High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[edwin_m]

Well, with respect, in your last summarising paragraph you agree with me that these data are required before anyone tries to say that the location of Toton is faulty or otherwise. That was my point.

The data and the business case process exists to test options, not to generate them. Any study worth its salt begins with some consultation and deep thinking about what options might be worth looking at. Ususally the preliminary sift of options is done qualitatively and only the front runners undergo the complex and expensive process of testing against demand models. So it is not sensible to say that only people with access to the data can participate in the discussion.

For Toton the process is documented quite well on the HS2/DfT websites, but unfortunately this information is quite hard to find (and has probably moved since I studied it back in January so even if I had a link it would be of little use).

I should say here for the record I have been very careful not to say that Toton is the wrong place for an East Midlands HS2 station. What I actually believe is that it is probably the best option compatible with the constraints of local geography and the design parameters for high speed infrastructure. However I have my doubts about whether it will be as beneficial for the region as some people seem to think. These are of course only my opinions, based on 20 years experience of railway consultancy and 25 years living in Nottingham, which you are entirely free to criticise constructively.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Surely public transport networks would shift to give Toton greater prominence as it siphons off traffic from the city centre stations, hopefully preventing the massive modal shift many here seem to fear?

But the question is how much traffic is likely to transfer from city centre stations to Toton? As things stand I think the estimates are rather optimistic.

 

[HSTEd]

But the question is how much traffic is likely to transfer from city centre stations to Toton? As things stand I think the estimates are rather optimistic.

That depends, if the journey time is as short as it appears it will be, you will see significant transfer from the west side of Nottingham, and you probably see new development around the site of the station as it then becomes reasonably close to London.

In the short term, perhaps not, but the access point being at Toton could very easily cause a significant shift of the "centre" of Nottingham and even Derby, towards it.

Essentially Nottingham and Derby become... Nottingby!
Over 30 years or more I mean.

Of-course if you offered combined NET/HS2 tickets you could just eliminate the Nottingham "fasts" and add a second "semi-fast" in its place, all of them using some new EMUs running all EMT stations to St Pancras.

 

[edwin_m]

Of-course if you offered combined NET/HS2 tickets you could just eliminate the Nottingham "fasts" and add a second "semi-fast" in its place, all of them using some new EMUs running all EMT stations to St Pancras.

No you couldn't. Assuming it is extended NET will have (I think) 15 stops between the city centre and Toton so a centre-to-centre London journey via HS2 would be completely uncompetitive. A non-stop coach service on the A52 would be quicker than the tram ... except in peak hours.

What it really needs is a Nottingham-Toton-Derby train service timed for quick but reliable connections with HS2 stopping trains in both directions. This will be a tall order since the HS2 timetable probably won't be planned with connections in mind, and the linking train will probably have to be a re-routed existing service as HS2 passengers won't provide enough patronage for a dedicated service.

Nottingham city council seems to be thinking along these lines whereas Derby wants the line re-routed. Admittedly it is technically very much less difficult to go through Derby than through Nottingham, but Derby Midland station is also a fairly poor location for access to the wider region.

 

[YorkshireBear]

No you couldn't. Assuming it is extended NET will have (I think) 15 stops between the city centre and Toton so a centre-to-centre London journey via HS2 would be completely uncompetitive. A non-stop coach service on the A52 would be quicker than the tram ... except in peak hours.

What it really needs is a Nottingham-Toton-Derby train service timed for quick but reliable connections with HS2 stopping trains in both directions. This will be a tall order since the HS2 timetable probably won't be planned with connections in mind, and the linking train will probably have to be a re-routed existing service as HS2 passengers won't provide enough patronage for a dedicated service.

Nottingham city council seems to be thinking along these lines whereas Derby wants the line re-routed. Admittedly it is technically very much less difficult to go through Derby than through Nottingham, but Derby Midland station is also a fairly poor location for access to the wider region.

