High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[pablo]

Incidentally the link provided doesn't seem to take you anywhere much - here is the link to the maps:

https://www.gov.uk/hs2-phase-two-initial-preferred-route-plan-and-profile-maps

I'm presuming that it's already been provided, but I ain't wading through 200+ pages on this topic to check!

The previous link I gave appears broken now. Must want to suppress it! Try this: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...o-high-speed-rail-city-a-vision-for-crewe.pdf scroll down p5 onwards. Otherwise Google "A Vision for Crewe"

 

[The Decapod]

I think they are just setting it up to come in "under budget" to get a positive spin from it.

As I've said before, I think the whole HS2 project is a 'sacrificial' one, to be cancelled at a future date, either to save money (that was probably never going to be spent anyway) or to buy political popularity. It's becoming the coalition's equivalent of New Labour's ill-fated ID card scheme.

 

[si404]

As I've said before, I think the whole HS2 project is a 'sacrificial' one, to be cancelled at a future date, either to save money (that was probably never going to be spent anyway) or to buy political popularity.

Why would anyone do such a thing? you cancel it and it's a u-turn that loses you credibility, your opponents cancel it and they get political capital at your expense.

much better politically to leave bear traps like the 50% tax-rate - policies that are bad but sound good.

And given that the media attack on the Coalition is to complain about the (non-existent overall) cuts, then finding savings by ditching the project is easily spun as "now they won't even fund infrastructure that expands the economy. Stupid ConDem Cuts keeping us poor!"

 

[Metrailway]

Keeping with the subject of politics, there have been some interesting developments this week with regards to HS2 and the Labour Party.

Alistair Darling announced in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph that he is a "HS2 sceptic" as "there’s an awful lot of things in there that are wrong" with the project and that he fears HS2 will divert funds away from the 'classic' network.

Peter Mandelson has written an article in the FT today attacking HS2. He fears "HS2 could be an expensive mistake." claiming that Labour backed it in 2010 based on "almost entirely speculative" estimates and as a "political driven" decision on the eve of the 2010 general election. He also raises a similar point to Alistair Darling:

...A further key argument was that existing intercity services would reach full capacity. Without HS2, it was claimed, many people and freight would simply be unable to move. But this ignored what has only emerged since then: building HS2 would threaten rail services between the pole points of Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. As resources dried up, the bullet train would risk becoming surrounded by railway deserts...

(Read full article)

It has also been reported recently that Ed Balls has significant concerns about the expense of the project. Of course, in public Ed Balls continues to be pro HS2, and the Labour Party are still for the new railway.

However, could this be a sign of things to come? It may be politically beneficial to the Labour Party to differentiate themselves from the Tories and Liberals by being "anti HS2".

 

[jon0844]

It seemed like Labour was all for HS2 early on, then it suddenly got to be a bit unpopular so it started to attack the Government for dithering and even implying that it was all down the current Government. Perhaps to try and secure votes from these Tory heartlands by claiming that a Labour vote would see the end of the scheme?

Now it's one step closer to happening (not sure how many more steps there will be), it seems that some members of the party simply can't be happy and perhaps point out that it was their idea, especially those who might have constituents who are against it - or as said above, because they think they can secure votes.

I spoke to someone the other day who was quite embarrassed to say to me that he thought HS2 was a good idea - almost waiting for me to hit him. Has it got the point where you simply can't admit in public that you're for the scheme?

If Labour does switch support, then who will it be that did the U-turn?

 

[Metrailway]

It seemed like Labour was all for HS2 early on, then it suddenly got to be a bit unpopular so it started to attack the Government for dithering and even implying that it was all down the current Government. Perhaps to try and secure votes from these Tory heartlands by claiming that a Labour vote would see the end of the scheme?

Now it's one step closer to happening (not sure how many more steps there will be), it seems that some members of the party simply can't be happy and perhaps point out that it was their idea, especially those who might have constituents who are against it - or as said above, because they think they can secure votes.

I spoke to someone the other day who was quite embarrassed to say to me that he thought HS2 was a good idea - almost waiting for me to hit him. Has it got the point where you simply can't admit in public that you're for the scheme?

