Building HS2 to Euston and Crewe could pay for itself, analysis finds

[Peter Sarf]

AS it is, we now have a line that will never utilise its, enormously expensive, capacity. Meanwhile the WCML will cost almost as much as it does now, but will have been deprived of a large fraction of its operating revenue.

A high speed rail scheme in this corridor was our opportunity to escape the limitations of our ancient and cramped infrastructure - and I find it hard to escape the conclusion that it's been squandered.

HS2 will eventually have all its capacity utilised. hopefully not too soon !.

I think the only squandering may be the way the phases were defined. HS2 had to start at the London end and at least benefit Birmingham and the North West - the two biggest markets outside London. HS2 also alleviates the most congested part of the WCML (or it will do once Phase-2a gets done).

I think inflation in the construction industry is a culprit but also increased environmental costs. AND we should have built HS2 in the 1980s, France had a LGV going South from Paris by 1986 (will be over 40 years ago before HS2 opens) - I used it.

 

[FMerrymon]

Overall I find it incredibly sad that not building Old Oak Common to Euston and not building Phase-2a was even considered. It is odd that Phase-2a was not part of Phase-1 really. The lack of Phase-2a or the lack of Euston undermines each other and also undermines the whole point of HS2.

The elephant in the room however is that I fear the UK is broke - seriously broke financially.

Phase2a was the easiest and cheapest bit with a billion already spent on it. That it was cancelled without input from stakeholders, supposedly even the transport secretary was shocked, then was the only part to have safeguarding removed to try to hasten land sale, suggests it was a purely political decision. Justification in the Network North paper was sketchy too.

The country can afford that short stretch, but the previous government dumped on the project so much its politically difficult now.

 

[D Williams]

Whatever the estimates experience shows that the final cost will be a trifle more. The whole sorry saga is the result of shallow-thinking politicians being taken for a ride by consultants and advisors. I wonder if anyone who was involved in the original decision and is now outside the gravy train ever wishes it had never been started?

 

[camflyer]

Apparently Euston should be scrapped because getting to Oxford St would be quicker via Old Oak Common

Euston should be axed as HS2 terminus, says Labour peer

Passengers can get to Oxford Street more quickly on Elizabeth line than going via Euston

www.standard.co.uk

Euston should be abandoned as the London terminus of the HS2 high-speed line, according to a Labour peer. Lord Berkeley, a civil engineer who helped to build the Channel Tunnel, said many HS2 passengers would have quicker journeys if they switched onto the Elizabeth line at Old Oak Common station.

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston. I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

 

[zwk500]

Apparently Euston should be scrapped because getting to Oxford St would be quicker via Old Oak Common

Euston should be axed as HS2 terminus, says Labour peer

Passengers can get to Oxford Street more quickly on Elizabeth line than going via Euston

www.standard.co.uk

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston. I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

More to the point, OOC would struggle to cope with all the services.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Apparently Euston should be scrapped because getting to Oxford St would be quicker via Old Oak Common

Euston should be axed as HS2 terminus, says Labour peer

Passengers can get to Oxford Street more quickly on Elizabeth line than going via Euston

www.standard.co.uk

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston. I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

He is a very staunch anti HS2 civil engineer.

 

[Class15]

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston. I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

Having stations near OOC on the North and West London lines would help. My local station is Gospel Oak so for me it would be easier to use the “Mildmay line” rather than go either to Euston or via Tottenham Court Road to OOC.

 

[camflyer]

Having stations near OOC on the North and West London lines would help. My local station is Gospel Oak so for me it would be easier to use the “Mildmay line” rather than go either to Euston or via Tottenham Court Road to OOC.

There were two Overground stations proposed as part of the OOC masterplan, one one each of the lines in the area, but I don't know what the latest news is on them.

 

[Grimsby town]

He is a very staunch anti HS2 civil engineer.

Who had his idea for a Euston Cross underground station rejected. His anti-HS2 opinions appeared after that.

