More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[Nottingham59]

It would make sense to have a softish launch by having the new trains in public service limited to the HS2 infrastructure before risking them on the NR lines.

Sure. You'd expect an "ouverture" service to Curzon St, for a few months perhaps, before going for the full phase 1. But the wording of the government's announcement today rather suggests that the gap will be longer than that.

 

[camflyer]

I've just given you that look Hacker gives to Sir Humphrey!

Financial billion is the 1,000,000,000 (1 to the power 9) so the ultimate cost of HS2 could be, hang on, £100,000,000,000? That's over £15,000 per person (roughly) in the UK assuming appx 65m or more likely £1500/yr per person spread over 10 yrs.

So a family of four (two adults/two kids) is contributing £6k/yr towards this!

£6,000 per year is about what the NHS spends per household. You are way out.

 

[fishwomp]

Except its borrowed, and a good chunk of paying it back will come out of the fares paid by passengers.

£100bn at 3% interest would be £3bn a year.. The farebox of the entire country is approx £10bn - and this route isn't 30% of the country's rail spend. I doubt that the fares could pay the interest, let alone pay down the debt.

 

[Jack Hay]

£100bn at 3% interest would be £3bn a year.. The farebox of the entire country is approx £10bn - and this route isn't 30% of the country's rail spend. I doubt that the fares could pay the interest, let alone pay down the debt.

Or the operational running cost.

 

[6Gman]

I have always said that the govts original intention was a fast london to birmingham commuter railway. The only way they could get away with that was to pretend that other places such as Manchester and Leeds would also benefit. Then capacity was the mantra, not speed. COVID meant far fewer people commuted, reducing revenue drastically. They gold plated the southern section with lengthy tunnels and money no object Euston plans so that there was nothing at all for Leeds or Sheffield and delays for Manchester. If it's simply about capacity, then Birmingham - London commuters can suffer the pain and slightly longer journey times due to changing at OOC. It's difficult to see what the north gets out of this ill-advised HS2. Should have gone for that freight only railway based on Great Central and crossing over to Liverpool me

What freight flows would actually have gained significant benefit from that idea?

 

[PG]

Simply stop all Eurostar services at Stratford and the Liz line becomes the connection between the two...

Actually that sounds like a good idea, avoids the trudge along the Euston road.

 

[Nottingham59]

But this is the first time I have seen any mention of OOC-Curzon St being run in passenger service before OOC-Handsacre-WCML services. If this was mentioned in any official documentation I must have missed it. How long will this period be between the start of Curzon St services and the start of via-Handsacre services?

Just to reinforce that point, the Full Business Case for HS2 Phase 1, April 2020, was based on an opening strategy TSS of 6tph - 3tph to Curzon St and 3tph via Handsacre.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/939905/full-business-case-hs2-phase-one.pdf

Annex B: Modelled Train Service Specification
“Parliamentary Powers” Opening Strategy TSS between 2029 and 2031

The phased opening assumed 6 trains per hour (tph) from Old Oak Common between
2029 and 2031. The TSS provides the following services to/from Old Oak Common
making use of Phase One networks:
• 3tph Old Oak Common – Birmingham Curzon Street
• 1tph Old Oak Common – Liverpool Street via Crewe and Runcorn (via Handsacre)
• 1tph Old Oak Common – Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow and Stockport (via
Handsacre)
• 1tph Old Oak Common – Glasgow Central via Warrington, Wigan, Preston and Carlisle
(via Handsacre)

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm sure you're right. You usually are.

But this is the first time I have seen any mention of OOC-Curzon St being run in passenger service before OOC-Handsacre-WCML services. If this was mentioned in any official documentation I must have missed it. How long will this period be between the start of Curzon St services and the start of via-Handsacre services?

I’d expect at least 6 months. Much like Crossrail did. You want to be sure that your new railway works in practice, with passengers, before confirming that you will expose it to the vagaries of the conventional network (and vice versa).

 

[zwk500]

Actually that sounds like a good idea, avoids the trudge along the Euston road.

Bad idea - the 10min walk between St Pancras and Euston can be done avoiding Euston road and is a lot quicker than the EL between Stratford and OOC will be. Also stopping Eurostars at Stratford will drain capacity and require substantial money to fit out and staff the international areas of the station.
I reckon a fair bit more Eurostar traffic is trying to get to other bits of London (for which St P is a better option) than people heading up the WCML to Birmingham or beyond so Stopping at Stratford would be benefitting few people but disadvantaging most people on the train to the tune of an additional 7 minutes journey time (which also impacts on cleaning, stocking the cafe etc as it eats into the dwell).

