High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[digitaltoast]

And a 50% chance it will be under budget. Are you aware of what a p50 estimate is?

Yes, I'm aware that it's not the same as the "50% contingency" that YorkshireBear said. Which is the point I was making.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I'd LOVE to see where you got that figure from. Meanwhile, back in reality:

http://hs2.org.uk/about-hs2/facts-figures/route-trains-cost



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/260525/strategic-case.pdf (The Strategic Case for HS2):


I'm wondering if, (yet again), someone/you have (deliberately?) confused "P" with "percent"? Funny, as your signature says "The only way is the P-Way", not that I have any idea what that refers to.

"£42.6 billion, including £14.4 contingency" and "a 50% chance of delivering on budget" is not "50% contingency". Is it?

Just to clarify, and I think this is important people understand: The governments own optimistic white paper says there is a 50% chance it will go over the new revise budget.

14/28 *100 = 50. Done there is my figure.

P-Way is permanent way the term used to describe track generally. Google would have helped you there, it comes from my long work in the p-way department of a well known heritage railway.

I had not picked up on that 50% chance myself i will look it up.

 

[The Ham]

"£42.6 billion, including £14.4 contingency" and "a 50% chance of delivering on budget" is not "50% contingency". Is it?

In simple terms 50% has been added to the costings of the works as a contingency, this however looks like it is 1/3 of the budget once it has been added on.

Workings
£42.6bn less the £14.4bn contingency is £28.2bn
Therefore the costing for the project is £28.2bn
If you then increase this cost by 50% you end up with £42.3bn (to get to £42.6bn the increase is just over 51%).
Therefore the amount allowed for contingencies is 51% of the costings of the works.

However if you take the final figure of £42.6 and work out how much of that is the contingency you end up with 33.8%. Therefore the amount of contingencies is 33.8% of the allocated budget.

It therefore is very important that when people are talking about such things that they are clear about the terminology that they are using when they are having discussions about it.

 

[HowardGWR]

In simple terms 50% has been added to the costings of the works as a contingency, this however looks like it is 1/3 of the budget once it has been added on.

Workings
£42.6bn less the £14.4bn contingency is £28.2bn
Therefore the costing for the project is £28.2bn
If you then increase this cost by 50% you end up with £42.3bn (to get to £42.6bn the increase is just over 51%).
Therefore the amount allowed for contingencies is 51% of the costings of the works.

However if you take the final figure of £42.6 and work out how much of that is the contingency you end up with 33.8%. Therefore the amount of contingencies is 33.8% of the allocated budget.

It therefore is very important that when people are talking about such things that they are clear about the terminology that they are using when they are having discussions about it.

Good post but (not your fault) I find this discussion unilluminating because the last estimate is months ago now and nothing has changed in this respect. All the OP is continually saying (tediously) is that he thinks the costs will be higher based on other public projects.

Until we get more refined estimates that significantly alter the current estimate, I don't see there is a lot of fruit in further discussion. I'm bored anyway.

 

[edwin_m]

Good post but (not your fault) I find this discussion unilluminating because the last estimate is months ago now and nothing has changed in this respect. All the OP is continually saying (tediously) is that he thinks the costs will be higher based on other public projects.

Until we get more refined estimates that significantly alter the current estimate, I don't see there is a lot of fruit in further discussion. I'm bored anyway.

Would people prefer an estimate that didn't change or one that kept changing all the time?

Unless there's a major change of scope, the estimate is likely to stay put for some time until the project is developed further (well after the Bill is passed assuming this happens). Once detail design is under way the risks will be better understood and it should be possible to release contingency, at which point the estimate will go down as it did with Crossrail in 2010.

 

[jon0844]

I'm sure the plan is for people to get bored, so it can be assumed that those who don't want to add another 200 pages to this thread have simply admitted defeat.

 

[clc]

So unless you propose closing the WCML, you will have to both replace the Pendolinos and provide new stock for HS2. So the cost of rolling stock should be included.

A proportion/most of the cost should be included but perhaps not all of it on the basis that if HS2 doesn't happen we'll have to purchase and cram more Pendelinos onto the network than we will if HS2 does happen.

 

[NotATrainspott]

In general it seems the people who are complaining about the money don't compare the cost of HS2 against the alternatives in their criticism. The costs of strategic alternatives are also not as well fleshed out or have the same extreme level of contigency so it's even more ridiculous to compare the costs in a simplistic way.

Likewise they seem to believe that this amount of money is in any way large for a 20-year project, or do not appreciate the difference between capital and current spending (think of all the HS2 money that could be spent on the NHS! - it's a rounding error [2.5bn p.a.] in the NHS budget [~113bn p.a. for GB]). When people see a number like the whole HS2 budget they think it's enough to buy the whole world twice over, even though Apple Inc's profits over two years could pay for the whole scheme in its entirety plus an extension to Newcastle.

