Restarting HS2a

[Technologist]

The costs of HS2 and other UK rail projects are so ridiculous (multiples of those seen in other high cost European countries) that the amounts saved by reusing existing design work pale into insignificance compared to the value of doing it efficiently.

But we won’t be ripping up the statute and case law books so that we can concrete over great crested newts in their homes for the sake of efficiency. Has any western country done this to your satisfaction?

France, Italy, Spain, Germany all have the same EU legacy laws that the UK has and all have protected species. Yet in those countries high speed rail projects have been done for a fraction of the cost per mile, plenty of those have been through tough terrain and plenty have been through densely populated sprawl.

Even if you apply every caveat and multiplier to account for immovable differences like the cost of land or population density HS2 goes from being 10X more expensive to just being multiples more expensive. It's still far too expensive and the cost benefit for doing it would be a no-brainer if we could achieve those costs.

 

[zwk500]

France, Italy, Spain, Germany all have the same EU legacy laws that the UK has and all have protected species. Yet in those countries high speed rail projects have been done for a fraction of the cost per mile, plenty of those have been through tough terrain and plenty have been through densely populated sprawl.

Particularly in France and Germany, could you provide recent examples?

 

[Technologist]

Particularly in France and Germany, could you provide recent examples?

There are a mountain of comparison documents. This one is from 2016 and specifically compares phase 2 so includes expected savings vs phase 1 and also excludes all the actual cost increases beyond inflation which have occurred on actual HS2.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5fb7de78e90e077ee0856f00/high-speed-rail-international-benchmarking-study-document.pdf

However you cut it UK construction is expensive, the only thing we do at a level which is worse than average but not embarrassing is road construction! But of course we are cutting back on that despite most road programs having much higher BCR than HS2.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Probably not a popular view on here but money is too short so I really hope its not restarted. There are a lot more priorities than this project outside the railway. Also the industry and goverment has a lot to do to improve industrial relations in the rail industry first so we get a reliable 7 day a week servcice. If we are going to spend money on transport, I believe its better to spend local public transport and solving the industrial relations problems first.

My message to the Government is that they must renew HS2 phase 2a powers to Crewe and build HS2 to Crewe to avoid wasting the expected one hundred billion pounds cost of building HS2.

The original requirement was and is for a two track railway London to Birmingham and Crewe for long distance high speed trains to free capacity on the existing West Coast Main Line for more freight and passenger trains on the whole West Coast Main Line rail route London to the West Midlands, North West England, Scotland and North Wales.

As recent decisions by the Office of Rail and Road have made clear, the West Coast Main Line South of Crewe is full and no more trains can be run.

No additional capacity for freight and passenger trains will be created London to North West England, Scotland and North Wales without bypassing the Colwich Shugborough bottleneck. To do the job HS2 must go to Crewe on the 2a route, not Handsacre Junction.

Big projects often have big overruns on cost and the time taken to build them. Crossrail was completed four years later than planned and was around four billion pounds over budget but it was completed as planned and has delivered the planned additional rail capacity.

As a taxpayer I can forgive the massive overspend and taking some years longer if HS2 goes to Crewe and creates capacity for more freight and passenger trains on the whole West Coast Main Line rail route London to the West Midlands, North West England, Scotland and North Wales but I will never forgive the spending of one hundred billion pounds and not delivering any more capacity on the West Coast Main Line rail route London to North West England, Scotland and North Wales.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

All that capacity to help freight yet freight on rail is not being encouraged as far as I can see.

 

[weeklycommuter]

All that capacity to help freight yet freight on rail is not being encouraged as far as I can see.

