High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[HSTEd]

That will only happen if the Government decides to try and force customers to use HS2 by reducing the service offered on classic lines. This is the kind of tactic that I believe South Eastern Trains tried to use. Frankly that would seem to be pretty desperate stuff.

So 11-car Pendolino processions will continue as they do now for the benefit of minor intermediate settlements (compared to the ones served today?).

Who will pay for that?
It would be hopelessly uneconomic to run 3tph of 11-car intercity trains for the benefit of Coventry, Rugby and Milton Keynes passengers on the Birmingham corridor alone.

The state will allow the HS2 operators to push an "elite" service with excessive fares just so they can then spend even more additional money to prop up a subsidy junkie conventional railway for everyone else to use?

The better financial result for the state is to put everyone they can onto the cheaper to operate (per seat.km) high speed line and leave the classic line only to routes that have to use it.

It's a brand new railway with brand new rolling stock, every train will be packed to the rafters (according to you) and it will still require a subsidy? For God's sake don't leak this to the media. £50 billion plus a subsidy and you are wondering why people are beginning to question it.

£40bn construction costs and nonzero capital rates mean that a "subsidy" is required if you insist on using an artificially short time for depreciation of the capital expenditure, such as 30 years (who knew that tunnels spontaneously collapse, cuttings fill themselves in and buildings demolish themselves at that time?), and insist on using bespoke, expensive to operate, low capacity trains to weasel out of building a few billion pounds more infrastructure.

Any subsidy it does require will be far smaller than that the Classic lines require today just to overcome the inherent limitations of a railway designed for short light trains running at 30 miles per hour.

 

[samxool]

Lol, what planet do some people live on??
To all the posters who've wildly claimed that HS2 will lead to cheaper fares - if you need me, I can be found on the floor rolling about with laughter

 

[Deerfold]

Lol, what planet do some people live on??
To all the posters who've wildly claimed that HS2 will lead to cheaper fares - if you need me, I can be found on the floor rolling about with laughter

Have you read the reasons why? Perhaps you'd like to explain why you don't think this is the case and add to the discussion?

 

[jones_bangor]

So 11-car Pendolino processions will continue as they do now for the benefit of minor intermediate settlements (compared to the ones served today?).

Who will pay for that?
It would be hopelessly uneconomic to run 3tph of 11-car intercity trains for the benefit of Coventry, Rugby and Milton Keynes passengers on the Birmingham corridor alone.

The state will allow the HS2 operators to push an "elite" service with excessive fares just so they can then spend even more additional money to prop up a subsidy junkie conventional railway for everyone else to use?

The better financial result for the state is to put everyone they can onto the cheaper to operate (per seat.km) high speed line and leave the classic line only to routes that have to use it.

£40bn construction costs and nonzero capital rates mean that a "subsidy" is required if you insist on using an artificially short time for depreciation of the capital expenditure, such as 30 years (who knew that tunnels spontaneously collapse, cuttings fill themselves in and buildings demolish themselves at that time?), and insist on using bespoke, expensive to operate, low capacity trains to weasel out of building a few billion pounds more infrastructure.

Any subsidy it does require will be far smaller than that the Classic lines require today just to overcome the inherent limitations of a railway designed for short light trains running at 30 miles per hour.

You give it all away there, don't you?

HS2 can only thrive if all competition is removed. So much for the "free market" ethos of competition and choice!!

 

[AndyLandy]

You give it all away there, don't you?

HS2 can only thrive if all competition is removed. So much for the "free market" ethos of competition and choice!!

Except the WCML expresses have to be removed! That's pretty much the whole point of HS2. Once the Pendolinos have gone, the freed up capacity can be used for more desperately needed commuter services along that corridor.

 

[tbtc]

DfT would do well to explain why, given the positive BCR, they aren't building the whole Y system (and indeed, heading to Scotland and Newcastle with an HSR) as soon as possible rather than drip feeding it at the rate of £2bn / year. Answers please, DfT.

Tobbes

As has been pointed out on this thread, the HS2 money comes from the same "two billion quid a year" pot that is currently funding Crossrail. Once its stopped paying for Crossrail, that money becomes available for HS2.

