HS2: useful additions to attract more passengers?

[Sad Sprinter]

I've always wondered how HS2 can justify putting Birmingham on a branch of its own. Surely Birmingham isn't large enough to generate a 3tph non-stop service to London? Who are these passengers going to be?

 

[Ianno87]

I've always wondered how HS2 can justify putting Birmingham on a branch of its own. Surely Birmingham isn't large enough to generate a 3tph non-stop service to London? Who are these passengers going to be?

Suggest looking at the current 3 Pendolinos per hour between Euston and Birmingham and observing how many folks travel end to end today. Then apply 30+ years of demand and population growth.

Besides HS2 isn't non-stop. It calls at Birmingham Interchange (effectively replacing Birmingham International) and Old Oak Common (making journeys like Birmingham-Heathrow much simpler)

 

[Halish Railway]

Suggest looking at the current 3 Pendolinos per hour between Euston and Birmingham and observing how many folks travel end to end today.

Not to mention Chiltern from Moor Street/Snowhill and the couple of people that ride the LNWR services all the way to Euston for a cheaper price (Though I don’t think that HS2 can compete in terms of price).

 

[NotATrainspott]

Each 400m HS2 train can carry only as many people (albeit seated) as a 133m long 2009 stock train (seated + standing) on the Victoria line, which runs at 36tph. Seen in that light, you can see that we're not talking about that many people in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Ianno87]

Not to mention Chiltern from Moor Street/Snowhill and the couple of people that ride the LNWR services all the way to Euston for a cheaper price (Though I don’t think that HS2 can compete in terms of price).

With 400m trains, there'll be every chance that it *will* be able to compete on price with the off-peak capacity it is likely to have. And it'll blow Chiltern and LNWR out of the water in journey time terms.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Add to which the current Pendo service will be at least thinned, if not completely removed ...

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Add to which the current Pendo service will be at least thinned, if not completely removed ...

Probably reduced to 2tph on the fasts. The idea is that the Birmingham to London demand is transferred to HS2 and the trains are freed for commuter passengers from Rugby, Northampton, MKC, Coventry and obviously the same for other services. The 18tph on HS2 to London will replace 18tph to London from other places. HS2 relieves congestion off the WCML, ECML, MML and XC Route.

 

[Chester1]

I've always wondered how HS2 can justify putting Birmingham on a branch of its own. Surely Birmingham isn't large enough to generate a 3tph non-stop service to London? Who are these passengers going to be?

Don't forget the Birmingham Curzon Street to Birmingham Interchange section will be used by trains from Leeds and Manchester too.

 

[Ianno87]

Don't forget the Birmingham Curzon Street to Birmingham Interchange section will be used by trains from Leeds and Manchester too.

Plus Scotland and Newcastle.

The spur will be quite intrinsic to having HS2 journey times from Birmingham to the East Midlands, Manchester, Leeds etc being very substantially lower than the equivalent XC services today. Vital for capturing journeys made today by road, or not made at all.

 

[The Planner]

Don't forget the Birmingham Curzon Street to Birmingham Interchange section will be used by trains from Leeds and Manchester too.

Pedantry alert, but anything to the north won't go through Interchange, it will turn left at the Delta junction at Water Orton.

 

[Bald Rick]

I've always wondered how HS2 can justify putting Birmingham on a branch of its own. Surely Birmingham isn't large enough to generate a 3tph non-stop service to London? Who are these passengers going to be?

Perhaps implied in your question is that Birmingham should have been on a through route to Manchester /the north rather than a branch on its own.

The answer there is that for central Birmingham to be served on a through route needs extensive tunnelling, and almost certainly an underground station, which makes it extremely expensive.

 

[ComUtoR]

which makes it extremely expensive.

No offense..... (not used as a platitude) But...

You say that quite often. I understand that cost is a rather large factor in various projects but it seems to come with little foresight. From an edumacational standpoint. How much foresight is factored in ? With a project like HS2 there has to be some kind of long term implications. I'm thinking 20+yrs down the line. When the beancounters and abacus shakers play with the numbers. How far ahead is cost factored in ?

From a more emotional standpoint. Why is it always about cost and not what is the best choice ?

Cheers in advance.

