What does 6 and 3 stub platforms at Euston mean for hs2?

[MatthewHutton]

Yes but the powers that be be might want to build an eastern leg in forty years time and they’ll be livid if we haven’t built enough platforms now

Why would you do that rather than give the east its own dedicated line into Kings Cross where there’s amble spare capacity subject to a rationalisation of the rolling stock and electrification of 100-150 miles of branches some of which will be electrified anyway by the trans pennie upgrade?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2026 ==

True but most services would have run entirely on HS2 infrastructure (including Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds). I wouldn't be surprised if the theoretical maximum capacity of the high speed line was designed to be closer to 24tph, so probably some slack for things being out of sequence.

The splitting for Edinburgh/ Glasgow always seemed like chaos waiting to happen, though.

On the basis that you can recover from delays in the off peak hours if you run more service at peak there isn’t much running even 9-10 trains an hour off peak I don’t believe.

The exceptions are 14/15tph off peak on the fast tracks great western mainline between Heathrow junction and Paddington and the 12tph? of unreliable service into Euston (both of which top out at 200km/h) and the 11/12tph on the Tokaido Shinkansen (albeit with more on special occasions like golden week).

Not sure what LGV Sud Est will manage after the signalling upgrade off peak - but I doubt it’s that much.

 

[Zomboid]

We can't plan and build (very) expensive infrastructure based on what may happen in forty years. There's no realistic prospect of reviving the full Eastern Leg, so we shouldn't be planning for it.

You absolutely must, given the scale of the investment (even if the cost hadn't ballooned) HS2 needs to account for much longer than that, probably 80-100 years.

I believe the junction for the eastern leg will be constructed in terms of the bridges so that there's something to tie into in the future if an eastern leg is built in future (and could serve a purpose in the shorter term by connecting to the Birmingham to Derby line). A future HS2 east won't be what was designed this time round, and depending on what it might be, Euston at 6+3 platforms may be a constraint - but the +3 will allow something additional in future.

 

[Manutd1999]

By that logic, why not make it 15 platform station to allow for a future extension towards Bristol, or 25 platforms, just in case a future government decides to concentrate all long-distance trains at a single London terminus?

At some point you have to stop and decide what is realistic. Government doesn't have a mature design, a budget or even an aspiration for doing anything further on the eastern leg - it shouldn't be in our thinking.

One exception may be provision for a connection to the XC line at Birmingham towards Derby/Sheffield, which I believe is already provided as part of Phase 1 (?) However, the 6+3 design should already have enough slack to enable a future ~2ph service along that route.

 

[Zomboid]

By that logic, why not make it 15 platform station to allow for a future extension towards Bristol, or 25 platforms, just in case a future government decides to concentrate all long-distance trains at a single London terminus?

At some point you have to stop and decide what is realistic. Government doesn't have a mature design, a budget or even an aspiration for doing anything further on the eastern leg - it shouldn't be in our thinking.

One exception may be provision for a connection to the XC line at Birmingham towards Derby/Sheffield, which I believe is already provided as part of Phase 1 (?) However, the 6+3 design should already have enough slack to enable a future ~2ph service along that route.

You've got to be reasonable, but barely enough for today is not going to be enough in the longer term, and you have to think long term when building this sort of infrastructure. I'm not qualified to say where the line is, but it's foolish to build a station in the centre of London which will prevent the rest of the line being used to the fullest extent that could reasonably be expected.

 

[mmh]

Good luck selling "we're building a spare 7 platforms in London in case we want them in 40 years time" in a world where Manchester can't get an extra 2 for Piccadilly to be used now, and where it's quite likely most of the electorate would say "good" if HS2 was cancelled tomorrow.

 

[Zomboid]

Short term politics don't change the fact that a railway line which might be capable of 24tph could end up being constrained forever by a station that's only capable of 12. I'm not saying that those are the actual numbers here. But the basement where the station is being built and the civil engineering of the approaches should be capable of handling the full capacity of the line, whatever that is.

