High Speed 2 - do we really need it?

[GodAtum]

The compensation scheme for people affected by the proposed High Speed Rail link between London and Birmingham is due to be launched.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11028431

I feel sorry for those affected!

 

[Geezertronic]

At this stage, this is only for people looking to sell now who are on Labour's proposed route. If the route changes then I presume the process will start again

 

[j0hn0]

dunno about you guys but i would love a high speed line at the bottom of my garden

 

[LE Greys]

dunno about you guys but i would love a high speed line at the bottom of my garden

I'd certainly rather have a high-speed line with a view on the other side than an ugly sound-proof fence cutting off both line and view. I can live with a bit of intermittent noise (a road out the front would be far worse) but certainly don't want to feel like a prisoner in my own home.

 

[YesToHS2]

Yes To HS2. Sorry for the shameless plug, I have done and intend to contribute more to the forum.

Every article and paper I have read leads me to fully support HS2. All projections suggest a massive increase in rail demand over the next 30 years, speak to any rail professional and they will tell you passenger numbers are still on the rise.

I think people get scared off by HS2 due to the cost and scale but this is a long term project, the initial phase alone will take 15 years from now to plan and build. The government has to plan decades ahead simply because the time it takes to get projects such as this off of the ground.

I tend to think that critics or anyone who is unsure about HS2 needs to read a few hundred pages of documents before they make up their minds.

 

[Squaddie]

I tend to think that critics or anyone who is unsure about HS2 needs to read a few hundred pages of documents before they make up their minds.

But those who are in favour of it don't?

It's not difficult to imagine what high-speed rail travel in the UK will entail - sky-high fares, overcrowded trains and inevitable delays and weekend engineering works. In short, it will be just as miserable as the rest of the network.

I'd prefer to see the money spent on upgrading our existing stations and trains to European standards, in an attempt to make train travel in this country as much of a pleasure as it is in many other countries.

 

[Dennis]

Out of interest, is HS2 being planned as two track or four track? Reason for asking is that one of the arguments put forward against HS2 is that it will only benefit very few places (where the stops are). Obviously adding more stops will extend journey times, defeating the point of 'high speed'

Building it as a four track system (like most other mainlines) with fast and slow lines would give the best of both worlds. Although costing a little* more, the added flexibility and capacity would be useful.

* a high proportion of the expenditure goes on planning, and other soft issues rather than hard construction. I seem to recall reading that HS2 alone will spend £750 million before construction starts around 2015, add to that the costs of all the other previous studies and plans and a significant amount of the busdget for the line has been spent.

 

[YesToHS2]

But those who are in favour of it don't?

I have. I tried to summaries what I have read but an article which I wrote still came out at over 3000 words.

If we upgraded the WCML we would end up with 10 to 20 years of more passenger misery. The maximum practical length for pendolinos operation on the WCML is 11 cars. 17 car configs were considered but will be limited by stations which can not be easily lengthened.

I have read all the alternatives but they still come in at billions of pounds for what is essentially tinkering. The last WCML upgrade cost £13bn and took 10 years.

It is not all about speed either. It is primarily about capacity. But building a high speed line has the penitential for better value fore money.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Out of interest, is HS2 being planned as two track or four track? Reason for asking is that one of the arguments put forward against HS2 is that it will only benefit very few places (where the stops are). Obviously adding more stops will extend journey times, defeating the point of 'high speed'

Building it as a four track system (like most other mainlines) with fast and slow lines would give the best of both worlds. Although costing a little* more, the added flexibility and capacity would be useful.

* a high proportion of the expenditure goes on planning, and other soft issues rather than hard construction. I seem to recall reading that HS2 alone will spend £750 million before construction starts around 2015, add to that the costs of all the other previous studies and plans and a significant amount of the busdget for the line has been spent.

I will agree with you on that point Dennis - maybe two types of service could operate on HS2: express trains, calling only at Crossrail Interchange and Birmingham Interchange, before continuing to Manchester or Leeds, similarly with Birmingham services. Then you could also have slower trains on the slow lines, calling at maybe a new station in the Chiltern area and one maybe closer to Manchester and/or Leeds.

Just out of curiosity, how frequent would trains be over the line, hourly to all destinations, or more select services?

The scheme suggested by Dennis is done in France on their Marseille-Paris TGV, there are non-stop trains, those which call at Lyon on-route, and ones on top of this serving Avignon etc.

I'm still not convinced by the 'need'; for HS2 in this country - we are only compact as a nation. I don't think the Tories want it either, the much unwanted line down there would pass through Conservative heartlands in the Chilterns/Oxfordshire/Warwickshire areas. The National Trust have also started against HS2: it passes close to a stately home near Aylesbury.