 

[London Trains]

Add to which the current Pendo service will be at least thinned, if not completely removed ...

AFAIK the current Pendo service will be reduced to 2tph and both of them will call at Watford, MK, Rugby, Coventry and Bham Intl

 

[edwin_m]

No offense..... (not used as a platitude) But...

You say that quite often. I understand that cost is a rather large factor in various projects but it seems to come with little foresight. From an edumacational standpoint. How much foresight is factored in ? With a project like HS2 there has to be some kind of long term implications. I'm thinking 20+yrs down the line. When the beancounters and abacus shakers play with the numbers. How far ahead is cost factored in ?

From a more emotional standpoint. Why is it always about cost and not what is the best choice ?

Cheers in advance.

If there's one thing that comes up on HS2 threads more than the question of a through station in Birmingham, it's asking why it's so expensive, and whether it is worthwhile...

The demand between Birmingham and other places is large enough to fill the trains on their own without them having to continue elsewhere, so a through station isn't necessary.

The open land along the M6 and the Tame Valley allows HS2 to get close to the centre of Birmingham, mostly on the surface. But there is no obvious surface route out again in any direction. On a quick look the place to surface with a clear route to open country would be somewhere just east of Walsall, requiring about 7 miles of tunneling once the necessary 90-degree curve is allowed for (on a very gentle radius, because some trains would go through Birmingham non-stop at high speed) That's slightly shorter than the tunnel to get into Manchester, where there is no alternative surface access from the south of the city.

The tunnel might be a bit shorter if the Birmingham station was oriented north-south, but then it would miss the eastward access and have to have a tunnel southwards too. This would also make the eastern connection extremely difficult.

So the simple answer is that there would be very little benefit to justify the huge cost of providing through running at Birmingham.

To partly answer your wider question, business cases are based on capital cost plus 60 years of operating costs and benefits. The benefits aren't just the revenue to the operator, they include socio-economic benefits that are accumulated by society as a whole and provide much of the justification for the government to spend the money.

 

[ComUtoR]

If there's one thing that comes up on HS2 threads more than the question of a through station in Birmingham, it's asking why it's so expensive, and whether it is worthwhile...

This bit I understand.

So the simple answer is that there would be very little benefit to justify the huge cost of providing through running at Birmingham.

So who/what decides if the cost is justified ? Does it literally just come down to an equation for cost/benefit analysis or is there someone or some mechanic that is saying '"$"£"$" it. lets do it because we need to ?

To partly answer your wider question, business cases are based on capital cost plus 60 years of operating costs and benefits.

60yrs is way more than I expected.

Ta Mr _M

 

[edwin_m]

The Benefit to Cost Ratio gives a guideline and normally anything under 2 doesn't stand much chance. However there's no law to say a scheme with a lower BCR can't be approved, as it famously was in the case of Borders Rail which was down to regeneration effects that aren't captured in the BCR, or to political factors (delete according to prejudice). HS2 has a better BCR to start with, and also some similar regeneration effects as well as regional re-balancing which the government is thinking of adding into the BCR methodology as is currently tends to favour schemes in the south-east where there are more people to benefit.

But politicians are understandably nervous to spend a sum that would run into the billions of public money for a tunnel under Birmingham if the experts are saying it won't have any significant benefit.

 

[ComUtoR]

But politicians are understandably nervous to spend a sum that would run into the billions of public money for a tunnel under Birmingham if the experts are saying it won't have any significant benefit.

I think. Since I work for the railway. My bias has skewed somewhat. Cost has always been a factor and politically I get the numerous implications but I struggle more and more about some of the seemingly short-sightedness. I see some projects that get implemented but kinda have a side plan that at a later date, more would be added. I wonder more and more about the long term future and hope to some extent that money is less of a deciding factor for major projects like HS2 where we need to think more about the very long term implications.

 

[Peter Kelford]

I've always wondered how HS2 can justify putting Birmingham on a branch of its own. Surely Birmingham isn't large enough to generate a 3tph non-stop service to London? Who are these passengers going to be?

Commuters and businessmen. Successful Birminghamites who can now move to London and travel to Birmingham and ordinary Londoners who can now afford a slightly larger abode in Birmingham.

