HS2 could cost up to £102.7bn and trains won't start until at least 2036

[norbitonflyer]

Scotland. They have benefitted, just don't see it. Wonder what happened with Wales?

The thinking was that wales would benefit as some HS2 trains would continue beyond Handsacre towards Holyhead?

But that doesn't really add up because others would go to Glasgow

 

[Swedenorer]

The fact is, by the time stage 1 is done, we should have the experience and people who know how to make these projects a success: it is folly to bin that experience, and not continue with the railway, as per the original plan.

Sadly they'll all be retiring age by then.

 

[Broucek]

I actually resigned myself a few years ago to the idea that I won't see a meaningful rollout of HS2 in my lifetime. It's been delayed time and time again, the route cut short, possibly not even terminating at an existing central London terminal any time soon, and not even getting past the Midlands at this point, speeds reduced, the lot.

Me too

But the view is rubbish so we won't be missing anything

 

[styles]

Will Scotland really benefit? If the new HS2 trains don't tilt, they will be slower on the existing track so I am not sure overall journey time will improve (and could actually get worse). Also will Scotland benefit or lose out with train capacity? I believe the current 11 or 9 coach Avanti express out of Glasgow Central will now be reduced to the HS2 8-coach config? If the southbound Glasgow/Edinburgh express trains have to connect with each other after Carstairs, does that double the risk of delay if one or other portion is delayed? Also, will standing be allowed on the HS2 trains when not on high speed track? If not, that will be bad for Scotland because everytime there is mass delays on the network, the priority is trains south to London (which I appreciate is where most customers want to go) but that means the first and second trains north are normally rammed. Unpleasant, but better than being left on the platform at Preston!

Yeah I can't see Scotland benefiting.

Currently London-Glasgow services are 4.5h direct. HS2 London to Birmingham might be an hour, but it's then >4h from Birmingham to Glasgow. It'll be slower and more expensive and involve a change.

Anyone wanting Edinburgh, Dundee, Aberdeen will take LNER on the ECML. They're not going to take HS2 to Birmingham then WCML to Edinburgh then another change to get further north. Especially as it'll cost more.

Anyone wanting Glasgow or Edinburgh on thew cheap can use Avanti Superfares.

If they withdraw the direct London-Glasgow/London-Edinburgh via WCML services it'll make things much worse.

Capacity-wise, Scotland isn't really that restricted on the WCML at the moment.

 

[mike57]

London is where the money and influence is and the Tufton Street crowd are not going to trek to OOC to catch a train.

They may not have a choice, as the changing Political landscape means that the only way the current government are going to remain in power is if they can claw back votes in the North, because that is where they will loose the next election, This trend started with Brexit and then Boris Johnston's election and is gathering pace with Reform.

I think we will have OOC - Curzon street for many years, yes people will use it, and fares may be set to encourage use, but it isn't going so see the use that would have been made before the various cutbacks.

 

[gravitystorm]

I assume that it was felt that there wasn't a majority within parliament for a change to the law to remove the remediation requirement, despite Labour's majority.

No, that's not the case. The estimates given for cancelling the scheme do assume such a law would be passed - see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-cancellation-cost-advice for the full details.

I wonder if a hypothetical Reform government would have a majority within its MPs for a change to the law to allow abandonment without remediation in 2029, as has been the stated ambition of their leadership.

Abandonment without remediation (i.e. assuming such a law is passed) is estimated to cost "£33bn to as high as £58bn (2025 prices)". "This scenario delivers sites that are safe, stable, and acceptable to local communities through measures such as tunnel capping slabs, partial completion for stability, high quality landscaping, and long-term maintenance readiness." That doesn't even include the ongoing cost of maintenance on the bridges and viaducts that would be left standing. The alternative scenario, without any new laws being passed, was not estimated.

Anyone who, at this stage, thinks it would be a good use of money to just abandon the project is not grounded in reality. Anyone who thinks, after 3 more years of construction, that it would be a good use of money to abandon it, would be delusional.