 

[Bald Rick]

Who had his idea for a Euston Cross underground station rejected. His anti-HS2 opinions appeared after that.

Quite. Because it was physically impossible!

 

[Mikey C]

Apparently Euston should be scrapped because getting to Oxford St would be quicker via Old Oak Common

Euston should be axed as HS2 terminus, says Labour peer

Passengers can get to Oxford Street more quickly on Elizabeth line than going via Euston

www.standard.co.uk

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston. I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

Leaving aside capacity issues, Cherry picking a destination Bond Street on the Elizabeth Line, but not on one of the Underground Lines out of Euston is pretty laughable really. What about Oxford Circus or Tottenham Court Road?

 

[camflyer]

Quite. Because it was physically impossible!

Isn't an underground "Euston Cross" station the plan for Crossrail 2? Granted the subterranean environment in the area is very crowded already.

 

[Nottingham59]

Apparently Euston should be scrapped because getting to Oxford St would be quicker via Old Oak Common

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston.

It's too late to change the decision now of course, but in a way he's right. It's grossly inefficient for a high speed line to have two stations in the same city. It's far better to concentrate passenger flows into one terminus, and invest in distributing them from there.

As it is, we are now building two expensive large diamter tunnels from the suburbs to Euston that will only ever carry 10tph trains that will only ever be half full.

Best would have been a single terminus, at Euston, and spending the money saved on a 30tph tube line to distribute the passengers better to their final destinations.

I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

It could easily. The 12tph EL terminators by themselves have a higher capacity than HS2.

 

[trebor79]

Err... while OOC does open a lot of connection possibilities there are other routings which would be better via Euston. I doubt the Elizabeth Line could cope with all of the extra passengers anyway.

It could easily. The 12tph EL terminators by themselves have a higher capacity than HS2.

That would be true if the Elizabeth Line trains all arrived at OOC with no passengers already on board. That seems...unlikely!

 

[Nottingham59]

That would be true if the Elizabeth Line trains all arrived at OOC with no passengers already on board. That seems...unlikely!

The EL plan is to have 12tph terminating at OOC, and 12tph running through from Heathrow and Reading, to give 24tph through the core, rising to 28tph and (hopefully) 32tph eventually. The 12tph from west will indeed have passengers on board already. The 12tph terminators less so.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

As it is, we are now building two expensive large diamter tunnels from the suburbs to Euston that will only ever carry 10tph trains that will only ever be half full.

Really? I work trains into Euston most days and I could count on my hands how many half full trains I've had this year coming from Crewe! Most are half full or more just from Crewe itself.

Avanti always seems fairly heavily loaded too. As are LNR Birmingham services. Full at the seams going north too.

 

[robspaceman]

Really? I work trains into Euston most days and I could count on my hands how many half full trains I've had this year coming from Crewe! Most are half full or more just from Crewe itself.

Avanti always seems fairly heavily loaded too. As are LNR Birmingham services. Full at the seams going north too.

But the point is, those trains wouldn't be full if there was a stop on the WCML just before / after Euston in the same vein as OOC.

 

[Nottingham59]

Really? I work trains into Euston most days and I could count on my hands how many half full trains I've had this year coming from Crewe! Most are half full or more just from Crewe itself.

Avanti always seems fairly heavily loaded too. As are LNR Birmingham services. Full at the seams going north too.

Sure. But those trains won't be using the HS2 tunnels.

All the modelling shows that around 40% of arriving HS2 passengers will disembark at Old Oak Common, so the trains using the new £1.7bn tunnels that they are starting to dig now will only ever be 60% full or less. An equivalent tunnel capacity could have been used to carry 32tph metro services, for the benefit of all Londoners, in addition to HS2 passengers.

 

[camflyer]

Sure. But those trains won't be using the HS2 tunnels.

All the modelling shows that around 40% of arriving HS2 passengers will disembark at Old Oak Common, so the trains using the new £1.7bn tunnels that they are starting to dig now will only ever be 60% full or less. An equivalent tunnel capacity could have been used to carry 32tph metro services, for the benefit of all Londoners, in addition to HS2 passengers.