If Labour does switch support, then who will it be that did the U-turn?

The Tory leadership have been pro HS even before HS2 was announced by the Labour Government! Osborne wanted a domestic HS line after visiting Japan when he was in opposition. Of course there is a disconnect between the leadership of the party and the grassroots. The grassroots on the whole dislike HS2 and have done so since the beginning. The business community on the other hand support HS2.

I doubt Labour would be after votes from Tory heartlands as there is no benefit for Labour considering our electoral system. There are a few marginals along the route - Leamington & Warwick for example - and if Labour do become anti-HS2, these marginals would be easy pickings for Labour.

However, the dislike for HS2 is widespread across the country. Rightly or wrongly, the populace as a whole view HS2 as a massive waste of money benefiting the few. Also, the general public as a whole still view Labour as profligate when it comes to spending public money and economically incompetent.

Binning a high profile project like HS2 is an easy and very effective way for Labour to signal to the public that an Ed Milliband ministry would be prudent with the public finances. This would be popular in seats not just along the proposed route but across the country.

HS2 requires political consensus amongst Labour and the Conservatives and if Labour do become anti-HS2, it inevitably means the death of the project. We are, of course, a long way from reaching such a conclusion.

 

[Chris125]

Labour has little to gain from cancelling HS2, but like the Conservatives during opposition they will happily criticise the current government's plans and propose populist alternatives to help stick the knife in - hence both main parties suggesting alternative routes in opposition.

It should be noted however that this is far from unusual, remember all the talk of rolling back Beeching and more recently reversing privatisation?

Chris

 

[tbtc]

The recent criticisms of HS2 in the press (especially in the "comments" sections of newspapers) has reinforced that there's no real alternative out there AFAICS.

Yes, there's lots of bottlenecks that we could spend money on (and, to be fair, *are* spending money on - like the new flyover at Hitchin), but a lot of these only push the problem slightly further along the line (and would mean long periods of disruption to existing lines - does anyone want to go back to the "five day" railway?).

Daftest comments are the ones suggesting that we start construction in "the north" (rather than at the London end) - the capacity problems that HS2 are intended to help to solve are at the London end - a High Speed line from Leeds to Birmingham (that doesn't run to London) would be a real waste.

 

[Ironside]

The recent criticisms of HS2 in the press (especially in the "comments" sections of newspapers) has reinforced that there's no real alternative out there AFAICS.

Yes, there's lots of bottlenecks that we could spend money on (and, to be fair, *are* spending money on - like the new flyover at Hitchin), but a lot of these only push the problem slightly further along the line (and would mean long periods of disruption to existing lines - does anyone want to go back to the "five day" railway?).

Daftest comments are the ones suggesting that we start construction in "the north" (rather than at the London end) - the capacity problems that HS2 are intended to help to solve are at the London end - a High Speed line from Leeds to Birmingham (that doesn't run to London) would be a real waste.

Totally agree with this.

Also I would point out that the main vote for HS2 phase 1 is expected in October so that leaves 12-16 weeks for the anti campaign to try to convince hundreds of MPs to change there minds. Therefore I would expect alot of campaign noise from the anti campaign trying to show they represent the voice of the people.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I'm not convinced that the Labour party is going to abandon support for HS2, there is very little political gain in the Tory shires and most support for the project from is from Northern councils in traditional labour heartlands. Plus Alistair Darling has largely left the front line of Labour politics while as I am lead to believe Andrew Adonis who is the architect of HS2 still retains some influence.

 

[DW54]

The recent criticisms of HS2 in the press (especially in the "comments" sections of newspapers) has reinforced that there's no real alternative out there AFAICS.

Yes, there's lots of bottlenecks that we could spend money on (and, to be fair, *are* spending money on - like the new flyover at Hitchin), but a lot of these only push the problem slightly further along the line (and would mean long periods of disruption to existing lines - does anyone want to go back to the "five day" railway?).

Daftest comments are the ones suggesting that we start construction in "the north" (rather than at the London end) - the capacity problems that HS2 are intended to help to solve are at the London end - a High Speed line from Leeds to Birmingham (that doesn't run to London) would be a real waste.

