High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[NotATrainspott]

Its on one of the busiest sections of the M25, and is notorious for traffic snarl ups, better to build a purpose built parkway, rather than a hybrid parkway airport station, that ends up doing neither well.

So you wouldn't have a Heathrow spur at all then? I imagine even you would see the nonsense involved in having one HS station only a few kilometres along the line from another.

That exact reasoning is why parkway stations are becoming the norm for new openings because people drive there cars a short distance and park them. Much easier than getting into the centre of town traffic.

Those parkway stations don't have to be on HS2 itself though - they can be on existing, upgraded or reopened lines which go to the interchange stations. It means the town can get its rail service back and people aren't forced to drive if they live near a classic connection station unlike just having HS2 parkways.

What reopenings, feel free to name one in England that has happened, with the exception of the line to Aylesbury Parkway, I cant think of any since 1997. East-West Rail has taken over 20 years to get to where it is now

I admit here that I am thinking of all this from a Scottish perspective where we've had a huge amount of success with our reopenings over the past few years. So much success in fact that it significantly helps the case for further ones in England, and should help when rail services in the North are devolved away from London control. In the case of Birmingham International I'm thinking of the Stonebridge Railway reopening which wouldn't happen if it weren't for HS2.

You have two stations in two separate locations, a fair distance apart, that means taking luggage, elderly, blind and disabled people off one station over to a people mover, across to another station, this will have a huge time penalty associated, you will most likely be looking at a 25-30 minute connection time between the two stations. Anybody who claims that Coventry will be well served by Birmingham International is living in a dream world and believing the HS2 Ltd hype.

Is that really that different to what is the case now at some of our labyrinthine main line stations at the moment? Any new build station, whether it be the 15m platform at Conon Bridge or the new Euston has to comply with disability regulations. Since they would get a chance to design both almost from the ground up they'll be able to provide full accessibility from the start and it's not like these will be unstaffed halts either so there would be help for those who truly need it to interchange. It doesn't matter how far away they are from each other when you only need to go (step free) from one platform to the people mover and then on to platform.

You have too many losers in the current plan, that is why public support is wavering. Crewe would be a missed opportunity to deliver benefits to the Staffordshire area.

Who really loses? The number of people served by HS2 city centre stations alone would go most of the way towards justifying the scheme since these are the most populous cities in the entire country. The people who won't have direct HS2 services will get much improved local and regional services, and in the long term once the East Coast demand comes off HS2 and onto HSx their towns/cities might now justify a captive station.

The main argument for HS2 steadily segues from pure capacity to journey time improvements as you go further up the line as the HS2 services leave the classic ones in the dust. Just because it doesn't stop outside your front door doesn't mean it's of no benefit to you.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

After a long read thru the comments are copied mostly from bnm and PR1Berske - replies in bold (I hope)!

The SW matters because it's an economically deprived area which needs to have the same opportunities for jobs and growth as the rest of England. Imagine spending a fraction of the 20/40/73+bn on rail in the SW, with better links within and beyond Cornwall and the Bristol city regions? What opportunities there could be to extend the same opportunities to one corner of England in greatest need of investment which seem to be only offered to London Birmingham Leeds Manchester.

Quite -Lowest wages in the UK are in the far South West

The Great Western Main Line is only just being electrified this decade. The West Coast Mainline was identified for electrification fifty years ago and only just needs to have full HSR built now. The South West has a lot of easy pickings like electrification still to go and these are happening simultaneously with HS2.

HS2 is broadly focused on London at the already stuffed Euston.

If it really goes ahead a proper through route to Paris is the the very minimum requirement - not Euston. Ideal for the British Library - its former goodsyard I think, but not especially convenient for anywhere else at all!

This is a perfectly reasonable statement and thus is why Labour want the HS1-HS2 link reviewed before being signed into law. Birmingham is well within competitive distance of Paris but services to Europe will only be able to take off truly once we're in Schengen.

I am suggesting that the existing timetables could be examined from top to bottom to find greater or more efficient use of existing stock.

Especially by joining and splitting trains on most lines N of London especially the WCML - seems so far not to have been considered.

Splitting and joining on such an intensive route which connects into so many others can't ever give the reliability requirement to make things much better. If something breaks down between Glasgow and Carlisle there isn't much you can do to overtake or get around it.

Of course , Alistair Darling will be well aware that it isn't really possible to guarantee investment on an uprade project over several decades. Target investment in education, job creation, housing, transport and capital projects in the regions. Make it more attractive for people to work, rest and play nearer home. Not another line to London. HS2 will do nothing to improve the lot of the vast majority of those on this island. If you focus this investment in the regions, you reduce demand for travel to/from London.

Hear, Hear!

Agreed, but this is what we see now with the widespread improvements rolling out across the North, the Valleys and the GW corridor.

Comparisons with Europe are flawed. France and Spain need high-speed rail because they are enormous countries:

the only really beneficial British equivalent would be from, say, London to Glasgow, Aberdeen or Penzance or Aberdeen to Penzance (or even just Aberdeen Exeter).

