HS2 future northern extensions

[Noddy]

Interesting one if the SNP props up a Labour government in the next Westminster Parliament. Their price will presumably be another referendum, which they are quite likely to win, in which case Labour won't have anywhere to look for support the next time round...

Not that it's anywhere near being on topic but do you honestly think that Labour would grant them that??!! The fact that Alex Salmond is standing for Westminster suggests he doesn't think it's going to happen in at least the next parliament. A more interesting question perhaps, is why is he standing in a Lib Dem seat where the sitting MP is retiring rather than against a sitting Labour MP?

Going back on topic there was talk earlier in the year about Transport Scotland High Speed plans. According to their website they should have submitted a Business Case for the G2E HSL in the spring and submitted a report on extending HS2 to Scotland by the end of the year. Sorry if I've missed it but has either happened? Surely there needs to be joined up thinking on this - perhaps the reason for the delay?

 

[NotATrainspott]

Not that it's anywhere near being on topic but do you honestly think that Labour would grant them that??!! The fact that Alex Salmond is standing for Westminster suggests he doesn't think it's going to happen in at least the next parliament. A more interesting question perhaps, is why is he standing in a Lib Dem seat where the sitting MP is retiring rather than against a sitting Labour MP?

Going back on topic there was talk earlier in the year about Transport Scotland High Speed plans. According to their website they should have submitted a Business Case for the G2E HSL in the spring and submitted a report on extending HS2 to Scotland by the end of the year. Sorry if I've missed it but has either happened? Surely there needs to be joined up thinking on this - perhaps the reason for the delay?

I presume the delay is because the UK Government are planning a similar report, and it would be nonsensical to have two separate reports on intimately connected ideas for high speed rail in Scotland. Without concrete plans for building HS2 to Scotland, there's no point in the Scottish Government doing very much at all if it could all be swept away by later events.

 

[po8crg]

A more interesting question perhaps, is why is he standing in a Lib Dem seat where the sitting MP is retiring rather than against a sitting Labour MP?

Because it's where he lives?

It's the constituency he currently represents at Holyrood, so it's not unreasonable to stay where he lives.

Going back on topic there was talk earlier in the year about Transport Scotland High Speed plans. According to their website they should have submitted a Business Case for the G2E HSL in the spring and submitted a report on extending HS2 to Scotland by the end of the year. Sorry if I've missed it but has either happened? Surely there needs to be joined up thinking on this - perhaps the reason for the delay?

Interesting. "Submitted to Ministers" doesn't mean published, so I suppose it could have happened without anyone mentioning it to the general public, but I've not actually heard anything.

 

[clc]

Going back on topic there was talk earlier in the year about Transport Scotland High Speed plans. According to their website they should have submitted a Business Case for the G2E HSL in the spring and submitted a report on extending HS2 to Scotland by the end of the year. Sorry if I've missed it but has either happened? Surely there needs to be joined up thinking on this - perhaps the reason for the delay?

From parliament the other week:

"Mark Griffin: ...There have been plans for an Edinburgh to Glasgow high-speed rail line. Are you able to give us an update on the feasibility planning for that?

Keith Brown: We are examining that just now. As I have said previously to the committee, that line is predicated in large part on the idea that a high-speed rail link will come from the south. It would make sense to make that project part of a high-speed rail network — that fundamentally affects the suggested line's viability. We want more information from the UK Government before we take the possibility of high-speed rail between Edinburgh and Glasgow much further. I hope that the joint study that I mentioned will help us with that. A new direction from the UK Government, if it were to come out explicitly in favour of high-speed rail to Scotland, would also help."

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/28862.aspx?r=9677&mode=pdf

 

[Altnabreac]

Not that it's anywhere near being on topic but do you honestly think that Labour would grant them that??!! The fact that Alex Salmond is standing for Westminster suggests he doesn't think it's going to happen in at least the next parliament. A more interesting question perhaps, is why is he standing in a Lib Dem seat where the sitting MP is retiring rather than against a sitting Labour MP?

Going back on topic there was talk earlier in the year about Transport Scotland High Speed plans. According to their website they should have submitted a Business Case for the G2E HSL in the spring and submitted a report on extending HS2 to Scotland by the end of the year. Sorry if I've missed it but has either happened? Surely there needs to be joined up thinking on this - perhaps the reason for the delay?

As others have said the report and business case submitted to Ministers in the spring dealt purely with the Edinburgh - Glasgow section which was developed purely by Transport Scotland.

This report hasn't been made public yet.

