• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,664
Not pointless at all... were all having fun arnt we :)

Plus i have a 6000 word essay on it so regardles of hybrid bill i need to know about it....
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,609
Latest proposal is for the 332s to go the Airedale line (they're longer than the 333s, but the platforms at Shipley aren't long enough for double sets on Leeds-Skipton runs), and for 333s to then be used on other local services, currently expected to be Leeds-Sheffield (both via Moothorpe & Barnsley) and the Harrogate line.

part of the TPE wiring is now considering Ravensthorpe-Wakefield Kirkgate-Leeds, as it's an often used diversionary route. Last diagram I saw said that, if that's done as TPE, Kirkgate-Barnsley-Meadowhall-Sheffield will be done as part of MML, as otherwise DMUs would be running under the wires halfway, and it allows EMT services ex STP to continue to Barnsley, instead of reversing at Sheffield.

Do you have sources for either of these?
 

Padav

Member
Joined
28 Nov 2010
Messages
67
@nerd

Many thanks for this information, which relates specifically to Hybrid and Private Members Bills

Of course, for the Hybrid Bill to transfer in this manner a motion must be brought forward and carried.

Given the highly politicised nature of HS2, that outcome is by no means certain.

I remain convinced that the core strategy of anti-groups is to frustrate the Hybrid Bill's progress to completion during the term of this Parliament.

Yes, there is a large degree of consensus support across normal party boundaries in this field but this agreement applies to the broad principle of High Speed Rail rather than the specifics of HS2. We know for example that Labour now support a different route (ironically it's the route formerly advocated by the Conservatives when they were in opposition so the two main parties have swapped sides!) to the currently approved ROUTE3 option.

If the Hybrid Bill fails to achieve Royal Assent, I can see a new Labour administration going back to the drawing board, which is precisely what the anti-HS2 campaign groups located in the narrow Route3 corridor want. All they are interested in is moving the route somewhere else - of course their tactics are disingenuous on this front - they pretend that they are against the idea of High Speed Rail per se but if a new high speed rail policy came forward from a new administration and the planned route was somewhere else, nowhere near them, you'd hear precisely zero from groups such as STOPHS2, HS2AA et al, once the huge party had finished to celebrate their campaign's success!
 
Last edited:

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,051
Location
Reston City Centre
Well there have to be two for potential International services, then I just proposed 6 services to London per hour and 2tph of some sort of high speed all stations service on "HSXC".
Running 8tph each direction out of 4 platforms sounds a little hairy to me..

So Newcastle would have six trains an hour to London (presumably 400 metre length) *and* several International services?
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,281
So Newcastle would have six trains an hour to London (presumably 400 metre length) *and* several International services?

No, it would have those six trains to London and Glasgow and maybe some international services, just that since international platforms have to be secured they only practical way to manage them is to have them be seperate from the other platforms. Can you imagnie the outcry if you built a new station without international securable platforms and then it turned out someone wanted to run international services through it?
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
3,267
Location
Isle of Wight
If the Hybrid Bill fails to achieve Royal Assent, I can see a new Labour administration going back to the drawing board, which is precisely what the anti-HS2 campaign groups located in the narrow Route3 corridor want.

I really don't think that's going to happen - if anyone was going to force major changes to the route it would've been the Conservatives. Ultimately Labour are playing the same game of politics in opposition that the Tories did but the reality remains the current route is the only game in town.

Perhaps im being a little optimistic, but if anything controversy about the first phase could actually die down as attention moves to the route of the second phase. Im sure Labour will prefer arguing about how the line serves Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds than its affect on the Chilterns.

Chris
 

chris eaglen

Member
Joined
14 May 2011
Messages
8
The Judicial Reviews are not a side show. The Hybrid Bill may become unacceptable as the method of obtaining enabling powers based on Route 3 as it currently exists.

The Rail UK forum members could possibly have created a much more valuable rail route than route 3 and wider in delivery than HS2 passenger intercity services only for England and Scotland as part of longer term developments.

Worthwhile reading the Right Line book on the iterative determination of the CTRL HS1 route through Kent. The hybrid bill process follows the technical route determination and scoping phase.

