HS2 in the press

[willsmadeit]

It is too late, of course, for "reasoned debate" now that the scheme has Royal Assent. I came across the crowing of some of your correspondents last week and found that "unreasonable".

Please remember that the scheme will destroy businesses and lives along the route. I act for farming clients whose businesses will not survive the construction phase; in one case his farmhouse and buildings are obliterated. He is over 70 years old and has no wish to move. Is he a NIMBY? I have worked for him on a variety of land management matters for over thirty years: if I object on his behalf, why do I attain NIMBY status?

Compensation monies are unable to replace his way of life. Fact.

 

[deltic]

It is too late, of course, for "reasoned debate" now that the scheme has Royal Assent. I came across the crowing of some of your correspondents last week and found that "unreasonable".

Please remember that the scheme will destroy businesses and lives along the route. I act for farming clients whose businesses will not survive the construction phase; in one case his farmhouse and buildings are obliterated. He is over 70 years old and has no wish to move. Is he a NIMBY? I have worked for him on a variety of land management matters for over thirty years: if I object on his behalf, why do I attain NIMBY status?

Compensation monies are unable to replace his way of life. Fact.

Sadly any major infrastructure scheme one cares to mention has these type of impacts including many which will have benefited the individuals impacted here. Unlike China at least we have a system where those impacted have the right to petition Parliament to identify ways of minimising the impacts on them and changes have been made to the scheme to address some of the worse impacts of construction.

 

[NSEFAN]

It is too late, of course, for "reasoned debate" now that the scheme has Royal Assent. I came across the crowing of some of your correspondents last week and found that "unreasonable".

Please remember that the scheme will destroy businesses and lives along the route. I act for farming clients whose businesses will not survive the construction phase; in one case his farmhouse and buildings are obliterated. He is over 70 years old and has no wish to move. Is he a NIMBY? I have worked for him on a variety of land management matters for over thirty years: if I object on his behalf, why do I attain NIMBY status?

Compensation monies are unable to replace his way of life. Fact.

By definition, the people you act for are nimbies, as they don't want the railway built near him, and latch onto any argument they can (including recycled arguments about white elephants and shaving-a-few-minutes-off-a-journey) in the hope of stopping the project. This is completely understandable as being forcibly moved out of one's home is very unpleasant, but as Altfish has said:

I wouldn't like to be turfed out of my home. And you have my sympathy and I wish you well.

BUT if that argument was used to stop every infrastructure scheme the UK would grind to a halt.

At some point a line has to be drawn between not disrupting people and building necessary infrastructure, because we all live in a society and have to compromise. This is especially true given how densely populated the UK now is. You mentioned about locals not being able to use the line; would they have preferred a far more polluting and land-consuming motorway instead?

 

[HSTEd]

Please remember that the scheme will destroy businesses and lives along the route.

A tiny handful compared to the numbers it will help.

I act for farming clients whose businesses will not survive the construction phase; in one case his farmhouse and buildings are obliterated. He is over 70 years old and has no wish to move. Is he a NIMBY?

Yes, he objects because it will personally disadvantage him.
He will be compensated for the loss of his buildings and housing, indeed he could probably build a brand new set of buildings a hundred yards away - which whilst it will not be his original home it is not as if he will be moving far from his network of friends and acquiantances.

 

[najaB]

He is over 70 years old and has no wish to move. Is he a NIMBY?

By definition, yes.

While it is unfortunate that he will be badly affected by this project, the benefit to the nation outweighs the impact on the individual.

 

[The Planner]

I assume you petitioned on their behalf the hybrid bill?

 

[Voglitz]

For example, putting the current fast service from London to Birmingham onto a new line will free up a lot of capacity for local services in & around the West Midlands.

At present, the local services are fairly poor, mainly due to having to work around a 20 minute frequency fast service along an essentially 2 track corridor between Coventry & Birmingham New Street.

The fast Birmingham - Coventry services also perform a local function.

Removal of the fast trains will allow a much more regular pattern stopping service on the Coventry - New Street section which should encourage modal shift from car to rail.

Because the line was, is, and will be mixed stopping 2-track, there is no way of "freeing up a lot of capacity for local services in & around the West Midlands".