Seems sensible economics.

Clearly you have never lived in or commuted to London? It's not practical to drive from Richmond to Bankside and taking the District Line would take far too long. So yes in terms of my commute there are no alternatives

There are alternatives - you've listed a couple - they just aren't as convenient. This is how most markets work - should rail fares be reduced on very busy lines to compensate people for the fact that driving is too expensive?

 

[Ironside]

You give it all away there, don't you?

HS2 can only thrive if all competition is removed. So much for the "free market" ethos of competition and choice!!

Competition isn't removed but will not be able to compete head to head against the lower running costs of HS2 so will focus on semi fast, stopper and new cross country services. So their will be the same level of competition on the stopping services and more options on the intercity trains all be it that one operator is going to take most of the market because it has lower running costs so should be able to offer lower prices.

 

[jon0844]

Lol, what planet do some people live on??
To all the posters who've wildly claimed that HS2 will lead to cheaper fares - if you need me, I can be found on the floor rolling about with laughter

A more modern line, bigger trains and stacks of capacity. Why wouldn't you be able to get cheaper fares?

Don't confuse that with the fact that any operator might still seek to offer premium fares for business users and first class (offering bigger seats, free food/drink etc).

Plenty of people will still use the older lines if they live along it, or use them for part of the way to connect into HS2 further up (or down in London).

 

[AndyLandy]

Competition isn't removed but will not be able to compete head to head against the lower running costs of HS2 so will focus on semi fast, stopper and new cross country services. So their will be the same level of competition on the stopping services and more options on the intercity trains all be it that one operator is going to take most of the market because it has lower running costs so should be able to offer lower prices.

The other thing that people seem to forget is that the competitiveness of railway services is part of the franchising process. It's never been about services competing with each other. There are some places where that's possible, and indeed you see competition on those routes, but that's just a by-product of the services that are run. HS2 will likely be handled in exactly the same way.

Whether or not this is a good model for a privatised railway is a discussion for another thread, but the point is that it's the one we've got. Otherwise I'd be delighted to pay a bit more to get a Virgin Trains express service from Cuddington to Manchester.

 

[Zoe]

I'm sorry Zoë but none of this is any use if you are travelling to London in the Peak. How many rock bottom advance tickets do you see available on an InterCity service that get you into London before say 09.00 on a weekday? Or if you're from the NE before 10.00? Or if you’re unable to plan journeys weeks in advance? It's all very well for you to sit in your Ivory Tower extolling the virtues of advance fares but your ignorance of everybody other than the leisure customer is breathtaking.

Personally I'm no fan of these rock bottom advance fares and I'd be quite happy to give them up in return for cheaper walk-up fares. There was once a time when I'd get up and decide to go on a day trip to London but I no longer do so as I find that it's simply too expensive without booking in advance. However at the end of the day the railway is not run for me personally and from previous discussions here and elsewhere I get the impression that people prefer the current system since the rock bottom fares are much cheaper than even the old Super Saver ticket would have been. Even though I'm no fan of the system, I can't deny that it does seem to have been very successful. If 15 - 20 years ago someone had said that the railways would move the cheapest fares to airline style book in advance and significantly increase walk-up fares I'd have thought that it would result in less people using rail due to the loss in flexibility (except for some long distance journeys like holidays which would likely always have been planned well in advance). This however has not been the case with many intercity trains becoming very busy even off peak so even if you pay for the more expensive walk-up fare, you may not get a seat whereas if you book in advance not only can you get a much cheaper fare but also a guarantee of a seat.

 

[Clip]

I concur that by buying an annual season ticket I make a substantial saving but that's still a large amount of money to pay up front. My financial circumstances mean that I don't have to think about it but that is certainly not the case for thousands of others.


In all fairness I know of people who live in the East Midlands who drive to Brent Cross and take the Tube from there. I'm afraid that all too often for two adults travelling together that is the cheaper option.

