HS2 in the press

[pablo]

Very good idea. They could go straight to the National Transport Museum. A bit like APT.

 

[Chris125]

No, it just means that the CC trains will travel at higher speeds for longer from day one, and the money that would've been spent building the WCML connection at Lichfield will be saved. CC trains will run via HS2 when phase 1 is complete to Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow (and maybe Edinburgh).

The Lichfield connection remains part of the plans for HS2 and unless services via Stafford are dropped that's likely to remain the case - however opening to Crewe earlier reduces it's use and therefore relieves a potential capacity bottleneck on the WCML north of the connection between the opening of phases 1 and 2.

Chris

 

[Wavertreelad]

The Liverpool Echo 10 Aug 2014 is reporting

"The fight to bring High Speed Rail right into the heart of Liverpool received a boost when a government transport minister agreed to meet campaigners.

Baroness Kramer is to sit down with the leaders of the Linking Liverpool campaign – which is backed by the ECHO – where they will be able to put forward their case for the city being part of the planned superfast network.

Currently, Liverpool is in line for a ‘spur’ to Crewe which will see ‘EuroStar-style’ trains travel from the city on conventional track, before running onto the dedicated high speed line.

But campaigners are worried that without a full link-up, the city could miss out on billions of pounds of growth and will not be as attractive a proposition to investors as Birmingham and Manchester. Commuters will be able to get to London from Manchester in just over one hour.

The news that the transport minister is willing to meet the campaign was welcomed. Cllr Phil Davies, the Wirral council leader who chairs Merseyside combined authority, said: “The response from the Minister is extremely encouraging.

“The Government is evidently listening carefully to what we have to say, and we will use this opportunity to make the case for High Speed Rail into Liverpool as forcefully as we can.

“Bringing High Speed Rail to the city region will bring benefits across the board – jobs, investment, increased tourism – and our research provides clear evidence that this opportunity is important not only to Liverpool but to the whole of the north.”

The campaign has already handed over its research on the economic benefits a full link-up would bring.

Baroness Kramer said it was a “welcome contribution to our ongoing consideration of the responses to the consultation as well as the work aimed at improving connectivity in the north and bringing benefits of HS2 to the north quicker.”

Political leaders, regional economic development chiefs and academics are supporting the ECHO-backed campaign. They say having High Speed Rail run into the heart of the city is a “once in a lifetime opportunity” that will be of major importance to Liverpool’s long-term prosperity.

Prime Minister David Cameron has also said the city region is making a good case for being linked into the HS2 network.

Public support has also been encouraging, with more than 4,000 people signing the e-petition – launched on July 29 – calling on the government to debate Liverpool’s case.

Tomorrow, campaigners will be starting a project to bring business leaders on board."

The article can be found at
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/transport-minister-agrees-meeting-liverpool-7592104

 

[Geezertronic]

I still think it is ironic (almost strange) in a way that with all the negative press HS2 gets around the Buckinghamshire & Chiltern areas, there are those "up north" who actually want to be on the line. Hopefully people will stop listening to the anti-HS2 bilge and start listening to people who want it in their back yard.

 

[Deerfold]

I still think it is ironic (almost strange) in a way that with all the negative press HS2 gets around the Buckinghamshire & Chiltern areas, there are those "up north" who actually want to be on the line. Hopefully people will stop listening to the anti-HS2 bilge and start listening to people who want it in their back yard.

Although I'm in favour of HS2, I supect more people in Buckinghamshire and Chiltern would be in favour if they had a local station

 

[jon0844]

People mostly aren't listening to the anti HS2 lot, but they have loud voices and the means to get heard in the media.

But they won't win in the end, and HS2 will happen one way or another. That's a given and even they know it, hence many just wanting to secure more compensation.

 

[HSTEd]

The way these things drag on makes me wonder if it might not be easier to just have continuous tunnels apart from the stations.