London to Newcastle is the same distance as Paris to Lyon which was the first European HSR scheme and is so successful they're having to semi-permanently couple two TGV Duplexes together to increase capacity. If we really want to kill the domestic air market stone dead we're going to need to build HSR from Aberdeen/Inverness to South Wales/Exeter and I see HS2 as being a useful first step towards that.

There are no regional voices loud enough promoting the scheme - it's entirely the work of the London elite and the Westminster bubble, and that's what makes this a London-centric scheme. There's no point in keep saying "There's a link to Manchester too you know!" when that's 30 or so years away, at which point Crossrail et al. would have provided yet more evidence that there's only one part of the country where investment really matters; London, London, London.

Hear, Hear! Again

Apart from all three political parties at Westminster (notwithstanding the backbenchers); the Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, and Sheffield local councils, the Scottish Government and the North East Chamber of Commerce. Yes, they might not be big names but the big names for the mainly London-based media tend to be based in the South.

"Whilst I agree that the Government does focus economic development on London, could this be because London is in fact the main economic driver and it's seen as safer to promote this than dabble with other regions?"
This is a circular argument!

It is indeed but the problems of investment and capacity in London are vastly different to those elsewhere. When people complain that they have to trundle about in a two-car Pacer for hours around Yorkshire this is a problem, but nothing that cannot be fixed simply by giving them better rolling stock and electrification at a not-insurmountable cost. You might have to extend a platform or two but the capacity issues aren't unsolvable with conventional methods unlike in London where they have all been done or are being done but still aren't enough. Beyond 12 cars and 24tph there's not a vast amount else you can do without having to build additional lines and we know that it's far more efficient in the long run to connect mainline termini via expensive NR-sized tunnels than to do as the Victorians did and build separate tube networks to connect them.

"At the moment we have a number of lines where we are trying to fit 125mph services and 75mph services, which leads to a lot of wasted capacity. Put the fastest services on a dedicated line for "high speed" trains and you have a lot more capacity for other trains."

Couldn't we just do this by putting say slower trains on, say, a widened upgraded Chiltern line for example?

The slow services whole purpose is to serve lots of local stations on that line. If you remove them from the WCML then you're going to have nothing serving the local services since the Chiltern line is a bit too far away to serve the WCML corridor. The only line where it doesn't matter which exact route it takes is a LDHS line which is the exact reason why these services are being taken off the WCML and put on a line without intermediate stations.

Apropos nothing. I was called out for talking "absolute tosh" by the Managing Editor of "RAIL" magazine today for my opposition of HS2.

Who has himself failed to report that all French TGV investment is on hold!

In France there aren't cities in between Paris and Lyon in the way we have cities built up along the various main line corridors, so their Lignes Classiques don't have a vast amount of traffic going over them and thus haven't been subject to the same amount of investment as they should have. Our existing WCML will be just as important but in a different way than what it is at the moment.

But that means thousands upon thousands of people, potentially millions, are paying through taxes for an ultra-modern high speed route they will never use. And that's no good use of public funds by any measure.

Spending for others education is fine but spending for others' transport any more than we already spend for London's is absolutely not.

If we don't build HS2 it will be even longer until we build lines to other places. It serves the cities representing at least one third of our entire population (UK: 63.1m London: 8.3m, Birmingham 3.6m, Manchester 2.5m, Liverpool 1.3m, Glasgow 2.8m, Edinburgh 0.8m, Newcastle 1.0m) so it's going to have a massive effect on a large number of people in the UK and a massive effect on the economy.

Well said,its too costly with no cap,& local lines like the Wrexham/Chester redouble are frowned on because real people want a few extra services locally.Too many vested interests in Parliament for HS2 for my liking, is this being built for MP's to get to London quicker like the Welsh North/South route for AMs & few else. Plus will real people afford to travel on HS2?

Quite so and doubt it and those of us in the SW of England for example are unlikely to have the opportunity1

We're seeing the biggest rail investment since the Victorians since we've rediscovered why railways were such a good thing in the first place. HS2 has a viable business case behind it since in no way is it going to sit unused, while some reopenings can't be guaranteed to be commercially successful. The vast majority of the big projects you're hearing about are going to be finished before HS2 stage one so imagine what will be in the pipeline by the completion of stage two. The electrification of lines will be continuous as the skills and tools can be kept in use while the network effects of additional electrification become greater and greater. The East Midlands arm of HS2 is the first section of a Cross Country HSR so it's not just London to country travel which is going to benefit. The money for HS2 is a very long term investment which wouldn't be spent on anything else, whether it be capital or current spending.

 

[HSTEd]

Wait.... all TGV Investment in France is on hold?

What about the Contournement Nîmes-Montpellier, LGV Sud Europe Atlantique, LGV Bretagne-Pays de la Loire and numerous other planned and committed projects?

This hardly looks like it is "on hold".

If we don't build HS2 it will be even longer until we build lines to other places. It serves the cities representing at least one third of our entire population (UK: 63.1m London: 8.3m, Birmingham 3.6m, Manchester 2.5m, Liverpool 1.3m, Glasgow 2.8m, Edinburgh 0.8m, Newcastle 1.0m) so it's going to have a massive effect on a large number of people in the UK and a massive effect on the economy.