Surely there would be some passengers getting on at OOC to go to Euston - including those connecting from Heathrow

 

[Richardr]

It's too late to change the decision now of course, but in a way he's right. It's grossly inefficient for a high speed line to have two stations in the same city. It's far better to concentrate passenger flows into one terminus, and invest in distributing them from there.

As it is, we are now building two expensive large diamter tunnels from the suburbs to Euston that will only ever carry 10tph trains that will only ever be half full.

Best would have been a single terminus, at Euston, and spending the money saved on a 30tph tube line to distribute the passengers better to their final destinations.


It could easily. The 12tph EL terminators by themselves have a higher capacity than HS2.

Whilst it may not be ideal, for those going to Heathrow, many likely to be carrying heavy baggage, Oak Common is much much more convenient than Euston. If only to eliminate such passengers firstly from the over packed Euston and secondly from having to change again from whatever line they get from Euston, there is quite a positive.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

But the point is, those trains wouldn't be full if there was a stop on the WCML just before / after Euston in the same vein as OOC.

I reckon they would though. Maybe once it's open, and people realise there are decent connections at OOC it will affect it, I don't believe it will at the start. People are used to travelling into the terminus when travelling long distances into London.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2024 ==

Sure. But those trains won't be using the HS2 tunnels.

Which trains? Trains to Birmingham will, the Avanti services will mostly be ported across to HS2 dependant on the classic line link at Handsacre or whatever they choose to do instead.
The only services I mentioned that won't are the ones served by LNR

 

[The Planner]

Surely there would be some passengers getting on at OOC to go to Euston - including those connecting from Heathrow

I don't think its been agreed as to whether OOC is going to be open or a set down/pick up. That may not be possible.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It's too late to change the decision now of course, but in a way he's right. It's grossly inefficient for a high speed line to have two stations in the same city. It's far better to concentrate passenger flows into one terminus, and invest in distributing them from there.

As it is, we are now building two expensive large diamter tunnels from the suburbs to Euston that will only ever carry 10tph trains that will only ever be half full.

Best would have been a single terminus, at Euston, and spending the money saved on a 30tph tube line to distribute the passengers better to their final destinations.


It could easily. The 12tph EL terminators by themselves have a higher capacity than HS2.

Yes, seems a bit strange having two High Speed line stations so close together. Old Oak Common makes services from Euston slower.

Sure. But those trains won't be using the HS2 tunnels.

All the modelling shows that around 40% of arriving HS2 passengers will disembark at Old Oak Common, so the trains using the new £1.7bn tunnels that they are starting to dig now will only ever be 60% full or less. An equivalent tunnel capacity could have been used to carry 32tph metro services, for the benefit of all Londoners, in addition to HS2 passengers.

Well 40% at Old Oak Common station is less than 60% at Euston station - a whopping 50% more people would use Euston !. So given the choice I would have dropped Old Oak Common station and concentrated on better connections at Euston.

For myself and I imagine most with destinations away from the Elizabeth line Euston is better connected. Granted Old Oak is certainly not useless but should the money be spent on Old Oak Common station before links at Euston start to need relieving rather than improving ?.

I think the risk ends up being - trying to cover too many bases and thus spoiling advantages of any.

The only example that occurs to me of a high speed line having two stations in one city is High Speed 1. How much use does Stratford get from High Speed services.......
(none).

In an ideal world the Elizabeth line should have served Euston and StPancras. Better still HS2 should have ended in a new mega station at Tottenham Court Road on the current Elizabeth line. No what was that someone said about space !!!.

 

[FMerrymon]

Yes, seems a bit strange having two High Speed line stations so close together. Old Oak Common makes services from Euston slower.

Well 40% at Old Oak Common station is less than 60% at Euston station - a whopping 50% more people would use Euston !. So given the choice I would have dropped Old Oak Common station and concentrated on better connections at Euston.