 

[edwin_m]

Although I'm in favour of HS2, I supect more people in Buckinghamshire and Chiltern would be in favour if they had a local station

That may be true to some extent. Unfortunately a station would be very expensive in terms of cost and also each train stopping there would take up two train paths on a route which is planned to be fully used. As it is relatively close to London the time saving compared with Chiltern wouldn't be huge, and for many people would be outweighed by the extra time to get to an HS2 station that would be less convenient than the nearest Chiltern station.

 

[HSTEd]

Actually a station could be included that would not use up paths - but it would mean that every train would have to stop there.

 

[Deerfold]

That may be true to some extent. Unfortunately a station would be very expensive in terms of cost and also each train stopping there would take up two train paths on a route which is planned to be fully used. As it is relatively close to London the time saving compared with Chiltern wouldn't be huge, and for many people would be outweighed by the extra time to get to an HS2 station that would be less convenient than the nearest Chiltern station.

Oh indeed. I was just commenting on reasons for the different attitudes.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If you look at the amount of road infrastructure required around Birmingham Interchange you'll see another reason why the Government isn't even considering a Chilterns Parkway station. The vast majority of travellers would use cars to get to the station, meaning that the roads around it would get very busy and you would need a truly enormous car park.

 

[MarkyT]

If you look at the amount of road infrastructure required around Birmingham Interchange you'll see another reason why the Government isn't even considering a Chilterns Parkway station. The vast majority of travellers would use cars to get to the station, meaning that the roads around it would get very busy and you would need a truly enormous car park.

Also, most of those travellers would choose the new HS service over existing alternatives on Chiltern, GW and WC routes, which could leave these services and the franchises that run them in business difficulties. That may not inconvenience the people choosing the new services, but if service reductions on the classic routes then followed other users who couldn't get to the new parkway or who were travelling to other destinations. The point of HS2 is surely to free up capacity on the classic lines so shorter distance commuter / regional / local services can be expanded. Using some of that expensive new HS2 capacity for such local services is highly counter productive for the whole industry.

 

[edwin_m]

Actually a station could be included that would not use up paths - but it would mean that every train would have to stop there.

There might be a way of working it if about every third train stopped there, and restarted to drop into the path vacated by the next one that stopped. But even six trains per hour would be a lot more than the demand would justify.

 

[NotATrainspott]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28672424

Interesting article about the north-south divide over support for HS2. Nothing new though.

 

[Altnabreac]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28672424

Interesting article about the north-south divide over support for HS2. Nothing new though.

The map of council support is quite interesting. The North - South split is fairly obvious but interesting that some southern councils like Peterborough and Milton Keynes can see the potential benefits to them of released capacity and so support the idea.

Looks like HS2 could do with working on more detailed plans for released capacity on the MML though as you have 3 undecided councils in Luton, Bedford and Central Bedfordshire (with Leighton Buzzard, Flitwick and Biggleswade its the only authority covering the WCML, MML and ECML so should benefit 3 times!).

You would think all these areas would benefit from extra capacity on the MML but the case obviously hasn't been made to them convincingly yet.

 

[MarkyT]

Interesting statement from Stop HS2's Joe Rukin, who acknowledges there has been a groundswell of support for the project among councils in several northern cities and goes on to say:

"Basically, if you are getting a station, you think it's a great idea . . . If you're not, you don't."

I think an intermediate chilterns parkway, even a classic rail interchange at the HS2-EWR intersection, would cause many problems and should be avoided. Getting rid of those pesky non stop trains from the WCML will create capacity for many more semi fast expresses from all over the midlands and north west, interchanging at Milton Keynes with east-west rail routes and providing vast numbers of extra fast seats from Milton Keynes into London, as the burghers there have no doubt realised. The benefits are complementary and enabled by HS2, rather than being directly provided by its infrastructure. How to sell that to the public is the problem.

 

[jon0844]

Most of the public don't know the finer details and just have a split second to decide on soundbites. Thus it's easy to just say it's a waste of money and the money better spent elsewhere (as they also don't realise the money isn't already sitting in a pot waiting to be spent).

 

[NotATrainspott]

Interesting statement from Stop HS2's Joe Rukin, who acknowledges there has been a groundswell of support for the project among councils in several northern cities and goes on to say:

"Basically, if you are getting a station, you think it's a great idea . . . If you're not, you don't."