 

[Trainman40083]

No, that's not the case. The estimates given for cancelling the scheme do assume such a law would be passed - see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-cancellation-cost-advice for the full details.

Abandonment without remediation (i.e. assuming such a law is passed) is estimated to cost "£33bn to as high as £58bn (2025 prices)". "This scenario delivers sites that are safe, stable, and acceptable to local communities through measures such as tunnel capping slabs, partial completion for stability, high quality landscaping, and long-term maintenance readiness." That doesn't even include the ongoing cost of maintenance on the bridges and viaducts that would be left standing. The alternative scenario, without any new laws being passed, was not estimated.

Anyone who, at this stage, thinks it would be a good use of money to just abandon the project is not grounded in reality. Anyone who thinks, after 3 more years of construction, that it would be a good use of money to abandon it, would be delusional.

At least when it is finished, it starts delivering a return. It gives options to people who face constant disruption on the existing WCML. Maybe it stops people having to use Midland Mainline to London , instead. Maybe in years to come, there will be the view that we are glad they built it ...just not how they built it. But maybe it will be Northern Powerhouse Rail.. there is no demand all over again

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The thinking was that wales would benefit as some HS2 trains would continue beyond Handsacre towards Holyhead?
But that doesn't really add up because others would go to Glasgow

Actually Wales was never going to get direct trains via HS2, because Crewe-Holyhead is not electrified and HS2 trains are pure electric.
Changing at Crewe would be necessary, reducing any journey time benefit (though probably faster than today).
Euston-Chester-Holyhead trains will stay on the WCML.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Actually Wales was never going to get direct trains via HS2, because Crewe-Holyhead is not electrified and HS2 trains are pure electric.

....althoughb the Senedd has plans, and completion of HS2 to Crewe might just be the spur to actually do it.

 

[LickeyIncliner]

No, that's not the case. The estimates given for cancelling the scheme do assume such a law would be passed - see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-cancellation-cost-advice for the full details.

I don't think that's quite right - though it's recognized that such a law could be passed. The paragraph at the top of p2 in the letter (as per your link) says "We have acknowledged that if a Government were to wish to progress this option they could pass legislation, probably hybrid, to relax the requirement to demolish built assets in the event of cancellation. However, these would need to consider blight, community impacts, ongoing maintenance and above all safety..." (emphasis added).

In any case the previous sentence says it's agreed that full remediation would be impractical

 

[styles]

The cost of demolition would probably not be far off the cost of completion at this point. I can't see it being a financially or politically advantageous position.

 

[Taunton]

The concept that the WCML is "at capacity" doesn't quite fit with actuality. Trains consistently run with less than the optimum formation (remember Class 86 plus 13 coach formations?). The Fast lines, which used to be wholly 125mph services, then had 110mph services pushed in, which absorb multiple paths ahead of them. The WCML improvements of a generation ago that were meant to add capacity in things like power supply, nowadays come out of the woodwork that they were cancelled, sometimes halfway completed, so someone could claim coming in within budget. Leading to 807s having to now be run under the wires on diesel.

Euston station concourse being overloaded, principally because of a commercial policy that if you don't make your booked train, your expensive ticket is ripped up. A operating policy that provides a Turn-Up-And-Go every 20 minute service from London to Manchester, only for a fare strategy the direct opposite of Turn-Up-And-Go, that the only reasonable fares need you to get there for one train only. And more.

 

[thejsa]

Actually Wales was never going to get direct trains via HS2, because Crewe-Holyhead is not electrified and HS2 trains are pure electric.
Changing at Crewe would be necessary, reducing any journey time benefit (though probably faster than today).
Euston-Chester-Holyhead trains will stay on the WCML.

Hey, if it was good enough to run Pendos to Holyhead, I wouldn't put it past someone to propose dragging 895s behind a diesel loco as the fiscally responsible option

 

[Dr Day]

Currently London-Glasgow services are 4.5h direct. HS2 London to Birmingham might be an hour, but it's then >4h from Birmingham to Glasgow. It'll be slower and more expensive and involve a change.