 

[Bald Rick]

Just to reinforce that point, the Full Business Case for HS2 Phase 1, April 2020, was based on an opening strategy TSS of 6tph - 3tph to Curzon St and 3tph via Handsacre.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/939905/full-business-case-hs2-phase-one.pdf

That TSS is, of course, compatible with an opening between OOC and Curzon St ahead of OOC to the WCML via Handsacre.

Having personally been involved in several new build opening strategies, (some now running, some not), there is a common theme - run the new bit stand alone if possible for a while to get everything (infrastructure, trains, systems, integration, process, staff & passenger know-how) bedded in before linking up to the existing network.

And it’s not just us that do it. The issues with opening of Heathrow T5 are relatable, and informed the opening strategy of T2, and Istanbul, and Berlin Brandenburg, and others.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Mar 2023 ==

I reckon a fair bit more Eurostar traffic is trying to get to other bits of London (for which St P is a better option) than people heading up the WCML to Birmingham

That’s underegging it somewhat. The overwhelming majority of Eurostar passengers have an U.K. origin / destination within the M25. The number of people heading to the W Mids and Birmingham is single digit %.

And before anyone says ‘well that’s because of the interchange penalty…” just look at the number of people flying between Birmingham / Manchester and Paris / Brussels, and compare to the people flying or using Eurostar between London and Paris / Brussels.

 

[Howardh]

Ok, I'm one out on my maths, point taken! It's good news though as it means it's, ahem, "cheaper" than I thought.

 

[snowball]

Just to reinforce that point, the Full Business Case for HS2 Phase 1, April 2020, was based on an opening strategy TSS of 6tph - 3tph to Curzon St and 3tph via Handsacre.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/939905/full-business-case-hs2-phase-one.pdf

Annex B: Modelled Train Service Specification
“Parliamentary Powers” Opening Strategy TSS between 2029 and 2031

The phased opening assumed 6 trains per hour (tph) from Old Oak Common between
2029 and 2031. The TSS provides the following services to/from Old Oak Common
making use of Phase One networks:
• 3tph Old Oak Common – Birmingham Curzon Street
• 1tph Old Oak Common – Liverpool Street via Crewe and Runcorn (via Handsacre)
• 1tph Old Oak Common – Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow and Stockport (via
Handsacre)
• 1tph Old Oak Common – Glasgow Central via Warrington, Wigan, Preston and Carlisle
(via Handsacre)

There seems to be a missing Lime there. (Not your fault, it's missing in the official document.)

 

[zwk500]

And it’s not just us that do it. The issues with opening of Heathrow T5 are relatable, and informed the opening strategy of T2, and Istanbul, and Berlin Brandenburg, and others.

I do feel sorry for anybody who wrote an opening strategy based on the lessons of LHR T5 for Berlin Brandenburg, because the entire thing will have had to be rewritten a few times given the 12 years that elapsed between T5 and BBI opening!

That’s underegging it somewhat. The overwhelming majority of Eurostar passengers have an U.K. origin / destination within the M25. The number of people heading to the W Mids and Birmingham is single digit %.

I don't know the numbers so didn't want to go too hard - I certainly tend to stay in London when getting the Eurostar over although my next option is Sussex so St P is still better as I can jump on a Thameslink with zero fuss.

And before anyone says ‘well that’s because of the interchange penalty…” just look at the number of people flying between Birmingham / Manchester and Paris / Brussels, and compare to the people flying or using Eurostar between London and Paris / Brussels.

Indeed.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Ive been a vociferous anti HS2 campaigner given the greater needs of the rail transport network but once its was committed to they just need to get on with it as fast as practical. The civil works are making good progress and i see no impediment to not having the OOC-Curzon St ready for test running by 2028. To slow down Euston is farcical it will save a few 100's millions in the mid to late 2020's when overall govt spending will be 10's billions is noise. Maybe the benefit will arise elsewhere with higher spending on the classic network but im not holding my breath.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Sigh.

There is so much on this thread that is assumed and incorrect. I suggest everyone reads the Government announcement - and carefully

The project is not being paused for two years.

It was always the case that OOC - Curzon St would open first (a captive system), followed by Delta Jn to Handsacre for OOC - ‘the north’ trains. This doesn’t change, nor does the timing of that in the ‘2029-2033’ range. I expect to be on the first train.

Euston - OOC and Handsacre - Crewe were slated to open later, but at the same time. The announcement today is not of a two year delay, but of using the next two years to rephase 2a and deliver an ‘affordable‘ Euston. Euston is a massive job, as anyone who has looked at the site and the very large holes in the ground and thousands of tonnes of concrete already poured will testify. Work will continue.