Exactly, it looks as if the Nottingham Matlock is to be diverted. They are building conventional rail platforms and i see no reason that a dedicated service could not run as it would also provide a fast Nottingham Derby service with no stops between the two other than HS2 IMHO this would generate enough traffic.

 

[brianthegiant]

Another patch & mend alternative to HS2:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/10/hs2-rail-service-alternative-paddington

"HS2 will not deliver a better rail service. Here is a radical alternative
Making Paddington the focus of services from the West Midlands would save billions and provide a better infrastructure"
blah
The alternative, which I firmly believe destroys the rationale for HS2, is to make Paddington the new London terminus for fast services to the West Midlands – making use of the terminal's extra capacity, which will be freed up by the opening of Crossrail in 2018, and upgrading the route from Old Oak Common (just west of Paddington) to Birmingham via Banbury and Leamington Spa. One section of this route – from Old Oak Common to its junction, with the line from Marylebone at West Ruislip – currently has a service of just one train a day: no capacity issues there.

This was one of the main routes to Birmingham until electrification of the line to Euston was completed in 1967, when it was relegated to the role of a secondary route. But it has recently been significantly upgraded by its current franchised operator, Chiltern Railways. Potential capacity issues can be solved by reinstating fast through lines at stations that once had them – Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield, High Wycombe, Bicester North – and diverting north-south freight trains – currently using this route north of Banbury – on to the soon-to-be-reopened east-west route from Oxford to Bletchley, where they could join the west coast mainline, or to Bedford, for the Midland main line. "

 

[YorkshireBear]

Another patch & mend alternative to HS2:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/10/hs2-rail-service-alternative-paddington

"HS2 will not deliver a better rail service. Here is a radical alternative
Making Paddington the focus of services from the West Midlands would save billions and provide a better infrastructure"
blah
The alternative, which I firmly believe destroys the rationale for HS2, is to make Paddington the new London terminus for fast services to the West Midlands – making use of the terminal's extra capacity, which will be freed up by the opening of Crossrail in 2018, and upgrading the route from Old Oak Common (just west of Paddington) to Birmingham via Banbury and Leamington Spa. One section of this route – from Old Oak Common to its junction, with the line from Marylebone at West Ruislip – currently has a service of just one train a day: no capacity issues there.

This was one of the main routes to Birmingham until electrification of the line to Euston was completed in 1967, when it was relegated to the role of a secondary route. But it has recently been significantly upgraded by its current franchised operator, Chiltern Railways. Potential capacity issues can be solved by reinstating fast through lines at stations that once had them – Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield, High Wycombe, Bicester North – and diverting north-south freight trains – currently using this route north of Banbury – on to the soon-to-be-reopened east-west route from Oxford to Bletchley, where they could join the west coast mainline, or to Bedford, for the Midland main line. "

That alternative is laughable.

 

[pablo]

You've got to admit that re-instating the Chiltern line for an HS Padd-Bham shuttle service and sending anything longer than 300m from OOC into Waterloo International, as an interim solution, would test the business case for HS2 and reduce the speculative calculations.
Would save Camden and Euston masive disruption for a while and might provide a pause to see whether a Grand Central east-west through station is a realistic possibility.
Since HS2's scheme doesn't start to deliver any benefit for more than ten years, this incremental approach delivers sooner and would prove or disprove the need for HS2?

 

[YorkshireBear]

You've got to admit that re-instating the Chiltern line for an HS Padd-Bham shuttle service and sending anything longer than 300m from OOC into Waterloo International, as an interim solution, would test the business case for HS2 and reduce the speculative calculations.
Would save Camden and Euston masive disruption for a while and might provide a pause to see whether a Grand Central east-west through station is a realistic possibility.
Since HS2's scheme doesn't start to deliver any benefit for more than ten years, this incremental approach delivers sooner and would prove or disprove the need for HS2?