You forgot Leeds and Sheffield (1.7m and 1.3m respectively).

That adds up to almost 40% of the British population.

EDIT:

And remember, the Core is always going to be the expensive part.
REmember putting high speed line from the current north-east end of HS2 between York and Leeds all the way to Newcastle was projected at only £4.5bn.

Short spurs to Liverpool from Wigan and to other destinations are not going to break the bank.

 

[The Ham]

Projects that do not win hearts and minds will fail, they always have, and always will, that is the way of the world, if you convince people that this will benefit them, and it does or even if it doesn't its part of a grand scheme that will benefit them, they will support it.

If there is something that HS2 has done badly with regards to its planning of the project it wasn't producing a realistic post HS2 timetable showing that most stations on the WCML could see improvements to their services in both journey time and/or frequency of service.

If there was an early press reliase quoting that by 2025 Coverntry could have double the number of services to London that it currently sees, electrification of more routes in the area, a new staion at Kenilworth and so on. It is likely that there would have been less opersition to HS2. Even if it added £2bn to the price tag at that stage it could have saved money in not having to fight quite so many battles to get it through.

However as no one appears to look at the bigger picture such a PR trick was missed.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Who really loses? The number of people served by HS2 city centre stations alone would go most of the way towards justifying the scheme since these are the most populous cities in the entire country. The people who won't have direct HS2 services will get much improved local and regional services, and in the long term once the East Coast demand comes off HS2 and onto HSx their towns/cities might now justify a captive station.


Most people who live in a city work in that city, shop in that city. One report suggested that 1 million Londoners have never left London. Belfast and Leeds are both in the top 10 most populous cities in the UK but what demand is there between the two?




If we don't build HS2 it will be even longer until we build lines to other places. It serves the cities representing at least one third of our entire population (UK: 63.1m London: 8.3m, Birmingham 3.6m, Manchester 2.5m, Liverpool 1.3m, Glasgow 2.8m, Edinburgh 0.8m, Newcastle 1.0m) so it's going to have a massive effect on a large number of people in the UK and a massive effect on the economy.

Oh please:roll: In the 2011 census, Birmingham passed the 1 million mark for the first time. The old West Midlands county encompasses about 2.6 million but that includes Coventry, Wolverhampton, Walsall & Dudley. I doubt if you did a survey of those towns and cities, that you would find the people feel they will be 'served' by HS2.

If there was an early press reliase quoting that by 2025 Coverntry could have double the number of services to London that it currently sees, electrification of more routes in the area, a new staion at Kenilworth and so on. It is likely that there would have been less opersition to HS2. Even if it added £2bn to the price tag at that stage it could have saved money in not having to fight quite so many battles to get it through

So where is this magic capacity that will allow Coventry to have 6tph fast to London AND for commuter service to increase AND for freight AND for 'better "regional" services' along the Trent AND maintain services to Stoke/Chester/the Lake District? It simply isn't possible. To improve commuter services and freight, the likes of Coventry and Stoke have to lose out - unless MK, Coventry and Stoke were on HS2.

 

[Snapper]

Why should I have to stand at Hatfield and watch East Coast trains fly through at 100mph on their way to Scotland without stopping? How dare this line not serve me!!!

Indeed. It's a completely spurious & illogical argument, but typical of the anti Hs2 mob.

The irony is that many local stations on lines like the ECML were closed to allow express services to be speeded up & remain competitive. With the advent of Hs2 & many expresses moved to the new line, that process could be reversed.

 

[YorkshireBear]

O



So where is this magic capacity that will allow Coventry to have 6tph fast to London AND for commuter service to increase AND for freight AND for 'better "regional" services' along the Trent AND maintain services to Stoke/Chester/the Lake District? It simply isn't possible. To improve commuter services and freight, the likes of Coventry and Stoke have to lose out - unless MK, Coventry and Stoke were on HS2.

Comes from having no non stop trains eating up the capacity.

 

[The Planner]

In the case of Birmingham International I'm thinking of the Stonebridge Railway reopening which wouldn't happen if it weren't for HS2.

That one is even less likely than HS2! it is just a consultants plan with no business case at all and with no real backing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If there was an early press reliase quoting that by 2025 Coverntry could have double the number of services to London that it currently sees, electrification of more routes in the area, a new staion at Kenilworth and so on.

The really cynical would suggest Kenilworth is only being rushed to appease the anti-HS2 people though....

 

[Philip Elliott]

Comes from having no non stop trains eating up the capacity.

How about stopping to think for once instead of quoting soundbites? Or even reading what is in front of you?:roll:

To maintain services to Stoke, the Lake District etc. will require non stop trains. Even if you slowed them slightly by adding an MK stop, the number of fast trains from Euston to MK means you can't transfer anything from the slow lines to make room for freight.