 

[HSTEd]

Short term politics don't change the fact that a railway line which might be capable of 24tph could end up being constrained forever by a station that's only capable of 12. I'm not saying that those are the actual numbers here. But the basement where the station is being built and the civil engineering of the approaches should be capable of handling the full capacity of the line, whatever that is.

9 platforms is highly likely to tolerate the maximum capacity of line, be it 16, 17 or 18 trains per hour.

They might not get the very long turnarounds that were included in the original plan, but it is highly likely to be operable.

 

[The Planner]

By that logic, why not make it 15 platform station to allow for a future extension towards Bristol, or 25 platforms, just in case a future government decides to concentrate all long-distance trains at a single London terminus?

At some point you have to stop and decide what is realistic. Government doesn't have a mature design, a budget or even an aspiration for doing anything further on the eastern leg - it shouldn't be in our thinking.

One exception may be provision for a connection to the XC line at Birmingham towards Derby/Sheffield, which I believe is already provided as part of Phase 1 (?) However, the 6+3 design should already have enough slack to enable a future ~2ph service along that route.

The original plans would have been based on growth and economic predictions much like any route study undertaken by NR or National Highways etc and has been for time immemorial. No one is plucking numbers out the air.

There is no provision to drop onto the Derby lines at Kingsbury apart from people discussing it.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Short term politics don't change the fact that a railway line which might be capable of 24tph could end up being constrained forever by a station that's only capable of 12. I'm not saying that those are the actual numbers here. But the basement where the station is being built and the civil engineering of the approaches should be capable of handling the full capacity of the line, whatever that is.

Even if we take your point that the line can handle 18 trains an hour it is still dependent on avoiding having to add any stops south of Birmingham and not being pressured into providing HS2 service to Chester/North Wales or Shrewsbury to the west.

Additionally on the east coast you are assuming that it is politically acceptable not to provide high speed service to Hull, Bradford, Sunderland and Middlesborough. Also you are probably assuming that you won't have to use up capacity to do the service to Sheffield via Kingsbury as it will be very very difficult to take away HS2 service from Derby and Sheffield city centre to put them onto a line in the outskirts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2026 ==

There is no provision to drop onto the Derby lines at Kingsbury apart from people discussing it.

That and the North Wales coast are probably the additions with the most pressure for them to be delivered, the former because its cheap and relieves both St Pancras and Kings Cross, the latter because HS2 is treated as an England and Wales project that provides no benefits at all to Wales.

 

[JonathanH]

Even if we take your point that the line can handle 18 trains an hour it is still dependent on avoiding having to add any stops south of Birmingham and not being pressured into providing HS2 service to Chester/North Wales or Shrewsbury to the west.

There is not going to be any pressure to add stops south of Birmingham. There isn't any right now and never has been.

What needs to be demonstrated is that the stations on existing lines into London get a more comprehensive service after the fast trains no longer get in the way.

Additionally on the east coast you are assuming that it is politically acceptable not to provide high speed service to Hull, Bradford, Sunderland and Middlesborough. Also you are probably assuming that you won't have to use up capacity to do the service to Sheffield via Kingsbury as it will be very very difficult to take away HS2 service from Derby and Sheffield city centre to put them onto a line in the outskirts.

Again, where is any such view coming from? If you read the record of the parliamentary debate on Tuesday, it is about local connectivity on existing lines, the blight caused by construction work, and reassurances about delivery of what is planned.

 

[Manutd1999]

Good luck selling "we're building a spare 7 platforms in London in case we want them in 40 years time" in a world where Manchester can't get an extra 2 for Piccadilly to be used now, and where it's quite likely most of the electorate would say "good" if HS2 was cancelled tomorrow.

Precisely

The original plans would have been based on growth and economic predictions much like any route study undertaken by NR or National Highways etc and has been for time immemorial. No one is plucking numbers out the air.

There is no provision to drop onto the Derby lines at Kingsbury apart from people discussing it.

