High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[Yew]

"The Scottish government looks forward to a future where Scotland stands on its own two feet as a nation, fully connected with its neighbouring communities.

It seems Mr Salmond seems to think that Scotland has already got independence, perhaps he should let the people of scotland decide first?

With regards to High speed rail, I think that High speed to newcastle would suffice. I mean With HS2 to leeds, there is a 40 min reduction in time, so HS2 to newcastle would probably put it to around 3 hours. Okay its a bit long for commuting but its certainly fine for meetings

 

[SkinnyDave]

Im open to High Speed but I would have thought distance would be the main driver. It is a ridiculous amount of money to spend to link just two cities and I would have thought we could get 140mph running a lot cheaper between Birmingham and London.
I wonder if the benefits of 140mph running on both WCML and ECML would have out strip the costings to put it in place.

 

[scotsman]

This is largely a political move, with a typical SNP two-fingers to David Cameron who, increasingly, is being likened to a latter day King Edward. By pressuring Boris Johnson, who has recently been suggested as a candidate for the Tory leadership, they send a clear message that they think Cameron's past it and he's on the way out.

 

[p123]

I've always thought a great thing to do would be for Scotland to build it's own high speed rail link...

a) From Glasgow to Edinburgh (because let's be honest, that'll probably happen one day anyway, might as well get it over and done with sooner rather than later!)

b) From Glasgow to somewhere in the Lake District (Lancaster, perhaps, seeing as half the Euston-the North pendo's terminate there instead of Glasgow Cent)

c) From Edinburgh to Newcastle.

That way there's two advantages:
- It makes Newcastle and the North of England much more likely to do business with Glasgow & Edinburgh, instead of London due to fast transport links thus boosting the Scottish economy (especially if the G to E high speed link is also in place)
- It makes the Cameron government look a bit embarrassed to have a massive 'hole' in their high speed network between Birmingham and the North, thus making them likely to want to complete it.

Of course, Scotland would pay for this all on their own, but reap the benefits.

 

[tbtc]

The re-elected London mayor, Boris Johnson, has been urged to push for a high-speed rail link to Scotland.

Scottish Transport Minister Keith Brown has written to Mr Johnson,

"The Scottish government looks forward to a future where Scotland stands on its own two feet as a nation, fully connected with its neighbouring communities.

"I would hope that Mr Johnson will also see how London can only realise the full potential of high-speed rail when it connects all the way to Scotland."

So to prove that Scotland can stand on its own two feet, you've written a begging letter to a bloke in London asking him to spend some money? Well done Mr Brown...

The sad truth is that London doesn't need a high speed rail link to Scotland. Scotland does, however, need a high speed rail link to Scotland. And I say this as a Scot. A much bigger issue for London would be HS trains further into Europe (e.g. Frankfurt).

 

[scotsman]

So to prove that Scotland can stand on its own two feet, you've written a begging letter to a bloke in London asking him to spend some money? Well done Mr Brown...

The sad truth is that London doesn't need a high speed rail link to Scotland. Scotland does, however, need a high speed rail link to Scotland. And I say this as a Scot. A much bigger issue for London would be HS trains further into Europe (e.g. Frankfurt).

Good point. Not the SNP's style to go begging, no matter how much I dislike them.

They would never say that Scotland needs the link, but push the benefits to the south if one was built. If the SNP were to say Scotland needed it, it would seriously harm their independence push. You can also bet your bottom dollar that it high speed rail to Scotland won't happen if they say that.

 

[Waverley125]

Hi there,
I've been busy avoiding more work and I've come up with some more ideas. Here's my speculation about the Leeds HS2 station.


Here are a lot of assumptions that need to be made or at least questions asked about where Leeds HS2 Station will be. What I'veasssumed is that, unlike Sheffield or Nottingham, this will be a city centre location. It also assumes that it will need to be able to cope with 400m trains. The minimum size would probably be 4 platform faces

■Will it be a through station?
■Will it be a terminus?
■Will there be links to allow running onto the exising network?
■Will it be connected to the current station?
Here are some ideas

There are three terminus station sites which are shown in red and two through station options shown in green



The first terminus option is on the site of the long abandoned Leeds Central Station

The advantages of this site are:

■Right size, long and wide enough
■Was once rail connected, allignments are still feasible
■Only a couple of building would need to be demolished

The disadvantages of this site are:
■No possibility of being a through station
■No way to access the station from the North
■A bit of a way from the existing station - interchanges not really easy
■Would have to build partly over the river meaning a partly elevated station



The second terminus option is on the site of the current car park (or the long abandoned Leeds Wellington Station)

The advantages of this site are:

■Right length for 400m trains
■It's part of the existing station - easy interchanges
■Through trains would use the existing station

The disadvantages of this site are:
■Rather narrow - may struggle to get 4 new 400m platform faces
■Will some of this space be used for general expansion of the station anyway?
■Tricky construction - partially over the river
■Complex trackwork needed to get to the new HS2 line and provide through running onto existing tracks
■Where would a replacement car park go?