*** Please not I did all this on the route suggested up through the Chilterns, past Birmingham and into a 'Y' shape for Manchester and Leeds. ***

 

[Metroland]

I think people get scared off by HS2 due to the cost and scale but this is a long term project, the initial phase alone will take 15 years from now to plan and build. The government has to plan decades ahead simply because the time it takes to get projects such as this off of the ground.

Actually the cost is about the same as free pensioner bus travel over the building period, it's not that great in the grand scheme of things, especially considering it will transform travel over much of the country.

 

[YesToHS2]

I have compared it to Crossrail £16bn creating a 10% capacity increase, HS2 London to Birmingham £17bn creating in effect a 100% capacity increase. I was accussed of pleading the North South divide though. Were as, in fact I was pointing out that no one, not even the tax payers alliance has brought up the subject of Crossrail's cost even thought the costs are comparable.

I didn't realise that about bus passes. Puts things in perspective.

 

[tbtc]

To "sell" HS2 you need to:

1. Remind people that it won't just be a London - Birmingham shuttle. Even if the HS2 line isn't extended north of Birmingham for some time it'll still be a quicker route from London to Manchester/ Liverpool/ Glasgow etc by moving onto the "classic" line there. Too many people think it'll only go to Birmingham, so will only be of benefit to Birmingham

2. Point out all the other places that will benefit from the paths freed up. For example, if the bulk of the trains from London to Leeds/ Newcastle/ Edinburgh are moved on to HS2 then that frees up a lot of paths on the ECML to Doncaster/York which could mean direct / additional services from London to Lincoln/ Grimsby/ Hull/ Scarborough/ Middlesbrough. Same with Northampton and other places which would benefit if the "fast" lines on the WCML had additional paths

3. Remind people how many years it took to sort the WCML improvements out. If we want additional capacity, are we prepared to put up with years of the railways being closed evenings/ weekends to cope with the engineering?

4. Point out the problems of running multi-speed railways. Yes, France has mega-speed services, but that's because those trains aren't competing for space with snail-paced-freight. Until we take freight out of the way we are never going to be able to get beyond 125mph on :conventional" lines

5. Be prepared to accept that HS2 isn't going to be all things to all people. Its not going to go to Cambridge/ Bristol. It won't ease busy trains in Portsmouth. It might mean that some places with great London services (like Stoke) might lose some of those services. Please don't pretend its going to benefit everyone, because that leads you to some horrible compromise like the Tories' "S" shaped route. The logical thing is to link the biggest cities first. There may be NS3 and HS4 and the like, there may be extensions, but its disingenuous to pretend it'll solve everything

Just be honest, be practical and accept that HS2 is the first step on the way (not an instant solution to everything)

 

[YesToHS2]

There will definitely been benefits north or Birmingham even before the line is extended north. HS services will operate from Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool and Scotland using classic compatible trains and will benefit from the time saving of at least 20 minutes. I'm looking for further clarification from Philip Hammond and HS2 Ltd on the services people can expect North of Birmingham though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just be honest, be practical and accept that HS2 is the first step on the way (not an instant solution to everything)

At the moment I am fighting an uphill battle just getting the reported truth out, when all I read everyday is over exaggerated and emotive claims about HS2 from critice.

I only report what I have read from various reports and try and stick within the realms of fact.

 

[Geezertronic]

You'll find that the campaigners and NIMBYs against HS2 will often be full of inaccuracies, chinese whispers etc... as the Facebook group was and probably still is full of this. They are only interested in their own point of view and be damned if you try and correct them (reminds me of someone on here )

Having joined the Facebook group with the intention of correcting rather than patronising, I was kicked out of it because I corrected numerous inaccuracies and it wasn't what people wanted to hear. The "why do we need another railway link from London to Birmingham" is a typical inaccuracy that was posted. If the against campaign feel the need to vet membership of their group, let them but it leads to a very blinkered view.

Personally I believe HS2 will be good for the country as a whole as long as it is done properly. 4 tracking to the Y split at the very least is a must and confirmation on whether the Birmingham city centre station will be a through station or a spur/teminus would be nice to know as well.

 

[YesToHS2]

So far I've dealt with the 100m exclusion zone. the inacurate £34bn price tag, the 250mph trains and thousands of people being effected by deafening rail noise. All these "facts" are incorrect on so many levels. As you said thought "be damned if you try and correct them"

Fact £17bn for London to Birmingham section (The planned section) including rolling stock.

Exclusion zone of 70m only refers to trees, HS1 is heavily planted with grasses and low plants right up to the ballast

Initial plans are for trains up to 225mph. 250mph only refers to potential line speed in the late future.

And the list of inaccuracies grows added to the emotive way in which the critics describe all the negatives you would think that HS2 will bring to apocalypse with it.

