Better rail links promised with Heathrow expansion?

[Class 170101]

The only reason for the internal flights is connectivity for International flights where this would quicker than using High Speed.

The biggest problem with HS4 as proposed is it seems to want to join HS2 near Denham which is on the core section of the line. How a full HS2 from London to Birmingham Interchange (Jn) is supposed to accommodate extra trains join from HS4 at Denham I don't know.

 

[swt_passenger]

Here's one proposal for better links. It adds several very worthwhile rapid intranational and international connections. It looks like an excellent piece of infrastructure to me … now somebody needs to fund it.

https://expedition.uk.com/thinking/hs4air-an-m25-for-high-speed-trains/

“HS4Air (High Speed for Air) is a proposed strategic high-speed rail/air connection in south east England developed by Expedition director Alistair Lenczner.

“The proposal is for a new high-speed railway connection that links the existing HS1 line with the planned HS2 line passing via both Gatwick (LGW) and Heathrow (LHR) airports to the south and west of London.”

Well done. Now a fantasy project is again being discussed in about 5 places...

 

[Roger100]

Rail links to Heathrow from London are not bad, Heathrow Express every 15 minutes and TfL Rail every 30 minutes. Crossrail will run a train to Heathrow every 10 minutes, and these will connect to other London destinations more easily. The Piccadilly Line currently runs through London frequently and is part of the Night Tube. It's difficult to envisage an increase on the GWML which is a very busy line. Getting a train to connect with the 6 am flights from LHR is however not possible.

The WRAtH project will obviously add connections to the west if all goes to plan.

If Old Oak Common station and HS2 ever go ahead there will be an easy, if not direct, route to Heathrow from places served by HS2. There are many other fantasy plans but in practice finding a suitable affordable route from the north or south will be very difficult.

I recently moved from the London area to the North East. If I ever want to fly again Heathrow is still my best bet. The northern airports have worse connections and lack the destinations. These airports are running below capacity so the chance of any improvement in connectivity is slight.

 

[Skymonster]

The tragedy is the best option for better rail access to Heathrow was lost when a HS2 station was dropped in favour of Old Oak Common. Capitalising on the governments lack of vision for an integrated transport network, the rail industry selfishly lobbied to reduce the costs of HS2 and by doing so denied air travellers from the north simple station-to-terminal access to long haul airline services.

Take a look at Frankfurt / Cologne for example. Long haul passengers bound for Cologne fly into Franfurth on Lufthansa's services, and then have a simple modal transfer onto a train that is marketed by the airline and carries airline flight numbers. Baggage can be dropped at the airport station, through ticketing is available, rail-air connection guarantees are offered, and frequent fliers can even earn miles on the train. As a result, using rail for the short domestic journey is easy. The arrangements extend to several other cities and as a result there is no need for domestic flights to link them to Frankfurt - the train is just too easy, and the side effect is that there is no demand for slots for flights to those destinations, leaving them to be allocated to longer haul air services.

HS2 is not going to do any of that. Travellers from the Midlands and the North are going to be going in the wrong direction, past Heathrow towards London, lugging their bags through a station in West London - Old Oak Common - that serves an area no one actually needs to go to (and vice versa). That will extend journey times and make the proces much less convenient.

Had HS2 gone through Heathrow, the end game could have been domestic connectivity from / to Birmingham, the East Midlands, and later even Manchester and Leeds - maybe even Newcastle - being delivered by rail alone. That would have relieved pressure on Heathrow and put slots back into the pool for much-needed expansion of long haul air links. But is was all blown because the government didn't have a truly integrated transport policy, and because the rail industry lobby was strong enough to ensure its own interests were put above those of the whole country.

 

[swt_passenger]

The tragedy is the best option for better rail access to Heathrow was lost when a HS2 station was dropped in favour of Old Oak Common. Capitalising on the governments lack of vision for an integrated transport network, the rail industry selfishly lobbied to reduce the costs of HS2 and by doing so denied air travellers from the north simple station-to-terminal access to long haul airline services.