 

[The Ham]

In the 2018/19 year there were 14.3 million passenger journeys between London and the West Midlands, that's more than between London and any of the other regions which will benefit from HS2.


The next closest (North West) had 11.3 million.

As such it's not surprising that Birmingham is going to have its own services.

However, it's also seen the most growth over the decade since HS2 was announced. The HS2 growth model was based on 2.5% a year, due to compound growth this would have reached +28% from the 2008/09 figures.

However the actual figures for 2017/18 was a little more than +71% and for 2018/19 was +80%. (Before anyone points out that the figures show a +5.1% growth between those two years and not the 9% indicated, this is down to that you are adding 5.1% to 171 and not 100).

What's more shocking is that at the opening of Phase 1 (which is about 6 years away) the growth was expected to be +50%, so we're well ahead of that and not far off the +100% which was expected at the opening of Phase 2.

Thus also shows that if we'd have gone for RP2, which some opposed to HS2 wanted as an alternative, (which provided +100% capacity) we'd have been getting close to needing to do something else to deal with the growth seen and so HS2 would have likely have been being put back on the table anyway.

 

[edwin_m]

I think. Since I work for the railway. My bias has skewed somewhat. Cost has always been a factor and politically I get the numerous implications but I struggle more and more about some of the seemingly short-sightedness. I see some projects that get implemented but kinda have a side plan that at a later date, more would be added. I wonder more and more about the long term future and hope to some extent that money is less of a deciding factor for major projects like HS2 where we need to think more about the very long term implications.

I'd suggest the real short-sightedness with HS2 in the Birmingham area was not including any provision to add a connection (probably in the Water Orton to Washwood Heath area) for trains to access the classic network to New Street and beyond. This would ultimately allow HS services to continue towards Bristol and Reading on the existing route. Similar provision is being included further north for future links to NPR (which I think may now happen before some parts of HS2 itself) and it shouldn't be particularly expensive as it's basically a straight track long enough to allow a junction to be added later. But I've not seen any mention of it being added in Birmingham and Government wants to minimize changes to Phase 1 as already agreed by Parliament.

 

[Ianno87]

This bit I understand.



So who/what decides if the cost is justified ? Does it literally just come down to an equation for cost/benefit analysis or is there someone or some mechanic that is saying '"$"£"$" it. lets do it because we need to ?



60yrs is way more than I expected.

Ta Mr _M

When you are doing high level initial route options, it usually is simplistic as looking at the amount of infrastructure and judging whether it is "worth it" in what would be possible with the train service.

In this case, a Birmingham through station:
-Wouldn't really enable any more trains to fit, given that is likely to be determined by the capacity into Euston anyway
-Probably slows down Manchester-Euston passengers, so net loss of benefits


Usually such things might be built in as "passive provision" where there is a clear case...but for the Birmingham through station there really isn't any rational benefits it could potentially offer, beyond what HS2 already does anyway.

Commuters and businessmen. Successful Birminghamites who can now move to London and travel to Birmingham and ordinary Londoners who can now afford a slightly larger abode in Birmingham.

There are plenty of leisure travellers all day between Birmingham and London. As evidenced by Chiltern/LNW/Megabus/National Express, plus Avanti's Super Off Peak and Advance fares...for which capacity will be available on HS2 trains to sell these fares off peak

The idea it will only be used by Businessmen (sic*) and commuters is ludicrous.

(* Business Travellers is a far more relevant term these days suggesting you've got quite a skewed view of what modern travel demands actually are)

 

[Ianno87]

I'd suggest the real short-sightedness with HS2 in the Birmingham area was not including any provision to add a connection (probably in the Water Orton to Washwood Heath area) for trains to access the classic network to New Street and beyond. This would ultimately allow HS services to continue towards Bristol and Reading on the existing route. Similar provision is being included further north for future links to NPR (which I think may now happen before some parts of HS2 itself) and it shouldn't be particularly expensive as it's basically a straight track long enough to allow a junction to be added later. But I've not seen any mention of it being added in Birmingham and Government wants to minimize changes to Phase 1 as already agreed by Parliament.