 

[43021HST]

The question in the title - under 5h London-Glasgow and under 1h30 London-Birmingham - so do we need a highly-expensive, massive rail network to take Britain's railways into the 21st century?

Simple answer, no I believe in upgrading the existing infrastructure up north and in wales, I'm tired of all the investment going to London and major cities. Also not every journey a passenger does is off to some far off destination at 200mph.

 

[YesToHS2]

@BR_fanatice. I think your missing the point, London is an world economic power in it's own right, we can't just dismiss it as easily as that. The North needs better, more frequent and yes faster trains to London. At least HS2 is actually coming northwards where as projects such as Crossrail will only server London.

Despite what the critics think we will not all be working from home in 10 years time far from it. Even conservative estimates see a 100% increase in passenger number by 2033. Imagine what will happen when fuel hits $200 a barrel, will people be able to afford internal flights then? I don't think so, so they will have to find an alternative transport method and the only one available for the people of the North West is the already overcrowded WCML.

This is a future project to meet our future transport needs.

 

[jon0844]

Indeed. I think that while we can't predict everything, it's fairly obvious that fuel prices are going to sky rocket in the next 10-20 years.

 

[rb311]

One of the main reasons that railways offer such a poor alternative to road travel is because the feeder routes are now either cycle tracks or served with such infrequent and poorly connected services that there are very few journeys available to the passenger other than arterial axial spokes from London.

Adding a further spoke to the same wheel will not improve railway usage. It will create another massive financial hole (see HS1) that the poor beleaguered tax payer will have to fill to enable an elite few to cut a few minutes off their journey time, at, no doubt, great expense.

And given what has been said on another thread recently, getting there faster is not the be all and end all.

Simply put, this project's sole purpose is a muscle flexing exhiition by rail to show it can compete with inter-city air travel.

If even a fraction of the money was spent on improving existing lines, restoring missing links and increasing the size of trains, then the rail network would benefit far more.

And don't even mention the fact that building the new line will tear up lots of new virgin countryside, much in areas of outstanding beauty, very environmentally friendly.

Much better to recycle cycle tracks..

 

[gordonthemoron]

improving exisiting lines causes disruption to current services, whereas completely new lines do not. Furthermore, how else can you increase capacity between London and Birmingham by 100%? Turn the WCML into an 8 track railway?

 

[starrymarkb]

I could always be devils advocate and ask "how will HS2 benefit me as someone who lives in the South West?"

 

[gordonthemoron]

it's a Northern Rail Line, for Northern People, there's nothing for you here

 

[jopsuk]

I could always be devils advocate and ask "how will HS2 benefit me as someone who lives in the South West?"

It doesn't. Nothing everything that a government spends your tax money on will directly benifit you. This is a fundamental aspect of taxation.

 

[tbtc]

And don't even mention the fact that building the new line will tear up lots of new virgin countryside, much in areas of outstanding beauty, very environmentally friendly.

Much better to recycle cycle tracks..

Be environmentally friendly - dig up cycle tracks :roll:

What a clever boy...

 

[LE Greys]

improving exisiting lines causes disruption to current services, whereas completely new lines do not. Furthermore, how else can you increase capacity between London and Birmingham by 100%? Turn the WCML into an 8 track railway?

Let me ask whether London-Birmingham needs 100% more capacity. Is the route overcrowded? Has it not been upgraded recently? I tend to think that several other posters here that increased investment in local lines and missing links, provided they're well thought-out, properly funded and properly marketed. Would it cost £20,000 mil to [say] reopen the Somerset and Dorset, the Woodhead, the eastern Callander and Oban and finally build a Great Glen Railway? What about actual plans, like SELRAP or the Ripon line? I like the idea of HS2, it's just a question of whether it's really the best thing to do.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Be environmentally friendly - dig up cycle tracks :roll:

What a clever boy...

A cycle track is a lot easier to relocate with a railway. Just stick it in the next field and hope that cyclists don't mind too much when overtaken by a train.

 

[tbtc]

I could always be devils advocate and ask "how will HS2 benefit me as someone who lives in the South West?"

It won't. Hence my comment earlier about this only being HS2. It may not benefit Sheffield (my town) - depending on route. One route can't benefit everywhere.

However, we need more High Speed services, we need them on dedicated lines, and the logical way to go about this is to concentrate on the busiest corridor.

If you can build London - Birmingham then that improves a massive market plus gives faster journeys to/from Manchester/ Liverpool/ Glasgow etc by using the new route.

You can then start to worry about whether the next step is extending HS2 to Manchester/Leeds on dedicated new lines, or building HS3 to another part of the UK (eastern England, south west England, Wales etc). But this is the logical place for the next High Speed line to be built.