There is a debate around tilt and journey times, but AIUI London-Glasgow will always operate as direct services, surely? After Handsacre is connected, HS2 can operate 'through' trains between London and Glasgow, using a combination of high-speed and classic infrastructure. Some people seem to be confusing HS2 infrastructure, which *will* only be between London and a bit north of Birmingham, with HS2 services, which will still go between London and places like Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester.

 

[JamieL]

There is a debate around tilt and journey times, but AIUI London-Glasgow will always operate as direct services, surely? After Handsacre is connected, HS2 can operate 'through' trains between London and Glasgow, using a combination of high-speed and classic infrastructure. Some people seem to be confusing HS2 infrastructure, which *will* only be between London and a bit north of Birmingham, with HS2 services, which will still go between London and places like Glasgow, Liverpool and Manchester.

People understand this. The issue is those shiny new HS2 services running up to Glasgow are going to be a worse offering than we have at present. Understandably that irks.

 

[Shalford]

HS/2 is a classic 'Basket Case' a few issues to ponder

a) The original benefit proposed that by serving Birmingham Airport it would provide extra capacity for Heathrow as it could be accessed so quickly from London

b) Replacing the 390's by a new fleet proposed by Chris Gibb which appear to have caused his sacking seem even more prescient. No doubt DfT will double down due to not thinking of the idea.

c) The 10 years to completion imposes it's own risks, how is the project going to continue sponsorship and continuity. If you are going to do the project make it as rapid as possible with appropriate funding.

d) Surely Euston can be speeded up to the extent of providing the Station Box, the oversite development can follow on later.

To cheer you up we are not alone ---- Berlin Airport, Stuttgart 21 come to mind.

 

[norbitonflyer]

After Handsacre is connected, HS2 can operate 'through' trains between London and Glasgow,

But isnt Curzon Street being prioritised? When will Handsacre be connected?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 May 2026 ==

Leading to 807s having to now be run under the wires on diesel.

807s are pure electric. But 805s are indeed running on diesel where they shouldnt.

 

[Krokodil]

People understand this. The issue is those shiny new HS2 services running up to Glasgow are going to be a worse offering than we have at present. Understandably that irks.

100 seats fewer per train, true. It remains to be seen whether it becomes possible to run the planned second train per hour with just the rump of HS2. Running double sets (splitting at Carlisle) requires just the platform work, it isn't contingent on

There seems to be a misplaced view shared by a few on here that services between London and Scotland will be slower than at present. This is patently untrue. A few minutes lost by the inability to tilt will be more than compensated for by the time saved between Euston and Handsacre Junction.

But isnt Curzon Street being prioritised? When will Handsacre be connected?

Until Handsacre is connected how are the 895s going to get from the depot at Washwood Heath onto the mainline. So the 390s would still be operating the London-Glasgows until Handsacre is opened, therefore no reduction in speed between Handsacre and Euston via the WCML.

 

[JamieL]

There seems to be a misplaced view shared by a few on here that services between London and Scotland will be slower than at present. This is patently untrue. A few minutes lost by the inability to tilt will be more than compensated for by the time saved between Euston and Handsacre Junction.

Someone did the sums upthread. It will be slower - perhaps not by much - but still slower. With less than a third of the journey as high speed - which will include an additional station stop - the remaining two-thirds plus will be at slower speeds than now. Plus the train will need to be divided somewhere for the Edinburgh and Glasgow split so that is going to add more delay as well.

On a different issue, nobody has commented on any 'no standing' rule for HS2 trains on legacy track. This will be a massive loss if not available as it will severely impact the ability to get home to Scotland when there is a major problem on the WCML. Does anyone have any info?

 

[Trainman40083]

The cost of demolition would probably not be far off the cost of completion at this point. I can't see it being a financially or politically advantageous position.