Perhaps we should initiate a sub-thread and discuss the ramifications of dropping HS2 per se, but still seeking to address the capacity constraints between the Midlands and London.

I personally do think there are alternatives involving a lot less "greenfields" investment, and a staged investment in London.

I see the former GC alignment plus some old Midland trackbed, new construction near Rugby, the Chiltern ex-GWR route and the major interchange at OOC as forming key parts of an non-HS2 approach. This would be a network which would have largely GC clearances where posssible, use the heavier European 25kV wiring system for multi-pan trains and have working speeds up to about 160mph to use trains like Pendolinos (but not Fyras) at their full potential.

As for through services to the Continent, well the UK Border Agency procedures effectively put paid to them for now. Changes may occur. That's why GC gauge is used wherever possible. Of course, full UIC gauge trains would conflict with classic compatible platforms, so stations would be designed to take that into account, with appropriate passive or preliminary provision.

Main advantages: uses existing or moribund alignments and easements, uses tilt for speed, rather than new gently curved contsruction, raises speeds without going to the extremes needed for operations over 1000km. 260km/h would make a heap of difference in Britain - would 300 or 320 really add that much benefit? Can exploit underutilised assets, and provide upgraded service to more of Great Britain than the limited and dedicated HS2 network.

Anyway, food for thought. There will be pressure to do "something" and if HS2 isn't that "thing" then the New Great Central and Great North-Western might be the alternative.

 

[gordonthemoron]

just stop time wasting and get on with it

 

[jon0844]

However, the dislike for HS2 is widespread across the country. Rightly or wrongly, the populace as a whole view HS2 as a massive waste of money benefiting the few.

I do believe that's because of a lot of misinformation that seems to mean people think that there's a pot of cash and some rich Tory MP wants to build a nice new fast line for rich people to whiz back and forth to Birmingham with it, meaning that money can't be used elsewhere.

As many people have their agendas, including those in the media (i.e. a certain 'journo' from the Telegraph that is blatantly anti-HS2 and has the power of the press to repeat these mistruths or simply mislead), it seems the anti-HS2 brigade has been quite successful in making it out as some sort of white elephant, and suggesting we don't need to build new lines as we can magically upgrade what we have - ignoring all the issues of working on a live railway and the limited improvements you could expect from lines, tunnels and bridges that are so old.

If people were truly aware of the economic benefits as a whole, the fact that the cost per passenger would actually be lower, it isn't just to Birmingham, it improves services on the old lines (so those away from HS2 WILL benefit), the money will be spread over a long period of time and isn't actually that high, it will be a good investment for people who choose to invest (or perhaps savings funds/pensions etc) and it will be built for multiple generations that may be living in an era where huge increases in cost for fuels makes even driving a lot more expensive, and flying out of the reach of many.

But, before I come over as a blinkered HS2 fan, I am not saying the scheme as-is is perfect - but we simply need to get it right, not axe it.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think everything you suggest has been covered earlier in the thread. Please don't expect anyone to be much interested in yet another debate about reopening the GC instead of HS2...

 

[HowardGWR]

I think everything you suggest has been covered earlier in the thread. Please don't expect anyone to be much interested in yet another debate about reopening the GC instead of HS2...

I see DW54 has only just joined us (welcome DW54 from another recent joiner) and I don't think new colleagues should be expected to plough through hundreds of pages of earlier contributions, just for the sake of not duplicating a comment.

The points DW54 raises are indeed what most of think that the essence of HS2 phase 1 is, namely resurrecting the concept that was the GCR and too hastily abandoned, as it turned out. Indeed it makes use of much of the GCR formation.

I see HS2 phase 1 as being the extra 2 tracks for higher speed trains but at a distance from the WCML, thus avoiding the challenge of building them a few feet away from the present 4 track layout.

 

[Philip Elliott]

it improves services on the old lines (so those away from HS2 WILL benefit),

Except for all the places that will have less frequent and/or slower services...

 

[HSTEd]

Except for all the places that will have less frequent and/or slower services...