HS2 Limited were unwise to park other routes.

Perhaps a consultation with Rail UK Forum members in 2009 and 2010 could have provided wise advice on the scope and rail route options.

HS2 Limited could adjourn the route 3 process to re-examine the alternative routes with different benefit profiles for upto 4 tracks and wider range of services.
 

nerd

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
524
My take on this is that a vast bulk of speculation is being built on one particular remark. It would seem that McLoughlin was asked a question about whether there might be implications for HS2 arising from the Davies review of airport capacity in the South East, and responded that, "“I hope if anything needs to be adapted we will have time to do it,”

The Torygraph is interpeting this as an offer to consider ditching the current planned Phase 1 route altogether. Which I don't think is the case.

But it does appear that McLoughlin's SPADs are willing to suggest that a Heathrow-wards diversion might happen if Heathrow R3 were to be approved. They may, or may not, reflect an ambivalence in their master.

As I understand it, the HR3 proposals in themselves could not possibly justify a diversion of HS2, as Heathrow business takes up so little of the current modelled demand. The last lot of Ministers (against the strongly expressed advice of HS2 ltd) enforced a Heathow spur line, but all the demand modelliong suggests that three-quarters of those using the spur would simply switch onto Crossrail at Heathrow, and ride on into the smoke.

But it could explain why elements in DfT may be trying to bounce Mclouglin into an early announcement on HS2 - to stop him re-opening too may carefully closed drawers.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9576183/HS2-rail-line-could-be-re-routed-to-Heathrow.html


Patrick McLoughlin, the new Transport Secretary, has signalled that he could reroute the new high-speed train line towards Heathrow if the aviation inquiry recommends developing the west London airport.

Such a move would represent a dramatic U-turn for the Government and be hailed as a triumph for campaigners seeking to protect part of the Chilterns, an area of outstanding natural beauty, included in the route. There has been heavy opposition to the proposed route for HS2, between London and the North, since it was unveiled by Justine Greening, Mr McLoughlin’s predecessor, in January.

Despite criticism from a host of Conservative MPs, including David Lidington, the Europe Minister, and Cheryl Gillan, the former Welsh Secretary, the Government has until now remained wedded to a route taking HS2 through the wooded vales of Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire.

Only last month officials working on HS2 told The Sunday Telegraph: “The route that was agreed by the Transport Secretary in January is the one that we believe gives the best balance between cost, benefits and sustainability.” However, Mr McLouglin has now said that HS2 may have to be “adapted” depending on what Sir Howard Davies, the economist leading the Government’s airport commission, says about Heathrow. “I hope if anything needs to be adapted we will have time to do it,” he said.

Last night aides acting for the Transport Secretary stressed they would not “prejudge” the findings of the Davies Commission. However, they made clear that HS2’s route could be redirected towards Heathrow if the economist recommended expanding the airport.

Although support for developing Heathrow has grown at Westminster in recent months, the Davies Commission will consider a number of alternatives, including a new airport in the Thames estuary, a project dubbed “Boris Island” because it has the backing of Boris Johnson, the London Mayor.

If the HS2 line is rerouted towards Heathrow, it will probably go to the west of the Chilterns. Mr McLoughlin’s words offer hope to thousands of homeowners along the proposed route, many of whom have already seen the value of their homes fall by as much as 40 per cent since the route was announced.

Estate agents say many properties along the line are not selling at any price even though work on the London to Birmingham stretch is not set to begin until 2018.

The Davies Commission is not expected to report until 2015. Such a late change to HS2’s route would put officials in charge of the project under great pressure and almost certainly delay the scheme.

The directors of HS2 Ltd, the quango set up to deliver the scheme, have admitted they are finding the timetable set by ministers “very challenging”. Officials are struggling to inspect the land and complete all the design work in time to lay the hybrid Bill before Parliament next year.

The most recent boardroom minutes of HS2 Ltd stated: “It was agreed that the time-frame [to deliver the hybrid Bill] was very challenging and that the board agenda will be set so as to allow progress to be monitored closely.”