That's ok, but the assumptions behind those initial studies have fundamentally changed. Sticking to them now 'just in case' is wasteful.

IMO, a plan for 10ph with capacity to go up to ~12ph off 6x platforms is a good capacity for Phase 1. If some version of Phase 2 or the Eastern Leg are built in the future, the 3x 250m spare platforms could be brought into use to add another 4-6x 200m services. The 6+3 design is therefore a perfectly reasonable balance between cost and future-proofing.

 

[bringbackcrouc]

My concern is that it will only take one train with some vomit requiring a deep clean or a computer fault requiring a full reset and we’ll still have the same resilience or near the same resilience just because we didn’t spend enough on Euston

 

[JonathanH]

My concern is that it will only take one train with some vomit requiring a deep clean or a computer fault requiring a full reset and we’ll still have the same resilience or near the same resilience just because we didn’t spend enough on Euston

Wouldn't that just necessitate stepping a unit up? The advantage that should exist is having one common train fleet.

 

[MatthewHutton]

My concern is that it will only take one train with some vomit requiring a deep clean or a computer fault requiring a full reset and we’ll still have the same resilience or near the same resilience just because we didn’t spend enough on Euston

You do also have six platforms at OOC which gives you resilience. Certainly at least two of those could be used for terminating trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2026 ==

There is not going to be any pressure to add stops south of Birmingham. There isn't any right now and never has been.

What needs to be demonstrated is that the stations on existing lines into London get a more comprehensive service after the fast trains no longer get in the way.


Again, where is any such view coming from? If you read the record of the parliamentary debate on Tuesday, it is about local connectivity on existing lines, the blight caused by construction work, and reassurances about delivery of what is planned.

Where’s the pressure coming from?

Increased ridership for low cost, benefiting more than the big cities, levelling up and MPs in marginal constituencies wanting to hold their seat depending on where exactly we are talking about.

 

[JonathanH]

Where’s the pressure coming from?

Increased ridership for low cost, benefiting more than the big cities, levelling up and MPs in marginal constituencies wanting to hold their seat depending on where exactly we are talking about.

The MPs on the route of HS2 still want it cancelled - that is apparent from this week's debate. They are not interested in stations, because they will cause even more destruction of the countryside. The level of debate is still about blight.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-05-19/debates/97279309-058D-4409-9964-0317BB133734/HighSpeed2Reset#contribution-F594C72D-FC6D-44EE-86EE-E83E465A012F

Joy Morrissey
(Beaconsfield) (Con)

If the Secretary of State decides to scrap HS2 in a year’s time, or in a few months’ time, she will have my full support. What assurances can she offer on providing better services to our residents, on unpaid land claims and on the destruction of roads? In Beaconsfield, Marlow and the south Bucks villages, we have seen nothing from HS2 but a negative impact.

Heidi Alexander

I am keen that HS2 should always engage with the community and local businesses with care, respect and rigour. If that has not been the hon. Lady’s experience locally, I know that I and other Ministers will be only too happy to take that issue away. I am aware that she has an Adjournment debate on the matter later today.

I have to disagree with the hon. Lady on the idea that we should cancel the project. In his letter to my Department’s permanent secretary, the chief executive of HS2 made it very clear that cancelling this project and doing the necessary remediation could cost almost as much as completing the line. We would have half-completed structures strewn across the English countryside, and I am sure that her constituents would not wish to see that. That is why it is right to reset this project and to complete HS2, as I have set out today.

They recognise that what their constituents want are improvements to existing railways, not high speed rail. Can you cite any substantive campaign for intermediate stations on HS2?

 

[MatthewHutton]

The MPs on the route of HS2 still want it cancelled - that is apparent from this week's debate. They are not interested in stations, because they will cause even more destruction of the countryside. The level of debate is still about blight.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-05-19/debates/97279309-058D-4409-9964-0317BB133734/HighSpeed2Reset#contribution-F594C72D-FC6D-44EE-86EE-E83E465A012F

Beaconsfield constituency isn’t affected by HS2 so I am not sure that’s relevant?

