High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[Metrailway]

From The Telegraph:

HS2 will clog up the rail system, warns freight expert

The head of the body representing Britain’s rail freight industry has dismissed ministers’ claims that HS2 will free capacity on the railways, warning that it will in fact lead to a “capacity crunch” on parts of the system.

Lord Berkeley, chairman of the Rail Freight Group, attacked the Government and HS2 Ltd for “bulldozing through” a badly-designed project which “just doesn’t link up properly with the existing transport network”.

The peer’s criticisms — which undermine ministers’ main justification for the scheme – are the latest blow to a project suffering a collapse in political and business support amid a 30 per cent rise in costs and scathing reports by the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office.

Patrick McLoughlin, the Transport Secretary, insisted last week that the £45  billion HS2 scheme would be a “heart bypass for the clogged arteries of our transport system”. The new line would, he said, free space on existing tracks, allowing “more room for local trains, more space for direct services to London from places that can’t get them today and more space for freight trains, to free up our motorways”.

But Lord Berkeley said: “There will be capacity gains in the South, but there will be a capacity crunch in the Midlands and North, particularly in the first phase of the scheme.

“What amazes me is they’ve got to this stage without doing a timetable of trains to demonstrate that it’ll fit.”

HS2 is supposed to remove trains from the existing West Coast route, described by Mr McLoughlin as “already operating close to its limit”. But the new line will initially be built only between London and the West Midlands.

For at least the first six years after it opens, seven HS2 trains an hour to Manchester, Liverpool and points further north will have to join the crowded West Coast tracks anyway, just north of Birmingham, to complete the second half of their journeys.

“The rail freight industry is pretty worried,” said Lord Berkeley. “That is a big problem and HS2 don’t seem to have any solution.
(Read More)

 

[Geezertronic]

Two possibilities.

Best case scenario. Google cars are up and running, at high speed, within five years and this idiotic project is cancelled before serious money is spent bulldozing the countryside.

Worst case scenario, Google cars take 15 years and HS2 is built just in time to be cancelled.

You should be ridiculing that because it is truly ridiculous. Someone has been watching iRobot this evening...

 

[PR1Berske]

You should be ridiculing that because it is truly ridiculous. Someone has been watching iRobot this evening...

Well I tell you one thing. Whilst Google Cars are far off fantasy, superfast broadband and advances in "off site" communication are not. Pity we're not putting money into broadband now.

(And interesting story above, first significantly "anti" post from the freight industry I think)

 

[WatcherZero]

Well I tell you one thing. Whilst Google Cars are far off fantasy, superfast broadband and advances in "off site" communication are not. Pity we're not putting money into broadband now.

(And interesting story above, first significantly "anti" post from the freight industry I think)

We are, billions of pounds of Government funding to roll it out in the citys (Including £1.2bn subsidy given to BT alone) and hundreds of millions to roll it out in the countryside where the rollout has been deemed a expensive white elephant for costing a fortune for very few customer connections.


Lord Berkeley argument is interesting:
London-Birmingham freight is too crowded
HS2 Phase 1 built
London-Birmingham freight is ok now but Birmingham to Manchester freight is too crowded
HS2 Phase 2 built
London-Manchester freight is ok now but Wigan-Scotland is too crowded

His argument supports the need for HS2 and it needs to be more ambitious but his words dont though reading the way the rest of the info has been twisted by the newspaper even thats open to question. Instead they are portraying him as making the argument that if he runs a fresh bath the water is too hot therefore he shouldnt bathe.

 

[The Ham]

Well I tell you one thing. Whilst Google Cars are far off fantasy, superfast broadband and advances in "off site" communication are not. Pity we're not putting money into broadband now.

(And interesting story above, first significantly "anti" post from the freight industry I think)

It sounds more like this "anti" story is just trying to get HS2 built faster so as to not to have freight stuck because of congestion. The story has an anti twist, but another reporter could have put a different spin (not that either spin is better or more right) on it so as to make it sound like we need to build HS2 faster.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

From The Telegraph:

If you look past the obvious anti-HS2 bias of Andrew Gilligan and the Telegraph then Lord Berkeley puts forward an interesting argument that in the seven year period between the completion of phase 1 of HS2 in 2026 and the completion of phase 2 in 2033 then capacity for freight could be reduced on the WCML between Lichfield and Crewe because of the patching of HS2 services along this stretch of track. What measures could be put in place to mitigate against this apart from grade separation of Norton Bridge junction?