They won't be significantly slower (indeed look out how much slower the fast Class 350 service to Rugby is than the Pendo now) and the lack of end-to-end passengers will allow far more seats to be made available.

If the WCML fast lines are essentially all 110mph we can really pack the paths in, and the reduced cost of running a Class 350 per seat (and per set) would allow more trains to be provided at the same cost.

 

[YorkshireBear]

They won't be significantly slower (indeed look out how much slower the fast Class 350 service to Rugby is than the Pendo now) and the lack of end-to-end passengers will allow far more seats to be made available.

If the WCML fast lines are essentially all 110mph we can really pack the paths in, and the reduced cost of running a Class 350 per seat (and per set) would allow more trains to be provided at the same cost.

Or even if all the pendos stopped more you'd get yourself another couple of paths.

 

[jon0844]

I saw the BBC report on Alstom working with F1 to improve reliability, so perhaps the WCML should be modified so that trains pull off to platforms at stations, then have an acceleration track of a mile or so to rejoin the mainline at speed - thus protecting paths, while enabling multiple stops.

All that needs to happen then is for people to get off and on in about 5-6 seconds before the train shoots off!

 

[Philip Elliott]

They won't be significantly slower (indeed look out how much slower the fast Class 350 service to Rugby is than the Pendo now) and the lack of end-to-end passengers will allow far more seats to be made available.

If the WCML fast lines are essentially all 110mph we can really pack the paths in, and the reduced cost of running a Class 350 per seat (and per set) would allow more trains to be provided at the same cost.

Carlisle/Oxenholme/Penrith/Lancaster to London via Manchester will take about 40 mins longer. I would call that 'significant'.

I'm sure the First Class passengers will be ever so glad to get a 350:roll:

 

[edwin_m]

Carlisle/Oxenholme/Penrith/Lancaster to London via Manchester will take about 40 mins longer. I would call that 'significant'.

They won't be going via Manchester.

 

[HSTEd]

Carlisle/Oxenholme/Penrith/Lancaster to London via Manchester will take about 40 mins longer. I would call that 'significant'.

I'm sure the First Class passengers will be ever so glad to get a 350:roll:

What?
Why would it take longer?
Surely the classic compatibles would leave HS2 at Crewe and proceed as they do now? Wouldn't it be faster than now?

And are you proposing that we should maintain a full restaurant on classic Birmingham trains for the benefit of passengers from Coventry that will be on the train for 60 minutes (Pendo) to 66 minutes (Class 350)?

 

[Rational Plan]

The Labour party may be turning against Hs2 because it would rather cut future capital spending than have to make unpopular cuts to benefits, it will not be spending that £33 billlion on the rail network.

 

[Philip Elliott]

They won't be going via Manchester.

That is what HS2 ltd is quoting although I doubt it would actually happen but it does mean that a supposed 'freed path' isn't.

Surely the classic compatibles would leave HS2 at Crewe and proceed as they do now? Wouldn't it be faster than now?

HS2 trains aren't planned to stop anywhere between Preston and Carstairs.

Have you actually read any of the HS2 documents?

And are you proposing that we should maintain a full restaurant on classic Birmingham trains for the benefit of passengers from Coventry that will be on the train for 60 minutes (Pendo) to 66 minutes (Class 350)?

Should the Manchester HS2 service not have restaurant services because they are 'only' 68 minutes? I didn't say restaurant service - simply first class. The service provided by LM on the 350s is simply not up to the standard expected by the numerous first class passengers on the route. It isn't just Coventry, there is Wolverhampton, Milton Keynes (particularly northbound) and Rugby. Network Rail's indicative plan has 3tph ICWC to Birmingham...

 

[HSTEd]

That is what HS2 ltd is quoting although I doubt it would actually happen but it does mean that a supposed 'freed path' isn't.

Those are not the paths I am referring to, the paths I am referring to are possible efficiencies on the Manchester/Birmingham routes.
The trains going north of Manchester are frankly a rounding error compared to that.

HS2 trains aren't planned to stop anywhere between Preston and Carstairs.

Have you actually read any of the HS2 documents?