And I know people who commute from Thanet who probably pay more just to get to their job rather than take the car - it happens all over, people make the choices they do whether thats have children or live outside of London and have a job in London. Personal choice is at stake here. They dont have to if they dont want to. Could get a job in the midlands could they not?

Anyway thanks for skirting over this post #5070

 

[Tobbes]

As has been pointed out on this thread, the HS2 money comes from the same "two billion quid a year" pot that is currently funding Crossrail. Once its stopped paying for Crossrail, that money becomes available for HS2.

Seems sensible economics.

On the contrary, it seems like lazy budgeting. With interest rates still on the floor, it would be much more sensible to establish the most efficient construction rate, and build it at that. I suspect it will be sooner than the current programme.

Tobbes

 

[tbtc]

On the contrary, it seems like lazy budgeting. With interest rates still on the floor, it would be much more sensible to establish the most efficient construction rate, and build it at that. I suspect it will be sooner than the current programme.

Tobbes

Ideally, but there's a limit to how much we can do at once, how many construction staff, how many project managers etc - we're going to struggle to meet the CP5 "commitments" (some of which, like electrification to Sheffield, now appear to be planned for the early 2020s, i.e. in CP6), so I really don't think we could do much about building HS2 in the short term (even if we could get the current Government to abandon their austerity and stump up the money sooner).

 

[8A Rail]

Except the WCML expresses have to be removed! That's pretty much the whole point of HS2. Once the Pendolinos have gone, the freed up capacity can be used for more desperately needed commuter services along that corridor.

But not freight? Some of the reasons is to increase capacity for more freight by rail not just about more commuter trains!

 

[quantinghome]

On the contrary, it seems like lazy budgeting. With interest rates still on the floor, it would be much more sensible to establish the most efficient construction rate, and build it at that. I suspect it will be sooner than the current programme.

Tobbes

I'm not sure how much engineering background you have. Even if money is no object, large civil engineering projects tend to take several years to design and build. For example, the optioneering reports for HS2 estimate a typical new build station will take 4-5 years to construct. You could speed things up by building the whole Y network at once rather than phasing it, but I suspect you would hit engineering skills shortages. This could be remedied by the government really pushing engineering degrees and apprenticeships, but it would be several years before that feeds through.

 

[HSTEd]

Or we could just bring in more engineers from abroad.

 

[Metrailway]

On the BBC Daily Politics 'Mood Box' feature today at the Labour Party Conference, former Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott came out against HS2 as he believes "it won't do anything for the North". In the same feature, Louise Ellman, the chair of the Transport Select Committee supported HS2. It was around 50:50 split amongst delegates for and against HS2, although the 'Mood Box' is very unscientific!

 

[Ironside]

Sir David Higgins is to be chairman of Hs2 in the new year. Currently boss at Network Rail and formerly in charge of Olympic Delivery Authority.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-leadership-of-hs2-announced

 

[Tobbes]

I'm not sure how much engineering background you have. Even if money is no object, large civil engineering projects tend to take several years to design and build. For example, the optioneering reports for HS2 estimate a typical new build station will take 4-5 years to construct. You could speed things up by building the whole Y network at once rather than phasing it, but I suspect you would hit engineering skills shortages. This could be remedied by the government really pushing engineering degrees and apprenticeships, but it would be several years before that feeds through.

I'm not an engineer, but I've been involved in infrastructure policy and finance for some time. I completely understand the capacity problem of insufficient staff, but every time I've asked about the timeline, the rationale has been "£2bn pa", leading me to suspect that there could be better value if it weren't phased and were built faster. Obviously it isn't just cost savings, but it's also earlier realisation of the benefits.

Kind regards to all,

Tobbes

 

[Ironside]

I'm not an engineer, but I've been involved in infrastructure policy and finance for some time. I completely understand the capacity problem of insufficient staff, but every time I've asked about the timeline, the rationale has been "£2bn pa", leading me to suspect that there could be better value if it weren't phased and were built faster. Obviously it isn't just cost savings, but it's also earlier realisation of the benefits.