 

[edwin_m]

If you look past the obvious anti-HS2 bias of Andrew Gilligan and the Telegraph then Lord Berkeley puts forward an interesting argument that in the seven year period between the completion of phase 1 of HS2 in 2026 and the completion of phase 2 in 2033 then capacity for freight could be reduced on the WCML between Lichfield and Crewe because of the patching of HS2 services along this stretch of track. What measures could be put in place to mitigate against this apart from grade separation of Norton Bridge junction?

Send some freight via the MML and Stenson-Crewe or Hope Valley?

 

[tbtc]

For at least the first six years after it opens, seven HS2 trains an hour to Manchester, Liverpool and points further north will have to join the crowded West Coast tracks anyway, just north of Birmingham, to complete the second half of their journeys

Well, yeah.

But what the article misses is that these services are generally already running non-stop from London to Stafford/ Crewe/ Stoke/ Warrington, so can presumably still fill the same paths north of "Lichfield", so no need for extra paths?

A non-story (other than it encourages the need for the full HS2 to be built as soon as possible, though this isn't really practical)

 

[jon0844]

Well I tell you one thing. Whilst Google Cars are far off fantasy, superfast broadband and advances in "off site" communication are not. Pity we're not putting money into broadband now.

Broadband has been around for almost 15 years, so wouldn't we already see everyone working from home? I had a 0.5Mb ADSL connection goodness knows how long ago, while you could also get 1 or 2Mbit in some locations. I doubt anyone gets much less than this today, and that's pretty much good enough for most needs.

Fact is, faster Internet isn't going to reduce demand on travel.

 

[Chris125]

Typical bile from Gilligan, helpfully disected by the following blog post

Chris

 

[Deerfold]

Broadband has been around for almost 15 years, so wouldn't we already see everyone working from home? I had a 0.5Mb ADSL connection goodness knows how long ago, while you could also get 1 or 2Mbit in some locations. I doubt anyone gets much less than this today, and that's pretty much good enough for most needs.

Fact is, faster Internet isn't going to reduce demand on travel.

Indeed. I've been working from home since I had a 2 Mbit connection. I've now got an 8 Mbit connection and am considering upgrading to a (recently available) 76 Mb connection.

I realise these are maximums. However I don't work from home any more often than I did with the 2 Mbit connection - and the speed required by my connection to work is still not enough to eat up a 2Mbit connection.

 

[HSTEd]

This idea that broadband will not make transport obsolete should not be taken as a reason not to pursue broadband though.
~£20bn would see the deployment of dedicated gigabit fibre connections to every property in the United Kingdom.
Such a thing would have transformative effects on society and the economy considering the network's operating costs once installed would be tiny and thus the broadband fees would be tiny. (Even if the TV licence was replaced by a broadband tax).

 

[Geezertronic]

Well I tell you one thing. Whilst Google Cars are far off fantasy, superfast broadband and advances in "off site" communication are not. Pity we're not putting money into broadband now.

(And interesting story above, first significantly "anti" post from the freight industry I think)

Since I work in that industry, I am very familiar with the investment in broadband. And for the record, even though I work for a large IT Consulting company performing work for several large Telecommunications companies, I work from home 2 days a week and the other three are spent in locations 90 miles and beyond away from where I live. My 60Mb broadband is no substitute for face to face meetings, and that view is an instruction from the top of the company I work for

 

[Deerfold]

I've just taken part in the latest ICM poll.

The questions felt to be (slightly) biased to produce views against HS2 and more importantly rather odd -

I was asked if I knew of a railway line being planned between London and then Birmingham and then possibly Leeds and Manchester.

Then I was asked if I knew of a railway line being planned between London and Birmingham. I asked if that wasn't just the same one...

There were about 15 questions about HS2 - and then 1 about Syria!

(And then some party political ones).

 

[RichmondCommu]

Well, yeah.

But what the article misses is that these services are generally already running non-stop from London to Stafford/ Crewe/ Stoke/ Warrington, so can presumably still fill the same paths north of "Lichfield", so no need for extra paths?