But if the shifting of traffic to the new HS2 allows longer possessions for engineering work on the WCML, as one of the uses of the freed up capacity. HS2 will thus allow engineering work to be carried out more efficiently, which means less disruption.

Does the shifting of traffic to the new HS2 allow longer possessions for engineering work on the WCML? I can't see how that would happen.

 

[The Planner]

The fast Birmingham - Coventry services also perform a local function.

For whom? Coventry? How do they benefit Canley, Tile Hill, Berkswell, Hampton in Arden, Marston Green, Lea Hall, Stechford and Adderley Park?

Because the line was, is, and will be mixed stopping 2-track, there is no way of "freeing up a lot of capacity for local services in & around the West Midlands".

By making the existing "fast" services into a half hourly pattern instead of 3tph would allow the current skip stopping pattern to be removed.

Does the shifting of traffic to the new HS2 allow longer possessions for engineering work on the WCML? I can't see how that would happen.

No reason why it couldn't allow longer two track timetable possessions than current.

 

[Voglitz]

For whom? Coventry? How do they benefit Canley, Tile Hill, Berkswell, Hampton in Arden, Marston Green, Lea Hall, Stechford and Adderley Park?

I'd imagine people who live in Coventry and work in Birmingham might not want to be stuck on a train that stops at every station inbetween. For example.

By making the existing "fast" services into a half hourly pattern instead of 3tph would allow the current skip stopping pattern to be removed.

There's little, if any, evidence that it would allow skip stopping to be removed.

No reason why it couldn't allow longer two track timetable possessions than current.

Network Rail stated HS2 could allow more and faster trains to run on the WCML. That would mean more rather than fewer possessions.

The length of individual possessions depends on train service finish and re-start time, which is not really anything to do with HS2.

 

[Trog]

The length of individual possessions depends on train service finish and re-start time, which is not really anything to do with HS2.

If you take some traffic off the WCML and onto HS2, there is more chance that the night time white period with no trains can be extended. It would need the remaining service last thing at night and first thing in the morning to be handled on one pair of tracks, which is more likely with some of the current trains moved to run on HS2. Even just an extra hour or two would be invaluable, as it would all be working time, as the time for possession set up and release would stay the same.

 

[GCR]

As such by the time of all of HS2 being open it is not unreasonable to assume that we could reach double the number of passengers. Even if we don't, there is a good chance that we could reach that point soon after.

If that is the case then how much will it cost to cater for that growth on the whole network or can you explain why it only happens between stations served by HS2?

 

[GCR]

If you're building new, the extra cost to make it high speed is comparatively negligible

Please explain what you mean by 'comparatively negligible', what speeds you are comparing, and explain why HS2 is so expensive if it is negligible.

Trying to implement improvement works on the WCML without shutting the whole thing down for extended lengths of time will cost many, many, times the projected amount that the new build will cost

It will be far more difficult and expensive to maintain HS2 than conventional lines and much more disruptive as there is no alternative route for captive trains and a small time window for doing any work. HS2 must be the only railway line that has ever been planned to have no spare capacity for more trains from the day it finally opens.

From the outset it's been stated that the funding for HS2 will be raised to fund HS2 - it's not a pot of cash that can be spent on something else if HS2 gets canned.

Where is this pot of cash coming from?

 

[The Ham]

If that is the case then how much will it cost to cater for that growth on the whole network or can you explain why it only happens between stations served by HS2?

HS2 basically releases capacity on the WCML, ECML and MML, so that's those three sorted (at least on the busier southern seconds), it also Aides the core of XC.

It makes the business case for Crossrail 2 better, so that's the SWML aided to about 50%, likewise services on the outside of London.

The GWML will benefit from Crossrail.

Most of Wales, Cornwall, Scotland and other rural areas will benefit just by train lengthening.

So far the bill is something like £20bn on top of HS2 beyond what had been committed.

There will be a need for more (the talked about HS3 as just one example), and that full list will be clearer as we get closer to 2030, but it won't be easy without HS2

 

[Trog]

It will be far more difficult and expensive to maintain HS2 than conventional lines and much more disruptive as there is no alternative route for captive trains and a small time window for doing any work.