The second report is a joint one with HS2/DfT on the cross border element of the scheme. I don't think this one is finished yet?

The Business Cases are very closely interlinked so it makes sense to publish them together.

Hopefully we'll see them before the election next year.

 

[clc]

The second report is a joint one with HS2/DfT on the cross border element of the scheme. I don't think this one is finished yet.

That's correct. Quote from Keith Brown on 3 Dec:

"we await the outcome of the joint study that is being undertaken by HS2 and of which we are sighted."


In the context of £1.4 trillion national debt and rising, I cant see any Uk govt commiting to a full extension north of Manchester no matter how good the business case. The political returns wouldn't be sufficient to cover the huge capital outlay.

 

[Noddy]

Ok thanks everyone for your comments - it does seem like that Transport Scotland webpage could do with a bit of updating! As everyone says the two projects are so interlinked they do require joined up thinking. Hopefully was once the plans, business case and route are sorted they can start. If the SNP are as pro-rail/green as they claim I don't see why they can't do the G2E section with maybe a bit of the line south first. It will leave a gap to the south but this is what happens in other countries (eg Belgium, France, all of the them?).

In the context of £1.4 trillion national debt and rising, I cant see any Uk govt commiting to a full extension north of Manchester no matter how good the business case. The political returns wouldn't be sufficient to cover the huge capital outlay.

This hasn't stopped the Germans, French, Spanish, Italians etc etc who continue to spend money on HSR despite the massive debt everyone is in!!!!

 

[MidlandMainlie]

That's correct. Quote from Keith Brown on 3 Dec:

"we await the outcome of the joint study that is being undertaken by HS2 and of which we are sighted."


In the context of £1.4 trillion national debt and rising, I cant see any Uk govt commiting to a full extension north of Manchester no matter how good the business case. The political returns wouldn't be sufficient to cover the huge capital outlay.

If we still have a national debt of £1.4 trillion by the time we get round to building a Scottish extension to HS2 (2030 at the earliest) then I think the country will have some very serious issues to tackle.

 

[Noddy]

If we still have a national debt of £1.4 trillion by the time we get round to building a Scottish extension to HS2 (2030 at the earliest) then I think the country will have some very serious issues to tackle.

Erm, most of that debt is not going to go away any time soon considering the UK is still owing debts incurred during the South Sea Bubble crisis (in 1720), the Napoleonic and Crimean wars, the abolition of slavery and the Irish potato famine - and we aren't due to have a budget surplus until 2018/19!

 

[clc]

If the SNP are as pro-rail/green as they claim I don't see why they can't do the G2E section with maybe a bit of the line south first. It will leave a gap to the south but this is what happens in other countries (eg Belgium, France, all of the them?).

The Scottish Govt reckons the cuts in Scotland will amount to £15 billion over the next 5 years: http://news.scotland.gov.uk/News/Austerity-agenda-hits-Scotland-hard-1303.aspx

Against that background and with limited borrowing powers it's difficult to see how the Scot Govt could afford the £2.5b - £3b cost* of E2G HSR on top of £3 billion to simultaneously dual the A9.

Having recently awarded contracts worth £120 million for design work it's clear that the A9 is the number one priority: http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/news/young-people-jobs-boost-a9-dualling-contracts

*To put into context, the Scottish Govt's entire capital budget for rail spending in 2015/16 is £476 million.

 

[Haydn1971]

Someone either on here or elsewhere compared HS2 and national debt to a more personal level - if your unemployed and spent £2k on a holiday that's frivolous, but spending £2k on a second hand car to help you get to a new job is investing in your future. Most people cannot understand the scale of costs for HS2 vs national expenditures - HS2 is peanuts per year vs the expenditure on other things.

HS2 over the 60 year investment life equates to about a £1Bn per year, that's a 5% of each years national spending on transport, a 2% of interest payments or defence, 1% of state education, 0.7% of healthcare

 

[NotATrainspott]

Also, the fact remains that captive services on HS2 will be not only good for economic growth, but will also be far more profitable than any existing LDHS service on classic rails. Converting classic-compatible running to captive running just makes existing services more efficient to run, and the infrastructure necessary to do it can be paid for through deals with pension funds and other long-term investors.

 

[33Hz]

In the context of £1.4 trillion national debt and rising, I cant see any Uk govt commiting to a full extension north of Manchester no matter how good the business case. The political returns wouldn't be sufficient to cover the huge capital outlay.

Everyone seems to think the cost of high speed rail is coming out of the Exchequer. This is the Tories we are talking about, they will go out of their way to avoid it - hence the courting of Qatari sovereign wealth funds and the Chinese.