But surely this clashes with the idea that running trains on HS2 frees up capacity on the WCML? Now unless we start cutting back services north of Lichfield this is clearly not going to happen.

A non-story (other than it encourages the need for the full HS2 to be built as soon as possible, though this isn't really practical)

It's worth remembering here that Lord Berkeley is most definitely 'pro rail' and judging by his column in Railway Magazine he certainly knows his stuff. He certainly doesn't come across as being sensationalist.

 

[TheKnightWho]

But surely this clashes with the idea that running trains on HS2 frees up capacity on the WCML? Now unless we start cutting back services north of Lichfield this is clearly not going to happen.

That, however, isn't the area in which the WCML is full or close to being full.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Typical bile from Gilligan, helpfully disected by the following blog post

Chris

I think we could do without the vulgar language though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That, however, isn't the area in which the WCML is full or close to being full.

But as we are continually reminded by other posters we need to think of the future! That is the whole rational behind the construction of HS2 otherwise we wouldn't be planning to extend HS2 to Manchester / Leeds and run services to Liverpool / Wigan and York et al.

 

[TheKnightWho]

But as we are continually reminded by other posters we need to think of the future! That is the whole rational behind the construction of HS2 otherwise we wouldn't be planning to extend HS2 to Manchester / Leeds and run services to Liverpool / Wigan and York et al.

Of course, but you can't expect them to do the entire thing at once. Complaining that it won't ease all bottlenecks is hardly an argument against it, unless you can come up with a cheaper proposal that will in fact do more.

 

[The Ham]

But surely this clashes with the idea that running trains on HS2 frees up capacity on the WCML? Now unless we start cutting back services north of Lichfield this is clearly not going to happen.

The way HS2 creates more capacity is by running the same number of trains, but as the captive sets will bbe to europian sizes are then able to take more passengers.

The proposals are for the off peak nomber of trains to be 10 per hour rarther than the current 9 per hour (although some of these will only run as far as Birmingham)

It's worth remembering here that Lord Berkeley is most definitely 'pro rail' and judging by his column in Railway Magazine he certainly knows his stuff. He certainly doesn't come across as being sensationalist.

although that doesn't stop others using what he says and putting a spin on it so that it is not seen as pro for individual projects.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Of course, but you can't expect them to do the entire thing at once. Complaining that it won't ease all bottlenecks is hardly an argument against it, unless you can come up with a cheaper proposal that will in fact do more.

Please refrain from attempting to put words into my mouth. I've never suggested that the completion date be brought forward; indeed the nation couldn't afford to do it. However, there is no doubt that according to the current proposals there will be capacity problems on that part of the WCML for number of years before the 2nd stage is built. And from what I've just read you appear to agree with me.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The way HS2 creates more capacity is by running the same number of trains, but as the captive sets will bbe to europian sizes are then able to take more passengers.

I concur, but don't forget those captive trains will be of no use north of Birmingham until the 2nd stage is built. Hence the issue that has been raised by Lord Berkeley.

although that doesn't stop others using what he says and putting a spin on it so that it is not seen as pro for individual projects.

However, that is not the fault of Lord Berkeley!

 

[The Ham]

However, that is not the fault of Lord Berkeley!

Nor did I imply that it was.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Please refrain from attempting to put words into my mouth. I've never suggested that the completion date be brought forward; indeed the nation couldn't afford to do it. However, there is no doubt that according to the current proposals there will be capacity problems on that part of the WCML for number of years before the 2nd stage is built. And from what I've just read you appear to agree with me.

Who is putting words in whose mouth now? I thought that any points I made were tacitly taking any assumptions (such as that the WCML would be full between those points) that had been made that were key to the discussion, however likely they are to occur. It doesn't necessarily mean that I actually agree with them.

My point still stands, however. If there will still be capacity problems for a few years, it doesn't actually preclude building a new line that adds only part of the capacity that we need. This is especially true if there are plans in the works that will ensure that they will be relieved in due course. I fail to see how a new diversionary route will add to capacity problems simply by virtue of having been built.

 

[tbtc]

But surely this clashes with the idea that running trains on HS2 frees up capacity on the WCML? Now unless we start cutting back services north of Lichfield this is clearly not going to happen

When the London - Lichfield part of HS2 is opened, the trains which currently run non-stop from London to Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington (etc) can be diverted via the HS2 route to free up capacity on the Trent Valley/ Milton Keynes/ Watford part of the WCML.

