Some late model Shinkansen are discarding 3+2 for bigger seats in a 2+2 formation, see the 800 series for examples.
Gran class on E7/W7 series Shinkansen is 1+2. Those seats appear to be enormous. And again, a much more suitable aisle width
The chances of Castlefield becoming four-tracked were always virtually impossible. There is too much existing property on either side of the current alignment that would be prohibitively expensive to purchase and remove.
They could have built a mezzanine deck above existing formation.
Would be fun getting that up and down at Deansgate etc...
And past the planners given the impact on adjacent properties.
I do wonder with 300m long trains if it would make it easier to build Euston with 11 platforms as in theory you would have 100m x summat square meters spare that could be used as a construction compound, obviously it would depend on the design of the station.
Depends whether you are literally just removing property or replacing it with new.
A substantial fraction of that property is on the verge of being converted into piles of rubble at the moment (University North campus redevelopment).
HS2 also as been said I believe a few times, gives more capacity to WCML, which is the main reason for it to be built let us not forget. Without that extra capacity, you will not be able to get extra freight and passenger trains on the WCML that will also help to reduce carbon emissions the UK is given out. To enable the full extent of the carbon emissions to be reduced, HS2 is needed to be built in full to Euston, Manchester, Crewe and York at least.
The money has been borrowed specifically for the scheme. That does not mean it would have been available for any long list of smaller schemes
I think the eastern leg is dead in the water, its not about which party wins the next election, I just dont think the money will be made available. My prediction is the Euston will happen, but delayed, and Manchester is 50/50. Its not about which party is in power its just simple 'cant afford it'
I have to agree with comment 100% @mike57. But even if it takes 20/30/50 years to be completed, the Eastern leg should be built, but as you say it needs cross party agreement to enable it to be built. But those with the reponsibility to get it built, as you should be playing hard ball and keeping cost escalations down where possible and safe to do so.
A much less lavishly specified freight and relief line running roughly parallel to the southern WCML?
No of course not, but you wouldn't need to route it through towns as most freight terminals aren't in the middle of towns anyway.
High Speed rolling stock isn't really that expensive!
Some of the worst gold-plating is the environmental mitigation - the green tunnels in the middle of nowhere, the vast amounts of earth-moving needed to make sure it isn't possible to see the line from anywhere
Agree, and it's actually a misnomer to refer to it as environmental mitigation - it's actually more environmental impact than would otherwise be the case, just to pacify some nimbys who don't want their view "spoiled".
NIMBYs will NIMBY, and I partially blame them for the project being so expensive due to the railway being forced to travel through more tunnels that will naturally increase costs. But then again, given that homeowners make up quite a substantial part of the voting population, it was almost inevitable that the government, regardless of the party, would've had to deal with it in some way sooner or later.
The problem is that surface construction, especially cut and cover tunnel construction, isn't actually cheap any more. In all but the emptiest terrain you spend so much on "enabling works" and land acquisition to wipe out savings from just boring the damn thing, or putting a viaduct in.
I know, a cost comparison with the Brenner Base Tunnel is "interesting", even for Phase 2a
