HS2 - What will happen next

[Gareth]

Temporary or not, there's still the expectation that HS2 will reach Crewe before Manchester and as much as the powers that be tend to be coy about the fine detail, it appears that all three are slated to go via Wilmslow and not Stoke. Is 2b doesn't happen, then that could just easily be made permanent, although one could argue for rerouting one via Stoke, which would keep Stokes's 2tph to London.

 

[The Planner]

Phase 1 and 2a are temporary solutions while 2b is built. I do acknowledge that there will be services to Liverpool and Scotland that use the existing network, but they will be a small proportion of the whole. Based on trend, the HS2 east and NPR projects are nothing but pipe dreams.

Whats temporary about them? Each phase will require its own timetable on the existing network.

 

[Purple Orange]

Whats temporary about them? Each phase will require its own timetable on the existing network.

The clue is in your answer. ’Phase’. I.e. at each stage the timetable is temporary until the next phase is completed. If only phase 1 or phase 2a is built then of course it becomes permanent, but it is at the cost of certain services not being realised, such as Birmingham to Manchester & Scotland.

 

[The Ham]

Just to throw a curve ball in, currently a lot of the cost increases we are seeing are linked directly to fuel.

If that continues (especially if car purchase costs also stay high) for very long you may well find that there's a start to move away from cars.

That may not make a big difference in the volume of rail users, nor is it likely to change the number of people driving.

However what it may do is allow the government to stop building roads (so no Stonehenge tunnel, Lower Thames Crossing, etc.) or at least those sorts of major schemes; in doing so the pressure to cut other infrastructure spending may be less intense than may have otherwise been the case.

Whilst on the surface this may sound out there, it should also be remembered that there's likely to be significant pushback from green groups over the extra emissions (either through construction or through use).

Likewise, even before Covid, there was a trend for younger people not to own cars. With high car purchase costs that's only likely to have continued. Now it's not going to take too many years before that's going to become noticeable.

Especially given there's been news stories of people phoning into work sick to save on fuel costs and keep workers claiming that they can't afford to go to work.

Over the last decade the population growth as almost entirely been due to a growth in the over 65's. Whilst that may not have an impact now, over time that's likely to result in fewer drivers.

As such it could be that HS2 might be at less risk than some fear assuming that spending on infrastructure projects needs to be cut.

 

[stuu]

Just to throw a curve ball in, currently a lot of the cost increases we are seeing are linked directly to fuel.

If that continues (especially if car purchase costs also stay high) for very long you may well find that there's a start to move away from cars.

That may not make a big difference in the volume of rail users, nor is it likely to change the number of people driving.

However what it may do is allow the government to stop building roads (so no Stonehenge tunnel, Lower Thames Crossing, etc.) or at least those sorts of major schemes; in doing so the pressure to cut other infrastructure spending may be less intense than may have otherwise been the case.

Whilst on the surface this may sound out there, it should also be remembered that there's likely to be significant pushback from green groups over the extra emissions (either through construction or through use).

Likewise, even before Covid, there was a trend for younger people not to own cars. With high car purchase costs that's only likely to have continued. Now it's not going to take too many years before that's going to become noticeable.

Especially given there's been news stories of people phoning into work sick to save on fuel costs and keep workers claiming that they can't afford to go to work.

Over the last decade the population growth as almost entirely been due to a growth in the over 65's. Whilst that may not have an impact now, over time that's likely to result in fewer drivers.

As such it could be that HS2 might be at less risk than some fear assuming that spending on infrastructure projects needs to be cut.

The result of next week's Tiverton by-election might have an impact on the Stonehenge tunnel. If the Tories lose there then it will definitely happen, lots of Tory seats along the A303

 

[The Ham]

The result of next week's Tiverton by-election might have an impact on the Stonehenge tunnel. If the Tories lose there then it will definitely happen, lots of Tory seats along the A303

It's already on the list of projects which should being processed, re announcing it isn't going to make much difference to how people vote.

