HS2 Euston - Development, design and construction news (not speculation, please)

[Geogregor]

2. Spoil extraction has generally shifted to slurry systems (for all the geologies encountered by HS2) which makes spoil handling easier.

I think spoil removal from the Euston tunnels will be via traditional conveyor belts, no slurry here as they will dig largely in London clay.

 

[chris2]

Can the logistics tunnel both take away the spoil and be used to deliver the segments??

 

[Nottingham59]

Can the logistics tunnel both take away the spoil and be used to deliver the segments??

That's what HS2 say

Atlas Road Logistics Tunnel - HS2

To support the construction of the Euston Tunnels, SCSJV will build the Atlas Road Logistics Tunnel between the Atlas Road and the Old Oak Common Station site.

www.hs2.org.uk

What will the Atlas Road Logistics Tunnel be used for?
The tunnel will be used to transport 8,010 tunnel segment rings to construct the Euston tunnel. The segment rings are being manufactured by STRABAG in Hartlepool and will never be transported by public road – utilising rail, and the logistics tunnel – all part of HS2’s commitment to sustainable construction.

A conveyor system will also run through the logistics tunnel, and will connect to an existing conveyor at Atlas Road, taking the London clay being excavated to construct the Euston Tunnel to HS2 London Logistics Hub at Willesden Euro Terminal. From there, the spoil will be taken by train for re-use at sites in Kent, Cambridgeshire and Rugby.

 

[Snow1964]

Have just found this Skanska article on the piling of approaches to Euston. It seems when work was paused in June 2023 they were 65% completed

Apart from daft idea of pausing two thirds the way through when machinery is being efficiently utilised, thought some of the details might be interesting, and clarify some of the approach names

• nearly 800 piles to create the Euston scissor box (ESB) to carry the new running lines
• over 600 piles for two new bridge structures – Hampstead Road Bridge (HRB) and Granby Terrace Bridge (GTB) – to take traffic over the new lines
• 343 piles for an extension to the scissor box known as Euston throat retained cut (ETRC)
• 134 piles for the new Euston cavern shaft (ECS).

In all, the completed project will comprise a total of 1,831 piles and an estimated 18,000 cubic metres of concrete and 120,000 tonnes of steel

HS2 Euston Approaches | Skanska in the UK

www.skanska.co.uk

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Have just found this Skanska article on the piling of approaches to Euston. It seems when work was paused in June 2023 they were 65% completed

Apart from daft idea of pausing two thirds the way through when machinery is being efficiently utilised, thought some of the details might be interesting, and clarify some of the approach names

HS2 Euston Approaches | Skanska in the UK

www.skanska.co.uk

It is totally daft would imagine the cancellation charges for plant on hire and other sub contracts would have covered a fair proportion of work along with all the disruption that folk in that area will now have to endure again at some point in the future.

 

[chris2]

https://assets.hs2.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Construction-Update-slides-March-2024.pdf

This is the latest doc I’ve seen on what the plan for the approaches looks like. It appears to be unchanged from the March 2022 design update, at which point HS2 was still going to Manchester and the East Midlands.

With piling 65% complete and a recent document showing unchanged plans from pre-cancellation, these suggest that the intention with this part of the Euston project is to build what was originally planned.

If it takes longer, that’s unfortunate, but still far better than descoping.

 

[Snow1964]

https://assets.hs2.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Construction-Update-slides-March-2024.pdf

This is the latest doc I’ve seen on what the plan for the approaches looks like. It appears to be unchanged from the March 2022 design update, at which point HS2 was still going to Manchester and the East Midlands.

With piling 65% complete and a recent document showing unchanged plans from pre-cancellation, these suggest that the intention with this part of the Euston project is to build what was originally planned.

If it takes longer, that’s unfortunate, but still far better than descoping.

Looking at this document, and the Skanska piling document, it is fairly obvious that the Euston approach are too far advanced to change the design easily. For clarity discussing from end of tunnels to new Granby Terrace Bridge or Hampstead Road bridge area, (which is the Euston throat area, not the actual Euston station area where designs seem to ping-pong between building 11 and 6 platforms)

If you combine with the recent update documents on Euston tunnels (which are in Old Oak thread as that is where TBMs are being assembled), then it appears that work is expected to restart big time, between January and May 2025. (That is also consistent with 2 year pause announced Spring 2023).