The third terminus option is on the site of the old goods yard at Pottery Fields, now a retail park

The advantages of this site are:

■Right size, long and wide enough
■Was once rail connected, allignments into the site still exists
■Retail parks can be simply relocated with sufficient financial motivation
■It's flat and straighforward to build on

The disadvantages of this site are:
■It has been comprehesively redeveloped
■It's some distance from the existing station
■No possible way to serve trains from the North



The first through option is at Crown Point parallel to the existing track

The advantages of this site are:

■Right size, long and wide enough
■Existing railway thoroughfare
■Simplest connection to the North
■Not too much demolition required

The disadvantages of this site are:
■It's an elevated viaduct already - complex build?
■It's some distance from the existing station
■Would need to accomodate existing tracks through/around it
■How would the HS2 tracks get through the current Leeds station?



The second through option is at Holbeck. This would use the disused viaduct for the approach but rather than swinging back with the existing curves would have a new station. This would extend northeastwards on the site of mainly exisitng carparks. It would then tunnel under the office blocks and the river and emerge at Neville Hill Junction for access to the North.

The advantages of this site are:

■Right size, long and wide enough
■Approaches are simple, both to the south and north
■The approaches are smooth allowing fast through running if required
■Reasonably close to the new southern entrance to the existing station
■Not too much demolition required
■Minimal disruption to exising track layout and services

The disadvantages of this site are:
■It's an elevated viaduct already - complex build?
■It would require some low rise office blocks to be demolished
■It would need some tunnelling to access the North


Comments / idea / suggestions welcome. Abuse no so much...
Cheers,
Jason

There's only one site in Leeds that's vaguely workable, and that's at Crown point (which is called Crown Point, NOT Pottery Fields, Pottery fields is the area that borders the aire in northeast Hunslet, Crown Point is central Hunslet, south of Crown Point Bridge. Where you've said is 'Crown Point' is actually QUARRY HILL.

Crown Point retail park has low land value, is easily big enough for a station. None of the other sites are, not even the old Central station site (your platforms would stick out over most of the City station approach, and in any case, the land is owned by a property developer with big plans for a flats scheme).



Crown point is also in a cutting (the land has been graduall filled in from the south end to the north). If kept in a cutting, the line could dive under Hunslet Lane (station building on Waterloo Street/Meadow Lane), tunnel under the Aire, and curve sharply right to emerge in the extant goods yard at Neville Hill, and voila, we have a through station for Leeds. Given the nature of the Leeds Eastern approach, it could easily be widened to 4, if not 6, lines to accommodate HS access to Leeds City Centre.

As for interchange with city station, there's easily space for a new footbridge over the aire to Sovereign St, where there's an empty plot of land easily big enough to construct a new southeastern entrance to Leeds City, including a new eastern concourse slung between the footbridge & access bridge. This would give, not direct interchange, but certainly from the front door of Leeds Waterloo (high speed) on Meadow Lane, you'd be able to see the SE entrance of Leeds City (classic) over the water.

 

[jroddi]

Long time lurker first time poster....

Leeds HS2 route

A possibility of a through route maintaining connections with Leeds City

Would involve the repurposing of the alignment from City out towards Woodlesford / Normanton / Castleford, which I would suggest solving by restoring the link from Garforth to the eastern approach to Castleford.

 

[JGR]

I've always thought a great thing to do would be for Scotland to build it's own high speed rail link...

a) From Glasgow to Edinburgh (because let's be honest, that'll probably happen one day anyway, might as well get it over and done with sooner rather than later!)

b) From Glasgow to somewhere in the Lake District (Lancaster, perhaps, seeing as half the Euston-the North pendo's terminate there instead of Glasgow Cent)

c) From Edinburgh to Newcastle.

That way there's two advantages:
- It makes Newcastle and the North of England much more likely to do business with Glasgow & Edinburgh, instead of London due to fast transport links thus boosting the Scottish economy (especially if the G to E high speed link is also in place)
- It makes the Cameron government look a bit embarrassed to have a massive 'hole' in their high speed network between Birmingham and the North, thus making them likely to want to complete it.

Of course, Scotland would pay for this all on their own, but reap the benefits.

