HS2-HS1 link - a slightly different plan

[GingerSte]

Some people may remember I was interested trying to make the HS2-HS1 link viable. (Don't worry if you don't.) Here's another try.

What if the third tunnel went from Old Oak Common to the Travis Perkins timber yard adjacent to the WCML at Chamberlayne Road (just west of Queens Park Station)?

Such a tunnel would be about 1.5-2km long (as against about 5 for the previous version), so the cost would be a lot lower. This would connect HS2 to the WCML slow lines. The freight lines then branch off at South Hampstead and go through Camden, after which it would link to HS1.

The only land take would be the timber yard, and Travis Perkins could always locate somewhere nearby (subject to some compo, I'm sure). If you slewed the up (towards Euston) line to the north and put the tunnel portal / cutting between the up and down lines, that would limit any conflicting train movements. A very quick look on Bing Maps suggests about 750m length to do this, which might be do-able.

 

[edwin_m]

Would that allow European gauge trains like the original connection or be limited to UK-gauge trains?

 

[Moonshot]

I would have thought that deep in the original blueprints for HS2 was some sort of feasilbilty study into connections elsewhere. A lot of avenues would have already been explored and rejected for a whole variety of reasons.

 

[GingerSte]

Would that allow European gauge trains like the original connection or be limited to UK-gauge trains?

Good point. I don't know. The international trains would pass through Queen's Park, South Hampstead and Camden Rd Stations, not to mention a number of tunnels. I would therefore suspect something classic-compatible.

 

[GingerSte]

I would have thought that deep in the original blueprints for HS2 was some sort of feasilbilty study into connections elsewhere. A lot of avenues would have already been explored and rejected for a whole variety of reasons.

It might have been. I'm not aware of if it has.

 

[najaB]

It might have been. I'm not aware of if it has.

It was. I don't have a link to hand at the moment but a number of HS1-HS2 connections were studied and none provided value for money given the limited opportunities for through running.

 

[GingerSte]

It was. I don't have a link to hand at the moment but a number of HS1-HS2 connections were studied and none provided value for money given the limited opportunities for through running.

Apologies, najaB. I meant that I wasn't sure if this particular route had been studied. I'm sure that options were looked at, but not sure about this particular one. Sorry for not being clearer.

 

[Bald Rick]

Queens Park for a portal was looked at in the very very early days (before HS2 was HS2). The difficult bit is getting access to the site for constriction materials and spoil.

 

[Roast Veg]

Is it not set to become a terminal anyway?

 

[Trog]

Another problem with a portal at Queens Park would be that in sharing the slows with the WCML traffic for the three miles to the south end of Primrose Hill Tunnel is that you are going to eat up paths on the WCML. Unless there are very few HS2 - HS1 trains in which case the link is not worth doing.

 

[GingerSte]

Queens Park for a portal was looked at in the very very early days (before HS2 was HS2). The difficult bit is getting access to the site for constriction materials and spoil.

Yes, it would be difficult. There is a ramp between the road and rail level at the moment, though, serving the timber yard. It looks like only a small portion of the width of that ramp at the bottom end would need to be removed to allow the up slow to be moved. It looks like (from Google Earth) works traffic could still access the site from that ramp.

Plus, no doubt the local authorities would want materials in and out using rail.

Another problem with a portal at Queens Park would be that in sharing the slows with the WCML traffic for the three miles to the south end of Primrose Hill Tunnel is that you are going to eat up paths on the WCML. Unless there are very few HS2 - HS1 trains in which case the link is not worth doing.

We'd be talking a maximum of 1 train per hour in each direction outside of the peaks and after HS2 has opened and taken a good bunch of traffic from the WCML. Slewing the up slow and putting the portal between the slows would eliminate clashes here. The only clash (at South Hampstead) wouldn't be an issue if England-bound services were timed to coincide with either freight or continent-bound services through this junction.

 

[najaB]

We'd be talking a maximum of 1 train per hour in each direction outside of the peaks...

So a (let's say) £50M investment for ~5000 passengers a max per day. Not good value for money.

 

[Bald Rick]

So a (let's say) £50M investment for ~5000 passengers a max per day. Not good value for money.

You want to transfer one of the noughts from the second number to the first.

