staffordshire 2 track bottleneck needs shooting.

I see where you are coming from but I actually dont have a problem with it as long as there is a 30 year plan and that random field in South Staffordshire is just a temporary terminating point. In our democratic system, sadly any incoming government can cancel any forward thinking plan.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well you can't say that and not provide proof...

I’ll show you next time we meet. Perhaps

 

[eldomtom2]

Ultimately though, it never had the full ideological support of the Conservative Party because, well, apart from the fact they're not actually Conservatives but Libertarians in disguise, I think they and the rest of the public, couldn't "buy into" what persistently was seen as a London-centric project. A route connecting to the existing XC network couldn't even be called "HS2", because it would be an entirely new railway system in itself.

By plan, at the basic level, would provide a highly connectable spine from London to Manchester, taking on several different regional cross-country flows as well as the London bound Intercity flow.

I just don't see how your plan is different enough from HS2 to fend off accusations of being "London-centric". In its initial form it doesn't connect to the XC network any more than the HS2 plan.

And HS2 being "London-centric" clearly wasn't the issue for the Tories because they cancelled all the bits except the London connection.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

When I were a lad, and wielded pencil crayons (when I was about 17) I devised a line, which I dubbed the LGV Nord West Angleterre. It ran from Euston, in tunnel to Old Oak Common (for interchange with a link to Heathrow), then up to Ruislip, across the Chilterns to Birmingham International, thence central Birmingham and on to Manchester via the Airport, with a seperate line from south of the airport to the WCML near Wigan.

(And then from Wigan to near Uddingston).

This is completely genuine, and I still have the pencil crayoned map!

A frank confession, and now we know why you believe in HS2!

 

[Peter Sarf]

e to have as high a load factor as possible for each train by providing the premier London-Birmingham-Manchester service as well as important regional links that

I have always thought Birmingham being on a branch was dumb. The irony is the London centric services will terminate at Curzon street AGAIN !.

Going through Birmingham would have taken pressure of New Street to Wolverhampton.

When I were a lad, and wielded pencil crayons (when I was about 17) I devised a line, which I dubbed the LGV Nord West Angleterre. It ran from Euston, in tunnel to Old Oak Common (for interchange with a link to Heathrow), then up to Ruislip, across the Chilterns to Birmingham International, thence central Birmingham and on to Manchester via the Airport, with a seperate line from south of the airport to the WCML near Wigan.

(And then from Wigan to near Uddingston).

This is completely genuine, and I still have the pencil crayoned map!

Where did it (you) go wrong !.

I just don't see how your plan is different enough from HS2 to fend off accusations of being "London-centric". In its initial form it doesn't connect to the XC network any more than the HS2 plan.

And HS2 being "London-centric" clearly wasn't the issue for the Tories because they cancelled all the bits except the London connection.

By going through Birmingham to Manchester it indicates that Manchester to/from Birmingham is important. In fact building Birmingham to/from Manchester first might have been a useful enough thing in its own right and could not be argued as London centric.

Instead we are left with an expensive white elephant that connects Birmingham with outer London and Manchester with - oh nothing !.

The only excuse for building HS2 the way it was is so as to relieve the Southern most part of the West Coast mainline. A good excuse but perceived as London centric.

But was the London centric label actually a significant factor in giving up ?. The COST overruns are what killed HS2. So an alternative strategy would have to allow smaller useful stages to get built first (like Birmingham to Manchester). Of course it could end up like so many Motorways into London - fizzling out before getting much further in than the North/South circular roads !. Obviously railways have a less dramatic impact on central London BUT if the road orientated leaders could not sneak motorways further into London then what chance railways fifty odd years later.

 

[Senex]

On names v. numbers etc ...

Does anyone know why we gave up the clear and to-the-point "CTRL" in favour of "HS1" — were we already expecting more high-speed lines at the time?

