More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[fishwomp]

HS2 was never intended to be just phase 1 though.

Neither was the Apollo program, there are no prizes for getting half to the moon - but that's what we've done: started something we can't afford to complete. If we'd known the full cost, it would not have started.

 

[Arkeeos]

Neither was the Apollo program, there are no prizes for getting half to the moon - but that's what we've done: started something we can't afford to complete. If we'd known the full cost, it would not have started.

Not really, the budget has not changed significantly since the Oakervee review.

Phase 1 by itself could have never have been justified, that's a factor that has always been there.

 

[Energy]

Not really, the budget has not changed significantly since the Oakervee review.

And part of the high price is due to the government's management of risk (shifting to suppliers has lead to designs are over engineered so they cannot fail), their letting of cost plus contracts which have little penalty (100% over budget only looses 1% of the profit) and changing of scope (Euston, etc.).

So far it's a great example on how a government should not manage a project.

Price increases on HS2 for a while (ignore initial estimates) are due to construction inflation being very high.

 

[fishwomp]

And part of the high price is due to the government's management of risk (shifting to suppliers has lead to designs are over engineered so they cannot fail), their letting of cost plus contracts which have little penalty (100% over budget only looses 1% of the profit) and changing of scope (Euston, etc.).

and the rolling stock. A few weeks ago I questioned whether the full HS2 rolling stock contract had been signed, thinking it both crazy if so and equally also quite plausible. Some in the forum said oh no, the govt wouldn't be that daft... sure enough, Modern Railways this month wrote that the Govt is trying to come to agreement with Hitachi to build fewer than has been contracted for,..

So far it's a great example on how a government should not manage a project.

Except that they sent it off to HS2 Limited to manage.

Price increases on HS2 for a while (ignore initial estimates) are due to construction inflation being very high.

That cost has also said to have been caused by the size of HS2 and Hinkley Point. HS2 Phase 1 was estimated to require 13M tonnes of concrete - and for perspective the UK only manufactures 20M tonnes per annum. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/10/30/hs2-hinkley-point-blamed-concrete-shortages/ - and then add energy cost inflation to that..

 

[The Ham]

So, on a Manchester run, they'll use +1 extra staff for 2.5 hours out of each return trip [Lon-Brum bit] including overlap/leeway for reliability. Whereas they'll save 1 hour of driver+guard due to the shorter return. Umm, that's pretty much a wash. [NB we forgot to include catering..] Doesn't smell noticeable to me in terms of time. In terms of money.. staff cost is going to be sub 10% of the cost of the railway: each coach (per below) is £385k pa, so assuming a 16 hour working day, that on-board staff bill (2 shifts of 2-3 people) is in same ball park as cost of one coach. The saving, perhaps +10% or perhaps -10%.. smells like a +/-1% difference to running costs to me. Waste of time even thinking this is significant either way.

Currently there's a need for a driver, guard and catering (but catering should cover their costs from selling stuff) all the way on a London Manchester service (5 hours round trip) plus the same again for London Birmingham (4 hours round trip). Assuming staff run the same units (so circa 30 minute break at each end - it's more complex than that but as a like for like basis or makes it easier to understand). That's a total of 18 hours (27 if you count catering) of staff time for those two return trips.

If you run it as two services you save an hour on the Manchesters (4 hours in the Manchester, which reduces to 3 hours with full HS2) and 90 minutes on the Birmingham services (2.5 hours), so you're start costs fall by enough to run one return trip to Birmingham (in staffing costs only) for free. (13 hours/ 19.5 hours for just the two, or 18 hours/24.5 hours for the extra Birmingham service)

A pair of trains running one portion to Manchester and one to Birmingham would use 4 hours of staff time for the Manchester journey (again this would fall to 3 hours with full HS2) and 90 minutes for a driver picking up a portion at Birmingham Interchange and 2.5 hours for a guard in the Birmingham portion (12 hours/18.5hours).

Obviously that's assuming all staff are paid the same (which they are not), so the savings would likely be greater on the splitting services option as you're significantly reducing the time you need a driver.

Given that OOC is likely to manage (comfortably) 6 return trips an hour or (if there's no delays at all) a maximum of 8 return trips prior to building to Euston it's likely that splitting services would be viable.

Probably not to Birmingham (not least as the time savings are better the further north a train can go before it splits) but likely other locations (again practical matters come to play as the existing stations can't cope with 400m trains), so as an example one Manchester/Liverpool, one Manchester/Glasgow, one Manchester/Lancaster and three Birmingham services.

One other thing to consider, HS2's expected passenger numbers of 100 million on under 350 miles of new track happens to be about the same as the whole of the French TGV network (110 million but over 1,700 miles of track - OK HS2 would have used a fair amount of existing track to run services, however even if it was a further 500 miles it would just about be half the amount of track as the TGV network).

 

[JKF]

In terms of staffing costs, maintenance will be far more efficient than the existing railway as it will be designed in for modern needs, plus need less maintenance in the first place. Maintaining the existing network for high speed flows is expensive and disruptive.

 

[ABB125]

In terms of staffing costs, maintenance will be far more efficient than the existing railway as it will be designed in for modern needs, plus need less maintenance in the first place. Maintaining the existing network for high speed flows is expensive and disruptive.

I'm told (from a very well-placed source) that the cost of maintaining the environmental measures around the line will be far more than maintaining the actual railway...

 

[HSTEd]

Not really, the budget has not changed significantly since the Oakervee review.

The projected cost for Phase 1 is now £49-57bn in 2019 prices.

I don't recall that figure being the one that was being used before.....

EDIT:

The Oakervee Review (page 56/135 of pdf) lists the Phase 1 cost projection, in 2019 prices, at £40.4-43bn. It also notes that those prices are unlikely to be met.


The real cost of the project has gone up 20-33%.
Also note how the uncertainty has managed to go up despite the project being half-finished, from ~6.5% to ~14%.

And this is before Sunak cancelled the rest of the project, so that is not to blame.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Nov 2023 ==

Currently there's a need for a driver, guard and catering (but catering should cover their costs from selling stuff)

Does catering cover its costs from selling stuff?

I'd honestly be extremely surprised if it did, because if it did there would be a lot more catering options and it wouldn't be on the verge of completely dying out.

Honestly from this discussion, I'm wondering if it would not be better to just order 400m sets for Birmingham rotations so a single crewmember can handle the train if we are insisting on a crew member in each set.

Even if you insist on a crew member in both sets, the result will be a maximum possible crew of two, relative to the two now.

Many trains on Phase 1 will be able to operate with a driver only.

The reduced journey time will largely eliminate the need for a catering offer on the bulk of trains, allowing further savings and rationalisation.

EDIT:
The only way I can see substantial catering offers on a new UK railway is if we've gone GoA 3 (grade of automation 3/driverless but manned) and we need something productive for the train captain to do whilst they wait around for an emergency to happen.