At the House of Commons Transport Select Committee Oral Evidence on the Railways Bill on 7 January 2026, the Rail Minister Lord Hendy stated that the Government planned to keep the rail freight growth target of at least 75% by 2050. I do not see how they can deliver that without a substantial increase in the number of freight trains on the West Coast Main Line which they cannot deliver if they do not build HS2 to Crewe.

https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/16958/html

Transport Committee
Oral evidence: Railways Bill, HC 1472
Wednesday 7 January 2026

Dr Arthur: I think we will come back to accessibility. Moving on to freight, our friend the Secretary of State is going to be required to set a rail freight target, but she can change it at her own discretion. Does it make sense to tell her to move the goalposts like that? Does that actually help the railway?
Lord Hendy: It is implausible to put a numerical target into an Act of Parliament. As we have already said, this Act may—and we hope it will—endure for a long time. The Government understand the importance of stability and the long-term confidence of the freight industry, and would not look to undermine it by replacing the target needlessly. I can confirm to the Committee that we plan to keep the target at 75% to support certainty for the industry, and I have told them that.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Well apologies for missing this. Great news.

 

[zwk500]

All that capacity to help freight yet freight on rail is not being encouraged as far as I can see.

Being offered much more attractive paths would be the best encouragement, which is what new capacity should allow.

 

[slowroad]

Being offered much more attractive paths would be the best encouragement, which is what new capacity should allow.

Autonomous electric trucks operating at night may well destroy rail freight. Or not….

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Being offered much more attractive paths would be the best encouragement, which is what new capacity should allow.

So slightly “chicken or egg”

 

[zwk500]

So slightly “chicken or egg”

Very much so, or vicious/virtuous circle.

Freight will use rail if it is better than the alternatives.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jan 2026 ==

Autonomous electric trucks operating at night may well destroy rail freight. Or not….

Maybe.

Although you'll need a lot of trucks to replace a 775m freight train.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Although you'll need a lot of trucks to replace a 775m freight train.

Would that be ~32 carriages (therefore 32 lorries?)
Most freight I see has somewhere in the low 30s of wagons.

 

[Trainbike46]

Would that be ~32 carriages (therefore 32 lorries?)
Most freight I see has somewhere in the low 30s of wagons.

Potentially even more, as the weight restriction per wagon is much higher than the weight restriction on a lorry.

e.g., a wagon can contain ~75 tons of sand, which would require at least two standard 44 ton HGVs (and possibly three, depending on the empty weight of the HGVs).

 

[zwk500]

Would that be ~32 carriages (therefore 32 lorries?)
Most freight I see has somewhere in the low 30s of wagons.

A 775m train is usually equated to 80 lorries. Not exactly sure on the method behind that!

20m loco so 755m of wagons - an IKA wagon is 36.4m over the buffers (for both decks), so 755/36.4=20.6, so you're looking at 20 twin wagons, potentially 80 TEUs.

Potentially even more, as the weight restriction per wagon is much higher than the weight restriction on a lorry.

e.g., a wagon can contain ~75 tons of sand, which would require at least two standard 44 ton HGVs (and possibly three, depending on the empty weight of the HGVs).

Sand trains would not usually run to 775m, as a 2400t train is getting on for the max load a single loco can ordinarily pull.

A JNA is c.100t total loaded weight (25t tare, 75t payload), and 13.9m over the buffers. 20m loco + 24x13.9 = 353.6m

A HGV tare weight is quoted as a couple of tons either side of 15t by a quick google search, so payload of c.29t. 24*75 = 1800t rail payload, so 62.06 lorries (i.e.63) to replace a 2400t freight train.

 

[HSTEd]

Outside aggregates, loads will tend to be volume limited rather than weight limited. Given our strongly restrained loading gauge a lorry trailer gets substantially more load than the 40' container that container trains use.

So the number of lorries required to replace a container trains is much less than might be expected.

In the case of aggregates, noone is going to move them long distance by road because it would never be economic. Outside of odd hyper specialist edge cases that wouldn't use rail anyway.

Rail's competition in aggregates is mostly opening new quarries closer to demand, not road traffic.

 

[InTheEastMids]

In recent coverage of NPR by the i Paper (link below), there is one snippet regarding HS2 Ph2a that I don't think's been mentioned on this thread, and therefore may not have been seen by some.

When will HS2 run? Is NPR dead? Key questions for UK's ailing railways

Rail was a priority for the Labour Government, but concerns are emerging over the pace of delivery on new infrastructure

inews.co.uk

Late last year, The i Paper reported that officials were minded to allow the powers to lapse, thereby killing off any chance of a new rail link between Birmingham, Crewe and beyond.