And why we went for the rather meaningless "High Speed One" (HS1) instead of following the pattern elsewhere of including "Line" (i.e HSL1 etc). (Compare French LGV1, LGV2, etc = "Ligne à grande vitesse", German SFS = "Schnellfahrstrecke", Belgian HSL = "Hogesnelheidslijn", etc.)

 

[eldomtom2]

By going through Birmingham to Manchester it indicates that Manchester to/from Birmingham is important.

I don't see how going through Birmingham to Manchester indicates that any more than HS2's plan to have Birmingham be a terminus linked to both north and south with the under-construction "Delta Junction" does. Curzon Street will be accessible from Manchester as soon as Handsacre is complete.

But was the London centric label actually a significant factor in giving up ?. The COST overruns are what killed HS2.

Well yes. All was not rosy for HS2 before the cancellation of Phase 2.

 

[Magdalia]

Oh and of course a London to East Midlands HS Line running via the M11 corridor - allowing Cambridge to Heathrow regional services.

Cambridge will never be on a High Speed network.

Even though Cambridge is growing rapidly, it isn't big enough, and won't get to be big enough in future.

Cambridge is too close to London, the train will just have got up to speed in time to slow down again. I've learned that from previous discussions about HS2.

From a passenger perspective, Cambridge isn't on the way to anywhere, and definitely not on the way from London to the East Midlands. (Anyone who had been in or near the A14 will know that Cambridge is on the way between Felixstowe and the distribution golden triangle, but that's for boxes not people).

Even in the world of magic there are only usually 3 wishes. If Cambridge is going to have magic transport investment, then it would be one of those magic metro networks drawn with crayons, not a High Speed line.

Regarding Heathrow, Cambridge now has the Thameslink/Elizabeth Line route, with a 2 hour journey providing that neither implode.

 

[Mr. SW]

I came up with a Y-shaped network about a year before it was announced. But I wasn't brave enough to commit to crayons.

My eastern leg went a different way, though. Line divided near Rugby (ish) then veered east to roughly follow the A1 north, skirting towns and cities, crossing the border near Coldstream, on to Edinburgh and branching off to follow the M8 to Glasgow.

All done with very little research, of course, but the idea was to get the line over to the flatter eastern side of England so the driver (or computer) could basically floor it north of the Chilterns.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I came up with a Y-shaped network about a year before it was announced. But I wasn't brave enough to commit to crayons.

My eastern leg went a different way, though. Line divided near Rugby (ish) then veered east to roughly follow the A1 north, skirting towns and cities, crossing the border near Coldstream, on to Edinburgh and branching off to follow the M8 to Glasgow.

All done with very little research, of course, but the idea was to get the line over to the flatter eastern side of England so the driver (or computer) could basically floor it north of the Chilterns.

There is a strong argument to link Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds with a high speed line so why not use that as part of the route from London to Scotland.

 

[Bald Rick]

Does anyone know why we gave up the clear and to-the-point "CTRL" in favour of "HS1" — were we already expecting more high-speed lines at the time?

Yes, it was a statement of intent that more than one high speed line was on the cards.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I have always thought Birmingham being on a branch was dumb. The irony is the London centric services will terminate at Curzon street AGAIN !.

Going through Birmingham would have taken pressure of New Street to Wolverhampton.

Where did it (you) go wrong !.

By going through Birmingham to Manchester it indicates that Manchester to/from Birmingham is important. In fact building Birmingham to/from Manchester first might have been a useful enough thing in its own right and could not be argued as London centric.

Instead we are left with an expensive white elephant that connects Birmingham with outer London and Manchester with - oh nothing !.

The only excuse for building HS2 the way it was is so as to relieve the Southern most part of the West Coast mainline. A good excuse but perceived as London centric.