 

[edwin_m]

Did I see £17 billion quoted for a third runway at Heathrow? HS2 could be built most of the way to Birmingham for that sort of money.

 

[tbtc]

Did I see £17 billion quoted for a third runway at Heathrow? HS2 could be built most of the way to Birmingham for that sort of money.

Ah, but Airports are different.

Having watched the BBC News feature about it, they didn't have anyone point out that...

• technology advances may mean we don't need to fly in huge numbers in twenty years time
• figures used to predict airport demand in twenty years time are just estimates and may not be 100% accurate
• there is still some spare capacity at at least one "London" airport in 2013

(etc etc - just applying the same arguments that get applied to HS2)

...yet there was a feature bashing HS2 on The One Show earlier that gave a very slanted view of the documents available for public consumption ("we can't read three million pages in just eight weeks" etc) without much in the way of explanation for why we need HS2.

 

[edwin_m]

Ah, but Airports are different.

Having watched the BBC News feature about it, they didn't have anyone point out that...

• technology advances may mean we don't need to fly in huge numbers in twenty years time
• figures used to predict airport demand in twenty years time are just estimates and may not be 100% accurate
• there is still some spare capacity at at least one "London" airport in 2013

(etc etc - just applying the same arguments that get applied to HS2)

...yet there was a feature bashing HS2 on The One Show earlier that gave a very slanted view of the documents available for public consumption ("we can't read three million pages in just eight weeks" etc) without much in the way of explanation for why we need HS2.

You forgot "cost estimates for airports are bound to overrun by at least 100%".

 

[tbtc]

You forgot "cost estimates for airports are bound to overrun by at least 100%".

Are you suggesting that there's a chance that any airport construction may be delayed and go over budget?

I thought that these kind of problems only affected rail projects?

 

[pablo]

I see on another forum the suggestion that HS2 will cost £6,600 per inch (based on 192 miles - don't know where that distance comes from).
My estimate is circa £2,400 an inch based on 335 miles and £50 billion. Still a staggering rate.

What do you make it?

 

[gordonthemoron]

Are you suggesting that there's a chance that any airport construction may be delayed and go over budget?

I thought that these kind of problems only affected rail projects?

I give you Berlin Brandenburg International, snigger,

 

[Deerfold]

I see on another forum the suggestion that HS2 will cost £6,600 per inch (based on 192 miles - don't know where that distance comes from).
My estimate is circa £2,400 an inch based on 335 miles and £50 billion. Still a staggering rate.

What do you make it?

The only e-mails I've had quoting a price per inch weren't about HS2 (and went straight to my spam folder).

 

[AndyLandy]

A proportion/most of the cost should be included but perhaps not all of it on the basis that if HS2 doesn't happen we'll have to purchase and cram more Pendelinos onto the network than we will if HS2 does happen.

Conversely, if HS2 does happen, there's a pretty high chance that the Pendolinos will be replaced with much cheaper Class 350-esque trains.

 

[jones_bangor]

Conversely, if HS2 does happen, there's a pretty high chance that the Pendolinos will be replaced with much cheaper Class 350-esque trains.

That will be the fate for WCML south of Birmingham - semi-fast commuter route for Coventry, Rugby, Northants etc...

 

[quantinghome]

That will be the fate for WCML south of Birmingham - semi-fast commuter route for Coventry, Rugby, Northants etc...

Precisely. This is one of the reasons for HS2 in the first place. The WCML doesn't have capacity to provide enough semi-fast and commuter services. By removing the high speed services there will be plenty of room for these.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The cost isn't included because the trains will need replacing at a similar time whether we build HS2 or not. The replacement cost for the Pendolini will be very high and very possibly higher than buying HS stock simply because they are both highly complicated - i.e. tilting rather than just going faster - and completely unique in the world.

Eh? Most of the Pendolinos will be just over 20 years old when HS2 phase 1 is complete (if it's on schedule). And the four additional ones built afterwards will be about 15 years old. Rolling stock usually lasts longer than that before being replaced doesn't it?

 

[AndyLandy]

Eh? Most of the Pendolinos will be just over 20 years old when HS2 phase 1 is complete (if it's on schedule). And the four additional ones built afterwards will be about 15 years old. Rolling stock usually lasts longer than that before being replaced doesn't it?

There are a number of options for the Pendolinos, post HS2. Whether that's cascading them elsewhere on the network, retiring them early, or even using them as regional express trains on the WCML.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Eh? Most of the Pendolinos will be just over 20 years old when HS2 phase 1 is complete (if it's on schedule). And the four additional ones built afterwards will be about 15 years old. Rolling stock usually lasts longer than that before being replaced doesn't it?