However, sources have since suggested that the Government is likely to retain the powers, without committing to any future rail schemes. Even just holding on to the legal capacity to buy up land along the route would give a strong signal of the Government’s intent in the future.

 

[zwk500]

In recent coverage of NPR by the i Paper (link below), there is one snippet regarding HS2 Ph2a that I don't think's been mentioned on this thread, and therefore may not have been seen by some.

When will HS2 run? Is NPR dead? Key questions for UK's ailing railways

Rail was a priority for the Labour Government, but concerns are emerging over the pace of delivery on new infrastructure

inews.co.uk

Interesting. Failing to build the Colwhich bypass really would be hamstringing HS2 for the medium-term future. Hanging onto the powers necessary to secure the route would be an important shuffle in the right direction.

 

[chris2]

The FT have a story that the govt is to announce a new Brum-Man rail line tomorrow (weds). Hopefully someone with a subscription can provide more details / link etc.

 

[InTheEastMids]

FT is reporting that Ph2a, or something very like it will be built.

https://www.ft.com/content/a8beee6e-2317-4d20-aee0-22457f630c73

Ministers are set to promise a new version of HS2’s cancelled leg between Birmingham and Manchester as part of an overhaul of rail infrastructure in the north. The government will announce on Wednesday its much-delayed plans for major new and upgraded east-west rail links across the north of England, in a project known as Northern Powerhouse Rail. The plans will include a commitment to a new Birmingham to Manchester line after NPR is delivered, according to two people familiar with the matter.

However, it seems that it will be in a queue behind NPR projects including

upgrades in Yorkshire, followed by a new Manchester to Liverpool line and further electrification elsewhere in the north.

 

[NCT]

The plot thickens ...

It's frustrating the amount of politically driven mental gymnastics that's going on. Any version of Birmingham - Manchester HS2 has by far the strongest business case and is the most shovel ready - it's insane they have to pretend they are prioritising east-west for which there is no consensus and the formal scheme is an economic basket case.

 

[Nottingham59]

The plot thickens ...

It's frustrating the amount of politically driven mental gymnastics that's going on. Any version of Birmingham - Manchester HS2 has by far the strongest business case and is the most shovel ready - it's insane they have to pretend they are prioritising east-west for which there is no consensus and the formal scheme is an economic basket case.

I'm not sure that's true. Economic growth seems to come from the agglomeration effect of big cities, so better rail links within the Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds conurbation will have a better economic case than HS2.

But all is not lost. If the mayors' proposed line from WBQ to Manchester can be accessed by 400m long WCML trains then the capacity benefits of HS2 will be achievable at very little extra cost.

 

[kevin_roche]

Duplicate please ignore

 

[weeklycommuter]

The following report on this has appeared on the BBC news website.

New Birmingham-Manchester rail link to be proposed

Previous plans for a high-speed rail line between the cities were scrapped by Rishi Sunak's government.

www.bbc.co.uk

New Birmingham-Manchester rail link planned
Katy Austin Transport correspondent
Published 13 January 2026, 13:04 GMT

The government is set to announce its intention to build a new rail link between Birmingham and Manchester, the BBC understands.
Previous plans for the HS2 high-speed rail line had included a line between the two cities, but that part of the project was scrapped by Rishi Sunak's government.
On Wednesday, the government is expected to confirm proposals for new and improved rail links across the North of England in a scheme known as Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR).
Little detail about a new Birmingham to Manchester route is anticipated, other than the intention to build it after NPR is completed, meaning it may not happen for decades.
HS2 is currently tens of billions of pounds over budget and around a decade behind schedule.
Reports state that the now-shortened line between Birmingham and London could cost £81bn.
Accounting for inflation, that would mean at least £100bn will be spent but only 135 miles of railway built.

 

[anthony263]

If its true it should be built before NPR but im just glad its going to be built

 

[jfowkes]

If a Birmingham-Manchester line is decades away, the announcement surely means nothing. Any subsequent government can just cancel it with essentially zero cost like they did with 2a and 2b.