But was the London centric label actually a significant factor in giving up ?. The COST overruns are what killed HS2. So an alternative strategy would have to allow smaller useful stages to get built first (like Birmingham to Manchester). Of course it could end up like so many Motorways into London - fizzling out before getting much further in than the North/South circular roads !. Obviously railways have a less dramatic impact on central London BUT if the road orientated leaders could not sneak motorways further into London then what chance railways fifty odd years later.

Yes indeed, it also provides Birmingham, a metro area of almost 3 million people with a turn up and go service to Manchester Airport, with the intent of turning Manchester into a secondary hub.

Phase 2: High Speed Northern England is a combined trans-pennine/East Midlands route which would not only provide London to Leeds connections but XC connections and again, massively boost Manchester Airport’s high speed rail connections.

And of course, the initial Euston to Manchester Victoria trunk would allow Regional Eurostar services rom at 1 via High Speed Metropolitan, whether or not they actually do so is another matter.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Sep 2024 ==

Cambridge will never be on a High Speed network.

Even though Cambridge is growing rapidly, it isn't big enough, and won't get to be big enough in future.

Cambridge is too close to London, the train will just have got up to speed in time to slow down again. I've learned that from previous discussions about HS2.

From a passenger perspective, Cambridge isn't on the way to anywhere, and definitely not on the way from London to the East Midlands. (Anyone who had been in or near the A14 will know that Cambridge is on the way between Felixstowe and the distribution golden triangle, but that's for boxes not people).

Even in the world of magic there are only usually 3 wishes. If Cambridge is going to have magic transport investment, then it would be one of those magic metro networks drawn with crayons, not a High Speed line.

Regarding Heathrow, Cambridge now has the Thameslink/Elizabeth Line route, with a 2 hour journey providing that neither implode.

Yeah, I get what you mean. I remember Greenguage 21 had somehow managed to link Stansted and Cambridge with an East Coast high speed line but the dog-leg is huge. Truthfully the route I actually designed to Cambridge is a higher speed route, not an LGV to Cambridge, which will act as a relief route for the Great Eastern as well. My grand plan would connect this new “East Anglia New Trunk Line” onto High Speed Metropolitan to allow Cambridge to Heathrow Javelin style trains. So that effectively, gives 3 new lines out of London.

Cambridge could still be accessed from the north, but trains would need to go via London. Similar to the final routing of the Manchester to Harwich boat trains.

Cambridge is too small, but for a city of its economic output, it should be at least half a million people. Same with Oxford. Again, my plan is what a theoretical high speed railway designed not in the late 2000s but mid 2020s could look like - its scope would shift from how to relieve congestion on the southern WCML to how to aggressively grow the economy of the United Kingdom.

 

[Irascible]

I like the Cambridge-Basingstoke line. Birmingham-Bristol-Cardiff/Exeter is missing - as comes up in HS2 discussions, going to OOC and then up a high-speed rail line to the north saves zero time over what we have right now ( slower even before allowing for changing trains ) let alone any mild improvements. There is a fair chunk of traffic between different parts of the west side of the island.

 

[BayPaul]

I love the idea of a metro-frequency London - Birmingham - Manchester (and/or Liverpool or Leeds) service - trying to turn the whole country into one big united economic area. I think it could be a massive positive change.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I like the Cambridge-Basingstoke line. Birmingham-Bristol-Cardiff/Exeter is missing - as comes up in HS2 discussions, going to OOC and then up a high-speed rail line to the north saves zero time over what we have right now ( slower even before allowing for changing trains ) let alone any mild improvements. There is a fair chunk of traffic between different parts of the west side of the island.

I can assure you I haven’t forgotten! I was going to explain my idea for one but my fingers got tired from typing. I’ll do a write up on it later

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Sep 2024 ==

I love the idea of a metro-frequency London - Birmingham - Manchester (and/or Liverpool or Leeds) service - trying to turn the whole country into one big united economic area. I think it could be a massive positive change.

Thank you sir. I’m sure I’ll be heading the DfT in no time

 

[Snow1964]

Green Party at their conference have suggested rail plan, although they call it E01,

Not sure if it should have separate thread, but theme is basically same, plan for high speed rail so putting here.