Those are not choices for HS2 Ltd to make, those are choices that will be made by the eventual franchisee.
There is no engineering reason that the train will not stop additionally as they do now, so you can't really attack the project for it.
The stopping pattern is merely representative of what they think would happen, not that they are going to "force" the franchisee to implement.

Should the Manchester HS2 service not have restaurant services because they are 'only' 68 minutes? I didn't say restaurant service - simply first class.

It should probably not have a full restaurant no, simply because the length of the journey does not really allow a restaurant service to be efficiently used.
I would expect catering but nothing as extensive as what is provided now.
And there would be a far smaller proportion of first class seats as a percentage of the total provided.

Find me somewhere else on the rail network where a train with maximum travel times of an hour that have full restaurants?

And first class on the Class 350s will be fairly reasonable, it could easily be of the standard of the Class 185s that TPE run.

Firstly, what are The service provided by LM on the 350s is simply not up to the standard expected by the numerous first class passengers on the route.

Who said they would be LM Class 350s?
I would expect today's London Midland to not exist after HS2 opens, there will likely be a unified ICWC-South franchise.
They would likely have interiors similar to TPE ones, or if it such a problem you could just have 444-esque multiple units.

It isn't just Coventry, there is Wolverhampton, Milton Keynes (particularly northbound) and Rugby. Network Rail's indicative plan has 3tph ICWC to Birmingham...

Wolverhampton passengers will for some reason chose to ride all the way to Birmingham on a slow train that takes 85 minutes for the final leg rather than making a ten minute transfer to a train that will take <50 minutes for the same journey?

As to Rugby.... going south London will only be five minutes further away than it is now, which is not really a major sacrifice. (110mph Class 350s take 56 minutes instead of 51).

And Milton Keynes will still have plenty of northbound trains either way.....
And Network Rail has to develop a plan based upon the premise that the NIMBYs win... that is their duty.

 

[Philip Elliott]

There is no engineering reason that the train will not stop additionally as they do now, so you can't really attack the project for it.

If they stop as they do now, the quoted time for London to Glasgow cannt be met (on which the business case is based).

Wolverhampton passengers will for some reason chose to ride all the way to Birmingham on a slow train that takes 85 minutes for the final leg rather than making a ten minute transfer to a train that will take <50 minutes for the same journey?

10 minutes Please stop with these insane fantasy ideas of yours.

 

[HowardGWR]

If I can bring us back to the raison d'etre for HS2 - it's not to stop at farmyards.

Only the stations so far identified on the trajectory itself that are business centres make sense. Once off HS2 I suppose it becomes less of an issue but, arguably, the airport stops are already a bit of a luxury. However OOC (Heathrow) is serving several roles and I suppose BHI, if also connected to the proposed re-opened old 'Stonebridge line' being proposed up to the East Midlands, is also worth it.

 

[HSTEd]

If they stop as they do now, the quoted time for London to Glasgow cannt be met (on which the business case is based).

There is probably room in the timetable for another 200m set every hour if it such a big thing.
And I doubt you will lose so much time simply changing at Preston to render it slower than before, especially since the timetable could be recast to provide useful interchanges with "local" trains. Even cross platform interchanges could be arranged.

10 minutes Please stop with these insane fantasy ideas of yours.

I reliably transfer between Euston and King's Cross in less than ten minutes
Additionally they could always transfer at Birmingham International if they think that going between Curzon Street and New Street is too much for them.

Either way you still save considerable amounts of time.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Additionally they could always transfer at Birmingham International if they think that going between Curzon Street and New Street is too much for them.

You do realise the two stations are the best part of a mile apart? If the 'people mover' is anything like the current skyrail it would be useless at carting large numbers of people.

If I can bring us back to the raison d'etre for HS2 - it's not to stop at farmyards

Since when do the likes of Coventry and Milton Keynes equate to 'farmyards'? That is a truly pathetic strawman argument. Coventry is far more of a 'business centre' than either Nottingham or Derby and has far greater demand for IC services.

 

[tbtc]

How many direct London trains to Oxenholme and Penrith currently have on an average day, out of interest?