Use Euston-OOC to start western HS line?

[HSTEd]

I maybe missing something here, but what would be the point?

It’s an extra 2 and a half miles from Euston to OOC compared to Paddington to OOC. So why would you want to start a High Speed Line to the west at Euston, when it would take longer? Rather defeats the point, no?

By eliminating the transfer time between Paddington and the Euston/St Pancras/King's Cross complex.
This would allow the high speed line to further accelerate cross country journeys and relieve pressure on XC.
It would become reasonable for people to take the ECML into London and the HS-W out of London again.

The extra 4000m is unlikely to make much difference to the kind of high powered rolling stock that is used on high speed lines.

 

[tasky]

This seems likely, except for a possible eastern north-bound line - where Stratford might be in the running? It's well connected, and the centre of London has certainly moved eastwards in recent years. I know Greengauge was keen on it as a terminus for such a line in their Beyond HS2 report.

For a western line, I do wonder where the best Royal Park option would be. The north east corner of Hyde Park at Marble Arch might make sense? For connectivity there's the potential to put a Crossrail station there, as the line passes underneath. It could also have interchange with Marble March Central Line station.

The area around Marble Arch is pretty horrible and needs doing anyway, and the arch could potentially be re-sited or reorientated and something made of it. It opens onto Oxford Street which is a major destination. There's also an underground carpark somewhere there could could be replaced, and it might be easier to convince the public to 'replace the car park with a station' than simply 'dig up a park and put something new underneath it'.

Interesting to know what other ideas people have for park locations.

The northern corner of Green Park, with the Jubilee, Piccadilly and Victoria lines might also make sense

 

[Bald Rick]

By eliminating the transfer time between Paddington and the Euston/St Pancras/King's Cross complex.
This would allow the high speed line to further accelerate cross country journeys and relieve pressure on XC.
It would become reasonable for people to take the ECML into London and the HS-W out of London again.

The extra 4000m is unlikely to make much difference to the kind of high powered rolling stock that is used on high speed lines.

I don’t buy any of that, sorry.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Given as this is the Speculative Ideas section of RUK, I would suggest a High Speed line with 2/3 branches. The line would start at OOC and the more southerly branch would head south west in the straightest alignment possible, put a station at Southampton Airport Parkway, then head west, to Exeter via a station at Bournemouth-Poole, where it would join a branch from Bristol to a terminus at Plymouth. The other branch would roughly parallel with and relieve the GWML,having stations at Bristol Parkway,where the line to Plymouth splits and then Cardiff and perhaps Swansea. It would cost a ridiculous amount of money, which is why I'd put it at right of the bottom of the pile,below the HS2 extensions to Scotland, HS3/NPR and Crossrail 3.Also, if further funding was available, I would connect HS2' s western branch north of Birmingham with the Plymouth branch through Bristol Parkway, paralleling and relieving Bristol-Birmingham.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

No capacity on the HS2 alignment from OOC to Euston, but we are in a bit of a pickle due to shortage of platform space.

Now if only the British Library was not where it is, we could fit a lot of platforms there.

?
Libraries can be demolished

 

[HSTEd]

I don’t buy any of that, sorry.

Well then why not build HS2 to Paddington?
Its closer and thus cheaper.
KGX-St Pancras-Euston is a better terminus location

 

[edwin_m]

Paddington is full and the historic structure makes options such as double-decking improbable. With a canal on one side and very expensive properties on the other there's no scope for widening it either. Euston is less intensively used and some of its trains are replaced by HS2 anyway, most people wouldn't mind it being messed around with or demolished completely, and the adjacent property was consdiered more dispensable.

 

[AlastairFraser]

?
Libraries can be demolished

Not this one, it's one of,if not the most prestigious library in the UK and I would say ranks highly across Europe and worldwide. It's indispensable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not this one, it's one of,if not the most prestigious library in the UK and I would say ranks highly across Europe and worldwide. It's indispensable.