 

[mike57]

Whilst on the surface this may sound out there, it should also be remembered that there's likely to be significant pushback from green groups over the extra emissions (either through construction or through use).

Ignoring construction, which is a one off hit, improvements which ease traffic flow could be argued to be green, having vehicles stationary or close to it because of congestion is the worst possible scenario, and creating shorter routes (lower Thames Crossing) also has benefits. Given current fuel prices I cannot see there being a big increase in discretionary journeys from these improvements.

If that continues (especially if car purchase costs also stay high) for very long you may well find that there's a start to move away from cars

In areas with a widespread public transport system (London, and to a lessar extent Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham and maybe a few others) not running a car is a possibility, however for vast areas of the country not having a car whilst survivable if you have no choice isn't something the majority of people in these areas would decide to do. Public transports lack of integration, unreliability, no early and late services and costs, particularly for say a family with 2 children means that a car is almost essential.

 

[deltic]

Phase 1 and 2a will be built. Later phases will be kicked into the long grass and IRP will be massively descoped. The chances of it getting to the East Midlands are virtually nil.

The cost of getting into Manchester is huge and no funding is provided for Manchester Airport station.

 

[Starmill]

A large proportion of the contract value for phase 2a has already been awarded or will be very soon. Preparatory construction work has already begun since Royal Assent in 2020. Main works will begin within two years. It's almost beyond the point of no return.

 

[stuu]

It's already on the list of projects which should being processed, re announcing it isn't going to make much difference to how people vote.

I meant they won't cancel it before the next election if they lose in Tiverton. And it should be built regardless. Both the A303 and the setting of Stonehenge need it

 

[The Planner]

A large proportion of the contract value for phase 2a has already been awarded or will be very soon. Preparatory construction work has already begun since Royal Assent in 2020. Main works will begin within two years. It's almost beyond the point of no return.

I would be surprised if we get main works civils contractors and notice to proceed by 2024. Enabling works a plenty, but not the rest.

 

[Purple Orange]

Phase 1 and 2a will be built. Later phases will be kicked into the long grass and IRP will be massively descoped. The chances of it getting to the East Midlands are virtually nil.

The cost of getting into Manchester is huge and no funding is provided for Manchester Airport station.

I would be surprised if we get main works civils contractors and notice to proceed by 2024. Enabling works a plenty, but not the rest.

Nah, we had the same arguments while phase 2a was going through parliament. Phase 2b west will get royal assent, but it is the projects that have not yet had a hybrid bill in the process of being drafted that are at risk.

 

[The Planner]

Nah, we had the same arguments while phase 2a was going through parliament. Phase 2b west will get royal assent, but it is the projects that have not yet had a hybrid bill in the process of being drafted that are at risk.

Royal assent does not equal spades in ground.

 

[Purple Orange]

Royal assent does not equal spades in ground.

Of course not, but if that is the grounds for making a case, then we could sit here and say it is all going to get cancelled once it gets to Handsacre. No spur to Birmingham, no phase 2a, no phase 2b…. my evidence? Nothing other than scepticism.

 

[Starmill]

I would be surprised if we get main works civils contractors and notice to proceed by 2024. Enabling works a plenty, but not the rest.

Ministers still seem to be of the view that this is achievable before the end of this Parliament, and that the slimmed back HSR Crewe - Manchester bill can receive Royal Assent.

 

[zwk500]

Ministers still seem to be of the view that this is achievable before the end of this Parliament, and that the slimmed back HSR Crewe - Manchester bill can receive Royal Assent.

Because a Minister's judgment has never been wrong before...

 

[Starmill]

Because a Minister's judgment has never been wrong before...

Well they have ultimately met their forecast timescales so far, notwithstanding the Brexit parliamentary nightmare and covid closing Parliament. They have published the draft bill and set out priorities for legislation. It has also been shortened which makes it more likely that it will pass in time.

2a is relatively uncomplicated in terms of main works and there's less in scope than for phase 1. Progress has already been made since Royal Assent. Obviously securing vacant possession of the actual land continues to be a challenge.