Mr McLoughlin did not make clear how much of HS2’s route could be “adapted”. The architect of Britain’s only other high-speed rail network last month said that HS2 should run via Heathrow and in a corridor close to the M40 motorway.

Mark Bostock, who developed the Channel Tunnel rail link between Dover and London, said this alternative path would reduce damage to the environment.

It would also be more sensible to connect HS2 to Heathrow airport, he said.

However, HS2 recently said: “An M40 route would cost £3billion more and affect more population centres, including Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield, High Wycombe and Princes Risborough, which have a combined population in excess of 110,000 people.”

A possible change in the route is the latest headache for directors of HS2. In December a High Court judge will consider applications by five groups to force the ministers to rerun their initial public consultation.

If the judicial review goes against the Government, the project could be delayed by as much as two years.

Civil servants have advertised for private contractors to oversee new consultations after more than 11,000 submissions to the initial exercise last year went astray.

One of the tender documents states that the new contract — worth up to £6million — is to run a “range of different consultations” but admits that the “precise forward programme of consultations is not known at this stage”.

A senior official at the Department for Transport stressed that the Government still hoped to win the judicial review and that it felt it had a “robust” case.

A spokesman for the department said: “There is a large amount of engineering design and environmental assessment work that has to be done in preparation for depositing the hybrid Bill in Parliament towards the end of 2013.

“There is also a significant programme of stakeholder engagement and public consultations that needs to be undertaken. We remain on course to introduce the Bill by the end of 2013 as has always been the plan.”
 

brianthegiant

Member
Joined
12 May 2010
Messages
588
@nerd
If the Hybrid Bill fails to achieve Royal Assent, I can see a new Labour administration going back to the drawing board, which is precisely what the anti-HS2 campaign groups located in the narrow Route3 corridor want.
Not much danger of that, Andrew Adonis kick started this project in office & remains an influential figure in Labour. As an opposition party they have to be seen to offer an alternative, but like the Tories they will quietly change their tune in office and stick with what has been developed for some time. To do otherwise would be to kill the project, which Labour want less than the Tories.
 

Metrailway

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2011
Messages
575
Location
Birmingham/Coventry/London
According to BBC London the Hanger Lane Gyratory will have to be completely rebuilt if HS2 goes ahead in its current form as the New North Main Line corridor is not sufficiently wide enough. In the same report, HS2 are now studying potential tunnelling under Ealing instead of using the NNML.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,863
Location
UK
According to BBC London the Hanger Lane Gyratory will have to be completely rebuilt if HS2 goes ahead in its current form

That's certainly no bad thing! Horrid junction...

Sent from my XT890 using Tapatalk 2
 

Snapper

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2006
Messages
2,460
Location
All over the place
I really don't think that's going to happen - if anyone was going to force major changes to the route it would've been the Conservatives. Ultimately Labour are playing the same game of politics in opposition that the Tories did but the reality remains the current route is the only game in town.

Chris

Quite. Speculation on changes to the route keep the anti hs2 mob and Telegraph happy but in reality they're not going to happen.
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
3,267
Location
Isle of Wight
Some interesting commentary on the progress of HS2 at www.charteredplanningconsultancy.co.uk

While its true the Y route is going to create more controversy, unlike phase 1 there will be a lot more council's and business leaders arguing for it.

I doubt any of the main parties will too distressed to see the Chiltern's being overshadowed by arguments over being left out, taking too long to finish etc...

Chris
 

brianthegiant

Member
Joined
12 May 2010
Messages
588
I hope the ICWC malarky doesn't delay the phase 2 route announcement.
That the bulk of the work is done externally by HS2 Ltd is an advantage,
though it needs to be signed off within DfT, where there presumably will now be a culture of fear.

On the flip side there might be increased pressure to keep other things moving to demonsrate they are still running an effective department and take attention away from franchising a bit..?
 

nick.c

Member
Joined
12 Mar 2012
Messages
64
Most discussion of HS2 routes to the North West concentrate on alignments either West or East of Stoke. However what about through Stoke? Clearly having all HS2 trains run through the city would be unacceptable due to the extra cost and noise - particularly since most wouldn't stop. However having some trains run through and stop at Stoke would greatly assist the potential for that cities economic regeneration.