 

[starrymarkb]

It doesn't. Nothing everything that a government spends your tax money on will directly benifit you. This is a fundamental aspect of taxation.

I know that, I was referring to the hyperbole!

And if French practice is followed the classic lines parallel to the high speed route would be downgraded to regionals, would Crosscountry continue to provide through journeys?

 

[tbtc]

Let me ask whether London-Birmingham needs 100% more capacity. Is the route overcrowded? Has it not been upgraded recently?

The thing is that it's not about *just* London to Birmingham, in the way that the M6 by-pass wasn't just about getting from one side of Birmingham to the other. Its the first step on a whole new line, and trains from Manchester / Leeds/ Glasgow etc will be able to use the new line to improve journey times.

The WCML is pretty much at capacity already, and there's little scope for longer trains (once the 390s get their extra couple of carriages) or more paths. Any disruption to improve the WCML would be massive (remember the years of weekend bustitution, Project Rio etc)

Would it cost £20,000 mil to [say] reopen the Somerset and Dorset, the Woodhead, the eastern Callander and Oban and finally build a Great Glen Railway? What about actual plans, like SELRAP or the Ripon line? I like the idea of HS2, it's just a question of whether it's really the best thing to do

I agree that HS2 shouldn't be the *only* improvement, and I think we still need to tackle existing bottlenecks (Welwyn, platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly, Reading Station etc). However, I can't see Callander to Oban or Colne to Skipton in the same light, sorry.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

would Crosscountry continue to provide through journeys?

Well, with fast HS2 services continuing north from Birmingham to Leeds/ Newcastle/ Edinburgh and to Manchester/ Carlisle/ Glasgow, you could argue that there's not going to be much "Cross Country" north of Birmingham.

You could integrate the current XC lines south of Birmingham into an expanded Greater Western franchise(?)

 

[LE Greys]

The thing is that it's not about *just* London to Birmingham, in the way that the M6 by-pass wasn't just about getting from one side of Birmingham to the other. Its the first step on a whole new line, and trains from Manchester / Leeds/ Glasgow etc will be able to use the new line to improve journey times.

The WCML is pretty much at capacity already, and there's little scope for longer trains (once the 390s get their extra couple of carriages) or more paths. Any disruption to improve the WCML would be massive (remember the years of weekend bustitution, Project Rio etc)

Project Rio, now that should still be running today, or as long as there are MML paths available. As for the extensions, during the first stages of construction, those destinations will still be dependent on the WCML. It might be a good idea to rebuild Stafford at some point before this, if the disruption can be kept to a minimum.

I agree that HS2 shouldn't be the *only* improvement, and I think we still need to tackle existing bottlenecks (Welwyn, platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly, Reading Station etc). However, I can't see Callander to Oban or Colne to Skipton in the same light, sorry.

I was pulling a bunch of examples out of thin air, and ignoring rebuilds. Welwyn, Manchester and Reading would provide a lot of benefit, even though it would cause a lot of short-term disruption. Definitely useful.

Well, with fast HS2 services continuing north from Birmingham to Leeds/ Newcastle/ Edinburgh and to Manchester/ Carlisle/ Glasgow, you could argue that there's not going to be much "Cross Country" north of Birmingham.

You could integrate the current XC lines south of Birmingham into an expanded Greater Western franchise(?)

I agree with that, and would add the former GWR suburban lines south of Birmingham. You would then have practically the entire GWR under one franchise, and two suburban operators in the West Midlands. This is another reason why I wanted to rebuild the GCR, providing an alternative route for XC between Reading and Sheffield. That would mean cutting out Birmingham for some services, but Birmingham has plenty of XC services anyway. Another proposal would be to expand Norwich-Liverpool to include the TPX services to Edinburgh and Glasgow. Not sure if there is capacity to run half-hourly from Norwich to Sheffield (GCR and Woodhead would help) but it's worth looking at surely. It might also be worth looking at making Cardiff-Birmingham and Birmingham-Stansted into one route.

 

[YesToHS2]

I think people are forgetting that HS2 isn't the only rail improvement going ahead. You have the electrification of the Manchester Liverpool line, if you want to talk further south you have the extensive works being carried out on the Great Western line, Crossrail is about to begin (creating a mere 10% capacity, essential nether the less) . And the government has ring fenced the budgets for many metro services to be upgraded.

HS2 rather than being expensive should give the operators of the WCML the kick up the arse they need in order to bring down prices. So even IF you can't afford to travel in HS2 a big IF you will have access much cheaper tickets on WCML services. I'm sorry £60 London return booked 2 months in advance isn't cheap.

Please, if you want to talk about alternatives read The case for HS2 or go to the Dft's website for all the case documents.