Kind regards to all,

Tobbes

I think your right the £2bn pa is a political figure that govt think that they can get past the electorate, houses of parliament and the treasury. If the project could be built quicker then revenue would come in earlier but maybe it's a political reality of how long it takes go get thinks done in this country.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Except the WCML expresses have to be removed! That's pretty much the whole point of HS2. Once the Pendolinos have gone, the freed up capacity can be used for more desperately needed commuter services along that corridor.

Except all the expresses to Coventry, Stoke, Wolves, Chester, Trent Valley, Lake District?:roll:

 

[HSTEd]

Except all the expresses to Coventry, Stoke, Wolves, Chester, Trent Valley, Lake District?:roll:

HS2 expresses will be able to reach the Trent Valley, Stoke and the Lake District stations......

And chester once electrification (finally) occurs.

So only Coventry and Wolves.

 

[AndyLandy]

But not freight? Some of the reasons is to increase capacity for more freight by rail not just about more commuter trains!

Sorry, quite right. Additional freight paths too.

 

[HowardGWR]

Originally Posted by AndyLandy
Except the WCML expresses have to be removed! That's pretty much the whole point of HS2. Once the Pendolinos have gone, the freed up capacity can be used for more desperately needed commuter services along that corridor.

I get a little uneasy about this argument about 'commuters'. We do not envisage 'commuters' as other than people going to work in London and in the peak to boot, but one would hope that government policy would be trying to look at the capacity freed up by HS2 (which I support fully, we should never have closed the GCR) in a more innovative fashion.

I won't expand now, but I wonder if others have similar question marks on this aspect?

 

[Chris125]

HS2 can only thrive if all competition is removed. So much for the "free market" ethos of competition and choice!!

If the railway was a free market with genuine competition and choice I would agree, but that simply isn't the case - capacity is limited and strategic decisions have to be made about how it is used.

It would be utterly indefensible to retain the current service provision for long distance passengers on the WCML alongside HS2 when capacity for freight, regional and commuter services is so limited, but that doesn't mean there won't be equivalent services on the 'classic' network even though frequencies and stopping patterns will change as a result of the changes in demand.

Chris

 

[AndyLandy]

Originally Posted by AndyLandy
Except the WCML expresses have to be removed! That's pretty much the whole point of HS2. Once the Pendolinos have gone, the freed up capacity can be used for more desperately needed commuter services along that corridor.

I get a little uneasy about this argument about 'commuters'. We do not envisage 'commuters' as other than people going to work in London and in the peak to boot, but one would hope that government policy would be trying to look at the capacity freed up by HS2 (which I support fully, we should never have closed the GCR) in a more innovative fashion.

I won't expand now, but I wonder if others have similar question marks on this aspect?

I think that's a fair concern. My own laziness is why I've only covered "Intercity" and "Commuter" traffic. A previous poster reminded me that additional WCML capacity is needed for freight, and there are plenty of journeys that will be taken along the WCML corridor for regional semi-fast services and leisure travel to London, or indeed many other destinations along the route.

 

[Philip Elliott]

HS2 expresses will be able to reach the Trent Valley, Stoke and the Lake District stations......

And chester once electrification (finally) occurs.

So only Coventry and Wolves.

What Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth?:roll: There will be no paths for them. You know that so stop trolling.

 

[The Ham]

What Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth?:roll: There will be no paths for them. You know that so stop trolling.

Maybe you need to review the thread of what was being said:

Except the WCML expresses have to be removed! That's pretty much the whole point of HS2. Once the Pendolinos have gone, the freed up capacity can be used for more desperately needed commuter services along that corridor.

Except all the expresses to Coventry, Stoke, Wolves, Chester, Trent Valley, Lake District?:roll:

HS2 expresses will be able to reach the Trent Valley, Stoke and the Lake District stations......

And chester once electrification (finally) occurs.

So only Coventry and Wolves.

... so was only responding to the list you provided. Hardly could be seen as Tolling from HSTEd.

 

[tbtc]

What Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth?:roll: There will be no paths for them. You know that so stop trolling.

Rugby gets one "fast" service an hour from London, how many "fast" services an hour to Nuneaton and Tamworth get nowadays?