I don't think it would as it would disrupt the Chiltern main line to get it up to scratch to compete with WCML in any way. Also it would be way slower so the business case is weaker (although HS2 is not all about speed it does provide benefits)

 

[joeykins82]

It's nonsense. It'd presumably require the grade separation of the junctions Old Oak Common West and/or West Ealing, double tracking of the sections between the GWML and South Ruislip, the reinstatement of all of the passing loops along the CML (many of which couldn't easily be reinstated as the platforms were realigned to improve the speed of Chiltern's services during the Evergreen 3 upgrade), grade separation west of Leamington Spa station where the Solihull and Coventry lines diverge, full double tracking of the Leamington-Coventry line, grade separation at Coventry "somehow" (good luck with that one). Oh, and obviously the full electrification of the line. As with the "patch and make do" proposals for the WCML it'll deliver only some of the benefits that HS2 would for a similar price tag but with massive amounts of disruption during the required works.

 

[Martin222002]

It's nonsense. It'd presumably require the grade separation of the junctions Old Oak Common West and/or West Ealing, double tracking of the sections between the GWML and South Ruislip, the reinstatement of all of the passing loops along the CML (many of which couldn't easily be reinstated as the platforms were realigned to improve the speed of Chiltern's services during the Evergreen 3 upgrade), grade separation west of Leamington Spa station where the Solihull and Coventry lines diverge, full double tracking of the Leamington-Coventry line, grade separation at Coventry "somehow" (good luck with that one). Oh, and obviously the full electrification of the line. As with the "patch and make do" proposals for the WCML it'll deliver only some of the benefits that HS2 would for a similar price tag but with massive amounts of disruption during the required works.

Add to that TASS for the Chiltern route to make the journey times at least near what they are now on the WCML. All sounds very expensive, and very disruptive. Oh and would improve capacity for freight or the MML and ECML.

 

[tbtc]

I can see the appeal to someone starting with the position that Paddington will have a few spare platforms in a few years time (depending on how many services an hour are diverted into the Crossrail tunnels), but... the rest of the argument goes downhill fast.

Where's the spare capacity in the West Midlands for such a plan, for a start?

 

[Kettledrum]

I can see the appeal to someone starting with the position that Paddington will have a few spare platforms in a few years time (depending on how many services an hour are diverted into the Crossrail tunnels), but... the rest of the argument goes downhill fast.

Where's the spare capacity in the West Midlands for such a plan, for a start?

There's probably spare capacity at Birmingham Moor Street and the line from Solihull to Moor street used to be 4 track and would possibly have space to revert to 4 track, but this argument is clutching at straws.

 

[trainplan1]

I can see the appeal to someone starting with the position that Paddington will have a few spare platforms in a few years time (depending on how many services an hour are diverted into the Crossrail tunnels), but... the rest of the argument goes downhill fast.

Where's the spare capacity in the West Midlands for such a plan, for a start?

I agree about Paddington. It could knock a considerable amount off the funding if tunneling through to Euston was taken off and possibly reduce the need for OOC station? I think most casual travellers wouldn't be bothered by going from Paddington instead of Euston. Problem is, would there be enough space for both GWML and HS2 once it's all open. If there was or a plan to increase to required capacity was made then I could see the merits of that.

The rest definitely doesn't stack up.

 

[tbtc]

I agree about Paddington. It could knock a considerable amount off the funding if tunneling through to Euston was taken off and possibly reduce the need for OOC station? I think most casual travellers wouldn't be bothered by going from Paddington instead of Euston

Whilst I'm broadly in favour of HS2 (in favour of the concept, less keen on some aspects), the "London terminus" part is a bit of a weakness - Euston would require a lot of demolition and isn't on Thameslink/ Crossrail/ HS1.

Like you suggest, I'm not too bothered where it is in Zone 1 (between Euston/ Paddington). But this is just tinkering at the margins, really - it doesn't affect the need for a new line from London to the Midlands/North (and the benefits of having that line capable of running fast trains).