They do seem to suggest the cost of finishing it, is similar to the cost of cancelling it. I think if they did cancel it, the UK would be the laughing stock of the World for hundreds of years. At least finishing it, you start to get a return on investment.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 May 2026 ==

The concept that the WCML is "at capacity" doesn't quite fit with actuality. Trains consistently run with less than the optimum formation (remember Class 86 plus 13 coach formations?). The Fast lines, which used to be wholly 125mph services, then had 110mph services pushed in, which absorb multiple paths ahead of them. The WCML improvements of a generation ago that were meant to add capacity in things like power supply, nowadays come out of the woodwork that they were cancelled, sometimes halfway completed, so someone could claim coming in within budget. Leading to 807s having to now be run under the wires on diesel.

Euston station concourse being overloaded, principally because of a commercial policy that if you don't make your booked train, your expensive ticket is ripped up. A operating policy that provides a Turn-Up-And-Go every 20 minute service from London to Manchester, only for a fare strategy the direct opposite of Turn-Up-And-Go, that the only reasonable fares need you to get there for one train only. And more.

But surely 13 of the coaches, the Class 86s used to hall would be shorter than a Pendolino coach? A Mk 1 was saying 64 ft, a modern IEP 25 metres, which is over 75 feet. You only need a better seating layout and a smaller train, carries more people.

 

[Krokodil]

Someone did the sums upthread. It will be slower - perhaps not by much - but still slower.

Would you care to point to the relevant post because all I can see is one poster who did sums on the basis that you'd take HS2 to Curzon Street and then go via Wolves from there, and another who expects to see 895s running through MKC.

I can't find any post calculating slower timings for Euston-OOC-Handsacre-Glasgow than the present route via Tamworth.

I can do some sums though. There will be a 27 minute saving between Euston and Handsacre due to HS2. You're not saying that it would take an 895 27 minutes more to get from Handacre to Glasgow than it takes a 390? Especially when the 895 wouldn't be calling at Penrith/Oxenholme/Lancaster/Wigan/Warrington? And when 397s and 80x have little trouble keeping up?

 

[ScottGallagher]

Would you care to point to the relevant post because all I can see is one poster who did sums on the basis that you'd take HS2 to Curzon Street and then go via Wolves from there, and another who expects to see 895s running through MKC.

I can't find any post calculating slower timings for Euston-OOC-Handsacre-Glasgow than the present route via Tamworth.

I can do some sums though. There will be a 27 minute saving between Euston and Handsacre due to HS2. You're not saying that it would take an 895 27 minutes more to get from Handacre to Glasgow than it takes a 390? Especially when the 895 wouldn't be calling at Penrith/Oxenholme/Lancaster/Wigan/Warrington? And when 397s and 80x have little trouble keeping up?

Are you saying those stations lose their direct Euston connection or Just Glasgow?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

HS/2 is a classic 'Basket Case' a few issues to ponder

a) The original benefit proposed that by serving Birmingham Airport it would provide extra capacity for Heathrow as it could be accessed so quickly from London

b) Replacing the 390's by a new fleet proposed by Chris Gibb which appear to have caused his sacking seem even more prescient. No doubt DfT will double down due to not thinking of the idea.

With the delay to Handsacre then surely the train order now might as well be modified to include pendo replacement

c) The 10 years to completion imposes it's own risks, how is the project going to continue sponsorship and continuity. If you are going to do the project make it as rapid as possible with appropriate funding.

It would be interesting to know the answer to "how quickly can you get it completed"?

d) Surely Euston can be speeded up to the extent of providing the Station Box, the oversite development can follow on later.

Absolutely should now be opening coincidence with phase 1 given the timeline being bandied about

To cheer you up we are not alone ---- Berlin Airport, Stuttgart 21 come to mind.

True and Stuttgart 21 has just been bounced back again from end of this year.

 

[The Planner]

895s will run on the WCML before HS2 is open. If someone wanted to be novel about the Washwood Heath problem and determined to use the depot, you would make the temporary connection off the Derby line slightly more long term and wire up to Proof House.