It's a myth that non stop trains eat up capacity - 18tph non stop on HS2 anyone? What matters is homogenity. At the moment all bar one are either non stop or one stop (the exception being the xx.49 to Brum via Northampton calling WFJ & MKC). The problem with all services stopping at MK is that without an additional platform, the headways are increased reducing the amount of trains that can run.

You simply cannot maintain the existing service pattern to the intermediate stations and provide additional commuter services and freight paths - if you could, you could do it NOW!

 

[Geezertronic]

Well you can either have all of the slows stopping at all stations south of Northampton, all of the fasts stopping at Milton Keynes Central, Watford Junction, Rugby, (excluding Cov and Brum services), TV stations etc... or you can take all of the non stop services onto a separate line (HS2) to allow slow and fast WCML services to be distributed more effectively amongst the southern and TV stations

 

[Snapper]

It's a myth that non stop trains eat up capacity - 18tph non stop on HS2 anyone? What matters is homogenity.

So it's not a myth is it. Because that's exactly the situation we have on our main lines (and will continue to have) without Hs2!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Sometimes it's easy to forget that not all the media comment is negative. Here's a list of positive stories from yesterday:

BBC Radio Five Live – 5 Live Drive - 27/08/2013 - 16:04

Jerry Blackett – Chief Executive of the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce:

· In the great ten cities north of London - places like Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds - we believe there there are 400,000 jobs to be created by this new scheme, that there are 20,000 construction jobs over the fifteen year build period. At a time when the economy needs work this is the sort of scheme that could make a big difference.



BBc1 - BBC News - 27/08/2013 - 13:14

Norman Baker – Government Transport Minister:

· We have to get more capacity- if we didn’t have HS2 people in the 2020’s wouldn’t thank us when they’re standing [on the train] all the way from Scotland to London.

Emma Antrobus – Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce:

· It is about allowing greater capacity on the railways, allowing towns and cities to be better connected, allowing people to do business across the country much more effectively.

· We cannot keep trying to improve a Victorian railway. We need to have something that is first class for this country.



BBC Radio 4 - You and Yours - 27/08/2013 - 12:32

Phil Hague - Business Editor Rail Magazine:

· HS1 has delivered much quicker journey times and it has brought investment with it, you only have to go to Kings Cross and St Pancras and compare it to what was there 20 years ago.

· This is the sort of thing that HS2 can deliver and this sort of thing has been seen around high speed stations in Japan.

· When capacity is released on the existing network you could see new services linking places like Leeds to Stansted Airport, we could see Middlesbrough with a direct service to London – these are all good things that could be done with the capacity released by HS2.



Norman Baker – Government Transport Minister:

· (Regarding the IoD statement) Fewer than 4 per cent of IoD members were surveyed.

· This is not an economic analysis by the IoD; this is simply their members answering a series of questions no doubt based on what they read in the newspapers, which hasn’t been entirely accurate.

· HS2 is absolutely essential for capacity reasons – over the last 15 years long distance rail travel has doubled in this country to 120 million journeys a year.

· Network Rail has said that is nothing is done the WCML will be chock-a-block by 2020-21.

· Rail travel is now at its greatest number of passengers since 1927, on a network that is half the size.

· (Regarding Alistair darlings comments) We [the Government] are electrifying 880 miles of track, we’ve got biggest [rail] investment programme in over 100 years, we’re opening lines, we’re opening stations, we’re putting new stations in and the present network is getting £37billion in the next five year period.

· Forgetting HS2 we have the biggest investment programme since Victorian times, which includes improvements to the ECML.

· We have to get more capacity on the network and HS2 is absolutely crucial to that.



Beth West – Commercial Director HS2 Ltd:

· This autumn we will release our economic case and we’re working with some of the best economists in the country to verify and validate the work we’ve been doing.

· I’m disappointed with the [IoD] analysis. It was a very small sample set of the members - 1,300 out of 38,000, which is 3 per cent – so, it was really very misleading. It is not a robust statistically analysis.

· The business community is incredibly important for us and I looking forward to working with our supply chain to come up with really good ways to make sure we’ve got the costs contained.



BBC Radio Five Live – Breakfast - 27/08/2013 - 08:56 and 05:36

Emma Antrobus – Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce:

· We’re hoping that HS2 will make a massive transformation to rail transport for the country as a whole because what we are desperate short of is capacity.

· By building a new railway line that will take some of the point-to-point traffic off the current WCML and ECML it means that those lines are then freed up to allow the towns in between to have direct services into the major city areas.

· (Regarding the £70billion budget) the £70billion [figure] is not really corroborated; there’s quite a lot of speculation and political jockeying going on.



Simon Harris – Editor of Rail News:

· I’m finding it very hard to stand still with the amount of spinning that has been going on over the last few weeks! I find it surreal that a former Labour chancellor [Alistair Darling] should apparently be taking his cue from a right wing free market think tank [IEA].

· There seems to be a concerted effort to scupper this scheme and its getting support from some people who, to be honest, should know better. I think this is politics spinning fast at the moment maybe because there’s not too much real news around in August.

· Let’s not forget that this figure of £50billion includes the cost of the trains and also over £14billion of contingency that may not need to be spent.