What do Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) and Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) think?

 

[JonathanH]

Beaconsfield constituency isn’t affected by HS2 so I am not sure that’s relevant?

What do Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) and Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) think?

They didn't speak, but Greg Smith from Mid Buckinghamshire certainly wasn't talking about intermediate stations.

Greg Smith
(Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)

In her statement, the Secretary of State said that she was angry, and I can assure her that I have been consistently angry about this unaffordable, unwanted railway ever since it was green lit—angry on behalf of my constituents, who have to live in hellish conditions while it is constructed. Toggle showing location ofColumn 422Landowners are still waiting for payment for land taken, and our roads are churned up by construction traffic, and still unfixed. There is still not the money to deliver mitigation projects that were promised a decade ago. I heard nothing about any of those challenges in her statement.

May I ask the Secretary of State specifically about noise modelling? Modelling has found that in Wendover—where trains were already going to come through at 320 kph—hundreds of homes will face noise that is above the permitted decibel limit set down by the World Health Organisation. Will she commit to the Government fully remodelling the noise impacts on real people—certainly in Buckinghamshire—of the new speed that she has set for HS2, and come back to the House with a commitment that the noise level will not be above the level set out in WHO guidance?

Heidi Alexander

I appreciate that the hon. Gentleman’s Buckinghamshire constituents will have experienced considerable disruption to their lives as a result of this construction project, and I know that those who live nearest to infrastructure schemes tend to take more of the pain before the gain from the new service is delivered. I will look into the matter of the noise impacts of a lower-speed railway. My instinct is that the noise is likely to be less, but if what I learn is any different from that, I will write to him and let him know.

 

[MatthewHutton]

They didn't speak, but Greg Smith from Mid Buckinghamshire certainly wasn't talking about intermediate stations.

Yes and he is wrong. He is not the only MP affected.

And I listed a lot of places beyond Buckinghamshire as well.

 

[JonathanH]

Yes and he is wrong. He is not the only MP affected.

And I listed a lot of places beyond Buckinghamshire as well.

In Laura Kyrke-Smith's contribution to last year's debate, she did not raise the desire for an intermediate station. Like the other contributions the contribution is all about the disruption of construction. Adding stations is not a tenable contribution.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-06-18/debates/A676AA06-6199-4DB7-BF0B-8923EFF9DF75/HS2Reset

Laura Kyrke-Smith
(Aylesbury) (Lab)

The HS2 line runs down the west side of Aylesbury. It will bring no benefits at all to my constituency, yet my residents have suffered years of noise, disruption, flooding, loss of access to the countryside and the destruction of their natural environment as a result of its construction. I am pleased that the Government are getting a grip on this issue, and I commend the Secretary of State for her honesty and focus, but my constituents will understandably be concerned by the news of further delays and potential further disruption. Can the Secretary of State confirm that she will do everything in her power to hold HS2 and its contractors to account in order to minimise the ongoing disruption for my long-suffering residents?

Heidi Alexander

I can assure my hon. Friend that we are determined to see the main works civil engineering contracts completed as soon as possible. That is the element of construction that generally creates most disturbance for local communities, and we are pretty much at peak construction now. I thank her constituents for their patience while we continue to deliver this vital new piece of rail infrastructure.

Her facebook post about HS2 indicates that she views a link from Aylesbury to East West Rail as a greater priority.
https://www.facebook.com/6155813197...the-hs2-project-the-fact-/122230001654271065/

You may well have seen the news about today's report on the HS2 project.

The fact that trains won't be running until 2036-39 feels like yet another blow, when we've already been putting up with the construction work for so long.

The extent of mismanagement on the HS2 project under previous governments was staggering. This government’s investigations have found that tens of billions of pounds were needlessly wasted - on top of all the destruction of the environment and disruption to our town. But Ministers have set out that to cancel the scheme now would cost as much money as it would to complete it, and leave communities like ours with half-finished structures and a huge mess to clear up. So they've decided to press on and finish it.

