• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Hs2

Status
Not open for further replies.

matacaster

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2013
Messages
1,646
Location
Huddersfield
Whilst I have never believed HS2 will actually get north of Birmingham, beating in mind how slow the journey is between say Leeds or Manchester and Brighton, why does pretty much everything stop in London and require complex tube journeys? I am aware that there was a historical act of parliament forbidding such mainlines crossing central London, but the only exception even now seems to be Thameslink, which doesn't get very far north and is rather slow with many stops.
Discuss!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,287
Your question isn't really about HS2, it is about the principle of long-distance trains arriving on one side of London and then passengers dispersing to a large number of different rail services going in all directions from that terminal station.

Consider an alternative of use of the Thameslink tunnels as an example - let's suppose for one moment that Edinburgh trains could run to Brighton stopping at stations to York then only at St Pancras International and Gatwick Airport. (There clearly wouldn't be line capacity for this on the Brighton Main Line but that isn't the point.)

Most of the passengers on that train do not want to go to either Gatwick Airport or Brighton and so they would need to get on or off at St Pancras International - that would need a long dwell time so you would need a large number of underground platforms to allow for ten minute stops in London.

It just doesn't work, the distances south of London are commensurate with the distances Thameslink travels north of London, allowing journeys like Gatwick to Luton and East Croydon to Stevenage.

Given HS2 is seen by many as expensive, spending that money on further work in the south which wouldn't be appropriate would rather detract from the good it can do further north.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,257
On any individual train arriving at (say) Kings Cross, what proportion actually want a “Southern” destination, rather than Great Western, South Western, Southeastern, Eastern, somewhere on the tube, or staying in central London?

The passengers on any long distance arrival from the north will presumably want random destinations all over the Southeast area, if you want a through train to Brighton, should there also be through trains to everywhere else of similar size all over the region, and if so how often should each service run? Unless they’re all impossibly frequent any individual “spoke” from the London hub is only going to see a train a couple of times a day.

Agree with The Planner above, this is really not an HS2 issue.
 

Peter Kelford

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2017
Messages
903
It is worth, however, saying that Heathrow has access to the world paralleled only by a select few airports, thus connections from all over the UK to Heathrow is something which must be considered, and I do believe that it ought to be done, HS2 or not. France and the Netherlands do it, as does Germany to a lesser extent. Even Manchester has got the right thinking, but apparently not London.
 

Tobbes

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2012
Messages
1,242
Whilst I have never believed HS2 will actually get north of Birmingham, beating in mind how slow the journey is between say Leeds or Manchester and Brighton, why does pretty much everything stop in London and require complex tube journeys? I am aware that there was a historical act of parliament forbidding such mainlines crossing central London, but the only exception even now seems to be Thameslink, which doesn't get very far north and is rather slow with many stops.
Discuss!
Do you mean "Why doesn't London have a single main line through station?"? If so, I understand that in the 1830s it was considered, but rejected - and it is now impossible, given the size that would be required (how many platforms? how deep to get the tunnelled entries from the existing mainlines?). Moreover, London has built itself around its transport nodes, so wherever a single large station was placed, it would inconvenient for many users of existing services. And that's without noting that the idea of linking the LDHS pairs isn't a great idea anyway (where do you clean and service a Penzance - Norwich or Dover - Inverness train?)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top