· If HS2 didn’t happen this money would simply disappear, there is nothing to indicate that this £50billion would still be allocated to transport – much less railways.

· As for Mr Darling saying that nothing will be spent on the rest of the railway, the reality just is not that. There’s £12billion due to be invested between now and 2019.

· The question is do we need HS2? Bear in mind that it [£50billion] is being spent between now and 2032, it’s a big figure if you add it all up but it’s only a billion or two a year in a national budget of £750billion is not really very much.

· The big question is if we don’t do it how do we cope with increasing demand on the railways. All this vague talk of upgrading existing mainlines doesn’t actually work when you look at it in practice: what are you going to do, demolish half of Harrow and Watford to widen the WCML? Because that’s what you would be talking about.



Yorkshire Post - GlenHS2 vital even at over £50bn says business –26/08/13

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/mai ... -1-5986283

Chris Glen - Regional Chairman for the Federation of Small Business:

· HS2 is vital for economic growth in Yorkshire, even if the scheme costs more than £50bn to bring it to fruition.

· Replacing Victorian era rail infrastructure between the North and London is essential.

· It is not necessarily just about saving journey time to London, it’s about the additional capacity that will become available on other lines, which will give us more options for more trains and better intercity journeys within Yorkshire and across the Pennines.

· Faster travel time to London potentially brings business from London to Yorkshire but quicker journey times and more journeys between towns and cities in Yorkshire is where the big benefits are for small to medium-sized businesses in the region.

· Some of the higher price estimates for the project had been surreptitiously inflated by costs not directly related to the line.

· We are working with a transport infrastructure that was laid down by the Victorians. If some of those people who are decrying this had been about in Victorian times we might not have any railways at all.

· We are supposed to be one of the top economies in the world and we should have a transport system that matches that.



The Daily Star - HS2 Plan ‘on track’ and Within Budget - 26/08/13

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest- ... hin-budget

Alison Munro – CEO HS2 Ltd:

· The costs are firmly under control and we intend to deliver Britain’s high speed rail network within the £42.6billion budget.

· Passenger numbers continue to grow and the time when we reach capacity crunch is approaching. There is no HS2 alternative that delivers the benefits.”



The Independent - Labour threatens to withdraw support for HS2 rail project - 25/08/13

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 84151.html

Alison Munro – CEO HS2 Ltd:

· In numerous interviews in the last seven days I have stated categorically the costs of HS2 are firmly under control and that we fully intend to deliver HS2 within the £42.6bn budget set by the Government.

· Passenger numbers continue to grow on our main north/south rail arteries and the time when we reach capacity crunch is approaching.

· There is no alternative that delivers the benefits of HS2. Through building a world class 21st century high speed rail network that will link our great cities as never before we will provide the capacity we need on those routes and free up space to expand commuter services and freight."



The Telegraph - HS2 has the power to inspire a generation - 25/08/13

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... ation.html

Pete Waterman:

· Twice as many train journeys are made today as 20 years ago and the network is considerably smaller now.

· Last weekend the media reported that 500,000 people would be affected by construction traffic and villages up to 40 miles from the route would be blighted after the Campaign to Protect Rural England published information supplied to it by HS2 Ltd. It wasn’t true: CPRE supports HS2 on the basis of its being a sustainable transport scheme, and its chief executive, Shaun Spiers, clarified that last week.

· We also saw the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) publish a report that claimed the cost of HS2 was set to reach £80 billion. To get to that figure it lumped in £30 billion of other transport schemes which, it admitted elsewhere in the report, would probably never be built. This was quite rightly dismissed by HS2’s chief executive, Alison Munro, as ''absurd’’.

· The economies of northern England and the Midlands are playing an important part in the recovery of the UK from recession. Liverpool has the second fastest growing economy in the country, while Leeds has a vibrant city centre and Sheffield has attracted investment in advanced manufacturing to beat off competition from other European cities. We know that successful economies rely on efficient and reliable transport links. All of these cities will be served by HS2 and I am convinced they will thrive through the vastly improved connections it will bring.

· I want the schoolchildren of the North-west to be captivated and inspired to take up careers in construction and engineering, and for the students at universities in Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham, to have the opportunity to choose where they work once they graduate.

· HS2 is a 20-year programme that could transform the skills base of the country. We lament how few young people go into engineering and science. Today more than a quarter of our science, technology, engineering and maths graduates go on to take non-engineering jobs.

· High Speed Two has been predicted to create 400,000 jobs and 2,000 apprenticeships. Twenty thousand people will be employed during construction.



Conservative Home - Andrew Smith: Ignore the HS2 naysayers and have confidence in Britain's future - 25/08/13

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platf ... based.html

Andrew Smith is a Conservative Councillor in Westminster:

· The recent suggestions about the exploding costs of the project do seem to be divorced from realty. The IEA’s estimate of £80 billion seems to be based on questionable assumptions about significant future route changes, and claims that that any investment delivered near new stations should be seen as cost associated with the scheme.

· The claim that Treasury officials believe costs might rise to £73 billion seem to be based on a statistical sleight of hand by adding VAT and inflation over the construction period. This is against Treasury guidance on how projects should be costed.