I think an intermediate chilterns parkway, even a classic rail interchange at the HS2-EWR intersection, would cause many problems and should be avoided. Getting rid of those pesky non stop trains from the WCML will create capacity for many more semi fast expresses from all over the midlands and north west, interchanging at Milton Keynes with east-west rail routes and providing vast numbers of extra fast seats from Milton Keynes into London, as the burghers there have no doubt realised. The benefits are complementary and enabled by HS2, rather than being directly provided by its infrastructure. How to sell that to the public is the problem.

That's the experience abroad as well, where everyone wants the stations and no one wants the line. The experience of Stratford and Ebbsfleet International has ensured that HS2 has as few stations as possible and those that remain are as essential and well-developed as well.

 

[pablo]

I use Ebbsfleet a lot ...... unfortunately. Which is all the justification needed for having it!

The Eurostars I see usually pick up or set down 20 to 50 pax.

 

[WatcherZero]

Interesting statement from Stop HS2's Joe Rukin, who acknowledges there has been a groundswell of support for the project among councils in several northern cities and goes on to say:

"Basically, if you are getting a station, you think it's a great idea . . . If you're not, you don't."

I think an intermediate chilterns parkway, even a classic rail interchange at the HS2-EWR intersection, would cause many problems and should be avoided. Getting rid of those pesky non stop trains from the WCML will create capacity for many more semi fast expresses from all over the midlands and north west, interchanging at Milton Keynes with east-west rail routes and providing vast numbers of extra fast seats from Milton Keynes into London, as the burghers there have no doubt realised. The benefits are complementary and enabled by HS2, rather than being directly provided by its infrastructure. How to sell that to the public is the problem.

Theres a map floating around that shows all the councils for and against HS2, it basically shows that support is not dependant on being near a station with support from northern councils hundreds of miles from the nearest stations, but opposition is dependant on either being along the route or in the South and not served.

Basically this diagram but all the areas not shown such as Scotland, more of the south and wales also support it.

 

[TSR :D]

I haven't been following HS2 news for long time but wouldn't it save money if HS2 mainly followed Chiltern route seeing it was once quadruple tracked line? It would mean less CPO orders as well as less tunnels, etc? HS2 could still start from Euston and keep all of their stopping pattern (HS2 splits Chiltern Line at Leamington Spa to go to Interchange). I can see Chiltern line being disrupted but probably not much since line will be left alone most of time except for some rearrangement.

 

[sprinterguy]

I haven't been following HS2 news for long time but wouldn't it save money if HS2 mainly followed Chiltern route seeing it was once quadruple tracked line? It would mean less CPO orders as well as less tunnels, etc? HS2 could still start from Euston and keep all of their stopping pattern (HS2 splits Chiltern Line at Leamington Spa to go to Interchange). I can see Chiltern line being disrupted but probably not much since line will be left alone most of time except for some rearrangement.

Four-tracking of the Chiltern line was never continuous throughout the length of the route.

The radii of curves on the Chiltern line are probably insufficient to allow high speed running.

New build bypasses would still be required to take a high speed line around towns served by the Chiltern route (requiring the line to "weave" around the existing Chiltern infrastructure each time and potentially introducing new sections of route to more sensitive areas of the Chilterns than those proposed for HS2).

The loading gauge on the formerly four-tracked sections of the route will be insufficient for modern standards of high speed railway design or accommodating European gauge rolling stock.

Construction sites would be constrained by their proximity to the existing “live” railway. Far better to build a new line on an unencumbered corridor.

For these reasons, and many others, building a new High Speed line along the corridor of the existing Chiltern line, would be extremely disruptive to the existing Chiltern service and would constrain the new high speed line to primarily Victorian ideals.

In fact, this response to HS2 from Chiltern Railways quite competently explains why a new high speed line along the Chiltern line of route would be an unfeasible idea:

http://www.appghsr.co.uk/upload/Chiltern Railways submission.pdf
A number of commentators have suggested that the Chiltern line could be upgraded as an alternative to HS2. We do not believe this is practical:

 The Chiltern line is now very busy, and in parts working at capacity. Claims that there is significant spare capacity are incorrect.