Given the relatively small distance between Glasgow and Edinburgh, and the multitude of existing lines between them, is a dedicated express line really necessary? Surely a few more expresses and maybe a few bottleneck-removals on existing lines will suffice?

There's no point in terminating a HS line from Scotland in the lake district, unless you mean for it to be later extended to somewhere sensible like Manchester.

I suspect that the terrain will be somewhat of an issue for a fast(er) line from Edinburgh to Newcastle, and I don't see that there's a lot of point there unless it continues further south. Cutting a few corners off like at Morpeth would probably do just as well, and be a lot more practical.

Scotland does not really have an independent budget, and not even Sammond and co. are going to be able convince the largely sensible Scots to build a railway which will hardly be used until it connects to lines which haven't been built yet.

 

[AndrewP]

The Scottish Government yet again acting like a small child.

I want, I want, I want, Gimmee, Gimmee, Gimmee

With the bland assumption that someone else will pay.

Will there ever be a business case north of Newcastle or even Leeds / York? Of course not.

If they want it they should pay. They could use the same expertise as they used to build the Edinburgh tram which has been done to budget and schedule so well.

 

[michael769]

Given the relatively small distance between Glasgow and Edinburgh, and the multitude of existing lines between them, is a dedicated express line really necessary? Surely a few more expresses and maybe a few bottleneck-removals on existing lines will suffice?

Indeed post EGIP with services taking less than 40 minutes, a high speed replacement would be nothing more that another frighteningly expensive vanity project.

 

[PFX]

They could use the same expertise as they used to build the Edinburgh tram which has been done to budget and schedule so well.

Your astute political commentary aside, it wasn't the Scottish government that created the hugely embarassing Edinburgh trams fiasco, that was down to the city council.

As for HS2 extension to Scotland, I don't see that there is ever going to be a viable business case to provide the same. The existing links are already there but sadly, the investment hasn't been historically.

I'm guessing now but what was the last great improvement, electrification of ECML?

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm guessing now but what was the last great improvement, electrification of ECML?

Surely the WCML upgrade (brand new stock, higher frequency service, tilt, higher speeds)?

 

[PFX]

Surely the WCML upgrade (brand new stock, higher frequency service, tilt, higher speeds)?

I stand duly corrected sir.

 

[Chris125]

Apparently Greening has confirmed they expect next years Queen's Speech to reference HS2, with the Hybrid Bill coming forward at the end of next year - so despite some quality journalism from the Telegraph, nothings changed regarding the timetable for the Hybrid Bill.

Chris

 

[PR1Berske]

It is nonetheless notable that no Bill has been introduced two years before the next election!

 

[HSTEd]

Indeed post EGIP with services taking less than 40 minutes, a high speed replacement would be nothing more that another frighteningly expensive vanity project.

It would cut travel times by half (with proper rolling stock, you could do it in 19 minutes).

It is also helpful because you get Glasgow for "free" if you via Newcastle, which improves the case for the Scotland Rail link considerably if its already in existance.

 

[swt_passenger]

It is nonetheless notable that no Bill has been introduced two years before the next election!

You know when the next election is? Didn't they decide on fixed terms of 5 years, ie May 2015?.

It isn't notable at all anyway. The plans have been pretty consistent about introducing the bill at the end of 2013, eg here:

http://highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/hsr-timetable

and here:

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-decisions-and-next-steps/hs2-decisions-and-next-steps.pdf

Both from Jan this year.

 

[Padav]

Many thanks @swt_passenger for pointing this out

You are correct - the Fixed Term Parliament Act also fixed the date of the next General Election, 7th May 2015, so give or take a couple of days, my maths makes that 3 years from now?

The date when the Hybrid Bill is scheduled to enter Parliament is already in the public domain - 25th October 2013. The plan is to complete its legislative passage and receive Royal Assent early in 2015, approx 3 to 4 months before the General Election. Quite why there was any speculation about the Bill's inclusion in today's Queens Speech is a puzzle to me, given that the formal announcement covers a period May 2012 - April 2013?

Of course there is speculation but look at the origin of that speculation - first article appeared in the Sunday Telegraph - what a surprise - doubtless sparked by a private conversation between the Editor/Journalist in question and campaigners from STOPHS2, HS2AA or 51M Group (or all of them!)?

There is no accommodation to be had with the anti-brigade; they are fixated on a single goal only, which is removing the threat to their immediate vicinity posed by the approved Route3 pathway for phase 1 and they will use any means, fair or foul to deliver that outcome. If that means cancellation of the entire project, fine (UK plc can go hang!) - if it means moving the line somewhere else, fine (just dump the problem on someone else less affluent, influential or erudite) - they couldn't give a monkeys either way - just get the line moved from their backyards, plain and simple!

