HS2 Plan B?

[MidnightFlyer]

This is a very good point, and one that I think deserves further debate.

If the NIMBYs win, and HS2 doesn't get built (a line with cross party support which has significant support from business groups/ stakeholders across much of the UK) then it'll become even harder to get smaller scale routes built (without the kind of consensus that HS2 has).

For example, whilst the Chilterns are fairly unspectacular compared to much of the English countryside (and are only really "outstanding" if you've never gone more than an hour's drive beyond the M25), the Peak District is *genuinley* beautiful. But how will we be able to get a railway rebuilt between Matlock and Buxton area if the NIMBYs in the Chilterns win? Face it, a reopening of the direct route between the East Midlands and Lancashire (which could be a major route for both freight and passenger services) is harder to "sell" as a UK-wide benefit, but the local protestors will be just as organised as the Chilterns mob.

Same goes for any other attempt to build a railway near anyone's property... if we lose this one then we are going to have to become a lot less ambitious about the chances of building any new lines in the future.

Indeed. RAIL editor Nigel Harris has apperently received letters from Chilterners saying 'provide us your address so that we can come around to your area and destroy it' (or something along those lines). I really wish that they could formulate better arguments than 'it'll cause cancer' etc. Compared to a four lane motorway, a two track HS rail line is almost invisible. Many valleys in Kent (Nashenden etc) have both m'ways and High Speed rail running through them, and to be fair, it doesn't make them any uglier. And, as you say, the Chilterns are hardly stunning when put up against the Peak District, and even areas such as the Scottish Borders and the Cotswolds. The day that High Speed 2 construction starts, I will not see it as a way forward, but will enjoy the looks of disguist coming from Great Missenden and rural Buckinghamshire

 

[IanXC]

If HS2 was to not go ahead, I think the main priorities would be schemes to otherwise increase capacity to Birmingham and Manchester.

- Improvements to the MML to enable perhaps 2tph to Manchester, including reopening the Woodhead route
- Improvements to the Chiltern Mainline to include capacity through Birmingham and a reconnection to Wolverhampton. This would enable all Liverpool and North Wales services to run via this route, as well as increasing capacity to Birmingham.
- Improvements to both mainlines to enable 11 car running and acquisition of suitable stock.

 

[LE Greys]

Capacity isn't as constrained at the northern end of the WCML, as there aren't any major conurbations that have a large number of local services to weave Intercity services around. Granted that the two track nature of the section of the route through the Lake District and the Scottish borders does throw up some problems of course, but HS2 services bound for Glasgow would probably replace the current London to Glasgow WCML service, so it wouldn't consume much more capacity than at present if HS2 never got further north than Manchester, but I would hope that it does.

I believe there will probably be two Glasgow services, with one train running via HS2 and the other via the WCML, putting in a few extra stops. This should both speed up the Glasgow service and make it easier to get from the Trent Valley, and presumably Milton Keynes or Rugby, to various places further north. The major removals will be two of the Manchester services, leaving two free paths for one extra to Birmingham and Liverpool, or to increase the Holyhead service to hourly. The Birmingham trains will probably slow down, with extra Rugby, Milton Keynes and Watford stops.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If HS2 was to not go ahead, I think the main priorities would be schemes to otherwise increase capacity to Birmingham and Manchester.

- Improvements to the MML to enable perhaps 2tph to Manchester, including reopening the Woodhead route
- Improvements to the Chiltern Mainline to include capacity through Birmingham and a reconnection to Wolverhampton. This would enable all Liverpool and North Wales services to run via this route, as well as increasing capacity to Birmingham.
- Improvements to both mainlines to enable 11 car running and acquisition of suitable stock.

Sounds like a bit of a blind alley to me. I would rather like to see this happen anyway, although I'd prefer to see Shrewsbury and Aberystwyth services using the Chiltern rather than Liverpool or Holyhead. I'd also like to see 125 running one day, electrification (which would help XC just as much as Chiltern) and additional freight loops. Connecting Stratford-on-Avon back to Honeybourne and eventually Cheltenham via the G/WR would be worth looking into as well. However, this would be more to feed HS2 than replace it. Constantly trying to squeeze more capacity out of these lines might work for another few decades (my GCR idea is based on that) but there is only so much we can do.