 Extra capacity could only be added by building additional tracks. As noted above, this would be extremely disruptive, and the work would severely disrupt passenger journeys for many years.

 Claims that Chiltern trains could be “looped” onto side lines to enable intercity/high-speed trains to pass are not practicable. Not only would the looped trains be excessively delayed, but the overall gain in line capacity would be slight.

 Claims that the line was built with enough land to add additional tracks throughout (i.e. quadrupling) are largely incorrect. Whilst there are stretches of the line where 4-tracking was originally possible, these are not contiguous, and the width is often insufficient for earthworks and between-track clearances to modern standards. Significant extra land purchase would be required, along with much heavy engineering work.

 Much of the additional land and construction work needed would be in the middle of urban and residential areas such as Gerrards Cross and Beaconsfield, and considerable purchase of domestic property would be required. Away from the towns it is also questionable whether significant work would be allowed in the Chiltern AONB.

 At both High Wycombe and Leamington Spa the existing railway is elevated above the town, and on a sharp, speed-restricted curve. A new by-pass line would thus be needed, and due to (perceived) noise impacts this would probably also be desirable for the other towns en-route. In this case the various by-passes might as well be linked to give a wholly-new route throughout, rather than a sub-optimal mismatch of old and new.

 Between Northolt and Denham the works needed to upgrade the existing railway would be little different from those proposed for HS2.

 

[TSR :D]

Ah, that answers my question. Thanks.

 

[21C101]

It strikes me that HS2 is basically building the southern bit of the GC which expired at Quainton Road where HS2 leaves the GC formation, and certainly in respect of its eastern leg, diverting it a few miles west to serve Birmingham, something the more I think about it, I wonder why the GC didnt do in the first place. "The New Great Central Main Line" would seem the most accurate description of HS2.

Hopefully a spur to the GW line north of Oxford will be built, restoring a fast NE/SW link.

At Euston instead of a statue of Betjeman there could be one of Sir Edward Watkin with the words "I told you so, I told you so" in the inscription

 

[Wavertreelad]

The Liverpool Echo today was reporting that the Liverpool Mayor was taking the case for HS2 & HS3 to the Party Conferences. Interestingly it quotes that he also supports the 20 Miles More campaign which is has a slightly different view of where a suitable station in Liverpool could be built. Could this be a change in policy or just the press getting it wrong?

"THE case for the High Speed Rail network to come to Liverpool was set to be argued by the city’s mayor at the Labour Party conference in Manchester today.

Joe Anderson will then take the fight for a better connected Liverpool direct to the politicians at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham.

Liverpool does not currently feature on the proposed High Speed Rail 2 (HS2) route from London Euston to Birmingham and Manchester.

Campaign group High Speed Rail - Linking Liverpool, backed by the ECHO, is bringing the city region’s businesses and organisations together to lobby the government for an HS2 line to directly run into the city centre.

Mayor Anderson said: “I shall be lobbying both the Labour and Conservative Parties about why Liverpool must be added to the HS2 network.

“I was one of the first to make the case for HS2 and before details of HS2 were even released I was calling for HS3 running West to East from Liverpool to Newcastle and Hull.

“It is not just about passenger numbers, it is about freight, capacity and growth for the future, the future for us as cities, the future for us as Northerners and the future for us as British citizens.”

HS2 is the UK’s biggest and most expensive ever infrastructure project and has been promoted as an essential piece of economic investment that will help to rebalance the UK’s economy and unlock the potential of Northern cities and regions. But although the current plans connect eight out of 10 of the largest British cities they do not yet include Liverpool.

At the fringe meeting at Manchester Town Hall, which will be attended by shadow infrastructure minister, Lord Adonis (who conceived the HS2 idea), Mayor Anderson will argue HS2 will not deliver on its economic promise if Liverpool is not involved.

He said: “As a port city, Liverpool knows more than anyone else the importance of connectivity in all its forms: be it trains, roads or ferries across the Mersey.