It could be moved. It hasn't been there all that long anyway!

 

[AlastairFraser]

It could be moved. It hasn't been there all that long anyway!

What is the entire point,in fact, of continuing HS2 to Euston,in fact? You will have all GWR trains stopping at PLC, with Heathrow nearby, Crossrail which brings you all the tube connections of Euston/Kings Cross St Pancras and the station is already going to be built whereas the area is mainly industrial wasteland,property must be much cheaper than at Euston. Yes,extra platforms could be built for the WCML at Euston, but there's no need to drag HS2 all the way into Central London,especially with the cost of tunnelling that could be saved and now that the HS2/HS1 tunnelled link isn't going to happen, it just seems a stupid waste of money that could be spent on the Chiltern Long Tunnel,allowing money spent on property on that section to be spent on accelerating construction on the eastern B'ham-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds HS2 branch up north,which is very poorly served by classic rail compared to the southern WCML it seems. I know this is slightly off-topic,but the service levels on the Southern WCML aren't bad by any description and terminating HS2 at PLC with a connection to the WCML/West London Line/GWML for future proofing wouldn't be a bad arrangement at all.

 

[The Ham]

What is the entire point,in fact, of continuing HS2 to Euston,in fact? You will have all GWR trains stopping at PLC, with Heathrow nearby, Crossrail which brings you all the tube connections of Euston/Kings Cross St Pancras and the station is already going to be built whereas the area is mainly industrial wasteland,property must be much cheaper than at Euston. Yes,extra platforms could be built for the WCML at Euston, but there's no need to drag HS2 all the way into Central London,especially with the cost of tunnelling that could be saved and now that the HS2/HS1 tunnelled link isn't going to happen, it just seems a stupid waste of money that could be spent on the Chiltern Long Tunnel,allowing money spent on property on that section to be spent on accelerating construction on the eastern B'ham-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds HS2 branch up north,which is very poorly served by classic rail compared to the southern WCML it seems. I know this is slightly off-topic,but the service levels on the Southern WCML aren't bad by any description and terminating HS2 at PLC with a connection to the WCML/West London Line/GWML for future proofing wouldn't be a bad arrangement at all.

OOC has underground platforms for the HS2 services (as it's in a tunnel at that point), whilst Euston is ground level.

The big costs of Crossrail are the stations, the tunnels between are, in comparison, relatively cheap.

As such I'm not sure that the cost saving from turning back short of Euston would be all that great.

Especially if you have to provide ~11 platforms rather than 4 (or is it 6?). Each at 400m in length (Crossrail was circa 250m).

Then you have the issue of once you do so there's no chance of changing things in the future.

Anyway I'm not sure that the likes of Crossrail could cope with ~8,000 passengers (assuming 14tph with ~550 passengers on each) during the peak periods.

Of course the problem comes, that if HS2 is built (even just OOC to Birmingham), that there's likely to be a large spike in rail growth and lots of people will start to be able to see which journeys beyond the core start to be improved. As such the calls for it to be built in full start to grow and politically it looks bad that it was only built in part.

Either you cancel it outright or you don't (maybe trim a junction off here and there but nothing so major as stopping it at OOC) there's little scope for something half done.

If it gets built you then look to see, like this thread, of there's ways to boost passengers through OOC to maximise the use of the tunnel. However I don't think that's going to be a problem anyway.

 

[AlastairFraser]

OOC has underground platforms for the HS2 services (as it's in a tunnel at that point), whilst Euston is ground level.

The big costs of Crossrail are the stations, the tunnels between are, in comparison, relatively cheap.

As such I'm not sure that the cost saving from turning back short of Euston would be all that great.

Especially if you have to provide ~11 platforms rather than 4 (or is it 6?). Each at 400m in length (Crossrail was circa 250m).

Then you have the issue of once you do so there's no chance of changing things in the future.

Anyway I'm not sure that the likes of Crossrail could cope with ~8,000 passengers (assuming 14tph with ~550 passengers on each) during the peak periods.