· The Treasury wanted to kill off the investment in the M25, the Jubilee Line extension, HS1 and Crossrail. I am sure that if the clock could be turned back few people would want to see these successful schemes disappear.

· The cost estimate of the cost benefit ratio of HS2 to Birmingham at 1:7 is much stronger than the pre-construction estimates of the Jubilee Line extension and the cost benefit ratio for the second phase of HS2 linking Leeds and Manchester is expected to be much stronger than the first phase.

· The successful delivery of the 2012 Olympics, the current construction of Crossrail -which is on target and on budget - and the success of other major infrastructure schemes should show us that the UK can successfully deliver major infrastructure that can transform economic growth.

· We therefore need to look beyond the doubts of the HS2 naysayers and have confidence in our country’s future and the role that infrastructure like HS2 could play in getting us where we want to go as a nation.



New Statesman - It would be an act of national self-mutilation for Labour to cancel HS2 – 24/08/13

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... cancel-hs2

Andrew Adonis - Labour peer and former transport secretary:

· The case for High Speed Two is as strong now as when Labour committed itself to the project in March 2010 and virtually none of the arguments of the latest critics, including the Institute of Economic Affairs, affect it.

· HS2 trebles existing rail capacity between the conurbations it serves, to the benefit not only of intercity services but also local and freight services because of the capacity freed up on the existing lines. Detailed costings that I commissioned in 2009 suggested that to secure just two-thirds of HS2's extra capacity by upgrading existing lines would cost more in cash terms than building HS2.

 

[YorkshireBear]

How about stopping to think for once instead of quoting soundbites? Or even reading what is in front of you?:roll:

To maintain services to Stoke, the Lake District etc. will require non stop trains. Even if you slowed them slightly by adding an MK stop, the number of fast trains from Euston to MK means you can't transfer anything from the slow lines to make room for freight.

It's a myth that non stop trains eat up capacity - 18tph non stop on HS2 anyone? What matters is homogenity. At the moment all bar one are either non stop or one stop (the exception being the xx.49 to Brum via Northampton calling WFJ & MKC). The problem with all services stopping at MK is that without an additional platform, the headways are increased reducing the amount of trains that can run.

You simply cannot maintain the existing service pattern to the intermediate stations and provide additional commuter services and freight paths - if you could, you could do it NOW!

Non stop trains on the southern WCML eat up capacity then. Sorry for my lack of clarity. I guarantee it will happen again sometime.

Why are these places going to loose services I don't understand? If everyone stops at the same station that increases capacity because none is lost by fast services speeding through? I don't understand where you get your understanding from, What your saying makes no sense.

 

[Dave1987]

How about stopping to think for once instead of quoting soundbites? Or even reading what is in front of you?:roll:

To maintain services to Stoke, the Lake District etc. will require non stop trains. Even if you slowed them slightly by adding an MK stop, the number of fast trains from Euston to MK means you can't transfer anything from the slow lines to make room for freight.

It's a myth that non stop trains eat up capacity - 18tph non stop on HS2 anyone? What matters is homogenity. At the moment all bar one are either non stop or one stop (the exception being the xx.49 to Brum via Northampton calling WFJ & MKC). The problem with all services stopping at MK is that without an additional platform, the headways are increased reducing the amount of trains that can run.

You simply cannot maintain the existing service pattern to the intermediate stations and provide additional commuter services and freight paths - if you could, you could do it NOW!

Like I said before he (you know who) has said that HS2 is crucial for freight capacity. He did show me how and why. I think the Stoke point is crucial point but the rest I believe can be solved. When I see him I will ask him about your points and ask what his opinion is.

 

[The Planner]

Stoke seems odd, Colwich is always the place that has historically been the crunch point.

 

[jon0844]

Like I said before he (you know who) has said that HS2 is crucial for freight capacity. He did show me how and why. I think the Stoke point is crucial point but the rest I believe can be solved. When I see him I will ask him about your points and ask what his opinion is.

If places like Sheffield are securing big manufacturing contracts, surely they need better ways to move freight - and HS2 will give them more opportunities to do so on the classic lines that will have more paths freed up.

Of course, selling a scheme like HS2 on the basis of train movements that a lot of people don't often see, is going to be a pretty tough job. Especially dealing with those that will say 'Why not get those businesses to pay for their own line?'.

However, if businesses in the north can now move their goods to places like London Gateway, that could be very good for jobs. In fact, it might actually encourage more businesses to consider relocating.

Out of interest, would HS2 be built in principle as a 24 hour line (with single line operation for routine engineering work)? If so, could freight also be routed along this line at night?

 

[The Planner]

Not with conventional traction as the signalling system will be different.

 

[jon0844]

Not with conventional traction as the signalling system will be different.

But that can be addressed between now and the opening of the line?

 

[NotATrainspott]

But that can be addressed between now and the opening of the line?

The plan is for ETCS Level 2 which is the same as being rolled out on the Great Western and East Coast Mainlines. I can't see any new build stock being built without ERTMS built in from now on and they're still going to need to fit it to a large proportion of the existing fleet.