 

[RichmondCommu]

And I know people who commute from Thanet who probably pay more just to get to their job rather than take the car - it happens all over, people make the choices they do whether that’s have children or live outside of London and have a job in London. Personal choice is at stake here. They don’t have to if they don’t want to. Could get a job in the midlands could they not?

Who said anything about working in London? My friends are in fact having a day trip to London. With two adults travelling to London it’s cheaper to travel by car and split the cost of fuel. Hopefully HS2 might change all this but that's 20 years away.

Anyway thanks for skirting over this post

Oh please! Do you honestly believe that to be the case? I'm over in the US at the moment and was too tired to go back through all the pages that I'd missed. Good grief!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No, Ill probably still vote Tory like I have always done thanks. And if you cant be bothered to notice the sarcasm then thats fine, even though I spelled it out later on.

The biggest tragedy here is that your feeble attempt at sarcasm was missed by everyone and you've had to come back with 'ahem, excuse me, sarcasm anyone?' To be honest the whole thing sounded like the kind of ill informed rant normally associated with the likes of Godfrey Bloom.

How is saying it will create thousands of jobs a poor arguement? So what if the trains get built in France or Germany, the infrastructure will still be built here given its a HS line in this country, that means you will need people and plant and places to house those people and plant. You will need a very large supply chain also and whilst granted some may come from abroad there will still be componenets supplied by UK firms - which is a good thing is it not? Or do you think a massive infrastructure project will just sudddenly appear one day without using anyone or anything to build it?

The jobs created by the construction of HS2 will only be short term. Once the contracts are finished the work will also dry up. Not only that but construction companies in the UK have very little experience of building high speed lines which leads me to believe that the contract may well be awarded to an overseas company. From what I recall all the design work for HS1 was done by an overseas company. The track itself is a French design. The tunneling machines for Crossrail were built by a German company. The fact that a dumper truck will be operated by a bloke from Milton Keynes is not the be all and end all. And who is to say that cheap foreign labour won't be used to build the line? Mind you, with your previous rant in mind......

And why is there no guarantee that a UK company will not win the contract to build it? Have you got any facts or figures to back up your claim? Are you claiming that UK firms are not up to the mark of building such a large railway project? ARE YOU REALLY?

My goodness , judging by the block capitals you really do need to calm yourself down Clip. At this rate you'll end up bursting a blood vessel and that would be awful. There is no guarantee that a UK firm will win the contract to build the line simply because there will be strong competition from overseas firms who have previous experience in such matters. It would be wholly unacceptable to award the contract to a company simply on the basis that they are British. Value for money and a strong track record is all that matters here.

Now how many of those are UK firms or even joint ventures between UK firms and others? Do you know what that list of companies is for?

I have no idea Clip but I can see that you're itching to tell me.

So you tell me what that list is for and then get back to me again to tell me why you seem to be glad that there is no guarantee that UK firms will be awarded the building contract.

Clip, I would be pretty annoyed if the final decision to award a contract to a British company was made purely because they are based in the UK. In doing that the DfT would have failed this country. The whole process must come down to value for money and reputation.

Brilliant bit of posting this. It's the internet and whilst people do strive to spell correctly, some people cant and some people just really dont care as long as you can understand what they are saying.

The organisation that I run often receives applications from Graduates when we are looking to fill positions. All too often their command of the English language is appalling and I'm sorry but and some people just really dont care as long as you can understand what they are saying is simply not good enough. Suffice to say that kind of attitude won't get anybody anywhere, certainly not if you're looking to have a successful career. There can be no excuse for laziness and not being bothered to use a spell check function.

Well done for poiting out someone hasnt spelled something correctly in your attempt to try and belittle them and their views. *Golf claps all round*

What in the name of God is a "Golf clap"?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree, if I had good primary school teachers who would have spotted I had Dislexyia and didn't say he's a bight kid he'll get it in time then my spelling wouldn't be as bad.

I'm sorry to hear that you suffer from Dyslexia, although thankfully it does appear to be a mild form of the condition. Having said that I have noticed that you are unable to spell the condition. Never the less you might find that spell check is helpful when posting comments here.