Of course the problem comes, that if HS2 is built (even just OOC to Birmingham), that there's likely to be a large spike in rail growth and lots of people will start to be able to see which journeys beyond the core start to be improved. As such the calls for it to be built in full start to grow and politically it looks bad that it was only built in part.

Either you cancel it outright or you don't (maybe trim a junction off here and there but nothing so major as stopping it at OOC) there's little scope for something half done.

If it gets built you then look to see, like this thread, of there's ways to boost passengers through OOC to maximise the use of the tunnel. However I don't think that's going to be a problem anyway.

I was mostly thinking of saving the money for a Chiltern Long Tunnel to eliminate environmental opposition at that end. It won't happen without because Bucks and Oxon county councils have some control over a PM who is also willing to scrap it and he needs the local MP's support. It could be bought in return for the tunnel as environmental mitigation. Anyway,it won't be just Crossrail because there will be HER intercity trains to the tube at Paddington.

 

[The Ham]

I was mostly thinking of saving the money for a Chiltern Long Tunnel to eliminate environmental opposition at that end. It won't happen without because Bucks and Oxon county councils have some control over a PM who is also willing to scrap it and he needs the local MP's support. It could be bought in return for the tunnel as environmental mitigation. Anyway,it won't be just Crossrail because there will be HER intercity trains to the tube at Paddington.

There's already complaints about Reading commuters filling up the InterCity services, add in the HS2 services and it could become a major problem.

 

[Bald Rick]

What is the entire point,in fact, of continuing HS2 to Euston,in fact? You will have all GWR trains stopping at PLC, with Heathrow nearby, Crossrail which brings you all the tube connections of Euston/Kings Cross St Pancras and the station is already going to be built whereas the area is mainly industrial wasteland,property must be much cheaper than at Euston. Yes,extra platforms could be built for the WCML at Euston, but there's no need to drag HS2 all the way into Central London,especially with the cost of tunnelling that could be saved and now that the HS2/HS1 tunnelled link isn't going to happen, it just seems a stupid waste of money that could be spent on the Chiltern Long Tunnel,allowing money spent on property on that section to be spent on accelerating construction on the eastern B'ham-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds HS2 branch up north,which is very poorly served by classic rail compared to the southern WCML it seems. I know this is slightly off-topic,but the service levels on the Southern WCML aren't bad by any description and terminating HS2 at PLC with a connection to the WCML/West London Line/GWML for future proofing wouldn't be a bad arrangement at all.

The point is that the Elizabeth line will not have the capacity to take all HS2 passengers, and neither will it have the connectivity which Euston offers.

 

[edwin_m]

I was mostly thinking of saving the money for a Chiltern Long Tunnel to eliminate environmental opposition at that end. It won't happen without because Bucks and Oxon county councils have some control over a PM who is also willing to scrap it and he needs the local MP's support. It could be bought in return for the tunnel as environmental mitigation. Anyway,it won't be just Crossrail because there will be HER intercity trains to the tube at Paddington.

So we're inconveniencing most of the people from the North who have business in central London, to further appease a bunch of nimbys who will probably just take this as a signal to ask for even more?

 

[AlastairFraser]

The point is that the Elizabeth line will not have the capacity to take all HS2 passengers, and neither will it have the connectivity which Euston offers.

What special connectivity does Euston have? HS1 is the only line I can think of,and that didn't justify a special link from HS2, so there cannot be that many passengers projected to transfer from HS2 to HS1. And for a reasonable amount and many tangible benefits, the Paddington terminators could be extended to High Wycombe via the Acton-Northolt line, providing a quick service into Central London for a lot of inner Chiltern commuters/current Central Line users and increased capacity to Old Oak Common.

 

[AlastairFraser]

There's already complaints about Reading commuters filling up the InterCity services, add in the HS2 services and it could become a major problem.

