At vast cost and with most of it cancelled.
So 5 from 300km/h and a 1 minute dwell and 300 is what the trains are going to be running at.
LGV-SE had TGV services to Sens when it opened. But those places are also smaller and on the existing mainline. It’s like having a first stop at Crewe after hugging the west coast mainline the whole way.
So 2 stops each called at 3 times an hour would need to raise enough revenue to cover purchasing and operating 1 train. I think that would be extremely comfortable.
A new station for the Chilterns should by any reasonable measure cost less than 0.5% of Crossrail 2. It will also have somewhat higher fares as its long distance.
LGV Sud Est has a lot more destinations that are much further away from the centre than Britain. You could plausibly have to support Paris-Rome passengers.
Do you have a reference to TGVs going to Sens? French Wikipedia says nothing about this.
Repeating something again and again that isn't true doesn't in any way make it more true. 35 miles isn't far enough and you've not given any examples to the contrary. Some trains dedicated to new build lines do make stops at this distance, but it's uncommon. For the first stop out of a major demand centre it's even more uncommon.
The existing plan for HS2 already benefited people in Buckinghamshire and the surrounding counties by offering them the opportunity to receive more frequent trains with vastly more seats on them than they have today. That is something the ones who are opposed to the project wilfully misled people about, and it's one of the reasons we're in this mess today. Each additional high speed service releases space for multiple additional services on the existing lines.
I'm interested to hear what prices you'd expect to be setting to get approximately even numbers doing Aylesbury - London as Aylesbury - Birmingham. I'm sure you'd need to set an Aylesbury - London single into three figures against say £50 to Birmingham...
To amplify. Advice taken from people who have done it before us was to avoid intermediate stops unless you want all services to stop there (like Old Oak Common station and Birmingham Interchange station).
It is going to cost whatever you do, construction in the UK it generally more expansive (for road, rail and other projects). Hobbling HS2 is not going to justify the expense of a high speed route designed and built to bring UK cities further North closer to London in terms of time and convenience.
My bold. Good point. Furthermore, just to highlight, Leamington is not too far the station being built near the HS2 Birmingham / M42 "Birmingham Interchange". So a good job nothing nearer London.
Wrong. HS2 phase 1 is going beyond Birmingham, and will bring benefits to those travelling all the way to Glasgow.
Not everything will stop at Interchange, but the station layout is integral to the larger delta junction, with additional lines to the Birmingham divergence, so a stopper can call and pull out again to Curzon Street all while other trains to Handsacre pass through at speed on the fast line.
You say this. And yet it’s not what has been done in practice.
It wouldn’t be extractive if it was north of Aylesbury and especially wouldn’t if it had higher fares to London than from comparable stations.
Princes Risborough doesn’t even have direct service to Birmingham and changing at Haddenham and Thame would make trip times probably half an hour slower than driving to the city centre. It’s not really comparable.
Haddenham and Thame has 600,000 currently to London.
Every Shinkansen line, Taiwan HSR, Frankfurt-Cologne, Nuremberg-Munich, Nuremberg-Erfurt, Stuttgart-Ulm, HSL 4 etc.
They don’t run anymore as the people chose to have more Paris service. But there’s a junction south of Sens to support them.
Because it’s Aylesbury+Oxford+Bicester+the surrounding towns to Birmingham and Manchester and likely other destinations with changes.
The time delay now for a stop at didcot parkway over a through service at 200km/h is 4 minutes. So why with some efficiency improvements is 5 not reachable for 300km/h?
Once again it must be pointed out that most intermediate stops are either due to political pressures rather than because they are actually practical, or in the case of Shinkansen lines it's because they are actually connecting major centres of industry. Even then you have capacity loss as we see on the Tokkaido Shinkansen which now needs a relief line through the Chuo Shinkansen (whether it should've been a Maglev or not is it's own debate).
Why do you think the intermediate stops in other countries aren’t practical?
Except that isn’t the case.
The major cities on the Tokaido Shinkansen are much bigger than anywhere in Europe so the ridership from just serving them is much stronger than any other high speed line could manage.
Because the role of high-speed rail is to connect major dense urban centres as part of a wider hub-and-spoke model where local trains connect passengers at large interchange stations, and in many cases to also serve as capacity relief by specifically taking long-distance intercity traffic off the classic lines so the local services can connect the smaller areas together with the big cities.
It is absolutely the case.
The Kent ones are a pretty terrible example as those have to have customs and passport people so much higher costs than any other station.
It isn’t. Because in almost cases high speed lines aren’t running the absolute maximum number of trains with a high level of ridership.
Quite, but if the passenger numbers made it worth the operational expenditure then Eurostar or any of it's potential competitors would've been willing to front the costs, or perhaps the DfT. Even if you removed customs and passport control it's questionable.
You are further away from London at Ashford than you are at Aylesbury, so if those passengers can make do with going into London for a connection then Aylesbury folk certainly can too, not withstanding already existing services available to them in both cases.
That doesn't change the fact that high-speed lines are specifically designed for dense urban centres and not rural intermediates. HS2 if done in full would've certainly seen maximum capacity and high ridership because it would be absorbing demand from intercity services on three trunk routes out of London.
The costs are probably 20x higher to stop a Eurostar at Ashford than another high speed service somewhere else where the station needs like 2-3 on duty staff to be functional.
38 minutes from Ashford to St Pancras is much shorter than Aylesbury to Euston and is almost certainly shorter than Aylesbury to Old Oak Common. 19 minutes from Ebbsfleet to St Pancras is even quicker.
That is highly doubtful. Certainly not to Tokaido Shinkansen levels it wouldn’t.
12 pages and counting says that we are going round in circles!
So you think that the projected 15tph of a HS2 completed in full (i.e. all of Phase 2) would not have been comparable to Shinkansen levels of service?
In number of trains, yes, but not the 150 million passengers a year.
Then the argument here is to improve Aylesbury to London services, not hold back HS2 for the sake of a rural area that it was never intended to serve at the expense of those it was.
Therefore they are not suitable for high-speed rail services.
It was literally the plan - 17tph absorbing all the intercity WCML, MML and ECML traffic which would serve about 70-100 million passengers (not accounting for suppressed demand potentially pushing those numbers higher).
I can be many kinds of stubborn.
So that means if we take the view that 70-100 is reasonable (which I think it is - albeit perhaps a little optimistic) then you are using 1/2 to 2/3rds of the railways capacity and have quite a bit of spare capacity left.
Ashford to France, yes I agree.
What about if you want to travel north?
Running 17tph isn't far off the maximum technical capabilities which could be 18-24tph at a push (I doubt the latter though because these are high-speed trains with long start and stopping distances, nor Victoria Line stock with frequent stop-start patterns).
You could change at Birmingham Moor Street and walk to Curzon Street or New Street nearby. It's not like HS2 will be the only rail line the Chilterns have, it'll just be the one that doesn't bring an immediate benefit but may otherwise offer indirect ones like increased rail capacity on the classic routes.
You cannot do this from anywhere affected by the HS2 construction south of Birmingham.
70-100 must include future growth.
Agreed.
The Japanese certainly do 300-0-300 in under 5 minutes and most likely 4 to 4.5. You can see that from the timetable. So it’s not wildly silly.
From where?
With a locomotive hauled train, one door per carriage and double decker trains. I think we can do better than that.
The obvious location to limit extraction but still make it useful going north is where it crosses east west rail.