 

[clc]

I don't want to give the impression that I'm against HS2, far from it, I understand the economic benefits and would like to see it extended to Edinburgh and Glasgow.

The economic case for taking it all the way to Scotland is strong, but, as we know, this decision wont be based solely on the BCR, there has to be a compelling political case for doing so. This is where it falls down in my opinion, as I imagine any Uk government would calculate that there were greater political benefits to be achieved by investing £15 billion in other projects around the country.

 

[33Hz]

This is why if the Tories can attract private investors, or at least foreign investors, it might stand a chance. The anti brigade will find it much harder to argue that they could have spent the money on schools and hospitals.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I don't want to give the impression that I'm against HS2, far from it, I understand the economic benefits and would like to see it extended to Edinburgh and Glasgow.

The economic case for taking it all the way to Scotland is strong, but, as we know, this decision wont be based solely on the BCR, there has to be a compelling political case for doing so. This is where it falls down in my opinion, as I imagine any Uk government would calculate that there were greater political benefits to be achieved by investing £15 billion in other projects around the country.

The political dis-benefits of not completing HS2 to Scotland might be quite a bit worse though. It's a bit silly deciding to ignore the part of your country which is actively capable of wanting and managing to secede in favour of areas which would never dream of rocking the boat that much. In terms of high speed rail there really isn't much of a case for other lines if the Inverted A is not complete - a second London-Midlands line wouldn't yet be needed and any other lines to the South West would have difficulty filling up if the CrossCountry services had to be classic-compatible north of Manchester or Leeds.

 

[po8crg]

If you're looking at a complete UK network, then that's:

Inverted A (including the cross-bar, ie Manchester-Leeds)
Extended branches of the cross-bar to Liverpool and Hull
Second Midlands-London line on the eastern side
East Anglia link into second Midlands-London line
Birmingham-Bristol XC line
London-Bristol (possibly with branch to Southampton)
Bristol-Cardiff-Swansea
Bristol-Exeter-Plymouth
Possibly a Manchester-Sheffield link (so Manchester-London trains can use the eastern route to London)
Possibly some extension north of the Central Belt in Scotland (even just to Stirling or Perth to speed up CC trains to Aberdeen/Inverness)

I'd be surprised if we ever build it all, but I'd be seriously surprised if anything not on that list got made.

 

[clc]

HS2 on Track - March 2015:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ent_data/file/411808/HS2_Story_-_On_track.pdf

I notice that Glasgow and Edinburgh seemed to have dropped off the radar in this report, being conspicuously absent from the list showing journey time savings between cities and from the productivity improvements map. They've featured in previous reports so why omitted here I wonder?

 

[Noddy]

HS2 on Track - March 2015:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ent_data/file/411808/HS2_Story_-_On_track.pdf

I notice that Glasgow and Edinburgh seemed to have dropped off the radar in this report, being conspicuously absent from the list showing journey time savings between cities and from the productivity improvements map. They've featured in previous reports so why omitted here I wonder?

Yeah it must be a mistake as their journey times will inevitably improve. Unless the plan is to cancel these services after Scottish independence, so extra Manchester/Liverpool/Preston/Blackpool and potentially even North Wales trains can be run instead.

I also see the HS1-HS2 link has been dropped. A great shame in my opinion as it means changing trains in London twice to get to the continent, instead of 0 or 1 with the direct line. Even changing at Ashord and going throgh security there would be preferable as a passenger to faffing round in London. So there will be no end for Birmingham/Manchester to Paris/Brussels flights.

 

[UrbanWorld]

The east route from Scotland is by far the best route. It gives Scotland access to many conurbations. That is Tyneside, Teeside, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, Notts, Derby and Birmingham then London. From Leeds HS3 can take trains to Liverpool and Manchester. A Javelin service can also be in place from Glasgow to Edinburgh.

 

[dave59]

I also see the HS1-HS2 link has been dropped. A great shame in my opinion as it means changing trains in London twice to get to the continent, instead of 0 or 1 with the direct line. Even changing at Ashord and going throgh security there would be preferable as a passenger to faffing round in London. So there will be no end for Birmingham/Manchester to Paris/Brussels flights.

Dropped completely? Is an alternative link being planned? Is HS2 really so London-centric? With George Osborne's plans to rebalance the economy he should be insisting on it in chorus with Northern and Midlands 'Boris Johnsons'.