Those complaints are entirely unjustified anyway- we Reading users of the GWML pay high GWR fares to get into London and we should be allowed to use fast intercity trains for the privilege. There is ample capacity with the new IET's and timetable and there is room for projected passenger increases and the proportion of HS2 passengers who want to get to Paddington on the intercity platforms for the Tube and buses.I say to those complaining further down the line,if Reading commuters are forced to use Crossrail to London,then we should pay Crossrail-only ticket prices to TfL and then those further down the line will get correspondingly much higher ticket prices to account for the loss of income to the GWR franchise.

 

[AlastairFraser]

So we're inconveniencing most of the people from the North who have business in central London, to further appease a bunch of nimbys who will probably just take this as a signal to ask for even more?

Again,how are we inconveniencing them? Crossrail gives access to every relevant Tube line in London and a lot of outer London business districts and places if there is a need, there is clearly no point ploughing onto Euston to help a few HS2-HS1 transfers at great expense when it wasn't judged economic to create link to allow through trains. A lot of firms have shifted from the City to new estates further out like Canary Wharf,which Crossrail serves. A Central London terminus is not what it used to be, it is no longer absolutely necessary. If they were going to terminate it in Central London, a cross-platform interchange with the Eurostar at St Pancras would be useful,but we both know it's not happening because there is no space. And there is no reason why this section of HS2 has to be built first- why not build phase 2 first from Birmingham to Leeds via Sheffield/ Manchester to awfully-serviced corridors of classic rail compared to the WCML and then do phase 1 of HS2 properly later, when it is absolutely needed.

 

[edwin_m]

Again,how are we inconveniencing them? Crossrail gives access to every relevant Tube line in London and a lot of outer London business districts and places if there is a need, there is clearly no point ploughing onto Euston to help a few HS2-HS1 transfers at great expense when it wasn't judged economic to create link to allow through trains. A lot of firms have shifted from the City to new estates further out like Canary Wharf,which Crossrail serves. A Central London terminus is not what it used to be, it is no longer absolutely necessary. If they were going to terminate it in Central London, a cross-platform interchange with the Eurostar at St Pancras would be useful,but we both know it's not happening because there is no space. And there is no reason why this section of HS2 has to be built first- why not build phase 2 first from Birmingham to Leeds via Sheffield/ Manchester to awfully-serviced corridors of classic rail compared to the WCML and then do phase 1 of HS2 properly later, when it is absolutely needed.

Crossrail gives access to a handful of central London stops via OOC, but Euston accesses a whole range more which would need two changes via Crossrail, such as Baker Street, Oxford Circus and Victoria. Assuming a moving walkway or other slick connection to St Pancras and Kings Cross, most of the north-western suburbs of London have easier access via Euston.

OOC would need to be twice as big to terminate all the HS2 services.

 

[Bald Rick]

What special connectivity does Euston have?

5 tube lines (6 if you count both Northern Branches), 10 bus routes, all of which serve multiple zone 1 destinations, and walking distance from a whole swathe of the Central Activity Zone. + Crossrail 2 when it happens.

Crossrail gives access to every relevant Tube line in London and a lot of outer London business districts and places if there is a need

But would require two changes. I’d also say the Victoria, Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines are very relevant.

 

[The Planner]

And for a reasonable amount and many tangible benefits, the Paddington terminators could be extended to High Wycombe via the Acton-Northolt line, providing a quick service into Central London for a lot of inner Chiltern commuters/current Central Line users and increased capacity to Old Oak Common.

Would need a nice redesign on OOC station to do that and probably wouldn't fit between Crossrail services either on the reliefs.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Crossrail gives access to a handful of central London stops via OOC, but Euston accesses a whole range more which would need two changes via Crossrail, such as Baker Street, Oxford Circus and Victoria. Assuming a moving walkway or other slick connection to St Pancras and Kings Cross, most of the north-western suburbs of London have easier access via Euston.

OOC would need to be twice as big to terminate all the HS2 services.