 

[bangor-toad]

To complete my speculation about where HS2b will go on it's way to Leeds, here's my suggestions for the last bit:

Assumptions
■The Sheffield station will be at Meadowhall
■The Leeds station is one of the options I've already posted
There are three basic ideas shown for the route. These were a bit harder to look at, especially around Leeds where the station siting is not so obvious to predict.



The easterly route, in blue, can reach all the station options, albeit with a large loop for some

The central route, in red, broadly follows the M1 and can also reach all the station options

The westerly route, in orange, can only reach some of the station options

Common bits

Leaves Meadowhall and heads North using the disused allignement roughly parallel to the existing tracks


Red Route
It will need straightening out and it would have a climb to pass east of Chapeltown

Essentially it would run to the west of the M1


It would probably need a tunnel to pass under Horworth

As it crosses the M62 there are two options.



If the station is at Pottery Field it would need to curve slightly to the east and tunnel under the high ground

It then would run on the route of the Middleton Railway (Sorry guys!)

Cross the exising tracks with a flyover/diveunder to access the route into the terminus station and have links onto the existing tracks for through trains which would use the existing Leeds station



If the station is one of the other options, it would pass to the north east of Morley


There would be a 90degree to bring the route into the same vicinity as the existing tracks


The exact alignment then depends on which station site is chosen



Blue Route
This would diverge from the Red Route north of Chapeltown

It would use roughly an abandoned allignment to the north of Hoyland

It would then pass to the east of Barnsley


The freight branch to Monk Bretton would be either massively upgraded or built alongside


The route would pass to the east of Wakefield, alongside the Calder canal




If the station is at Pottery Field it would need to pass to the south west of Rothwell and pass close to the M1 / M621 junction


It would then follow the the exising tracks with a flyover/diveunder to access the route into the terminus station and have links onto the existing tracks for through trains which would use the existing Leeds station



If the station is one of the other options, it would curve to the west and pass west of the village of Stanely

It would run roughly parallel to the exising Leeds-Wakefield line and then follow the red route allignment to the north east of Morley


There would be a 90degree to bring the route into the same vicinity as the existing tracks


The exact alignment then depends on which station site is chosen



Orange Route
This would diverge from the red route soon after Meadowhall and pass to the south of Chapeltown

It would curve northwards and just reach the allignment of the old Stocksbridge - Penistone Woodhead route

The route would then head north avoiding the villages of Thuroland and Silkstone Common

It goes due north past Clayton West passing reasonably close to the terminus of the Kirkless Light Railway (interchange station perhaps )

The wouild probably need to be short tunnel under Middlestown

Over the River Calder to the west of Horbury

It would then pass to the east of Dewsbury, probably in a few short tunnels under housing areas

It would then curve to the east, passing Morley to the west and crossing the M62 and M621

It would then follow one of the red routes into whichever station site was selected

 

[Waverley125]

the blue line is by far the best option, although the best site for a Sheffield station is still at Victoria, not at Meadowhall.

 

[Batman]

Many thanks @swt_passenger for pointing this out

You are correct - the Fixed Term Parliament Act also fixed the date of the next General Election, 7th May 2015, so give or take a couple of days, my maths makes that 3 years from now?

The date when the Hybrid Bill is scheduled to enter Parliament is already in the public domain - 25th October 2013. The plan is to complete its legislative passage and receive Royal Assent early in 2015, approx 3 to 4 months before the General Election. Quite why there was any speculation about the Bill's inclusion in today's Queens Speech is a puzzle to me, given that the formal announcement covers a period May 2012 - April 2013?

Of course there is speculation but look at the origin of that speculation - first article appeared in the Sunday Telegraph - what a surprise - doubtless sparked by a private conversation between the Editor/Journalist in question and campaigners from STOPHS2, HS2AA or 51M Group (or all of them!)?

There is no accommodation to be had with the anti-brigade; they are fixated on a single goal only, which is removing the threat to their immediate vicinity posed by the approved Route3 pathway for phase 1 and they will use any means, fair or foul to deliver that outcome. If that means cancellation of the entire project, fine (UK plc can go hang!) - if it means moving the line somewhere else, fine (just dump the problem on someone else less affluent, influential or erudite) - they couldn't give a monkeys either way - just get the line moved from their backyards, plain and simple!