The arrogant claim by some that there is not enough demand is drivel and if only the ICEC operation had gone to Eurostar/Keolis we might have had proof of that.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Dropped completely? Is an alternative link being planned? Is HS2 really so London-centric? With George Osborne's plans to rebalance the economy he should be insisting on it in chorus with Northern and Midlands 'Boris Johnsons'.

The arrogant claim by some that there is not enough demand is drivel and if only the ICEC operation had gone to Eurostar/Keolis we might have had proof of that.

It's a combination of the lack of demand - the total number of people flying between Paris and Manchester every day is less than the capacity of a single HS2 train - and the extreme cost involved in connecting the two routes. Had the Government been sensible, they would have passively provided for a captive high speed rail link to the North when they built the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. With this, the link would have just consisted of a tunnel bore or two between Old Oak Common and wherever the passive provision was - likely Stratford Box - with no surface effects whatsoever. Even if the cost of that tunnel bore wouldn't have been justified immediately, it would have been possible to build in passive provision at the HS2 end as well, such that the final link between the lines could be built at any time once HS2 is operational.

 

[dave59]

It's a combination of the lack of demand - the total number of people flying between Paris and Manchester every day is less than the capacity of a single HS2 train - and the extreme cost involved in connecting the two routes. Had the Government been sensible, they would have passively provided for a captive high speed rail link to the North when they built the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. With this, the link would have just consisted of a tunnel bore or two between Old Oak Common and wherever the passive provision was - likely Stratford Box - with no surface effects whatsoever. Even if the cost of that tunnel bore wouldn't have been justified immediately, it would have been possible to build in passive provision at the HS2 end as well, such that the final link between the lines could be built at any time once HS2 is operational.

So yes another opportunity for the government to be sensible and open up options for through traffic and better domestic connectivity. It should not be some sort of superfluous optional extra and although it was a correct decision to cancel the original plan this should not have happened until a replacement scheme was finalised. As we have seen with Eurostar, traffic patterns take time to establish and it is not impossible that domestic and EU passengers could be carried on the same trains (as will the new Eurostar services to the South of France) boosting viability and frequency, even on-train rather than station based security and border controls gaining an advantage over the airport experience. To not have provision as part of the core scheme is plain wrong.

Political will rather than engineering/cost is the issue here and there needs to be a more vocal response from interests north of Watford before we see another huge 'national' infrastructure project yet again slanted heavily in favour of south east England.

 

[NotATrainspott]

So yes another opportunity for the government to be sensible and open up options for through traffic and better domestic connectivity. It should not be some sort of superfluous optional extra and although it was a correct decision to cancel the original plan this should not have happened until a replacement scheme was finalised. As we have seen with Eurostar, traffic patterns take time to establish and it is not impossible that domestic and EU passengers could be carried on the same trains (as will the new Eurostar services to the South of France) boosting viability and frequency, even on-train rather than station based security and border controls gaining an advantage over the airport experience. To not have provision as part of the core scheme is plain wrong.

Political will rather than engineering/cost is the issue here and there needs to be a more vocal response from interests north of Watford before we see another huge 'national' infrastructure project yet again slanted heavily in favour of south east England.

However, there still remains a balance to be struck between providing international services and providing domestic ones. HS2 is pretty unique in how it will serve almost every single major city in Britain (all but Bristol, actually) and so the pressure on the London-Birmingham section is immense. Providing an international service along this route might be possible but when capacity will be at such a premium, it may still be the case that using this capacity to provide additional services to the North (especially places like Chester, Stoke, Huddersfield, Hull or suchlike) would be better for the country. Eurostar services beyond Paris or Brussels will require passengers to de-train, go through security, and get back on. If you need to do this, why do you actually need to get on the same train once you've got through security? Euston and St Pancras could be nothing but an underground travelator ride away from one another, and it would mean both the London-Continent and London-North services would be able to be used by standard London passengers as well with no need for special arrangements like secured carriages.

 

[Noddy]

Dropped completely? Is an alternative link being planned?

Page 13, Section 3.1.6:

We have already listened and responded to the residents of Camden on the issue of the HS1-HS2 link. The link required too many compromises f in terms off impacts on freight, passengers and the community in Camden. The link was unable to secure a consensus, so the Government took decisive action, withdrawing safeguarding. We will also remove this from the hybrid bill at the right point in the parliamentary process. We are looking at other options for ways to improve connections to the continent.