 

[weeklycommuter]

If a Birmingham-Manchester line is decades away, the announcement surely means nothing. Any subsequent government can just cancel it with essentially zero cost like they did with 2a and 2b.

Any subsequent government could cancel it but Rishi Sunak's cancellation was followed nine months later by the worst general election defeat in the history of the Conservative Party. There were many reasons for that defeat but Rishi Sunak's assumption that cancelling HS2 to Manchester would be popular and help to rescue the Conservative Party proved to be false and this does not encourage any politician in future to think that they can win votes by cancelling or promising to cancel a Birmingham-Manchester railway.

 

[InTheEastMids]

If a Birmingham-Manchester line is decades away, the announcement surely means nothing. Any subsequent government can just cancel it with essentially zero cost like they did with 2a and 2b.

I think the main meaning for this (if true) is that they are extending the legal powers to build the railway, which are due to expire in the next few weeks. So if you believe that all 3 main lines linking London to the North are basically full, and something needs to be done, then it is welcome.

And you are right that this does not save the scheme from arbitrary cancellation in - for instance - mid 2029, or (given how Sunak managed to cancel it after being locked in a hotel room with his advisors for an afternoon), tomorrow.

What will be more interesting is how they set out the strategic rationale for HS2 and NPR, and equally importantly, things like the delivery model to ensure mistakes from HS2 Phase 1 are not repeated.

 

[HSTEd]

I think the positioning of this as a "New Birmingham-Manchester line to built at some point in the future" instead of revive HS2 Phase 2A is likely deisgned to give the government options.

If the NPR line is happening, building the existing HS2 Phase 2A is probably suboptimal in any case.

After all, what's your remaining rationale to go ~20km out of your way from Handsacre to Manchester to go to Crewe, when the fastest route to all destinations reached from crewe will likely be via Manchester Airport and the NPR line anyway?

Liverpool = Manchester Airport + NPR line to Liverpool.
Northern WCML = Manchester Airport + NPR line to vicinity Warrington + WCML North.

Given the political toxicity of anything associated with HS2, I doubt the existing concept is politically tenable in any case.

Of course, since NPR seems to be making very little progress, it is also a handy way to kick it into the long grass without appearing to do so explicitly.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Any subsequent government could cancel it but Rishi Sunak's cancellation was followed nine months later by the worst general election defeat in the history of the Conservative Party. There were many reasons for that defeat but Rishi Sunak's assumption that cancelling HS2 to Manchester would be popular and help to rescue the Conservative Party proved to be false and this does not encourage any politician in future to think that they can win votes by cancelling or promising to cancel a Birmingham-Manchester railway.

Sadly I am tempted to say most governments will want to spend the money (yes I know it would be a loan) and kudos on something the electorate are more interested in rather than HS2.

I think HS2 is one of those things where most of those in the electorate who have an opinion do not like HS2. All those who could/should benefit from HS2 cannot be bothered to work it out.
So, in a nut shell, HS2 just is perhaps not important (even if it should be).

 

[Nottingham59]

Of course, since NPR seems to be making very little progress, i

It looks like they're positioning Liverpool-Manchester as Transpennine Route Upgrade phase 2.

New Liverpool-Manchester railway line reportedly set to be built

It's something Andy Burnham, Bev Craig, and the Manchester Evening News have campaigned for

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

The government is said to be on the verge of rubber-stamping the new rail route between the north west’s largest two cities, something Andy Burnham, Bev Craig, and the Manchester Evening News have campaigned for since May 2024. They argue a new line Liverpool Central to a new underground Manchester Piccadilly, via Warrington Bank Quay and Manchester Airport, would boost capacity and alleviate congestion on northern lines.

The link will be ‘phase two’ of a cross-Pennine improvement programme with phase one comprising upgrades to existing lines between Leeds-Bradford, Leeds-York, and Leeds-Sheffield. Phase three will examine how connections from the east and west coasts could be implemented.