Good point, but there is a lot of land that could be easily freed up and what's currently on it moved elsewhere e.g the OOC rail sidings could be moved,whereas,in Central London,there's a lot that needs to knocked down and property must have cost/is costing a bomb,even compulsory purchase.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Would need a nice redesign on OOC station to do that and probably wouldn't fit between Crossrail services either on the reliefs.

What I really want to know then is how much would this redesign cost and how much would cutting out Euston completely save?

 

[The Ham]

And there is no reason why this section of HS2 has to be built first- why not build phase 2 first from Birmingham to Leeds via Sheffield/ Manchester to awfully-serviced corridors of classic rail compared to the WCML and then do phase 1 of HS2 properly later, when it is absolutely needed.

How do you get the TBM's in or out if not via OOC?

Now the other thing to consider is that if you have a passenger join a HS2 train at Birmingham or Manchester (and let's assume that there's no time penalty there) after HS2 phase 1 is open and they wish to travel to the BBC.

Currently they get off at Euston and it's just down the road, if they get off HS2 at OOC is going to take then find that instead of a 10 minute hop on the tube or a 20 minute walk that it's, optimistically, 25 minutes (9 minutes Elizabeth Line trip, 9 minute walk from Bond Street and 6 minutes to change trains.

I say optimistically as if you have a HS2 service unload 400 people chances are they're not getting on the first Crossrail train, that's assuming that they can make the change in that time, but we'll go with it for now.

That's then 5 to 15 minutes longer. Now 5 minutes more doesn't feel a lot but that's compared to walking it, so not only is it slower it's going to cost more as you'll need to pay for that trip where you don't have to if you walk (& I doubt that anyone would bring in walking charges in the future).

Therefore rather than 35 minutes quicker it's 20 minutes. If you are the wrong side of New Street and there's a retained service (which takes 6 minutes longer than the current fastest trains as it had 1 more stop and is a little slower) the for the sake of 10-15 minutes you may not use the HS2 services.

There's probably quite a few offices and business around Euston where the time saving could be even less and so you've potentially reduced the numbers who are going to use HS2.

Unless there's fixed date for opening it then it could be quite some years away before it opens (even on the current timeline at least 7 years) few people will put up with a fudge for that long, 18 months maybe, as they would probably be thinking that they may not be working in that location for that length of time.

 

[edwin_m]

Good point, but there is a lot of land that could be easily freed up and what's currently on it moved elsewhere e.g the OOC rail sidings could be moved,whereas,in Central London,there's a lot that needs to knocked down and property must have cost/is costing a bomb,even compulsory purchase.

The part of the OOC rail sidings that isn't the HS2 station is the Crossrail depot. There is the IEP depot on the other side of the GWML but it's probably impossible to access that from HS2 without a lot of extra tunneling. Even the throat for 11 or so platforms is going to encroach on residential areas.

The property needed to expand Euston has all been acquired and much of it has already been demolished, so that point may have had some validity a few years back but doesn't today. The Phase 1 station removes a couple of rather spacious platforms from the existing station that weren't heavily used. The further expansion of the HS2 station for Phase 2 is on land occupied by more platforms that will become redundant, so land for this expansion is effectively free.

 

[AlastairFraser]

5 tube lines (6 if you count both Northern Branches), 10 bus routes, all of which serve multiple zone 1 destinations, and walking distance from a whole swathe of the Central Activity Zone. + Crossrail 2 when it happens.



But would require two changes. I’d also say the Victoria, Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines are very relevant.