One could envisage a scenario where Manchester bound HS2 services ran EoS (most direct route) but all services to Crewe / Chester / Liverpool / Preston /Glasgow left HS2 just south of Stoke, ran through the city and then joined the classic WCML at Crewe. It might also be appropriate for Regional HS2 Birmingham to Manchester services to also call at Stoke before joining the HS2 line just north of the city. Alternatively the main HS2 route to the North West could be WoS, with Manchester services routed through the city (on upgraded infrastructure) before joining a separate section of HS2 for the remaining link into Manchester.

Both options would incur time penalties - but the scope for major economic regeneration in what is the largest urban area between Birmingham and Manchester may make it worthwhile.
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
"The Government will defy "grief and hassle" from its own backbenchers and fast-track plans for a new high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham"

My favourite opening line to a story in years :D
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,281
Why am I reminded of John Major.....

(The fact that when he said he was "100% behind you" it was time to clear your desk)
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,051
Location
Reston City Centre
Why am I reminded of John Major.....

(The fact that when he said he was "100% behind you" it was time to clear your desk)

Wasn't John Major the guy who said "when our backs are to the wall we need to turn around and come out fighting"?

In which case I'm not sure he understood the meaning of the word "behind" :lol:
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,664
Just to bring it back to Leeds for a second. Would it be stupid to have an old oak common style parkway on the outskirts of leeds at a main-line connection. Then (still on its own seperate line) build a route into the city centre from the south and a route out to the east to get to the ECML around Colton. This removes having to go out of the back of Leeds.

How sensible does that sound?
 

joeykins82

Member
Joined
24 Jul 2012
Messages
601
Location
London
As I understand the plan for each HS2 city is for it to have an HS2-only station somewhere in the vicinity of the current principal station which will handle the 400m trains. On the outskirts of each city there'll be a triangular junction connecting the main HS2 Y-route to that station and also to a spur line which in turn will connect to the existing nearby main line.

So, from London after Birmingham Interchange the line splits to go to either Curzon Street or on to the WCML at Lichfield; it's a reasonable assumption from the plans on the DfT site that the line will branch near Manchester to proceed to Manchester HS2 or the WCML (probably near Wigan), likewise services will go to the new terminus in Leeds or rejoin the ECML south of York. I'd guess there probably will be parkway stations outside each of these 2 in the same manner as Birmingham Interchange but then again I'd also assumed there'd be an interchange between HS2 and the East-West rail route, and/or a station at Brackley for Silverstone so I guess that shows how effective my assumptions are!
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,784
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Just to bring it back to Leeds for a second. Would it be stupid to have an old oak common style parkway on the outskirts of leeds at a main-line connection. Then (still on its own seperate line) build a route into the city centre from the south and a route out to the east to get to the ECML around Colton. This removes having to go out of the back of Leeds.

How sensible does that sound?

Very, I came up with this a while back by integrating it into Leeds East Parkway, or it's own station just south of Garforth (where the Delta Junction would be) to approach that way...

A more sensible place could be having a parkway station next to the M62, close to Glasshauton...?
 

Waverley125

Member
Joined
2 Sep 2008
Messages
1,010
Location
Leeds, West Yorkshire
I still don't see the issue with having a through station in Leeds City Centre, and all trains calling there. Same with Manchester.

However, on the assumption that that won't be happening, the best place would be at Thorpe Park, on the edge of East Leeds, where there are already plans for a station on the Leeds-York & Selby line, as well it being a proposed terminus of an 'East Leeds Line' of the new trolleybus.

Basically due north of Methley Junction (for Leeds City Centre), and easy to plug into the Leeds-York line for continuing north.

Also, in the event the DfT grew a brain, it'd be well placed to build a line continuing due north from Thorpe Park towards Newcastle, meaning HS2 would not have to go via York.
 