5 reasons why you should vote for E01 - Greens4HS2

5 reasons why you should vote in favour of motion E01 Green Rail Strategy for the Midlands and North at conference 2024

hs2.green

above link has map, following link has the motion and amendments to be debated at conference.

Green Rail Strategy for the Midlands and the North (#01) • Green Party Conference Agenda

www.greencoordinate.co.uk

Surprisingly close to some of the suggestions in this thread

 

[JamesT]

Green Party at their conference have suggested rail plan, although they call it E01,

Not sure if it should have separate thread, but theme is basically same, plan for high speed rail so putting here.

5 reasons why you should vote for E01 - Greens4HS2

5 reasons why you should vote in favour of motion E01 Green Rail Strategy for the Midlands and North at conference 2024

hs2.green

above link has map, following link has the motion and amendments to be debated at conference.

Green Rail Strategy for the Midlands and the North (#01) • Green Party Conference Agenda

www.greencoordinate.co.uk

Surprisingly close to some of the suggestions in this thread

E01 is just the numbering of their conference motion. It’s not a different proposal, but to implement HS2 and NPR in full.

 

[Magdalia]

Cambridge is too small, but for a city of its economic output, it should be at least half a million people.

Gove only wanted 250k and nearly everybody in the Cambridge area recognised that as bonkers. Growth in Cambridge is constrained by water supply, which means lots of people living outside Cambridge and commuting in and out. Hopefully the Lyons/Barker New Towns review will tell us where they will be.

Same with Oxford. Again, my plan is what a theoretical high speed railway designed not in the late 2000s but mid 2020s could look like - its scope would shift from how to relieve congestion on the southern WCML to how to aggressively grow the economy of the United Kingdom.

The objective is spot on, but the answer for Cambridge and Oxford is East West Rail, not High Speed. What's needed is a revival of the "Oxcam Arc", though probably with some rebranding.

I like the Cambridge-Basingstoke line.

Crossrail 2 with even more tunnels and fewer stops?

What's needed here is an interchange between Thameslink and the South Western Main Line at Wimbledon or Clapham Junction. If there was a Cambridge-Basingstoke via Thameslink, with only one change of train, then I for one would be using it.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Gove only wanted 250k and nearly everybody in the Cambridge area recognised that as bonkers. Growth in Cambridge is constrained by water supply, which means lots of people living outside Cambridge and commuting in and out. Hopefully the Lyons/Barker New Towns review will tell us where they will be.


The objective is spot on, but the answer for Cambridge and Oxford is East West Rail, not High Speed. What's needed is a revival of the "Oxcam Arc", though probably with some rebranding.


Crossrail 2 with even more tunnels and fewer stops?

What's needed here is an interchange between Thameslink and the South Western Main Line at Wimbledon or Clapham Junction. If there was a Cambridge-Basingstoke via Thameslink, with only one change of train, then I for one would be using it.

Really? I thought Gove wanted more. 500,000 certainly is an ambitious, probably unrealistic number, and yes people will throw a fit about it. But this country is going to fiscally die by 2050, and if we don’t make hard choices now, we’ll be living with hard choices permanently.

You could actually run Oxford to Cambridge services with my plan, high speed Metropolitan can link onto the GWML west of Heathrow will will of course link up to the new line to Cambridge. But I agree we need to focus of EastWest Rail too.

Cambridge to Basingstoke via Heathrow and OOC - the latter with interchange with trains northwards.

 

[Irascible]

I can assure you I haven’t forgotten! I was going to explain my idea for one but my fingers got tired from typing. I’ll do a write up on it later

*salutes* roger! I feel the Solent area probably should be linked in the network somehow - whether that's via Basingstoke or Bristol is open to argument.