Are you sure they've set a date for second reading yet? In terms of parliamentary timetabling October 2013 is still a long way off and the bill would be working to a very tight timetable if it were to go from second reading to royal assent in less than 18 months.

And I'm not even 100% sure how the procedure works for hybrid bills. Am I correct in thinking that the motion for second reading of a hybrid bill is moved by a government backbencher rather than a minister, and the bill is automatically sent to a select committee for its committee stage without the need for a program motion or a vote of the house?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And I'm not 100% sure as to how a hybrid bill is formally differentiated from any other bill. Is that stated in the wording of the motion at second reading, or is a done by a speakers ruling, like with money bills?

 

[PR1Berske]

You know when the next election is? Didn't they decide on fixed terms of 5 years, ie May 2015?.

It isn't notable at all anyway. The plans have been pretty consistent about introducing the bill at the end of 2013, eg here:

http://highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/hsr-timetable

and here:

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-decisions-and-next-steps/hs2-decisions-and-next-steps.pdf

Both from Jan this year.

Yes, I know that they've decided on fixed terms. I'm a card-carrying LibDem, very proud of our achievement

 

[HSTEd]

Yes, I know that they've decided on fixed terms. I'm a card-carrying LibDem, very proud of our achievement

The fixed Terms requirement is essentially meaningless.....

Because by definition a government which has the confidence of the house has a working majority, which essentially means it can hold a whipped vote on a no confidence motion..... thus obtaining a dissolution

Its just window dressing.

 

[Stats]

■The Sheffield station will be at Meadowhall

Looking at your map, you appear to have demolished half of Meadowhall Shopping Centre. I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.

I know the popular belief is that it will be at Meadowhall, but I can't see where you'd put it.

 

[nerd]

Looking at your map, you appear to have demolished half of Meadowhall Shopping Centre. I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.

I know the popular belief is that it will be at Meadowhall, but I can't see where you'd put it.

A bit more than a popular belief Stats.

HS2 supplied Arup with the layout for the potential Meadowhall station when they commissioned this capacity report.

http://hs2.org.uk/publications/ARUP-report-on-achieving-high-capacity-at-stations-77739

so a 'workable' plan did already exist last August; and all the indications so far is that Meadowhall remained the favoured South Yorkshire site in the report submitted to Ministers last month.

 

[Batman]

The fixed Terms requirement is essentially meaningless.....

Because by definition a government which has the confidence of the house has a working majority, which essentially means it can hold a whipped vote on a no confidence motion..... thus obtaining a dissolution

Its just window dressing.

Just because a government has the confidence of the house doesn't necessarily mean it has a working majority. A working majority means it can pass legislation without the fear of backbench rebellions.

The most obvious example was the Labour government in the 1970's that stayed in office for 3 years after it lost its majority through doing deals with the liberals and Scottish nationalists. But it suffered defeats on the floor of the house on an almost weekly basis.

 

[PR1Berske]

The fixed Terms requirement is essentially meaningless.....

Because by definition a government which has the confidence of the house has a working majority, which essentially means it can hold a whipped vote on a no confidence motion..... thus obtaining a dissolution

Its just window dressing.

German political history is littered with the governments which tried to manufacture an early election in spite of fixed-term legislation. It won't happen here.

 

[deltic]

Looking at your map, you appear to have demolished half of Meadowhall Shopping Centre. I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen.

I know the popular belief is that it will be at Meadowhall, but I can't see where you'd put it.

Given the need to avoid the tram and motorway I presume the HS2 station will actually be built at a height which is above the shopping centre - not sure if that is feasible

 

[HSTEd]

Just because a government has the confidence of the house doesn't necessarily mean it has a working majority. A working majority means it can pass legislation without the fear of backbench rebellions.

The most obvious example was the Labour government in the 1970's that stayed in office for 3 years after it lost its majority through doing deals with the liberals and Scottish nationalists. But it suffered defeats on the floor of the house on an almost weekly basis.

The political climate in the 1970s is entirely different to the one that prevails today.
For one thing neither of the two main parties particularily wanted to be in power due to prevailing economic conditions, and it was not clear that either would gain from an early election.

Now, there is a Conservative party that is doing suprisingly well in the polls and would probably overall gain seats from the probable collapse of the Liberal Democrats if the election were held tommorow.

And we have a Labour Party that would happily destroy the Liberal Democrats and which would likely gain additional seats from said obliteration.

So if the Conservatives wanted to end the coalition they could engineer a confidence vote, the Conservatives would vote "no confidence" and it is higly likely that enough Labour MPs would join the Conservatives to carry the motion.

The two-thirds provision is simply window dressing and has no real effect for the aforementioned reason.