 

[Snapper]

London School Of Economics: "High Speed Rail is a critical national infrastructure" IOD & others take note! http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandp...er&utm_content=buffer3fc45&utm_medium=twitter …

 

[tbtc]

The SW matters because it's an economically deprived area which needs to have the same opportunities for jobs and growth as the rest of England. Imagine spending a fraction of the 20/40/73+bn on rail in the SW, with better links within and beyond Cornwall and the Bristol city regions?

As has been pointed out, a lot of money is being spent on the GWML, with electrification to Bristol etc.

Rail is a mass transportation so the business case for spending a bucketload of cash makes a lot more sense in areas of denser population - I don't think it would make sense to have the same railway subsidy per person in London as it does in Shetland. People in rural areas get government subsidy in plenty of other ways.

If there is something that HS2 has done badly with regards to its planning of the project it wasn't producing a realistic post HS2 timetable showing that most stations on the WCML could see improvements to their services in both journey time and/or frequency of service.

If there was an early press reliase quoting that by 2025 Coverntry could have double the number of services to London that it currently sees, electrification of more routes in the area, a new staion at Kenilworth and so on. It is likely that there would have been less opersition to HS2. Even if it added £2bn to the price tag at that stage it could have saved money in not having to fight quite so many battles to get it through.

However as no one appears to look at the bigger picture such a PR trick was missed.

I agree - if you think that there's capacity on the WCML for (say) ten services an hour on the fast line and ten services an hour on the slow line - all split evenly to maintain space - then there's a lot of scope to give a "turn up and go" frequency at places like Watford Junction, Milton Keynes and Rugby that currently see most services whizz through without stopping.

Plus, with less need for so many of the paths through Milton Keynes to run fast to "the north", you've scope to divert more services via Northampton, or stop more services at Bletchley for the EW connections.

And space for more WLL services to Shepherds Bush/ Croydon/ Gatwick/ Brighton (etc) too.

It'd be good to see a proposed WCML timetable showing how many extra services an hour the stations south of the Rugby junction could get if there wasn't the current fixation with running services non-stop from London to Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington.

I agree - we've missed a trick in the PR "battle" here.

 

[HowardGWR]

You forgot Leeds and Sheffield (1.7m and 1.3m respectively).

That adds up to almost 40% of the British population.

EDIT:

And remember, the Core is always going to be the expensive part.
REmember putting high speed line from the current north-east end of HS2 between York and Leeds all the way to Newcastle was projected at only £4.5bn.

Short spurs to Liverpool from Wigan and to other destinations are not going to break the bank.

The OP and HSTEd also forgot Derby /Nottingham so add in another million or so.

Plus, then, one has to add in all points north of the two northern junctions to HS2 to get the numbers who will benefit with 'compatibles' services.

Plus one has to add in all those who have junctions at Crewe (e.g. Liverpool) and that adds a few million more. Then there are the airport stations who are accessed by other services, e.g. Crossrail - better add in a few more millions for those outside London.

- and so it goes on. Not worth bothering to do so really. It all comes back to that York councillor who did not see how HS2 would benefit them (until it was explained to him).

 

[Philip Elliott]

Non stop trains on the southern WCML eat up capacity then. Sorry for my lack of clarity. I guarantee it will happen again sometime.

Why are these places going to loose services I don't understand? If everyone stops at the same station that increases capacity because none is lost by fast services speeding through? I don't understand where you get your understanding from, What your saying makes no sense.

It really is simply, to gain freight capacity and more commuter services we will have to have some "LM" services calling at the likes of Hemel, Leighton and Bletchley on the fast lines. They will really eat up capacity. As a result there will not be the capacity to provide 2tph to Stoke (one is currently non stop), 1tph to the Lake District (non stop), 1tph to Chester, 3tph to Stockport (2 via Stoke, 1 via Wilmslow), 1tph Trent Valley (EPS125), 1tph Trent Valley (100/110), 3tph Coventry (62 mins, ie 1 stop).

Non stop trains can travel at minimum signalling headway (3 mins) apart whereas as soon you start calling en route then the headway extends to 4 or 5 minutes. As soon as you add in a Watford stop on top of an MK stop then you are looking at 8-10 mins before the next fast service to MK nevermind the aforementioned 'commuter' stops on the fast.

As a result NR's study concluded that 9tph off peak (12tph peak) would be possible based on 3tph EBW (more or less as now but all call MK), 3tph to Birmingham via Northampton (calling at various of Watford, Hemel, Leighton, Bletchley and MK) and 3tph for the Trent Valley. Now 3tph isn't nearly to run:

2tph express to Stoke
2tph Trent Valley (1 'fast', 1 'slow')
1tph Chester
1tph Lake District/Lancaster/Carlisle

Nevermind a service for Wilmslow or 3tph to Stockport or to restore direct links such as MK & Nuneaton to Liverpool.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It'd be good to see a proposed WCML timetable showing how many extra services an hour the stations south of the Rugby junction could get if there wasn't the current fixation with running services non-stop from London to Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington.