They could still run in the same paths as now between Lichfield and Manchester/ Liverpool/ Glasgow etc (no new paths required, no additional pressure north of Lichfield).

I don't see why this is a problem? Unless people are suggesting that (in the intermediate years, before the full HS2 infrastructure is built) we keep running non-stop services between London and Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington (etc) up the WCML as well as running similar services via HS2?

The only other alternative is to have the infrastructure sat unused (whilst non-stop trains through Milton Keynes etc mean that there's no space for additional passenger capacity on the southern end of the WCML)?

 

[Philip Elliott]

When the London - Lichfield part of HS2 is opened, the trains which currently run non-stop from London to Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington (etc) can be diverted via the HS2 route to free up capacity on the Trent Valley/ Milton Keynes/ Watford part of the WCML.

Except of course that the plan is for 3tph to Manchester on HS2 and only two run non-stop to Lichfield so there is another path created already. One of the supposed benefits of HS2 is the doubling of service along the Trent Valley, so there is another path along the section. Then we need room for the freight...

 

[Chris125]

The RFG have responded to Gilligan's article by restating their support for the project - RFG Position statement on HS2

The Rail Freight Group (RFG) strongly supports the development of HS2, which will provide additional rail capacity, a benefit of the project which is absolutely essential for the future growth of the rail freight sector and to continue to encourage more goods off of the UK’s road network.

Ahead of the Hybrid Bill, it has become clear that the main parties involved, namely HS2 Ltd, Network Rail and Government need to demonstrate how these benefits will be delivered in practice.

With capacity becoming ever more scarce on the West and East Coast Main lines, and with strong forecasts of future freight and passenger growth focussed on the city regions, additional capacity is now essential.

Indeed, growth in rail freight provides an important part of the justification for HS2. Recent studies have clearly show the scale of the potential benefits, with Greengauge 21’s report into the carbon impacts of HS2 (http://www.greengauge21.net/publications/the-carbon-impacts-of-hs2/) concluding that: ‘The carbon savings from using the additional unclaimed capacity of three train paths per hour in each direction for freight are considerably larger still, adding 55% to the direct carbon savings from HS2. This is such a strong advantage that it will be worthwhile examining complementary measures to ensure that a major switch from HGV road haulage to rail freight is achieved as a consequence of HS2.’

Research by WSP (http://www.wspgroup.com/en/Welcome-to-WSP-UK/WSP-UK/Press-centre-UK/?item=20665) also found similar results, stating that: ‘HS2 could take 500,000 HGV lorry journeys off the M1, M40 and M6 motorways each year leading to environmental benefits worth over £45 million per annum and saving over 65,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per annum.’

With such significant conclusions, it is clearly imperative that Government ensures that the development and operation of the route allows rail freight benefits to be delivered in practice as well as in principle. Although the opening of the route is still many years away, this framework needs to be understood as part of the dialogue around the Hybrid Bill.

We therefore strongly urge DfT, HS2 and Network Rail to work now to ensure that;

- Freight benefits are fully integrated in the case for HS2
- A fair proportion of released capacity is safeguarded for freight
- Capacity is available to meet freight's reasonable requirements on the existing network after HS2 services re-join the route
- Freight use of the North London Line is not compromised by the HS1/2 connection.

Chris

 

[RichmondCommu]

When the London - Lichfield part of HS2 is opened, the trains which currently run non-stop from London to Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington (etc) can be diverted via the HS2 route to free up capacity on the Trent Valley/ Milton Keynes/ Watford part of the WCML.

They could still run in the same paths as now between Lichfield and Manchester/ Liverpool/ Glasgow etc (no new paths required, no additional pressure north of Lichfield).

I don't see why this is a problem? Unless people are suggesting that (in the intermediate years, before the full HS2 infrastructure is built) we keep running non-stop services between London and Stoke/ Stafford/ Crewe/ Warrington (etc) up the WCML as well as running similar services via HS2?

The only other alternative is to have the infrastructure sat unused (whilst non-stop trains through Milton Keynes etc mean that there's no space for additional passenger capacity on the southern end of the WCML)?