 

[IanXC]

Sounds like a bit of a blind alley to me. I would rather like to see this happen anyway... Constantly trying to squeeze more capacity out of these lines might work for another few decades (my GCR idea is based on that) but there is only so much we can do.

Well absolutely. Its a good old fashioned British make do and mend plan!

 

[Nym]

I'm sure 50% of the NIMBYs will shut their moaning up if they had a station on the route, even though this would mean four tracking the whole damn thing, but still, 4 track will be needed soon enough anyway since I don't even think that 14tph capacity is going to be enough, with stoppers on 4 track that rises to up to 24tph, much more like it...

Oh and it depends on what the shape of Electrification will be as to if I'd like to see some lines from the HS2 route directly into New Street to intergrate HS2 into the XC network north of Birmingham Delta.

eg. if Birmingham - Bristol or Reading is done, have the link.

 

[PaulLothian]

Would there not be another way to route HS2 into Scotland? I know that the passes through the wild and hilly Scottish borders are few, especially those leading in the direction proposed by the route of HS2, but there might be another possibility somewhere. Maybe using part of the same valleys as the Waverley route up to a point?

The Waverley route takes you off in the wrong direction, really.

The only real pinch point on the WCML is on the upper slopes of the southern approach to Beattock; it would be possible to track share on the existing alignment for a few miles, if the civil engineering seemed excessive. North of Abington the route could probably parallel the M74, given the hill-climbing capacity of high-speed trains. I would propose a new Motherwell/Hamilton station where the Hamilton Circle crosses the M74, giving good connections from the Scotrail network, with the HS line joining the existing WCML near Uddingston.

 

[LE Greys]

The Waverley route takes you off in the wrong direction, really.

The only real pinch point on the WCML is on the upper slopes of the southern approach to Beattock; it would be possible to track share on the existing alignment for a few miles, if the civil engineering seemed excessive. North of Abington the route could probably parallel the M74, given the hill-climbing capacity of high-speed trains. I would propose a new Motherwell/Hamilton station where the Hamilton Circle crosses the M74, giving good connections from the Scotrail network, with the HS line joining the existing WCML near Uddingston.

Although it would certainly need straightening out pretty much from Gretna onwards. The Gretna-Lockerbie section could probably follow the M74, with a few speed restrictions around Kirkpatrick and Yeskett, as low as 125 maybe, although a bit of shortcutting might increase this to 155. Lockerbie-Beattock is more or less OK, and only minor realignment would be necessary. The simplest solution (but the most expensive) between Beattock and Lamington would be a long tunnel. If that's too pricey, a couple of short tunnels could cut out the twistiest bits between Elvanfoot and Abington, with some deep cuttings further south to trim off the curves, leaving restrictions of 125-155. It would then be possible to veer away from the WCML alignment through Carstairs and follow the M74 via Brocketsbrae and Kirkmuirhill before rejoining the WCML at Uddingston. An Edinburgh branch could diverge at Abington and join the current route just beyond Carstairs.

 

[tbtc]

I would propose a new Motherwell/Hamilton station where the Hamilton Circle crosses the M74, giving good connections from the Scotrail network, with the HS line joining the existing WCML near Uddingston.

Regardless of HS2, I think a "Lanarkshire Parkway" station by the M74 would be a good idea, given the large population who may struggle to get into central Glasgow/ Motherwell for a train to Edinburgh/ England.

 

[DarloRich]

The consultation was meant to be a rubber stamping project, by all accounts the public have rallied quite effectivley against and while it has the overwhelming support of business we all know how weak at the knees politicans can be.

NIMBY tw*ts - Just build it. End of

This money will only be spent on HS2 So if it isnt built it wil lgo on debt reduction.

However we ARE delaing with conservatives so it will no doubt go on a tax cut for the very people opposed to HS2!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This money will only be spent on HS2 So if it isnt built it wil lgo on debt reduction.

You have just said here EXACTLY what I said in posting # 6, on 12th June, but in somewhat a different tone

 

[YorkshireBear]

you know these points we make? can we not form a railukforums army and go tell them these facts?
cos im sure no one is telling them.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

you know these points we make? can we not form a railukforums army and go tell them these facts?
cos im sure no one is telling them.

That is the difference between reasoned logic of Rail UK forum members, on one hand, and the view of the cynical vested-interests, on the other hand.