I agree - we've missed a trick in the PR "battle" here.

Something like that is buried in the HS2 website, go digging, if by time i finish football tonight you haven'out found it ill find it.

 

[Dave1987]

It really is simply, to gain freight capacity and more commuter services we will have to have some "LM" services calling at the likes of Hemel, Leighton and Bletchley on the fast lines. They will really eat up capacity. As a result there will not be the capacity to provide 2tph to Stoke (one is currently non stop), 1tph to the Lake District (non stop), 1tph to Chester, 3tph to Stockport (2 via Stoke, 1 via Wilmslow), 1tph Trent Valley (EPS125), 1tph Trent Valley (100/110), 3tph Coventry (62 mins, ie 1 stop).

Non stop trains can travel at minimum signalling headway (3 mins) apart whereas as soon you start calling en route then the headway extends to 4 or 5 minutes. As soon as you add in a Watford stop on top of an MK stop then you are looking at 8-10 mins before the next fast service to MK nevermind the aforementioned 'commuter' stops on the fast.

As a result NR's study concluded that 9tph off peak (12tph peak) would be possible based on 3tph EBW (more or less as now but all call MK), 3tph to Birmingham via Northampton (calling at various of Watford, Hemel, Leighton, Bletchley and MK) and 3tph for the Trent Valley. Now 3tph isn't nearly to run:

2tph express to Stoke
2tph Trent Valley (1 'fast', 1 'slow')
1tph Chester
1tph Lake District/Lancaster/Carlisle

Nevermind a service for Wilmslow or 3tph to Stockport or to restore direct links such as MK & Nuneaton to Liverpool.

I can't establish as to whether you are pro or anti HS2 to be honest.

 

[Snapper]

This from the LSE is worth reading: “The economic benefits of high speed rail in Europe can now be demonstrated beyond doubt” http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/4126

 

[PR1Berske]

From the Buckingham Free Press. I have nothing to add other than I hope the case succeeds and HS2 fails.

A DATE has been set for the Supreme Court appeal against HS2.

Chiltern District Council Leader Nick Rose revealed at yesterday's meeting of the authority's cabinet the case would go to Britain's highest law court on October 15 and 16.

Campaigners failed at an earlier Court of Appeal hearing to have the decision to proceed with the controversial project re-examined.

They were however given leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, and a date has now been set for that hearing.

Cllr Rose said at Tuesday's meeting: "We are working on many aspects, not least preparing for various petitioning aspects because of the inadequacy of HS2 Ltd's information so far."

Court of Appeal judges gave the campaign groups permission to appeal on the grounds of a lack of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), saying this should have been undertaken before a decision was made to proceed with HS2 in January 2012.

At July's judgement hearing Judge Lord Justice Sullivan said: "If, as I have concluded, an SEA is required and there has not been substantial compliance with the SEA Directive, it would be difficult to think of a more egregious breach of the Directive given the scale of the HS2 project and the likely extent of its effects on the environment."

Chiltern District Council are one of three local authorities who will be contributing towards the cost of the appeal hearing, with the money coming from their reserves.

The London Borough of Hillingdon and North Warwickshire Borough Council are also helping to foot the bill.

Source: http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/10637866.Date_set_for_HS2_Supreme_Court_appeal/

 

[Geezertronic]

From the Buckingham Free Press. I have nothing to add other than I hope the case succeeds and HS2 fails.

I hope their case is dismissed for the grand folly that it is

 

[MidlandMainlie]

From the Buckingham Free Press. I have nothing to add other than I hope the case succeeds and HS2 fails.

How much is this latest legal challenge costing, given two previous legal challenges have failed at an estimated cost of 500 thousand of local tax payers money. :-x
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I hope their case is dismissed for the grand folly that it is

Hear Hear!

 

[PR1Berske]

It's unfortunate that public money is being used for the court cases, but councils have no choice. They don't want to be sliced into bits by HS2 and have a right to demonstrate against a Government's decision if they feel it correct and proper to do so.

No local authority should feel unable to fight against a national government's decision.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

It's unfortunate that public money is being used for the court cases, but councils have no choice. They don't want to be sliced into bits by HS2 and have a right to demonstrate against a Government's decision if they feel it correct and proper to do so.

No local authority should feel unable to fight against a national government's decision.

I don't disagree with you on that but there are ways and means of doing so and wasting tax payers money on legal challenges that are likely to fail is not one of them. It would be much better if Bucks County Council engaged in a positive dialogue with HS2 Ltd and the DfE over ways the impact of HS2 could be minimised in the county through better mitigation rather than screaming and shouting and throwing all their toys out of the pram which is getting them nowhere.

 

[DarloRich]

It's unfortunate that public money is being used for the court cases, but councils have no choice. They don't want to be sliced into bits by HS2 and have a right to demonstrate against a Government's decision if they feel it correct and proper to do so.

No local authority should feel unable to fight against a national government's decision.

what total and utter wibbling rubbish. Sliced into bits :roll: what tosh. Like the M40 doesnt run through the area already!