 

[Trainman40083]

With the delay to Handsacre then surely the train order now might as well be modified to include pendo replacement

It would be interesting to know the answer to "how quickly can you get it completed"?

Absolutely should now be opening coincidence with phase 1 given the timeline being bandied about

True and Stuttgart 21 has just been bounced back again from end of this year.

Just imagine if HS2 opens in half the time they announced, and at the lower end of the cost estimate. People will say "Wow, they can do it etc" when in fact it was always the intention. But when they talk about massively over budget, so was Brunel when he built his line to Bristol, wasn't it? And he bankrupted people.

 

[Mogster]

A bit of perspective is needed.

We spent £110 Billion on debt interest last year. That’s £110 Billion of dead money. Gone, nothing gained, no assets acquired, no improvement to living standards. The capital borrowed also provided very little in terms of investment: it bailed out banks, and payed for a pandemic.

£100 billion for an asset that will last a hundred years, considering the money should largely be staying in our economy, and acknowledging the massive devaluation of Sterling, is not horrific.

The original estimate was clearly never going to happen - it was probably 50% lower than realistic, and since then we've had a pandemic, which very much nuked the supply chains.

The fact is, by the time stage 1 is done, we should have the experience and people who know how to make these projects a success: it is folly to bin that experience, and not continue with the railway, as per the original plan.

Agree completely. Hinkley Point C is supposed to be costing an inflation adjusted £45-50bn. That’s just for one, undeniably large, but still just one, power station.

 

[Trainman40083]

A bit of perspective is needed.

We spent £110 Billion on debt interest last year. That’s £110 Billion of dead money. Gone, nothing gained, no assets acquired, no improvement to living standards. The capital borrowed also provided very little in terms of investment: it bailed out banks, and payed for a pandemic.

£100 billion for an asset that will last a hundred years, considering the money should largely be staying in our economy, and acknowledging the massive devaluation of Sterling, is not horrific.

The original estimate was clearly never going to happen - it was probably 50% lower than realistic, and since then we've had a pandemic, which very much nuked the supply chains.

The fact is, by the time stage 1 is done, we should have the experience and people who know how to make these projects a success: it is folly to bin that experience, and not continue with the railway, as per the original plan.

Love the wording "the pandemic nuked the supply chains". It certainly did. One only had to look at construction inflation that happened afterwards to see

 

[Broucek]

Agree completely. Hinkley Point C is supposed to be costing an inflation adjusted £45-50bn. That’s just for one, undeniably large, but still just one, power station.

Somehow it's not comforting that another item of critical infrastructure is also insanely expensive....

 

[Trainman40083]

Somehow it's not comforting that another item of critical infrastructure is also insanely expensive....

I imagine so will the Lower Thames Crossing. The question might be, "why are the estimated cost estimates so far out? ". And "what are they actually spending the money on, that is not part of the railway" ?

 

[London Trains]

The concept that the WCML is "at capacity" doesn't quite fit with actuality. Trains consistently run with less than the optimum formation (remember Class 86 plus 13 coach formations?). The Fast lines, which used to be wholly 125mph services, then had 110mph services pushed in, which absorb multiple paths ahead of them. The WCML improvements of a generation ago that were meant to add capacity in things like power supply, nowadays come out of the woodwork that they were cancelled, sometimes halfway completed, so someone could claim coming in within budget. Leading to 807s having to now be run under the wires on diesel.

Euston station concourse being overloaded, principally because of a commercial policy that if you don't make your booked train, your expensive ticket is ripped up. A operating policy that provides a Turn-Up-And-Go every 20 minute service from London to Manchester, only for a fare strategy the direct opposite of Turn-Up-And-Go, that the only reasonable fares need you to get there for one train only. And more.

Absolutely hit the nail on the head here. All trains should be full length using units which can run at full speed, and all tickets should be fully flexible (peak and off-peak only) with reasonable fares. I am pro-HS2, but regardless of that, it is clear the WCML is  not being used to its full capacity, which it should be.