 

[najaB]

You want to transfer one of the noughts from the second number to the first.

I was being very generous.

 

[HowardGWR]

How many pax, from West Midlands area, fly to Paris, Brussels and Amsterdam per day. That's the target market. As time went on (Phase 2a), one could probably hope to eat into the Liverpool / Manchester originating market too. Of course one has to take into account the numbers from those places that will use HS2 to get to Heathrow or Gatwick but would then would transfer to the through trains instead of the Euston terminators. You would have to decide whether that market transfer would mean less than full trains on the terminators, rendering them less profitable. I wonder what the market adds up to, max. I do know that the Mawhinney study worked out that no more than 10% of HS2 pax would be aiming for Heathrow, forcing the conclusion that the OOC stop would suffice for a connection to it, rather than a separate spur to it. Perhaps the same conclusion would apply to HS2-HS1.

Make them trudge up and down the Euston Road with their luggage!

 

[MathewGelry]

Its just a plan. Doesnt mean it will exactly happen that way. Plans can change at any time. And in the game development world there are many factors that can force plans to be rethought.

.

 

[edwin_m]

According to the Birmingham Airport website there are only three flights to Paris on a Thursday. Assuming all are 747-sized (some may be smaller) that's about the same number of seats as a single Eurostar. International trains can't be much shorter than that due to Channel Tunnel regulations.

However the flights go morning, afternoon and evening so you'd have to run three trains each about one third full to have a chance of capturing the same number of passengers. The journey would also be slower than flying, even between city centres, so anyone under time pressure would continue to fly.

This illustrates a wider point. Eurostar is about the only train service on the planet that carries only international passengers, and it is able to survive by doing so only because it links three major capital cities that are the ideal distance apart for rail. Other international services also carry domestic passengers within the countries they pass through. It's just possible that a train every two hours calling to pick up and set down at Birmingham, Old Oak, Stratford, Ebbsfleet, Ashford, Lille and Paris would be viable. However the passport and security rules applying to Tunnel trains make this impossible. Nobody wants to go through that for a domestic journey, and the time needed to do so would make it uncompetitive.

 

[najaB]

According to the Birmingham Airport website there are only three flights to Paris on a Thursday. Assuming all are 747-sized (some may be smaller) that's about the same number of seats as a single Eurostar.

I presume you meant 737 sized? They'll all be 738 or smaller - there's a couple of Q400s in there too.

 

[Voglitz]

So a (let's say) £50M investment for ~5000 passengers a max per day. Not good value for money.

On those figures, excellent value, when compared to HS2's Manchester spur.

 

[najaB]

On those figures, excellent value, when compared to HS2's Manchester spur.

As Bald Rick said, it's more likely to be £500M for 500 passengers a day.

 

[muddythefish]

Make them trudge up and down the Euston Road with their luggage!

B***** the north then - nothing changes.

 

[Roast Veg]

Solutions have been proposed for connections between Euston and St Pan, it will be much easier than the roadway (though maybe not at first).

 

[work-traveller]

According to the Birmingham Airport website there are only three flights to Paris on a Thursday. Assuming all are 747-sized (some may be smaller) that's about the same number of seats as a single Eurostar. International trains can't be much shorter than that due to Channel Tunnel regulations.

However the flights go morning, afternoon and evening so you'd have to run three trains each about one third full to have a chance of capturing the same number of passengers. The journey would also be slower than flying, even between city centres, so anyone under time pressure would continue to fly.

This illustrates a wider point. Eurostar is about the only train service on the planet that carries only international passengers, and it is able to survive by doing so only because it links three major capital cities that are the ideal distance apart for rail. Other international services also carry domestic passengers within the countries they pass through. It's just possible that a train every two hours calling to pick up and set down at Birmingham, Old Oak, Stratford, Ebbsfleet, Ashford, Lille and Paris would be viable. However the passport and security rules applying to Tunnel trains make this impossible. Nobody wants to go through that for a domestic journey, and the time needed to do so would make it uncompetitive.

According to the Civil Aviation Authority PAX figures (Jan '17) from Birmingham/Paris were 31,068, whilst Birmingham/Brussels were 10,765. So that's a little over 1000/day. The Eurostar 373 has a capacity of 750 seats whilst the newer Eurostar e320 has a capacity of 900 seats. Either way, that's 3+ trains to service the existing requirement.