 

[gordonthemoron]

however Euston is only a 5/10 min walk from St Pancras and connecting HS2 to HS1 wouldn't be too difficult. However, my main problem with Euston is the concourse is too small and congested

 

[pablo]

however Euston is only a 5/10 min walk from St Pancras and connecting HS2 to HS1 wouldn't be too difficult. However, my main problem with Euston is the concourse is too small and congested

How often do we have to de-bunk this myth?

It takes me a full 15 minutes to walk platform to platform, which is what matters, and that's without luggage and moving faster than most.

 

[jon0844]

There are many things that can delay your walk between the two stations, so I'd certainly not want to recommend a transfer as being as little as 5/10 minutes - especially if you're talking about connecting two long distance services where luggage is more likely.

Going from Euston, it can sometimes be worth walking via the bus stop and seeing if a bus is there.. you'll then be quicker on the bus than walking, but not always by much (traffic dependent/time of day, obviously).

I'd say 15 minutes is the bare minimum too.

Now, King's Cross to St Pancras might well be 5 minutes, but even then - realistically - whether you use the subway or cross overground, chances are from platform to platform you'd be better off saying ten minutes.

 

[JamesRowden]

There are many things that can delay your walk between the two stations, so I'd certainly not want to recommend a transfer as being as little as 5/10 minutes - especially if you're talking about connecting two long distance services where luggage is more likely.

Going from Euston, it can sometimes be worth walking via the bus stop and seeing if a bus is there.. you'll then be quicker on the bus than walking, but not always by much (traffic dependent/time of day, obviously).

I'd say 15 minutes is the bare minimum too.

Now, King's Cross to St Pancras might well be 5 minutes, but even then - realistically - whether you use the subway or cross overground, chances are from platform to platform you'd be better off saying ten minutes.

From looking at the TfL website it seems although the frequency of Underground services between Paddington to Kings Cross St Pancras are going to be double (,so travelling between Paddington and St Pancras might be more convinient than travelling between Euston and St Pancras unless a new connection is built).

According to the TfL website, in 2018 the capacity on the Hamersmith and City Line and the Circle Line will increase by '65 %' due to modern signalling. I think that this means that there will be 5 trains (including Metropolitan) per 10 minutes between Baker Street and Liverpool Street rather than the present 3 trains. The District Line capacity is to increase by '24 %.' It looks to me like this extra capacity will be in the form of the Hammersmith and City Line and the Circle Line each increaseing frequency from a train every 10 minutes to a train every 5 minutes.

 

[joeykins82]

If memory serves the "65% increase in capacity" figure is based on the capacity increase on the Hammersmith to Edgware Road section by extending the circle line, then lengthening the trains and the further increase in service frequencies.

 

[transmanche]

From looking at the TfL website it seems although the frequency of Underground services between Paddington to Kings Cross St Pancras are going to be double (,so travelling between Paddington and St Pancras might be more convinient than travelling between Euston and St Pancras unless a new connection is built).

If Crossrail 2 happens, there's planned to be a 'Euston St Pancras' station - which will connect to Euston, St Pancras (and King's Cross).

Perhaps it'll include a high-speed travelator (like the one on the Paris Metro) to get between the stations. (In fact, such a travelator between Euston & King's Cross was suggested ten years ago!)

[youtube]pBJN1X3LeJw[/youtube]

 

[HSTEd]

How often do we have to de-bunk this myth?

It takes me a full 15 minutes to walk platform to platform, which is what matters, and that's without luggage and moving faster than most.

I've done Euston to KGX in nine minutes more than once.
Although my legs were rather.... stiff after that and I am merely 23.

Also I was in the front vehicle at Euston and got onto rearmost passenger vehicle at King's Cross (first class to first class).