Presumably your Scotland route goes up the west coast rather than via the Newcastle area? it might be a bit of a zig-zag but from Manchester across the Pennines & up through Newcastle & then back halfway again to split between Glasgow & Edinburgh does seem an ok route - HSR is fast enough to be able to do that sort of thing without too much impact. MetroBritain should probably join as many places as it can.

 

[BayPaul]

*salutes* roger! I feel the Solent area probably should be linked in the network somehow - whether that's via Basingstoke or Bristol is open to argument.

Presumably your Scotland route goes up the west coast rather than via the Newcastle area? it might be a bit of a zig-zag but from Manchester across the Pennines & up through Newcastle & then back halfway again to split between Glasgow & Edinburgh does seem an ok route - HSR is fast enough to be able to do that sort of thing without too much impact. MetroBritain should probably join as many places as it can.

Why not go Leeds > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow? Matches the metro style, gives everywhere a connection to both Scottish cities and should be easier to build.

 

[Magdalia]

Really? I thought Gove wanted more.

See here.

Development corporation set to 'liberate' Cambridge potential

The Housing Secretary wants to deliver "tens of thousands" of new homes near the city of Cambridge.

www.bbc.co.uk

A new development corporation will oversee a massive expansion of Cambridge and "tens of thousands" of homes near the city, Michael Gove said.

The Housing Secretary wants "to liberate its potential" and build "northwards of 150,000 homes".

I'm not sure if Gove ever actually said a 250k population, it possibly comes from the comparison with Freiburg in the Case for Cambridge, which was published as part of the March 2024 budget:

The Case for Cambridge

www.gov.uk

For 800 years, Cambridge has been one of the intellectual centres of the world – a crucible of innovation, the home of Bacon, Newton, Widdowson, Rutherford, Crick, Watson, Franklin, Venki Ramakrishnan and Richard Henderson to name but a few.

Now, the next chapter is opening in this lengthy story of scientific and human achievement. One where new space is created for the laboratories and research activity which Cambridge so urgently needs, and new housing for the talented graduates and academics who are currently priced out of the area.

This document takes you into that future, where we work with local and national partners to create beautiful, integrated neighbourhoods and healthy communities. We will protect and enhance the cultural institutions and green spaces that are a treasured part of life in Cambridge and look to develop a sustainable transport network that makes congestion a problem of the past.

Whichever it is, it is unrealistic, because the most important constraint is that the Cambridge area is running out of drinking water.

But this country is going to fiscally die by 2050, and if we don’t make hard choices now, we’ll be living with hard choices permanently.

I agree, and Cambridge has a huge contribution to make. Do the right things and the growth will come, not just in Cambridge but also in the places that connect with it. But that's going to be over relatively short distances, not long distances at high speed.

You could actually run Oxford to Cambridge services with my plan

The original EWR plan was predominantly about linking Cambridge with the other place. But, at this end, it is now also about new towns and commuting, and spreading the growth along the route. A high speed route that doesn't stop anywhere doesn't contribute to that.

 

[Irascible]

Why not go Leeds > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow? Matches the metro style, gives everywhere a connection to both Scottish cities and should be easier to build.

Or that. I wonder how much that would actually add for Glasgow-Manchester vs just going down the west coast, that might be an instructive exercise to do.

Whichever it is, it is unrealistic, because the most important constraint is that the Cambridge area is running out of drinking water.

This has been a feature of govt policy for some time now - knee jerk reaction to housing issues is just to build more houses without considering the people who're going to live in them, very much government by accountancy. This govt's statement on coming to power was to restore local council housing build targets, again with no consideration for anything else. While the immediate problem is things like water ( down this way there's been all sorts of severe issues with water this year - not just the continual dumping of raw sewage onto holiday beaches which is doing wonders for tourism! ), and health - you can't even get a NHS dentist here & hospitals are nuts - and overcrowded schools, this sort of thing does obviously also affect transport planning & should probably be made more of an issue in these discussions.