No as it is all new with no hidden surprises and built to the same standards throughout, it will be cheaper to maintain HS2 than the classic lines with their selection of narrow and shallow bridges, buried foundations of structures demolished when Victoria was still on the throne, etc. etc.

I also believe that HS2 will be built with the two tracks far enough apart and reversably signalled so that in quieter times one line can be worked on while the other is open for traffic bi-directionally.

 

[Ianno87]

I'd imagine people who live in Coventry and work in Birmingham might not want to be stuck on a train that stops at every station inbetween. For example.



There's little, if any, evidence that it would allow skip stopping to be removed.



Network Rail stated HS2 could allow more and faster trains to run on the WCML. That would mean more rather than fewer possessions.

The length of individual possessions depends on train service finish and re-start time, which is not really anything to do with HS2.

They wouldn't be "stuck on a train that stops at every station"; there will still be fast trains from Coventry to Birmingham New Street calling at only Birmingham International.

Instead of having a Pendolino every 20 minutes* and an hourly CrossCountry overlaid where it fits, you might instead get a Pendolino every half hour and a CrossCountry every half hour, for example (recasting the corridor will almost certainly be the opportunity to divert the current Solihull XC via Coventry).

(*To satisfy the Birmingham-Euston 'fast' walk-up market to the cost of pretty much everything else as it stands, which will transfer to HS2)

Same number of fast trains, different timetable pattern to give better local service patterns rather than the current skip-stop compromise. Perhaps this will also mean that one of the current Northampton trains can also omit stops, providing a further fast service on the corridor.

There will almost certainly still be a market (and capacity) for a regular Birmingham-Coventry-MK-Watford-Euston fast-ish type service to serve the intermediate markets.

 

[The Planner]

I'd imagine people who live in Coventry and work in Birmingham might not want to be stuck on a train that stops at every station inbetween. For example.

Have I suggested that all the fast trains would be removed? And if you use that analogy then people will move away from the WCML onto HS2 as they don't want to use slower trains from London to Birmingham.

There's little, if any, evidence that it would allow skip stopping to be removed.

A reduction of fast paths to a half hourly frequency would allow more skip stopping and also the second XC to run via Coventry. Just because it isn't written down doesn't mean it isn't possible.

Network Rail stated HS2 could allow more and faster trains to run on the WCML. That would mean more rather than fewer possessions.

The length of individual possessions depends on train service finish and re-start time, which is not really anything to do with HS2.

Quite clearly it is, as HS2 could take up the long distance traffic at the end of the evening and allow an extended two track timetable to start earlier.

 

[The Planner]

No as it is all new with no hidden surprises and built to the same standards throughout, it will be cheaper to maintain HS2 than the classic lines with their selection of narrow and shallow bridges, buried foundations of structures demolished when Victoria was still on the throne, etc. etc.

Even more so if they decide to slab track it.

 

[Chester1]

HS2 is not necessary, enough capacity could be created on the WCML through smart timetabling

 

[willsmadeit]

A tiny handful compared to the numbers it will help.


Yes, he objects because it will personally disadvantage him.
He will be compensated for the loss of his buildings and housing, indeed he could probably build a brand new set of buildings a hundred yards away - which whilst it will not be his original home it is not as if he will be moving far from his network of friends and acquiantances.

A real bugbear in trying to "negotiate" with HS2 Ltd is that they expect the claimant or, in this case, their hard pressed advisor to run the risk and fairly considerable costs of applying to the local planning authority for planning consent for the replacement steading. And even then, Lord knows if living in the replacement will be tenable.

It would certainly be a lot simpler if HS2 could use their considerable power and influence to pick up equivalent reinstatement of this sort for the claimants.

 

[Polarbear]

HS2 is not necessary, enough capacity could be created on the WCML through smart timetabling

Really - including the additional freight trains that are expected to use the WCML once HS2 is opened and the fast services are transferred over to that line?

Whilst you probably could do something with the present WCML timetables to squeeze some additional train paths, it would be at the cost of removing pathing allowances. The whole thing would be much more likely to fall over at the first hint of disruption. It would only be a short term measure as well, so would have little effect in the longer term.