Although "just a bit of straight track" is rarely that simple. It may need to be several kilmetres in length to accommodate sufficently fast turnouts plus grade separation etc. That then fixes the alignment in such a way as to possibly need more land and more demolition - therefore more cost or more open to challenge via parliament if for something highly speculative.

 

[Robertj21a]

Commuters and businessmen. Successful Birminghamites who can now move to London and travel to Birmingham and ordinary Londoners who can now afford a slightly larger abode in Birmingham.

All of which will probably reduce substantially post-Covid 19. Very significant numbers of past commuters have now appreciated that their work can be completed remotely much of the time. Season ticket sales will plummet and the London peak overcrowding will reduce.

 

[Ianno87]

All of which will probably reduce substantially post-Covid 19. Very significant numbers of past commuters have now appreciated that their work can be completed remotely much of the time. Season ticket sales will plummet and the London peak overcrowding will reduce.

I think the jury is still out. I think there will be a drop in people commuting all 5 days per week.

But commuting 2-4 days per week (depemding on individual circumstances) will establish itself as the norm...which makes doing a longer commute fewer times per week much more practical...the sort of distances HS2 will be practical for. Fewer season tickets, but more higher-yield daily or carnet-type tickets.

Especially if people can do the journey off-peak in at least one direction and make use of working time on the train. People won't generally want to cut off from face-to-face time in the office entirely. In some industrues, it is pretty much essential to foster the greatest creativity.

 

[The Planner]

I'd suggest the real short-sightedness with HS2 in the Birmingham area was not including any provision to add a connection (probably in the Water Orton to Washwood Heath area) for trains to access the classic network to New Street and beyond. This would ultimately allow HS services to continue towards Bristol and Reading on the existing route. Similar provision is being included further north for future links to NPR (which I think may now happen before some parts of HS2 itself) and it shouldn't be particularly expensive as it's basically a straight track long enough to allow a junction to be added later. But I've not seen any mention of it being added in Birmingham and Government wants to minimize changes to Phase 1 as already agreed by Parliament.

Swings and roundabouts I think, if you look in detail at what work is going to be done to get into Curzon St above ground you would think why didn't they tunnel all the way in. However, that leaves you in the underground station conundrum which people on here seem to despise (especially if you go off the normal comments on New St), an overground architects wet dream will always sell, especially if it leads to surrounding regeneration with the station as the focal point.

 

[Class 170101]

I'd suggest the real short-sightedness with HS2 in the Birmingham area was not including any provision to add a connection (probably in the Water Orton to Washwood Heath area) for trains to access the classic network to New Street and beyond. This would ultimately allow HS services to continue towards Bristol and Reading on the existing route. Similar provision is being included further north for future links to NPR (which I think may now happen before some parts of HS2 itself) and it shouldn't be particularly expensive as it's basically a straight track long enough to allow a junction to be added later. But I've not seen any mention of it being added in Birmingham and Government wants to minimize changes to Phase 1 as already agreed by Parliament.

This is partly why I don't like Curzon Street as a terminus because I think HS2 should be built or least prepared for as an 'X' network with a route from Curzon Street towards the southwestas there will inevitably be trains from Curzon Street towards Leeds / York via Phase 2B. These could have started further south towards Bristol (and beyond) and South Wales.

 

[edwin_m]

This is partly why I don't like Curzon Street as a terminus because I think HS2 should be built or least prepared for as an 'X' network with a route from Curzon Street towards the southwestas there will inevitably be trains from Curzon Street towards Leeds / York via Phase 2B. These could have started further south towards Bristol (and beyond) and South Wales.

Phase 2B will indeed run trains from Birmingham as far as Newcastle. As the current Cross Country route is significantly slower than the ECML and WCML, a parallel HS2 route will deliver some of the best projected journey time savings from the whole HS2 network.

A tunnel onwards from Curzon Street would be approximately aligned for a future extension towards Bristol. Looking again at that map, it might surface somewhere around M5 junction 3 and turn southwards, perhaps to drop onto the existing line south of Bromsgrove as an initial phase (avoiding the congested suburban section). However the first part of the tunnel would have to go underneath New Street (station_) and it would also have to get down from the hill that is Birmingham to pass under the Chad valley. I haven't worked out a profile but I think these constraints would indeed push Curzon Street station below ground level, which unfortunately would also make it pretty much impossible to deliver without dismantling the Phase 1 station and disrupting services for many years. My idea for a Washwood Heath connection is a sort of compromise solution to this.