Today, once I heard the news, I met with Rail Minister Lord Hendy and the CEO of HS2, Mark Wild. I stressed the ongoing disruption and I raised several issues including the slow handover of land back to the Council once work is complete, and the slow progress on restoring the natural landscapes and our access to the countryside. I will be following up in writing again with HS2.

I also raised again the need for a Rail Link from Aylesbury to Milton Keynes, which would be transformative for our town and a fraction of the cost of HS2. I will continue to push this with Ministers until we see progress.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Adding stations is not a tenable contribution.

It is tenable. It will cost £100m a stop even at ridiculous British costs and add millions of passengers a stop.

Certainly a lot less than OOC-Milton Keynes that will cost £500m or something.

 

[JamesT]

Beaconsfield constituency isn’t affected by HS2 so I am not sure that’s relevant?

What do Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) and Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) think?

https://assets.publishing.service.g...-HS2-LP-MAP-000-000043-P03_-_Beaconsfield.pdf Shows HS2 does go through the Beaconsfield constituency.
And as their complaints are mostly about the construction traffic, that will affect a far wider area than the immediate construction zone.

 

[MatthewHutton]

Her facebook post about HS2 indicates that she views a link from Aylesbury to East West Rail as a greater priority.

I mean you can get both?

But south of Birmingham is only one thing and I listed about 5 in total. And doing any one of the 5 and the idea that you can do the eastern side of the Y is sunk.

 

[SynthD]

9 platforms gives you 38 minutes to turn a train around on average. Or 30 minutes to turn them round plus 2 spares.

There was a document listing the destinations and turnarounds. Something like 30m for Birmingham, 1hr for Scotland. I suspect that included cleaning at both ends.

We can't plan and build (very) expensive infrastructure based on what may happen in forty years. There's no realistic prospect of reviving the full Eastern Leg, so we shouldn't be planning for it.

Why can’t we plan for that timeframe?

Even if we take your point that the line can handle 18 trains an hour it is still dependent on avoiding having to add any stops south of Birmingham and not being pressured into providing HS2 service to Chester/North Wales or Shrewsbury to the west.

Chester is perfectly suitable, for a 200m unit. Any future end of electrification on that line is likely good. Liverpool isn’t getting as many trains as Scotland, give one of those to that line.

 

[HSTEd]

Why can’t we plan for that timeframe?

Spending resources now for infrastructure that won't be used for decades (if ever) reduces the resources society has to spend on other things.

 

[bringbackcrouc]

Is that 30 minutes for doors open to doors closed or is that 30 mins for the entire platform section occupied to entire platform section cleared. If anyone could provide a minute by minute breakdown to help me understand I’d be grateful.

 

[The Planner]

Is that 30 minutes for doors open to doors closed or is that 30 mins for the entire platform section occupied to entire platform section cleared. If anyone could provide a minute by minute breakdown to help me understand I’d be grateful.

Its wheels stop to wheels start. You'll still need a margin before and after for platform reoccupation.

 

[bringbackcrouc]

Its wheels stop to wheels start. You'll still need a margin before and after for platform reoccupation.

So that’s really three trains every two hours not two trains an hour

 

[The Planner]

So that’s really three trains every two hours not two trains an hour

Drop it to 25-27 minutes and you can do 2tph

 

[Zomboid]

And

Drop it to 25-27 minutes and you can do 2tph

And presumably about 17 minutes would allow 3tph - so given the short run time and lack of interface with the outside world, Birmingham could conceivably operate from a single platform (especially if there's a longer turn round in Birmingham). Not sure you'd want to risk it with any of the other destinations.

 

[The Planner]

And

And presumably about 17 minutes would allow 3tph - so given the short run time and lack of interface with the outside world, Birmingham could conceivably operate from a single platform (especially if there's a longer turn round in Birmingham). Not sure you'd want to risk it with any of the other destinations.

17 for 3tph is pushing it, leaves no buffer. Even my suggestion above is risky at 25.