 

[wildcard]

HS2 is a flawed vanity project variously justified as an alternative to domestic air travel, a capacity problem solver or an economic regeneration investment.
Economic justification : Of course UK plc is in favour ( but not with their own money), they are desperate for any consistent and fully funded transport policy implemented over the long term.. All bar Governments recognise the need for infrastructure investment. HS2 concentrates the spend in the South East – what chance the money continuing north of Birmingham? One big London-B’ham shuttle. Far better to spend the billions on many local smaller transport schemes. Quicker to implement and to produce the return and geographically the economic stimulus is wider spread.
Capacity : We haven’t made best use of our existing main lines out of the South East. We should improve the connecting links & chords between the main lines (Bicester- Bletchley, Northampton - Bedford , Northampton-Market Harborough) and ran freight trains throughout the night on the WCML. When this becomes insufficient then reopen GCML to a Rugby Parkway station as a low speed freight only route –cheap as they would be no stations.
Replacement for domestic air travel : why bother competing on journey time? Advances in technology and broadband speeds reduce the need for face to face meetings. The extra time on a convention train can be utilised by remote working with wi-fi, laptops, mobile comms.
Finally if we do need a HS line to the continent then build one to meet the existing line at Dagenham or similar .Not a half arsed patchup between Heathrow and Birmingham .
And yes I do live in the Chilterns – but in Berkhamsted – right beside the WCML.

 

[Nym]

How many times: IT IS NOT ONLY A BIRMINGHAM - LONDON SHUTTLE

Everything north of Stafford will run via HS2!

London - Birmingham HS2 only

London -
Manchester 3tph
Liverpool 2tph
Chester 1tph
Preston 2tph

 

[YorkshireBear]

How many times: IT IS NOT ONLY A BIRMINGHAM - LONDON SHUTTLE

Everything north of Stafford will run via HS2!

London - Birmingham HS2 only

London -
Manchester 3tph
Liverpool 2tph
Chester 1tph
Preston 2tph

its just circles mate no matter how many times we point it out.

 

[Nonsense]

Advances in technology and broadband speeds reduce the need for face to face meetings. The extra time on a convention train can be utilised by remote working with wi-fi, laptops, mobile comms.

I'm not sure that you can really argue that spending more time on a train is preferable to actually being where you need to be quicker. Speed matters and time is money.


I'm not convinced that any of the believers of this technology reduces need to travel argument actually use the technology. Yes, teleconferencing is a convenience when traveling isn't an option, but its a glorified telephone call, nothing more.

Technology will never replace a handshake, or eye contact, and its hard to mingle with people in geographically separate locations that have all congregated for a set period of time in front of a TV screen. Business can't operate that way, and the demand for business travel hasn't reduced with the new technology because the desire to travel remains.

 

[dggar]

Technology will never replace a handshake, or eye contact, and its hard to mingle with people in geographically separate locations that have all congregated for a set period of time in front of a TV screen. Business can't operate that way, and the demand for business travel hasn't reduced with the new technology because the desire to travel remains.

Teleconferencing is another of those dreams along with the paperless office and the paperless toilet.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Technology will never replace a handshake, or eye contact, and its hard to mingle with people in geographically separate locations that have all congregated for a set period of time in front of a TV screen. Business can't operate that way, and the demand for business travel hasn't reduced with the new technology because the desire to travel remains.

When the growth of the overseas outsourcing market was a very large part of the consultancy workload of the company in which I had project remit, which covered the North American market, not the South Asian market, the use of teleconferencing with its peculiar three-cornered telephones was very useful in intermediate project meetings in-between main stage project meetings. The only problem was the time differential that had to be considered which, in our case, was that of Toronto to the Cheshire area.

 

[brianthegiant]

Technology will never replace a handshake, or eye contact, and its hard to mingle with people in geographically separate locations that have all congregated for a set period of time in front of a TV screen. Business can't operate that way, and the demand for business travel hasn't reduced with the new technology because the desire to travel remains.

Bang on the nail.

My guess is that those who say things along the lines of:
'we dont need HS2 because of teleconferencing'

actually mean
'I dont want HS2 within 20 miles of my house because I believe it will knock tens of thousands off the value of my house and shorten my retirement'

but wont say the latter due to lack of any evidence?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This is just a reminder that there are now only 40 days left to voice your opinions on the first section of the HS route proposals. Visit the DfT special website.

<www.highspeed.dft.gov.uk>