The Government has restated its commitment to Euston to Manchester. Whilst it may be for the next Government to progress delivery, it would also be that next Government to decide if they didn’t want to do so. The chances of that are effectively nil, as by then the bill will be an Act, land will be purchased, and the business case even better.

In summary, then, just about everything in the media today is misguided hype² as per usual?

 

[P Binnersley]

The Government seems to have decided to spend X £Bn/year on HS2. Therefore if the cost goes up the project gets delayed/extended. I'm sure the project could be finished quicker if they upped the spend rate (at a similar final cost), but the political will isn't there.

 

[Requeststop]

I don't know why the Government doesn't adopt the Tom Sharpe method of paying for mega projects like HS2. (Read "Blott on the Landscape")
i.e. We will pay you XX Billion for you to build the project. If you get the project completed on time we will pay you XX Billion. If you get the project done earlier then we will add a bonus of Y million. If the project is delayed then we will charge you Z million. I'm sure the tax payers would appreciate this as a way of reducing all the overspend and budget mis-handling, and maybe there would be a lot more support for a project like HS2. I think I'm like many others in the country who are getting tired of what is happening on the project, seeing taxpayers money being wasted on a project many of them will never use and even more will never get to see completed at the rate it's going.

 

[snowball]

The Government seems to have decided to spend X £Bn/year on HS2. Therefore if the cost goes up the project gets delayed/extended. I'm sure the project could be finished quicker if they upped the spend rate (at a similar final cost), but the political will isn't there.

Yes. Commentators on the BBC have been saying that this is because the Treasury treats capital spending too much like current spending.

 

[domcoop7]

I don't know why the Government doesn't adopt the Tom Sharpe method of paying for mega projects like HS2. (Read "Blott on the Landscape")
i.e. We will pay you XX Billion for you to build the project. If you get the project completed on time we will pay you XX Billion. If you get the project done earlier then we will add a bonus of Y million. If the project is delayed then we will charge you Z million. I'm sure the tax payers would appreciate this as a way of reducing all the overspend and budget mis-handling, and maybe there would be a lot more support for a project like HS2. I think I'm like many others in the country who are getting tired of what is happening on the project, seeing taxpayers money being wasted on a project many of them will never use and even more will never get to see completed at the rate it's going.

Imagine you are one of the tiny number of infrastructure consortiums in a position to bid for, win, and construct a £100bn project. Bearing in mind that the Government can't ring up Dave's Building & Roofing in Hounslow to expect him to give a figure.

If the government told you, "please bid for this and also note that if inflation, costs, wars in Ukraine, pandemics, or other matters occur we are expecting you to bear the whole cost of the extra expense and pay us a penalty". But also tell you "if you do it cheaper than your bid, you'll get a bonus."

Keeping that in mind, what do you think your bid for the project would be? What you think it would actually cost? What you think it would cost, plus 10%? Plus 30%? Double the cost? More?

Noting that governments - even in arms length projects - have a habit of changing and respeccing and rescoping projects along the way, do you bid on the basis that you select the cheapest options and argue with the government if they want something different? Or do you bid on the basis that you'll buy 30 tunnel boring machines, clad every station in 18K gold, and manufacture the rails using depleted uranium, and let the government pay you off for contract changes to reduce the price at a later stage?

I'm sure you can guess the answer. Sometimes even that doesn't work. Ever heard of a company called Carillion PLC?

Generally even the government aren't stupid enough to try to enter into that sort of contract. Generally. (although remember the "cap and collar" franchise agreements that were a brilliant strategy to do pretty much what you suggested, but under which the DfT got royally screwed?)

Instead, the government would prefer what are known as DBFO contracts, where the consortium finances and builds it themselves (so they themselves lose the money if the contractors overcharge), and then charge an agreed fee for usage once complete.

 

[Fleetmaster]

I don't know why the Government doesn't adopt the Tom Sharpe method of paying for mega projects like HS2. (Read "Blott on the Landscape")
i.e. We will pay you XX Billion for you to build the project. If you get the project completed on time we will pay you XX Billion. If you get the project done earlier then we will add a bonus of Y million. If the project is delayed then we will charge you Z million. I'm sure the tax payers would appreciate this as a way of reducing all the overspend and budget mis-handling, and maybe there would be a lot more support for a project like HS2. I think I'm like many others in the country who are getting tired of what is happening on the project, seeing taxpayers money being wasted on a project many of them will never use and even more will never get to see completed at the rate it's going.

In the real world, handing out a contract worth tens of billions is more than sufficient motivation to get them to be the ones to back themselves, and commit to completing the project for a fixed fee. If they finish early, they get the benefit of having that massive good star on their resume. If they are late or go overbudget, the Treasury is insulated, and might even get the entire thing at cost if the consortium goes bust.