The other option would be a line taking off south-westwards from somewhere south of Birmingham Interchange (off the four-track section to avoid capacity problems), although this runs into some fairly hilly and scenic countryside. But it must be borne in mind that London-Birmingham fills three Pendolinos per hour (and most of it also serves London to the North) and Birmingham-Bristol only fills (overfills) two Voyagers.

 

[Class 170101]

Phase 2B will indeed run trains from Birmingham as far as Newcastle. As the current Cross Country route is significantly slower than the ECML and WCML, a parallel HS2 route will deliver some of the best projected journey time savings from the whole HS2 network.

A tunnel onwards from Curzon Street would be approximately aligned for a future extension towards Bristol. Looking again at that map, it might surface somewhere around M5 junction 3 and turn southwards, perhaps to drop onto the existing line south of Bromsgrove as an initial phase (avoiding the congested suburban section). However the first part of the tunnel would have to go underneath New Street (station_) and it would also have to get down from the hill that is Birmingham to pass under the Chad valley. I haven't worked out a profile but I think these constraints would indeed push Curzon Street station below ground level, which unfortunately would also make it pretty much impossible to deliver without dismantling the Phase 1 station and disrupting services for many years. My idea for a Washwood Heath connection is a sort of compromise solution to this.

The other option would be a line taking off south-westwards from somewhere south of Birmingham Interchange (off the four-track section to avoid capacity problems), although this runs into some fairly hilly and scenic countryside. But it must be borne in mind that London-Birmingham fills three Pendolinos per hour (and most of it also serves London to the North) and Birmingham-Bristol only fills (overfills) two Voyagers.

Perhaps a tunnelled Curzon Street for through services? So a doubled level station? I doubt there would be value in only going as far as Bromsgrove its either Bristol or nowt.

As for current capacity between Birmingham and Bristol yes overfilled and probably demand supressed I would suggest, though that could have been helped by longer trains of a certain type staying on a little longer but still thats for existing thraeds elsewhere.

 

[Bald Rick]

No offense..... (not used as a platitude) But...

You say that quite often. I understand that cost is a rather large factor in various projects but it seems to come with little foresight. From an edumacational standpoint. How much foresight is factored in ? With a project like HS2 there has to be some kind of long term implications. I'm thinking 20+yrs down the line. When the beancounters and abacus shakers play with the numbers. How far ahead is cost factored in ?

From a more emotional standpoint. Why is it always about cost and not what is the best choice ?

Cheers in advance.

No offence taken, some poor wording on my part. I should have written “which makes it extremely expensive for the extra benefit it would provide”.

It isn’t always about cost* otherwise we wouldn’t be doing HS2! It is, however, about value.

Projects are normally assessed over a 60 year appraisal period, although 100 years is now being considered given the long term cost of capital.

In this case, building a long tunnel and underground station through Birmingham, could easily add £5bn+ to the project, and a lot of extra hassle (not least finding a route through the densely populated West Midlands towards Stafford), and for what benefit? Well, journey times from Central Birmingham to the north might be a little quicker. However journey times from London to everywhere but Birmingham would likely be slower. I’m sure there’s other pros and cons, and I’m also sure it was looked st in the early feasibility days a decade ago.

* it usually is all about cost once a project has been authorised for delivery, as at that point the budget is set.

I replied before I read the following comments, and I see the #usualsuspects have already explained it brilliantly, thank you @edwin_m, @Ianno87 , @The Planner

 

[The Planner]

Perhaps a tunnelled Curzon Street for through services? So a doubled level station? I doubt there would be value in only going as far as Bromsgrove its either Bristol or nowt.

As for current capacity between Birmingham and Bristol yes overfilled and probably demand supressed I would suggest, though that could have been helped by longer trains of a certain type staying on a little longer but still thats for existing thraeds elsewhere.

You would struggle to do that. HS2 goes over Landor St/Duddeston Jn and then over the Cross City line, you would either have to dive down very quickly or go underground via another spur on the approach.