“In the 19th century half of the world’s freight came through Liverpool. Today, a £300m investment in the new Liverpool 2 superport is making our port ready to welcome the largest ships ever built by mankind, the post-Panamax vessels.

“Together with our growing city population and business confidence it is absolutely crucial that Liverpool has a full connection to HS2. That’s also why I have backed the 20 Miles More campaign, led by business to bring HS2 to Liverpool.”

Referring to last week’s historic vote in Scotland, the mayor added: “The referendum was a vote for change and proved emphatically that people want to live in a country that invests everywhere and not just in London. The £10-15bn of investment that is needed for HS2 may sound like a lot, but in comparison to Transport for London’s recent requests for £80bn up to 2050, it is only fair the nation invests in our future as well.”

The meeting at 5.30pm is part of think tank ResPublica’s Labour Party Conference Fringe programme.

It will also feature speeches by Phillip Blond, director at ResPublica and Stephen Twigg, the West Derby MP."

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-mayor-takes-hs2-campaign-7808260

 

[HSTEd]

Why does it matter if there is going to be a port at Liverpool?
Noone ever goes to watch the port where a computer unloads their boxes amongst thousands of other near identical ones.

 

[The Ham]

From the Eveing Standard:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...t-hub-at-old-oak-common-revealed-9747622.html

Plans to create one of the capital’s largest transport hubs by linking HS2 to London Overground were unveiled today by the mayor amid a bitter row with town halls about the development.

City Hall set out the options to build a new London Overground station on the sprawling west London industrial area at Old Oak Common to fully exploit the economic potential of additional links it is due to gain to Crossrail and HS2.

Although Old Oak Common is already on the route of the London Overground, the mayor believes it needs a dedicated station to be paid for by government, which his transport planners calculate would link locals to a quarter of a million jobs.

Transport for London have produced three options for a station, the most eye-catching of which is building a viaduct diverting the Clapham Junction branch of London Overground to link with the Richmond branch at Old Oak Common.

In all three scenarios, passengers are linked via a walkway to the proposed new station which would overarch HS2 and Crossrail lines.

With the new Overground, a greater number of HS2 passengers arriving from the North of England at Old Oak Common would avoid having to travel into central London, easing the pressure on Euston.

Only Crossrail is confirmed but if all the new lines are built, Old Oak Common could handle 250,000 passengers a day, similar to Waterloo station.

The mayor’s vision is to create a mini-Manhattan around the HS2/Crossrail station as part of a wider development at Old Oak Common he says can create 24,000 new homes and 55,000 new jobs.

 

[Wavertreelad]

Why does it matter if there is going to be a port at Liverpool?
Noone ever goes to watch the port where a computer unloads their boxes amongst thousands of other near identical ones.

It's not about passengers going to the port, but ensuring there is suitable capacity on conventional routes to enable some of those thousands of containers can move to and from the destination by rail, in addition to expanding amount of bulk traffic that could also move through the port. HS2 provides the additional capacity for some passenger traffic and increases the commercial access to city region as a whole.

 

[WatcherZero]

Someone, I presume a anti-HS2 campaign group has done a FOI request on Euston WCML arrivals and departure loadings vs total capacity.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-main-line-service-from-london-euston-in-2013

Essentially shows Long Distance capacity has increased by 50% since 2007/8 and while demands growing around 7% a year its led to quite a bit of excess capacity that should last a decade or so. Suburban capacity on the other hand has increased by about 5-15% but is pretty full in peaks, looks like it will be beyond peak capacity in only a couple of years time though still masses of offpeak capacity (offpeak services between a third and half full with well over a decade of growth potential left).

(should of course be pointed out that a train leaving a terminus will usually increase loading till around midpoint during the journey while a train arriving at a terminus is not neccesarily still at its highest loading, i.e if a train leaves Euston for Scotland half full it will be a lot fuller by the time it reaches Wigan/Preston)

 

[jon0844]

Masses of off peak capacity doesn't mean a great deal though, so I am not sure how the data will be twisted to make HS2 sound unnecessary.

Given the time it will take to get HS2 done, I suspect that the data actually proves HS2 is vital and that every second counts.