For myself and I imagine most with destinations away from the Elizabeth line Euston is better connected. Granted Old Oak is certainly not useless but should the money be spent on Old Oak Common station before links at Euston start to need relieving rather than improving ?.

I think the risk ends up being - trying to cover too many bases and thus spoiling advantages of any.

The only example that occurs to me of a high speed line having two stations in one city is High Speed 1. How much use does Stratford get from High Speed services.......
(none).

In an ideal world the Elizabeth line should have served Euston and StPancras. Better still HS2 should have ended in a new mega station at Tottenham Court Road on the current Elizabeth line. No what was that someone said about space !!!.

The point of OOC is to connect to Heathrow and the great western. In doing so, it provides, or should have provided, a faster, more frequent route with more seats to the north from the Thames Valley, south west and South Wales, relieving cross country services. It has the potential for more connections with the London Overground and with Chiltern, so there's a lot of potential for far better local connections too.

Its also a main part of the redevelopment of that area with 60000 new homes planned. Whether they are maximising that redevelopment opportunity, I'm not sure.

 

[HSTEd]

The only example that occurs to me of a high speed line having two stations in one city is High Speed 1. How much use does Stratford get from High Speed services.......
(none).

An awful lot?
It has several high speed trains per hour. Stratford International records 2.5 million National Rail entries and exits per year.

EDIT:
Indeed it appears a lot of the trafford using Stratford International actually comes from St Pancras itself, according to that ODM data website. Althuogh getting Stratford International was a bit of a challenge as it does not appear on the prompt, although it does work if you enter it manually.

I can also think of several other examples of high speed lines having multiple stations in one city, especially in Tokyo!

 

[MontyP]

Leaving aside capacity issues, Cherry picking a destination Bond Street on the Elizabeth Line, but not on one of the Underground Lines out of Euston is pretty laughable really. What about Oxford Circus or Tottenham Court Road?

Or Victoria, Waterloo, London Bridge, Camden, Angel, Leicester Square ....

 

[Energy]

Well 40% at Old Oak Common station is less than 60% at Euston station - a whopping 50% more people would use Euston !. So given the choice I would have dropped Old Oak Common station and concentrated on better connections at Euston.

40% of people getting off at Old Oak Common significantly reduces the load at Euston. A mega connected Euston sounds great but a single station would have to deal with all that traffic.

 

[Meole]

Or Victoria, Waterloo, London Bridge, Camden, Angel, Leicester Square ....

The assumption being that Oxford St will be a prime destination for HS2 users paying a premium fare.

 

[Bald Rick]

Isn't an underground "Euston Cross" station the plan for Crossrail 2? Granted the subterranean environment in the area is very crowded already.

Nope. Very different propositions. Crossrail 2 has the space safeguarded, and the station as designed - very expertly to fit into a the only available space - could not have been used by a high speed service (physically).

It could easily. The 12tph EL terminators by themselves have a higher capacity than HS2.

But the EL doesn‘t just run between OOC and Paddington. What happens when those OOC starters arrive at Bond St?

The only example that occurs to me of a high speed line having two stations in one city is High Speed 1. How much use does Stratford get from High Speed services.......

Montparnasse / Massy TGV
Frankfurt Hbf / Flughafen
Barcelona Sants / La Sagrera (opening soon)
Various examples in China and Japan

 

[NotATrainspott]

Having multiple stations for a single built-up area makes a lot of sense for high speed rail. If nothing else, the time penalty from another stop isn't as severe when you're already running slower anyway. Even without OOC, it's unlikely HS2 trains would be running >230km/h directly out of Euston. I recall hearing there'd only be a few minutes' journey time saving from making HS1 Phase 2 (Ebbsfleet-St Pancras) faster than 230km/h but it would mean big increases in tunnelling costs (higher speeds = more air friction/piston effect, so bigger tunnels to compensate).

The point of HS2 is to get people from the start to the end of their journey faster. Very few people start and end their journey at Euston, or Piccadilly. The nature of OOC means that it'll end up as another focal point of the London rail network in future. How much of London and the wider south east is only a single change away from OOC?