It's a combination of the lack of demand - the total number of people flying between Paris and Manchester every day is less than the capacity of a single HS2 train - and the extreme cost involved in connecting the two routes. Had the Government been sensible, they would have passively provided for a captive high speed rail link to the North when they built the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. With this, the link would have just consisted of a tunnel bore or two between Old Oak Common and wherever the passive provision was - likely Stratford Box - with no surface effects whatsoever. Even if the cost of that tunnel bore wouldn't have been justified immediately, it would have been possible to build in passive provision at the HS2 end as well, such that the final link between the lines could be built at any time once HS2 is operational.

Personally I think you're very narrow view of the services that would use the link. Yes, you could run a decent service from Manchester-I would pick up at Manchester Airport, Birmingham Interchange, and maybe Ashford International (all these stations have border guards nearby).

But more importantly it allows further cross London opportunities. For instance additional 'Javelin' type services from Kent to Reading/Oxford (and beyond) calling at Stratford International and OOC for connections to central London (eg DLR/Crossrail).

And then there's the potential for high speed freight from the continent to the midlands and the north.

 

[edwin_m]

Page 13, Section 3.1.6:
Personally I think you're very narrow view of the services that would use the link. Yes, you could run a decent service from Manchester-I would pick up at Manchester Airport, Birmingham Interchange, and maybe Ashford International (all these stations have border guards nearby).

This would be a very empty train, unless it could also carry intermediate passengers such as Manchester-Ashford, but unfortunately our security rules seem to make that impossible unless those passengers undergo baggage screening.

Page 13, Section 3.1.6:
But more importantly it allows further cross London opportunities. For instance additional 'Javelin' type services from Kent to Reading/Oxford (and beyond) calling at Stratford International and OOC for connections to central London (eg DLR/Crossrail).

However HS2 between London and the West Midlands is expected to be nearly full, with only two paths per hour previous reserved for Heathrow now available. This may be an opportunity for a future east-side route, which would be less busy and could perhaps link with HS1 in the Stratford area.

Page 13, Section 3.1.6:
And then there's the potential for high speed freight from the continent to the midlands and the north.

That's a high speed parcels service, which is possible in theory but no more has been heard of it since that demo. Probably not enough volume to make it worthwhile unless three or four competing parcels operators joined forces. There's also the problem that most premium parcels run overnight, when the high speed lines will be at least partly closed for engineering work.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

That's a high speed parcels service, which is possible in theory but no more has been heard of it since that demo. Probably not enough volume to make it worthwhile unless three or four competing parcels operators joined forces. There's also the problem that most premium parcels run overnight, when the high speed lines will be at least partly closed for engineering work.

Would both tracks have to close for engineering works or could the track that is being worked on only close and the other operate bi-directional, with a much lower speed limit in the area of the engineering works?

 

[edwin_m]

Would both tracks have to close for engineering works or could the track that is being worked on only close and the other operate bi-directional, with a much lower speed limit in the area of the engineering works?

Bi-directional running is possible so there will probably be some capacity overnight, but with single line running on different sections each night and trains having to pass somewhere, a reliable timetable would require much slower journey times.

 

[dave59]

However, there still remains a balance to be struck between providing international services and providing domestic ones. HS2 is pretty unique in how it will serve almost every single major city in Britain (all but Bristol, actually) and so the pressure on the London-Birmingham section is immense. Providing an international service along this route might be possible but when capacity will be at such a premium, it may still be the case that using this capacity to provide additional services to the North (especially places like Chester, Stoke, Huddersfield, Hull or suchlike) would be better for the country. Eurostar services beyond Paris or Brussels will require passengers to de-train, go through security, and get back on. If you need to do this, why do you actually need to get on the same train once you've got through security? Euston and St Pancras could be nothing but an underground travelator ride away from one another, and it would mean both the London-Continent and London-North services would be able to be used by standard London passengers as well with no need for special arrangements like secured carriages.

But it is not inconceivable that the present farce of security and border arrangements could change to something more sophisticated in the future, which might not require de-training. However good a travelator is EUS-KGX-STP this would still deny seamless long distance rail travel to UK cities along with new opportunities for inbound tourism and business links. Initially international services might not be heavily loaded but the sharp rise in numbers that came with the move to St.Pancras from Waterloo is an indication of latent demand from 'the north' and there would be another substantial increase should a change of train not be required. As the airport experience becomes ever more weary there are many who would chose rail travel to Europe if the option was effective. Not building the link closes off the options, possibly for decades. The HS2 line capacity argument is no doubt valid but short formed trains (ECML-style) to smaller towns would be well served by the classic lines.

 

[33Hz]

It also ignores the Heathrow to near continent transfer market which is not small, thus also opening up Eurostar to the rest of the country from the Heathrow/OOC hub.