There are two asumptions here. Firstly that there will be enough classic compatible trains built to replace all those trains currently run by Virgin. Now whilst this would be wonderful news in that they could be used to run all over the network i.e. Manchester to Bristol the impression I get is that this won't be the case.

The second asumption is that there will be no growth on the WCML north of Lichfield. Not only that but we won't be able to run the additional trains from Manchester to the South that serve the Trent Valley et al. You also need to bear in mind that not all trains to Cheshire run non stop.

 

[edwin_m]

The second asumption is that there will be no growth on the WCML north of Lichfield. Not only that but we won't be able to run the additional trains from Manchester to the South that serve the Trent Valley et al. You also need to bear in mind that not all trains to Cheshire run non stop.

The same problem exists even without HS2. HS2 may make it slightly worse in that faster journeys further south may attract more passengers, but on the other hand the classic compatibles may have more seats than Pendolinos, especially if a set longer than 200m is used.

 

[AndyLandy]

The same problem exists even without HS2. HS2 may make it slightly worse in that faster journeys further south may attract more passengers, but on the other hand the classic compatibles may have more seats than Pendolinos, especially if a set longer than 200m is used.

I was under the impression that CC sets would be pairs of 200m trains, so running as 400m sets up HS2, then split at Curzon Street to feed off to other destinations in the North.

There's no denying that HS2 phase 1 won't be doing anything for capacity issues north of Birmingham, but if the biggest squeeze is in the southern part of the WCML, it should at least alleviate some pressure on the WCML.

 

[PR1Berske]

MOURNERS held a mock funeral to mark the death of the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty at a public meeting last night - prompting a walkout of HS2 bosses.

Four pall bearers carrying a green coffin emblazoned with the words 'The Chiltern AONB RIP' arrived at the end of an HS2 community forum at Little Kingshill Village Hall last night.

Their arrival led to senior representatives of HS2 Ltd getting up to leave the meeting, with the company's South Area Stakeholder Manager Martin Wells telling campaigners: "I'm really sorry you've felt you have to win this with a publicity stunt."

A series of forums have been held in communities along the route of the planned high speed rail line over the last 18 months, but residents have been left frustrated at the lack of information being made available to them.

At last night's meeting Buckinghamshire County Council's ward member for the Chiltern Ridges Patricia Birchley called for a vote of no confidence against the process.

She said: "This is evidence, if any further were needed, the community forums are pointless - it's simply a tick box exercise."

Residents again asked for greater detail on certain aspects of the plans to cut through the Chilterns AONB to be made available to them.

Simon Hook asked if any mitigation factors being considered by HS2 Ltd had been raised during the forums but Mr Wells replied: "We are not going to start trailling out various bits and pieces."

He said the points would have been raised in a presentation at the meeting but residents had chosen not to see it.

Mr Hook said: "I take that answer as a no", to which Mr Wells replied: "I'm not getting drawn with that question."

Mr Wells was also asked when the Environmental Statement would be made public. He said: "It will be in due course. I don't have a date. It's for the Secretary of State to publish the report."

Cllr Birchley asked the HS2 representatives what steps were being taken to ensure there was minimal disruption to traffic in the region while building work takes place.

Neil Cowie, HS2 Ltd's Country South Area Manager, said: "There isn't a straightforward answer to that. How it's managed is subject to discussions with local authorities going forward. There's no specifics at this moment in time."

South Heath resident Philip Rook, who was one of the pall bearers, said: "We think it proved a point by the fact the HS2 representatives were clearly frustrated.

"You can't just come into a protected AONB and destroy it without people being concerned. This area has millions of visitors a year - that's a huge valuable resource to be destroyed.

"To deliver a small coffin sums up our point."

http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/10681509.Chilterns__funeral__held_at_HS2_meeting/

 

[jon0844]

A mock funeral? Clearly it WAS a publicity stunt, and a pretty poor taste one at that, so is it any surprise some people walked out upon realising that nobody was going to listen to anything they said?

Millions of visitors to the Chilterns won't be put off by a narrow railway line that in most places won't be visible. And plenty will actually find it quite pleasant to see a modern train gliding through the countryside anyway - and that isn't just railway enthusiasts.

I wonder how these millions of visitors get to the area each year? By car or by train? Do they have a problem with the existing railway, or the motorway?