 

[daodao]

I don't follow the logic in delaying (and implicitly possibly cancelling) the opening of HS2 to Euston or Crewe, as the work has started on these sections, and they are critical to making the project worthwhile; delaying building them will just cost more overall. However, Crewe is a major junction where trains from Euston diverge in 4 directions, so any HS2 sections north of Crewe will see much less potential use. IMO, the sensible way to save money overall would be to scrap HS2 north of Crewe, as no construction has yet started so there are minimal "sunk costs", and the benefits are smaller. However, the current announcement seems to be treasury-driven, based simply on trying to save money in the short-term that the government doesn't have or can't afford to borrow.

 

[jfowkes]

Maybe the benefit will arise elsewhere with higher spending on the classic network but im not holding my breath.

They're explicitly doing this to save money, so they're not going to start spending that money elsewhere.

 

[RochdalePioneers]

In summary, then, just about everything in the media today is misguided hype² as per usual?

If. And there was a huge amount of trust in what was written. And looking at evidence rather than faith, this government is trying to run down the railway system as a matter of policy.

Ending up with part built and pointless infrastructure is what this country excels at. As the usage of the railways has shifted post-covid it won't take much political thinking before "why bother with Euston" and "the trains are half full anyway" pushes anything beyond OOC and the delta junction even further back.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There seems to be a missing Lime there. (Not your fault, it's missing in the official document.)

That's evidence of the DfT's London-centric attitude, (not) writ in black and white.

 

[The Planner]

seeing taxpayers money being wasted on a project many of them will never use and even more will never get to see completed at the rate it's going.

I never quite get that attitude. There must be countless infrastructure schemes that "many" people will never use. For example I will unlikely ever use the A14 upgrade at Huntingdon or the Stonehenge tunnel or the Borders railway etc but I dont have an issue with them being/been built.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Re-reading the "2-years delay" announcement*, the DfT will take 2 years to "rephase" the Phase 2a Handsacre-Crewe section, and then optimise construction.
I take that to mean that the main contracts for Phase 2a, due by the end of 2023, will not now be let until 2025.
By then the Crewe-Manchester Bill should be through parliament, allowing an integrated view of the phasing of Handsacre-Crewe-Manchester construction.
So it is possible that completion to Manchester is not delayed.

It rather torpedoes the aim of opening Phase 2a with Phase 1 to deliver earlier benefits.
The railway contracts are/were also designed for combined Phase 1/2a delivery.
Thus HS2 placed an order this week for switches and crossings as far as Crewe, but there is now no delivery timescale north of Handsacre.

* link to the DfT announcement in post #495

 

[Nottingham59]

there is now no delivery timescale north of Handsacre

I fear there is now no delivery timescale north of the Delta junction.

I've looked back through the six-monthly reports to Parliament, and the wording of the delivery commitment has gradually changed:

• 23 March 2021: "HS2 Ltd is currently re-planning its schedule for Phase One in conjunction with its construction suppliers with a view to mitigating these delays. The schedule pressures reported above will not impact the projected ‘delivery into service’ date range of 2029 to 2033 set last year,..."
• 20 October 2021 "the forecast DiS range for Phase One remains 2029 to 2033"
• 16 March 2022: "... the forecast for initial services from Old Oak Common to Birmingham remains within the Delivery into Service (DiS) range of 2029 to 2033."
• 22 October 2022: "The forecast for initial services from Birmingham to Old Oak Common remains within the range of 2029 to 2033, ..."

Which brings us to the latest announcement (9 March 2023)

• "the government will prioritise delivering the opening stage of HS2, with the first high-speed rail services running between new stations at Old Oak Common in west London and Curzon Street in Birmingham by the early 2030s."

So as far as I can see, they have quietly dropped plans to deliver the Delta-Handsacre part of Phase 1 into service by 2029-33, limiting it to just OOC to Curzon Street by that time.

When a government announcement says they are prioritising something, what they really mean is that they are de-prioritising the bit they leave out.

 

[38Cto15E]

Surely if HS2 is going to be just from OOC to Curzon Street, then any benefits to travellers from Euston to NW England and Scotland will be very small, probably too small to pay a fare surcharge for.

 

[The Planner]

I would still expect the full Delta junction to get built as part of OOC to Curzon St, it would be an odd thing to try and chop in half.

 

[BRX]

Surely if HS2 is going to be just from OOC to Curzon Street, then any benefits to travellers from Euston to NW England and Scotland will be very small, probably too small to pay a fare surcharge for.

Is a fare surcharge supposed to be part of the plan?