Not going to speculate on eventual size of Euston station, but logically everyone involved with an ounce of common sense will have worked out if HS2 gets extended northwards in subsequent decades then eventually going to need the extra platforms.

 

[Meole]

Looking at this document, and the Skanska piling document, it is fairly obvious that the Euston approach are too far advanced to change the design easily. For clarity discussing from end of tunnels to new Granby Terrace Bridge or Hampstead Road bridge area, (which is the Euston throat area, not the actual Euston station area where designs seem to ping-pong between building 11 and 6 platforms)

If you combine with the recent update documents on Euston tunnels (which are in Old Oak thread as that is where TBMs are being assembled), then it appears that work is expected to restart big time, between January and May 2025. (That is also consistent with 2 year pause announced Spring 2023).

Not going to speculate on eventual size of Euston station, but logically everyone involved with an ounce of common sense will have worked out if HS2 gets extended northwards in subsequent decades then eventually going to need the extra platforms.

HS2 northwards is dead in the water, ludicrous to waste money on speculative thinking.

 

[Tezza1978]

HS2 northwards is dead in the water, ludicrous to waste money on speculative thinking.

Can you provide some evidence for that confident assertion? Given there is an already detailed alternative plan for a 2a replacement funded by the private sector, NPR is still on the table and a new government is pending I really don't believe that's the case.

 

[slowroad]

Can you provide some evidence for that confident assertion? Given there is an already detailed alternative plan for a 2a replacement funded by the private sector, NPR is still on the table and a new government is pending I really don't believe that's the case.

If we are talking decades, there is a very good chance that electric vtol aircraft will fillet longer distance rail demand.

 

[chris2]

Looking at this document, and the Skanska piling document, it is fairly obvious that the Euston approach are too far advanced to change the design easily. For clarity discussing from end of tunnels to new Granby Terrace Bridge or Hampstead Road bridge area, (which is the Euston throat area, not the actual Euston station area where designs seem to ping-pong between building 11 and 6 platforms)

If you combine with the recent update documents on Euston tunnels (which are in Old Oak thread as that is where TBMs are being assembled), then it appears that work is expected to restart big time, between January and May 2025. (That is also consistent with 2 year pause announced Spring 2023).

Not going to speculate on eventual size of Euston station, but logically everyone involved with an ounce of common sense will have worked out if HS2 gets extended northwards in subsequent decades then eventually going to need the extra platforms.

Let’s set aside the issue of future capacity needs for a second because I think the answer of what should be done at Euston is fairly obvious just from the facts on the ground.

The original plan was this…knock down existing platforms 17&18, clear the land to the west up to Cobourg St, build first six platforms. First phase to birmingham opens, freeing up capacity in classic station. Then knock down further existing platforms and build new HS2 platforms for phase 2.

What’s happened so far…platforms 17&18 demolished, land cleared to Cobourg St, approaches proceeding as planned.

The govt have said they want a six platform station for HS2, so isn’t the most sensible course of action to dust off the old plan and just build phase one of it?

Any other plan coming forward to achieve this is going to have to eat up more of the existing station, and will have to demonstrate how this is cheaper and how the knock-on disruption to existing services can be managed.

Taking the most extreme scenario, the govt might mandate that no new land can be used for platforms and the existing Euston station footprint must be used. Existing station has to be reduced to a 6-7 platform mainline terminus in order to build the HS2 station. That is surely never going to happen.

There could be a middle ground where some more of the existing station is demolished and some of the cleared land is taken for other development, but it still needs to be justified in terms of cost and disruption.

Even if you don’t care about the future and you’re simply looking for a way out of this mess, the easiest option is surely to put the new platforms on the cleared land, put as much development as you like on top, and leave the existing station alone for now.

 

[eldomtom2]

Given there is an already detailed alternative plan for a 2a replacement funded by the private sector

Has that been set out in any more detail than the mayors in question saying "we'd like to do 2a with private sector money"?

 

[Nottingham59]

Has that been set out in any more detail than the mayors in question saying "we'd like to do 2a with private sector money"?