 

[NSEFAN]

Really - including the additional freight trains that are expected to use the WCML once HS2 is opened and the fast services are transferred over to that line?

Whilst you probably could do something with the present WCML timetables to squeeze some additional train paths, it would be at the cost of removing pathing allowances. The whole thing would be much more likely to fall over at the first hint of disruption. It would only be a short term measure as well, so would have little effect in the longer term.

He's not serious, he's quoting someone else who has used an argument involving smart timetabling.

 

[Chester1]

Really - including the additional freight trains that are expected to use the WCML once HS2 is opened and the fast services are transferred over to that line?

Whilst you probably could do something with the present WCML timetables to squeeze some additional train paths, it would be at the cost of removing pathing allowances. The whole thing would be much more likely to fall over at the first hint of disruption. It would only be a short term measure as well, so would have little effect in the longer term.

I am guessing you didn't notice the "LOL" emoticon used instead of a full stop!

 

[Polarbear]

I am guessing you didn't notice the "LOL" emoticon used instead of a full stop!

You guess correctly! D'oh!

Sorry.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Well at least people against HS2 allow us to make sure we fully understand why the rest of us want it. Keeps us on our toes.

 

[The Planner]

A real bugbear in trying to "negotiate" with HS2 Ltd is that they expect the claimant or, in this case, their hard pressed advisor to run the risk and fairly considerable costs of applying to the local planning authority for planning consent for the replacement steading. And even then, Lord knows if living in the replacement will be tenable.

It would certainly be a lot simpler if HS2 could use their considerable power and influence to pick up equivalent reinstatement of this sort for the claimants.

Did they go through the petitioning process of the hybrid bill and what was the outcome? Can you direct us to when it was so we can read the details?

 

[GCR]

I also believe that HS2 will be built with the two tracks far enough apart and reversably signalled so that in quieter times one line can be worked on while the other is open for traffic bi-directionally.

You "believe" they will be far enough apart but I have yet to see anything that suggests that this is part of the design or that the safety bodies have agreed that people can work on one track while the other is in use. Even if this is possible, the capacity will be very greatly reduced because of the problems of operating trains at high speeds with long braking distances and slow acceleration. When are these quieter times you mention?

 

[najaB]

When are these quieter times you mention?

Towards beginning and end of the service day. Weekends and holidays. Same as the existing railway really.

 

[GCR]

Even more so if they decide to slab track it.

Haven't they decided that yet? How do you replace slab track and high speed points in the space of 5 hours? Does anyone know how long slab track lasts with 18 tph at 400kph? Possibly not, as no-one has tried it. The M42 and the M1 are still settling on the bits constucted over old mineworkings etc. Presumably the cost of HS2 includes everything necessary to ensure that it will not settle at all.

 

[Voglitz]

A reduction of fast paths to a half hourly frequency would allow more skip stopping and also the second XC to run via Coventry. Just because it isn't written down doesn't mean it isn't possible.

Presumably you meant to write "A reduction of fast paths to a half hourly frequency would allow less skip stopping". But from what has been written down, that is not the case.

If the number of fast paths stays the same [ -1 VWC, +1 XC ], the stopping service has to stay more or less the same.

Quite clearly it is, as HS2 could take up the long distance traffic at the end of the evening and allow an extended two track timetable to start earlier.

Quite clearly long distance traffic could be routed onto the Chiltern line via Willesden at the end of the evening, and allow an extended two track timetable to start earlier, saving £18+ billion.

 

[The Planner]

Presumably you meant to write "A reduction of fast paths to a half hourly frequency would allow less skip stopping". But from what has been written down, that is not the case.

If the number of fast paths stays the same [ -1 VWC, +1 XC ], the stopping service has to stay more or less the same.

That assumes the VWC and XC are on a 00 20 40 frequency, if as I suggest the VWC was 00 30 then the options are wider as I suspect you quite clearly understand.

Quite clearly long distance traffic could be routed onto the Chiltern line via Willesden at the end of the evening, and allow an extended two track timetable to start earlier, saving £18+ billion.

To quote your normal response to that, evidence? and how does it save £18 billion and resolve any future capacity issues during the day?