I wouldn't ever suggest that they would be scrapped but by then they will be full to capacity and new rolling stock would be required, whether the Pendolino fleet were cascaded away or simply augmented.

In any case the rolling stock cost includes effectively the cost of three mainlines' worth of intercity trains since it's overall for both stages. If they are financed by a ROSCO then the cost of these won't be upfront.

Just a thought, but is there any real difference in acceleration between intercity and commuter AC EMUs? If not, you could use the fleet to run most of the semi-fast services which could then continue up further north than they do at the moment.

 

[edwin_m]

Commuter EMUs may even have better acceleration as they tend to have more axles motored, and that is what affects acceleration at the lower speeds. However I would guess there is still a role for Pendolinos particularly at the northern end of the WCML where the maximum speed and the tilt gear makes a big difference to journey times.

 

[mr_jrt]

Commuter EMUs may even have better acceleration as they tend to have more axles motored, and that is what affects acceleration at the lower speeds. However I would guess there is still a role for Pendolinos particularly at the northern end of the WCML where the maximum speed and the tilt gear makes a big difference to journey times.

Quite.

Until the entire route to Scotland comes online then not being able to tilt north of Birmingham is going to keep the Pendolinos useful. Once that happens, if they have much useful life left then there are plenty of uses for them on other windy main lines that should probably all be wired up by then as well.

 

[AndyLandy]

However I would guess there is still a role for Pendolinos particularly at the northern end of the WCML where the maximum speed and the tilt gear makes a big difference to journey times.

Well, quite. I can easily see them remaining on Birmingham-Crewe-Scotland services, and they could probably run the Manchester-Scotland services, too.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Precisely. This is one of the reasons for HS2 in the first place. The WCML doesn't have capacity to provide enough semi-fast and commuter services. By removing the high speed services there will be plenty of room for these.

Apart from all the expresses from Coventry/Stoke/Macclesfield/Chester etc.

HS2 removes 1 path per hour (the xx.07 to Liverpool).

 

[matt]

Apart from Coventry wouldn't the other services join HS2 around Lichfield?

 

[AndyLandy]

Apart from all the expresses from Coventry/Stoke/Macclesfield/Chester etc.

HS2 removes 1 path per hour (the xx.07 to Liverpool).

I've thought about this since you last mentioned it. I don't think it's nearly as bad as that.

If Stoke and Macclesfield warrant an Intercity service, they'll get CC services on HS2. Otherwise they'll get a 110mph semi-fast service on the WCML.

Chester should see electrification before HS2 is complete, at which point the same logic as above applies. If not, then it's only 1tph.

Coventry is the only real loser here, but 2tph 110mph semi-fast to London as well as the option of going up to Birmingham to change for HS2 mean it's not exactly suffering that badly.

 

[Philip Elliott]

I've thought about this since you last mentioned it. I don't think it's nearly as bad as that.

If Stoke and Macclesfield warrant an Intercity service, they'll get CC services on HS2. Otherwise they'll get a 110mph semi-fast service on the WCML.

Chester should see electrification before HS2 is complete, at which point the same logic as above applies. If not, then it's only 1tph.

Coventry is the only real loser here, but 2tph 110mph semi-fast to London as well as the option of going up to Birmingham to change for HS2 mean it's not exactly suffering that badly.

There just aren't the paths on HS2 to allow this to say nothing of the fact that HS2 won't provide the fast links to MK etc. (a major growth area for employment)

Scotrail currently provide 4x 6-car services per hour between Edinburgh and Glasgow on the 'E&G'. They could provide 2x 12-car.

Merseyrail runs 4x 3-car services to Chester. They could run 2x 6-car.

In both cases why do they run more frequent but shorter trains? Because they stimulate demand. You suggest that the 11th largest city in the UK should get a paltry 2tph semi-fast with no real first class service. For £30bn.

Bargain of the century.....

 

[AndyLandy]

Bargain of the century.....

Out of curiosity, what solution to the capacity issues on the WCML would you favour? I gather you're not exactly enthused over the perceived "benefits" of HS2, but do you see it as a best-of-a-bad-bunch, or is there an approach you'd far rather see happen?

 

[edwin_m]

The latest assumptions on HS2 released capacity service patterns are contained in the "PFM V4.3 Assumptions Report" downloadable from:

http://hs2.org.uk/news-resources/economic-documents

The phase 2 WCML released capacity service pattern is summarised in figure 4.3. While this is obviously only for business case and not the final timetable, it does show Stoke retaining an hourly London train calling only at Milton Keynes. This train runs via Manchester to Scotland so would probably be a Pendolino or similar. Coventry has two "long distance" London services per hour.

Unfortunately no information is given on speed or running time but I would guess that this means there are at least some 125mph paths remaining on the WCML. If this is so they would logically be grouped into "flights" every 30min to maximise the availability of the fast lines for 110mph trains in between.