Not really. Being discussed here:

"HS2 Back on Track" - front page of Sunday Express - private sector plan to build Birmingham to Manchester

I'm not sure it would. Basford Hall was a pretty big build which you would have to replicate somewhere for HS2 to land on the fasts. Its certainly going to need some sort of realignment of the slows, probably in a very similar way as the original Handsacre design where the up lines were shifted...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The govt have said they want a six platform station for HS2, so isn’t the most sensible course of action to dust off the old plan and just build phase one of it?

No, because the government want a large chunk of the Euston HS2 footprint for non-rail development (housing, offices), funded privately.
That means squeezing the HS2 platforms nearer to the existing station.
Of course there's no blueprint yet, so anything is possible until new plans are approved.
In the meantime HS2 Ltd have had their direction of the Euston project terminated.

 

[chris2]

That means squeezing the HS2 platforms nearer to the existing station.

Is this possible though? Why would the original station plan have taken more space than necessary?

 

[jfowkes]

If we are talking decades, there is a very good chance that electric vtol aircraft will fillet longer distance rail demand.

I will eat all my hats if in the next 50 years battery energy densities get to the necessary numbers to make a viable 100+ passenger, medium/long-range electric aircraft, VTOL or not.

 

[snowball]

Is this possible though? Why would the original station plan have taken more space than necessary?

The government now wants Euston HS2 to have only 6 platforms. Before phase 2 was cancelled it was going to have 10 (originally 11).

 

[chris2]

The government now wants Euston HS2 to have only 6 platforms. Before phase 2 was cancelled it was going to have 10 (originally 11).

All I was trying to point out is that on site today there is the same amount of space cleared that would have been needed to build phase one of the original 11 platform design, which is 6 platforms.

If it is in fact possible to get more than six platforms onto this land, then I was wondering why the original plan required this amount of land to be cleared. Surely, they wouldn’t have needed to clear so much space?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2024 ==

EDIT: Looking at this plan for the ten platform station, the currently cleared area gets you roughly the first 8 of the HS2 platforms.



So perhaps some “squeezing” is possible on the cleared land, but it still appears that six platforms can’t be built on it without using most of the available space.

The only way you give back a significant amount of the cleared land is if another 2-4 platforms are demolished on the existing site. But would this be cheaper to do? How many more can Euston lose before services have to be removed?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Item in Constructionenquirer.com this morning

https://www.constructionenquirer.co...et-to-fund-1bn-final-hs2-london-tunnel-drive/

According to Whitehall sources, the Government has decided now to pay the upfront tunnelling cost of around £1bn to avoid further costly delays on the project.

The Government then hopes to recoup the cost through the wider development of the Euston station site once the planned development corporation secures investment from the private sector to develop the area.

Official go-ahead for the drive is now expected in weeks.

Looks like some common sense is starting to prevail that building these tunnels now is the most cost effective solution and probably gives any developer more commitment to coming up with a solution for the station and oversite development.

 

[Geogregor]

Item in Constructionenquirer.com this morning

https://www.constructionenquirer.co...et-to-fund-1bn-final-hs2-london-tunnel-drive/




Looks like some common sense is starting to prevail that building these tunnels now is the most cost effective solution and probably gives any developer more commitment to coming up with a solution for the station and oversite development.

I think the initial source was the FT

x.com

twitter.com

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Huw Merriman stated unambiguously in his recent Green Signals interview that the line will run to Euston... so yes, those tunnels will be built.

 

[jfowkes]

Huw Merriman stated unambiguously in his recent Green Signals interview that the line will run to Euston... so yes, those tunnels will be built.

Given the number of times HS2 has been cut back and de-scoped, you'll forgive me if I don't believe what Huw Merriman says about it.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I think the initial source was the FT

x.com

twitter.com

Argh OK wonder who gave that to FT - was it leaked or a placed story to generate some positivity.

 

[Speed43125]

Argh OK wonder who gave that to FT - was it leaked or a placed story to generate some positivity.

From the FT article:

High Speed 2 is set to get the green light to dig a 4.5-mile tunnel under central London within weeks, with the government expected to release over £1bn of taxpayer cash for the work, according to Whitehall and industry figures.

 

[Fazaar1889]

All I was trying to point out is that on site today there is the same amount of space cleared that would have been needed to build phase one of the original 11 platform design, which is 6 platforms.

If it is in fact possible to get more than six platforms onto this land, then I was wondering why the original plan required this amount of land to be cleared. Surely, they wouldn’t have needed to clear so much space?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2024 ==

EDIT: Looking at this plan for the ten platform station, the currently cleared area gets you roughly the first 8 of the HS2 platforms.