I'm not sure what more you want at this point? There are still two years to go.

 

[zwk500]

Well they have ultimately met their forecast timescales so far, notwithstanding the Brexit parliamentary nightmare and covid closing Parliament. They have published the draft bill and set out priorities for legislation. It has also been shortened which makes it more likely that it will pass in time.

2a is relatively uncomplicated in terms of main works and there's less in scope than for phase 1. Progress has already been made since Royal Assent. Obviously securing vacant possession of the actual land continues to be a challenge.

I'm not sure what more you want at this point? There are still two years to go.

What I want isn't really relevant. If they keep on time, happy days and good for them, I'll be in the 'congrats' camp. I was just making the point that just because a minister is optimistic about something doesn't automatically mean it'll happen that way.

 

[Starmill]

What I want isn't really relevant. If they keep on time, happy days and good for them, I'll be in the 'congrats' camp. I was just making the point that just because a minister is optimistic about something doesn't automatically mean it'll happen that way.

Of course that's that case, but that's the case with literally all things. It hardly invalidates a conversation about government policy.

 

[The Planner]

Ministers still seem to be of the view that this is achievable before the end of this Parliament, and that the slimmed back HSR Crewe - Manchester bill can receive Royal Assent.

Are any of the main works contracts out to tender? Even once they are let they will be doing detailed design before you get on the ground.

 

[Starmill]

Are any of the main works contracts out to tender? Even once they are let they will be doing detailed design before you get on the ground.

Market engagement events ran from January this year. There are four main lots. Civils, automated people mover, land referencing and technical support. Only land referencing has been awarded so far but the big civils one should be awarded in Q3.

 

[The Planner]

Market engagement events ran from January this year. There are four main lots. Civils, automated people mover, land referencing and technical support. Only land referencing has been awarded so far but the big civils one should be awarded in Q3.

If they are awarded in Q3 there is no way anything is getting started in 2023.

 

[Gareth]

Phase 1 and 2a will be built. Later phases will be kicked into the long grass and IRP will be massively descoped. The chances of it getting to the East Midlands are virtually nil.

The cost of getting into Manchester is huge and no funding is provided for Manchester Airport station.

Don't underestimate the political will to get it to Manchester. The powers that be like Manchester A LOT. Only London and, to some extent, Edinburgh, are held in higher esteem. That's why the massive, expensive tunnel was agreed to in the first place. Even Birmingham wouldn't have gotten that (and Curzon Street is a somewhat compromise location, at the end of the day). They want to get it to the North and to them, Manchester IS the North.

Certainly, they'll cut the remaining stump of the Leeds leg before the Manchester section. It could, of course, end up being pushed back in the timetable repeatedly without officially cancelling it, until people largely forget about it but we'll see.

 

[Starmill]

If they are awarded in Q3 there is no way anything is getting started in 2023.

I don't see why they wouldn't be started by May 2024 though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2022 ==

Don't underestimate the political will to get it to Manchester. The powers that be like Manchester A LOT. Only London and, to some extent, Edinburgh, are held in higher esteem. That's why the massive, expensive tunnel was agreed to in the first place. Even Birmingham wouldn't have gotten that (and Curzon Street is a somewhat compromise location, at the end of the day). They want to get it to the North and to them, Manchester IS the North.

Certainly, they'll cut the remaining stump of the Leeds leg before the Manchester section. It could, of course, end up being pushed back in the time table repeatedly without officially cancelling it, until people largely forget about it but we'll see.

Lots of elements will be competing for time after the current bill has passed through Parliament, including NPR elements and Birmingham - East Midlands Parkway. But also it will really be for the next government to decide on their sequencing because the current one will have its hands mostly full even if it lasts to 2024.

 

[KenA]

Yet another sound bite from a politician this morning 'stop HS2' in response to the current financial woes.

My view is that the economic outlook for the country is as bleak as at anytime since the 1970s. Some hard choices will have to be made, I dont see any government abandoning the works started but the purse strings will have to be tightened, and I dont think the political 'colour' of the government of the day is going to change the outlook as its a result of situations beyond government control.