 

[Philip Elliott]

The guy seems to be suggesting either Rail Package 3 or 4 which consists of:

1. Rail Package 2 enhancements (grade separation at Colwich, grade separation Ledburn, 2 additional Euston platforms, 4 track Attleborough - M69 bridge, Stafford bypass, 4 track Stechford - Beechwood)

2. New north main line (old oak to ruislip) re-doubled and electrified for 125mph

3. 4-track Ruislip to Seer Green

4. New railway Seer Green to Princes Risborough including 3-mile tunnel

5. Aynho Jn untouched

6. Banbury bypass for 125mph non stop trains

7. Full electrification from Marylebone to Moor Street

8. 16 paths per hour out of Euston for Trent Valley and Northamton services

9. 4tph Paddington to New Street via Kenilworth calling at Cov & Int'l with broadly the same journey times as now (no need for Tilt)

10. 2tph Marylebone - Moor Street 125mph electric service

11. RP4 adds a new railway from Harbury (east of Leamington) to Berkswell with a 'Coventry South' station giving a London to Birmingham (non stop) time of 61 minutes.

The benefits are plentiful - faster journey times from Leamington, Banbury and other Chiltern stations on top of the London - Birmingham reduction. The Birmingham services will be more frequent than HS2 aswell as allowing higher frequencies on the wcml for Northampton, Manchester etc. 4-tracking to Beechwood will add large amounts of capacity on the Coventry corridor which HS2 fails to do. More Northampton trains on the fasts allows room for freight on the slows.

 

[HSTEd]

so you have 16 trains per hour for Trent Valley and 6 trains per hour for Birmingham?

How does this compare with the 34 Pendolinos per hour of additional capacity provided by HS2?


And this is before we consider that capacity on Chiltern might be better used for other things, perhaps we could do with more trains to Stratford upon Avon or whatnot for the tourist traffic?

 

[RichmondCommu]

Exactly, it looks as if the Nottingham Matlock is to be diverted. They are building conventional rail platforms and i see no reason that a dedicated service could not run as it would also provide a fast Nottingham Derby service with no stops between the two other than HS2 IMHO this would generate enough traffic.

However you then have a reduced service for Beeston and Long Eaton. Given how busy the line is between Sheet Stores Junction and Derby I'm not sure that there is room for any more services.

 

[Philip Elliott]

so you have 16 trains per hour for Trent Valley and 6 trains per hour for Birmingham?

How does this compare with the 34 Pendolinos per hour of additional capacity provided by HS2?


And this is before we consider that capacity on Chiltern might be better used for other things, perhaps we could do with more trains to Stratford upon Avon or whatnot for the tourist traffic?

That additional capacity is provided by building additional tracks. In no way would we spend billions just to run more trains to Stratford.

HS2 provides capacity where it isn't needed. We are never going to need 3,300 seats per hour to Manchester.

 

[transmanche]

We are never going to need 3,300 seats per hour to Manchester.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." said the chairman of IBM in 1943...

 

[HSTEd]

That additional capacity is provided by building additional tracks. In no way would we spend billions just to run more trains to Stratford.

If we are building lots of additional track, why not do it along a greenfield alignment where it can be done in the most efficient manner possible without requiring expensive qualifications ofr any and all staff members or having to worry about causing disruption?

HS2 provides capacity where it isn't needed. We are never going to need 3,300 seats per hour to Manchester.

We can probably generate far more capacity than that, and I would question why we would never need that much?
HS2 puts Manchester Airport about an hour from London and Birmingham International even closer than that.

Tatton joins the commuter belt for well heeled city types, and we could expect explosive Metroland style development east of Birmingham.
With the reduced costs per seat.km of HS2 we could easily see explosive growth in demand.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Tatton joins the commuter belt for well heeled city types, and we could expect explosive Metroland style development east of Birmingham.
With the reduced costs per seat.km of HS2 we could easily see explosive growth in demand.

Given that those working in the City and Canary Wharf are generally at their desks by 07.00 that's one heck of an early start! Can't see it myself.

 

[HSTEd]

Given that those working in the City and Canary Wharf are generally at their desks by 07.00 that's one heck of an early start! Can't see it myself.

There are well heeled people who don't work in the City/Canary Wharf in London you know.
And we could run a train at ~5AM if you wanted....