View attachment 157187

So perhaps some “squeezing” is possible on the cleared land, but it still appears that six platforms can’t be built on it without using most of the available space.

The only way you give back a significant amount of the cleared land is if another 2-4 platforms are demolished on the existing site. But would this be cheaper to do? How many more can Euston lose before services have to be removed?

I'm still confused about the whole 6, 10, 11 platform thing. They only want to build 6 platforms now. Why? Surely the government realises that it's just gonna constrain the Timetabling and services??
Also, how is 6 platforms and 10 platforms gonna use the same amount of land? I've heard this a few times and it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Horizon22]

I'm still confused about the whole 6, 10, 11 platform thing. They only want to build 6 platforms now. Why? Surely the government realises that it's just gonna constrain the Timetabling and services??
Also, how is 6 platforms and 10 platforms gonna use the same amount of land? I've heard this a few times and it doesn't make sense to me.

Because they want to save money in the short-term without any consideration/care of/for the long-term consequences.

If the platforms are reduced, in 20-30 years time we'll all be lamenting the decision, complaining "why didn't they build 10 platforms when they had the chance?!"

 

[Fazaar1889]

Because they want to save money in the short-term without any consideration/care of/for the long-term consequences.

Why am I not suprised. Tories gonna Tory. However, I fear labour won't be much different.

 

[Horizon22]

Why am I not suprised. Tories gonna Tory. However, I fear labour won't be much different.

British infrastructure planning malaise, unfortunately.

 

[Nottingham59]

I'm still confused about the whole 6, 10, 11 platform thing. They only want to build 6 platforms now. Why? Surely the government realises that it's just gonna constrain the Timetabling and services??

The proposed final timetable for the phase 1 to Birmingham and Handsacre only needed 6 platforms, and one iteration of the Euston plan was to build it in two stages, first to 6, then extending to 10 or 11 platforms when the eastern leg was built.

Sunak and his speechwriters who cooked up the announcement for the Tory party conference think they're being clever by cutting out everything they say is now not needed. The fact that they're spending billions of pounds on a railway that can handle 18tph but won't be able to run at that intensity doesn't come into it.

Also, how is 6 platforms and 10 platforms gonna use the same amount of land? I've heard this a few times and it doesn't make sense to me.

It won't. Cutting back to 6 platforms allows some of the land to be used for housing and over-site developement.

 

[Snow1964]

I'm still confused about the whole 6, 10, 11 platform thing. They only want to build 6 platforms now. Why? Surely the government realises that it's just gonna constrain the Timetabling and services??
Also, how is 6 platforms and 10 platforms gonna use the same amount of land? I've heard this a few times and it doesn't make sense to me.

Originally there were going to be 11 platforms built in 2 phases, of which 8 or 9 were on newly cleared land to side of existing Euston, and the others were taking over space where two platforms in current Euston are.

Some time later it was decided to drop down to 10 platforms and try and build it in one phase. A few months ago (think it was last Autumn) it was revealed about £200-250m had been spent designing and planning and doing enabling works for the 11 platform version. Then similar amount had been spent on a redesign.

Various stories came out over time that initially some of the platforms would be unfinished, basically just a concrete shell to save initial fit out costs, but over station building would go ahead. The Rishi seemed to announce just down to 6 platforms with a strip of land repurposed to housing, instead of housing above station box.

Depending on which commentator you read, the general view amongst construction companies is they are wasting money with these redesigns, as every different version needs the foundation piles bored in different places so getting wasteful start-stop construction. From a railway point of view the cheapest was stick with plan 1 and don't initially fit out 4 platforms, complete them in in about 20 years time when traffic builds up as extensions in north get added.

The Rishi 6 platform version seems to be a short term bodge that can never be expanded, or if it is will cost 2-3 times what building the bigger shell in first place and not changing the design would have. If there is just 6 platforms, and no junctions just outside the station to a HS2-HS1 link then general view is will have a high capacity railway that can take 18-20 trains an hour, and a terminus that will struggle to take half that number of trains. Bonkers idea like building a big power station but only being able to use half its capacity because grid connection has half the capacity, consequences of lack of joined up thinking having already committed to building one part in full.