My own view is that anything not started 'on the ground' will end up being abandoned or cut back to the minimum.

Realistically where could money be saved and still deliver something. 250mph running could be one area, go for 'standard' 186mph rolling stock.

There is also the issue of cost over-runs, based on recent history its not going to be delivered for budgeted cost.

So how can this be managed as if it is allowed to go out of control the clamour to abandon everything might just get too loud to ignore.

They usually go 2 to 3 times over budget and are several years late. A lot of creative account goes on with thing being moved to other budgets

 

[The Planner]

Even Birmingham wouldn't have gotten that (and Curzon Street is a somewhat compromise location, at the end of the day). They want to get it to the North and to them, Manchester IS the North.

It has though, the original tunnel near Bromford has been extended right out to Water Orton now.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2022 ==

Of course not, but if that is the grounds for making a case, then we could sit here and say it is all going to get cancelled once it gets to Handsacre. No spur to Birmingham, no phase 2a, no phase 2b…. my evidence? Nothing other than scepticism.

The spur to Brum is phase 1 and would need a complete redesign to take it out. No 2a and it ends at Handsacre, no redesign. No 2b, it ends at Basford Hall as its planned to, no redesign. The only white elephants would be the junction for the East Mids as that is intertwined with the Birmingham spur in phase 1 and the stub for the Crewe tunnel.

 

[deltic]

Don't underestimate the political will to get it to Manchester. The powers that be like Manchester A LOT. Only London and, to some extent, Edinburgh, are held in higher esteem. That's why the massive, expensive tunnel was agreed to in the first place. Even Birmingham wouldn't have gotten that (and Curzon Street is a somewhat compromise location, at the end of the day). They want to get it to the North and to them, Manchester IS the North.

Certainly, they'll cut the remaining stump of the Leeds leg before the Manchester section. It could, of course, end up being pushed back in the timetable repeatedly without officially cancelling it, until people largely forget about it but we'll see.

Not sure I agree with that. Under George Osborne with his Northern Powerhouse yes but Theresa May made clear her dislike of his cities focus approach and the present levelling up focus is mainly on smaller towns and the flavour of the month is Teeside. There is no political capital in serving Manchester - the Tory voters are served by Crewe and by serving Manchester all the other northern cities will feel aggrieved. The expensive tunnel into Manchester was agreed because Salford rejected the idea of a station there because what was best for the whole of Greater Manchester was a station at Piccadilly.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's why the massive, expensive tunnel was agreed to in the first place. Even Birmingham wouldn't have gotten that

you appear to be missing the massive expensive tunnel into Birmingham…

 

[Gareth]

Not quite as long, so far as I recall (haven't read that stats recently but recall it to be quite a bit shorter), nor to quite the ideal location (existing main railway station), dot, dot, dot.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2022 ==

Not sure I agree with that. Under George Osborne with his Northern Powerhouse yes but Theresa May made clear her dislike of his cities focus approach and the present levelling up focus is mainly on smaller towns and the flavour of the month is Teeside. There is no political capital in serving Manchester - the Tory voters are served by Crewe and by serving Manchester all the other northern cities will feel aggrieved. The expensive tunnel into Manchester was agreed because Salford rejected the idea of a station there because what was best for the whole of Greater Manchester was a station at Piccadilly.

It doesn't matter what this Tory says and that Tory does. Here today, gone tomorrow. The plans are drawn up by civil servants and HS2 existed before Ozzy & Tezza and will outlast Bojo and whoever else.

 

[Bald Rick]

Not quite as long, so far as I recall (haven't read that stats recently but recall it to be quite a bit shorter), nor to quite the ideal location (existing main railway station), dot, dot, dot.

have a look at a satellite map view, and you’ll see why:

a) a tunnel wasn’t needed right to central Birmingham (plenty of spare / waste land along the corridor)
b) a new station wasn’t at New Street (no land next door) whereas it is at Manchester (spare land next door)

nothign to do with politics, and all about practicality.