Whilst the train will take longer, the connection to the centre of Paris or Brussels (where the majority of PAX will be going) makes the train more competitive than it may be credited for.

On the point of international arrival/departure issues, these facilities are already designed into the HS2 terminus at Curzon Street in Birmingham.

 

[najaB]

Whilst the train will take longer, the connection to the centre of Paris (where the majority of PAX will be going) makes the train more competitive than it may be credited for.

Does the data make that clear? A fair number of journeys to Amsterdam and Paris are AF-KLM passengers making connections to long-haul flights

 

[quantinghome]

According to the Civil Aviation Authority PAX figures to Paris during January 2017 were 31,068. So that's a little over 1000/day. The Eurostar 373 has a capacity of 750 seats whilst the newer Eurostar e320 has a capacity of 900 seats. Either way, that's 2+ trains to service the existing requirement.

Whilst the train will take longer, the connection to the centre of Paris (where the majority of PAX will be going) makes the train more competitive than it may be credited for.

On the point of international arrival/departure issues, these facilities are already designed into the HS2 terminus at Curzon Street in Birmingham.

You're assuming that all the existing air passengers will switch to rail. There are many reasons why this would not happen:

- the timetable will not suit everyone
- it may be more expensive
- they may be connecting to a long haul flight
- for their particular origin or destination it may be quicker to use the plane

But let's say 100% did switch to rail, we would end up with a few services a day. I can't see how that demand could possibly justify the construction of a HS1-HS2 tunnel.

I agree that the only way it could work is if international and domestic passengers use the same trains. This is actually planned for Eurostar's service from Amsterdam, where international and domestic travellers will be in separate halves of the train. Domestic travellers get off at Brussels, that half of the train is security-checked and new Eurostar passengers get on. However this requires a 20 minute stop. Even with this in place, I still don't see it happening.

 

[Joe Paxton]

Make them trudge up and down the Euston Road with their luggage!

A high quality pavement upgrade along Euston Rd would be cheaper than any rail link!

Recently-ish some signs were installed along the alternative route through Somers Town (Phoenix Place etc).

 

[edwin_m]

If Crossrail 2 is built a single station will have access at the west end to serve Euston and at the east end to serve St Pancras, similar to the various underground stations on Crossrail 1 being discussed elsewhere on the forum. I hope this arrangement can incorporate a link tunnel with moving walkways on the "unpaid" side of the barriers.

 

[Bald Rick]

According to the Civil Aviation Authority PAX figures (Jan '17) from Birmingham/Paris were 31,068, whilst Birmingham/Brussels were 10,765. So that's a little over 1000/day. The Eurostar 373 has a capacity of 750 seats whilst the newer Eurostar e320 has a capacity of 900 seats. Either way, that's 3+ trains to service the existing requirement.

Whilst the train will take longer, the connection to the centre of Paris or Brussels (where the majority of PAX will be going) makes the train more competitive than it may be credited for.

On the point of international arrival/departure issues, these facilities are already designed into the HS2 terminus at Curzon Street in Birmingham.

That 31,000 is total for both ways. So approx 500 a day each way. Or rather less than a train load.

Personally I think you need a train every 2-3 hours from early morning to around 1900 to compete on frequency.

 

[Bald Rick]

If Crossrail 2 is built a single station will have access at the west end to serve Euston and at the east end to serve St Pancras, similar to the various underground stations on Crossrail 1 being discussed elsewhere on the forum. I hope this arrangement can incorporate a link tunnel with moving walkways on the "unpaid" side of the barriers.

I don't think there will be an unpaid link, as that means a seperate set of escalators and tunnels.

But even if it was, given the depth of Crossrail 2, it would take much, much longer to go that way than at street level. Maybe worth it in the rain, but that's it.

 

[swt_passenger]

If Crossrail 2 is built a single station will have access at the west end to serve Euston and at the east end to serve St Pancras, similar to the various underground stations on Crossrail 1 being discussed elsewhere on the forum. I hope this arrangement can incorporate a link tunnel with moving walkways on the "unpaid" side of the barriers.

Such a link tunnel would still have to get under the deep basements of the British Library and Crick institute. I doubt it is going to be a practical solution.