Padav

Member
Joined
28 Nov 2010
Messages
67
@nick.c: "Most discussion of HS2 routes to the North West concentrate on alignments either West or East of Stoke."
My best guess for the North West England section still has the route east of Stoke - I can't see a station being sited within Staffordshire at all. My bet is that the final route is closer to the Peak District than most people envisage (although obviously it won't actually touch the National Park area).

I also remain convinced that a through running station will be sited within the environs of Manchester International Airport as the line up to Manchester approaches from the South. If you are going to incur time penalties stopping at stations you might as well pick up/put down twice within a relatively short distance - twice the immediate catchment area (South Manchester/North East Cheshire are quite affluent and more likely to boast a higher percentage of target demographic passenger sectors) for not much more in terms of time loss?
 

Stats

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2009
Messages
943
I don't believe there are any plans to build a station on the outskirts of Leeds. At least thats what the indicative service specifications suggest.

But HS2 as with most other transport, especially rail, projects is London centric. HS2 shouldn't just be about connecting principle cities to London. The benefits could be much stronger if it also served as improving regional connections. Why shouldn't Leeds or Manchester have improved High Speed connections to Scotland? If a HS line from Scotland or the North East connected to Leeds then why couldn't that line also be used by Classic Compatible trains to take over Cross-Country services to the South West (with a connection to the classic network in the Birmingham area before the two Y branches merge).

I completely appreciate that building lines through city centres is disruptive, costly and politically sensitive but I fear that if we don't it will become to be regretted and seen as a missed opportunity by our grandchildren.
 

Rational Plan

Member
Joined
3 Aug 2011
Messages
235
I don't believe there are any plans to build a station on the outskirts of Leeds. At least thats what the indicative service specifications suggest.

But HS2 as with most other transport, especially rail, projects is London centric. HS2 shouldn't just be about connecting principle cities to London. The benefits could be much stronger if it also served as improving regional connections. Why shouldn't Leeds or Manchester have improved High Speed connections to Scotland? If a HS line from Scotland or the North East connected to Leeds then why couldn't that line also be used by Classic Compatible trains to take over Cross-Country services to the South West (with a connection to the classic network in the Birmingham area before the two Y branches merge).

I completely appreciate that building lines through city centres is disruptive, costly and politically sensitive but I fear that if we don't it will become to be regretted and seen as a missed opportunity by our grandchildren.

Birmingham will have much improved connections to the North as well. Plus any high speed line to Scotland, is going to have a lot of spare capacity North of Manchester. There will be lots of scope of new Manchester and Birmingham services from Edinburgh and Glasgow. Any cross country services could certainly use either of the Y arms North of Birmingham international.

It's only the line South of Birmingham that is going to be full.

After HS2 goes to Scotland any additional lines are likely to look at speeding up connections to South Wales and the West Country. Any new lines for the East Coast are likely to act as relief between London and Peterborough/Doncaster. I could easily see a new line going to Stansted - Cambridge with spurs towards Norwich and Peterborough.
 

Joseph_Locke

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2012
Messages
1,878
Location
Within earshot of trains passing the one and half
I still don't see the issue with having a through station in Leeds City Centre, and all trains calling there. Same with Manchester.

HS2 is a high-speed network of end-to-end services. Trains will go A-B, B-C and A-C. Passengers for C will not have to sit at B, ever, as this defeats the object. So all stations are terminii by definition.

Secondly, to remove conflicts from a through station you would need to double or possibly triple the number of tracks for a distance equal to the acceleration distance of an HS2 train, which is likely to be of the order of 10 miles at least. However, the "main lines" would still need have a 250mph alignment, which constrains where the station goes.


So, why not have a terminus on a triangle? You get better alignment choices, only have constraints at one end of the station, you can have a cross-platform concourse fronting a street and you don't lose any functionality
 

Stats

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2009
Messages
943
HS2 is a high-speed network of end-to-end services. Trains will go A-B, B-C and A-C. Passengers for C will not have to sit at B, ever, as this defeats the object. So all stations are terminii by definition.
All stations? I think you'll find Old Oak Common, Birmingham Interchange, Manchester outskirts, East Midlands and S Yorks stations are all through stations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top