Take a look at Frankfurt / Cologne for example. Long haul passengers bound for Cologne fly into Franfurth on Lufthansa's services, and then have a simple modal transfer onto a train that is marketed by the airline and carries airline flight numbers. Baggage can be dropped at the airport station, through ticketing is available, rail-air connection guarantees are offered, and frequent fliers can even earn miles on the train. As a result, using rail for the short domestic journey is easy. The arrangements extend to several other cities and as a result there is no need for domestic flights to link them to Frankfurt - the train is just too easy, and the side effect is that there is no demand for slots for flights to those destinations, leaving them to be allocated to longer haul air services.

HS2 is not going to do any of that. Travellers from the Midlands and the North are going to be going in the wrong direction, past Heathrow towards London, lugging their bags through a station in West London - Old Oak Common - that serves an area no one actually needs to go to (and vice versa). That will extend journey times and make the proces much less convenient.

Had HS2 gone through Heathrow, the end game could have been domestic connectivity from / to Birmingham, the East Midlands, and later even Manchester and Leeds - maybe even Newcastle - being delivered by rail alone. That would have relieved pressure on Heathrow and put slots back into the pool for much-needed expansion of long haul air links. But is was all blown because the government didn't have a truly integrated transport policy, and because the rail industry lobby was strong enough to ensure its own interests were put above those of the whole country.

It was abandoned because the balance of passengers wanting a service to London is forecast to remain far higher than the demand to Heathrow, and although I don’t remember how many times this has been explained, it keeps coming up as a significant mistake, rather than being thought of as a sensible decision. Any HS2 Service direct to Heathrow removes a path for a direct train into London.

But we’ve had this discussion many times in the HS2 forum, let’s not do it all again eh?

 

[thenorthern]

I got a response.

Dear XXXXXXX

With regard to Heathrow, the Airport Commission, led by Sir Howard Davies, investigated in great detail several options to provide much needed additional capacity. The report concluded that the proposal for a new third runway at Heathrow, combined with a significant package of measures to address its environmental and community impacts, presents the strongest case and offers the greatest economic benefits. Expanding Heathrow will not only improve connectivity in the UK itself, but will also better connect the UK to long haul destinations in growing world markets, boosting trade and creating jobs. However, the Government is committed to supporting regional airports and the important transport links they provide across the UK to both national and international destinations. In fact, the Government’s own forecasts show all regional airports growing and Birmingham Airport is expected to benefit significantly with improved connectivity with the delivery of HS2.

As part of the Airport Commission’s investigation, the Commission looked into rail infrastructure and improving other transport links. One proposal which Network Rail recently consulted on is to build a connecting trainline between the Great Western Main Line and the airport. This would connect Cross-Country trains serving Reading to Heathrow and eliminate the need to travel via London. These proposals would also cut journey times from Burton to Heathrow to around 2.5 hours with only one change. You can take a look at the proposals by following this link: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-railway-upgrade-plan/key-projects/heathrow-rail-link/. It is also worth highlighting that from this December Heathrow will also be additionally served by Crossrail, soon to be known as the Elizabeth Line. With further improvements, by 2030, 70% of Britain’s population will be within three hours of the airport.

Not really answering my question though.

 

[The Ham]

They have answered how they know it will be better connected (Western Approach and Crossrail), they can't say how the Southern Approach will work as they've said they would like organisations to put forward their ideas for this.

As such there's suggestions like the Staines light rail proposal (which they think will be great because it would give a higher frequency, but would do nothing to improve connectivity from the likes of Woking, Guildford and Basingstoke, nor would it improve frequencies to/from Waterloo).

As such they can't say what other rail improvements there would be, although they could have said that they are seeking options for this at this time.

With regards to would it benefit the whole country they have provided a reasonable answer in the firm of 70% of the population could get there within 3 hours by train.

Again they could have gone further and said that with HS2 this would likely improve journey times further potentially increasing the number of those who could get there within 3 hours but certainly reducing journey times from several of our biggest cities as well as potentially making it easier to get to from Euston.

Did they try and answer you, yes.

Could they have provided you with a fuller answer, certainly.

Could others have complained if they did that they were just talking about "Jam tomorrow", yes. Which is why they stick to what is well known and not things which are over 5 years away.