Fair enough, I hadn't considered XR2, but Euston only has the 2 Northern branches,which one of is going to served by XR1 at Tottenham Court Road and Kings Cross St Pancras is a bit of a walk from Euston when the Bakerloo(which,according to you,doesn't stop at Paddington anymore)is one change away,getting you to most of the places you mentioned,the Jubilee,District,Circle,Metropolitan and Central the same one change away. It depends how much value you put on Crossrail 2 and,if and when that's built, that will be interchanging with Crossrail 1 at TCR. And it would be good to have a one-change interchange from Euston HS2 to KXSP ,but,apart from Eurostar and HS1 domestic services that head to Kent which apparently aren't good enough destinations for through services ,why would anyone coming into Euston on HS2 go straight back north on the MML/WCML/ECML when they just come a long way south? Sorry, but to me,the North London suburbs don't scream to me "central business district". I will concede your point on the Victoria and Piccadilly which is why they should have put a XR1 station at Oxford Circus. There's probably a good reason that I am unaware of to prevent that happening however,before I drag this thread miles off topic.

 

[AlastairFraser]

How do you get the TBM's in or out if not via OOC?

Now the other thing to consider is that if you have a passenger join a HS2 train at Birmingham or Manchester (and let's assume that there's no time penalty there) after HS2 phase 1 is open and they wish to travel to the BBC.

Currently they get off at Euston and it's just down the road, if they get off HS2 at OOC is going to take then find that instead of a 10 minute hop on the tube or a 20 minute walk that it's, optimistically, 25 minutes (9 minutes Elizabeth Line trip, 9 minute walk from Bond Street and 6 minutes to change trains.

I say optimistically as if you have a HS2 service unload 400 people chances are they're not getting on the first Crossrail train, that's assuming that they can make the change in that time, but we'll go with it for now.

That's then 5 to 15 minutes longer. Now 5 minutes more doesn't feel a lot but that's compared to walking it, so not only is it slower it's going to cost more as you'll need to pay for that trip where you don't have to if you walk (& I doubt that anyone would bring in walking charges in the future).

Therefore rather than 35 minutes quicker it's 20 minutes. If you are the wrong side of New Street and there's a retained service (which takes 6 minutes longer than the current fastest trains as it had 1 more stop and is a little slower) the for the sake of 10-15 minutes you may not use the HS2 services.

There's probably quite a few offices and business around Euston where the time saving could be even less and so you've potentially reduced the numbers who are going to use HS2.

Unless there's fixed date for opening it then it could be quite some years away before it opens (even on the current timeline at least 7 years) few people will put up with a fudge for that long, 18 months maybe, as they would probably be thinking that they may not be working in that location for that length of time.

I suppose it depends what you view as the real purpose of HS2. Is it just to relieve the southern WCML and make life slightly easier for some businessmen whose offices are near Euston or a fast,affordable railway connecting North and South and the Midlands with the Northern/Midlands section a priority as it would revitalize the North and the Midlands' economy and spread the jobs available more evenly across the country.This is currently limited by the totally inadequate classic rail network in the area and HS2 I would hope would provide a new alternative to the current unsatisfactory situation.

 

[HSTEd]

I suppose it depends what you view as the real purpose of HS2. Is it just to relieve the southern WCML and make life slightly easier for some businessmen whose offices are near Euston or a fast,affordable railway connecting North and South and the Midlands with the Northern/Midlands section a priority as it would revitalize the North and the Midlands' economy and spread the jobs available more evenly across the country.This is currently limited by the totally inadequate classic rail network in the area and HS2 I would hope would provide a new alternative to the current unsatisfactory situation.

The problem is the "Midlands Northern" section of HS2 is almsot useless without the trunk section.
There would be a tiny handful of trains running on it.
Even with the trunk the branches will never be particularly heavily loaded, if we only built the northern bits we would be better speccing a Spanish style single track line......

 

[Bald Rick]

Fair enough, I hadn't considered XR2, but Euston only has the 2 Northern branches,which one of is going to served by XR1 at Tottenham Court Road and Kings Cross St Pancras is a bit of a walk from Euston when the Bakerloo(which,according to you,doesn't stop at Paddington anymore)is one change away,getting you to most of the places you mentioned,the Jubilee,District,Circle,Metropolitan and Central the same one change away. It depends how much value you put on Crossrail 2 and,if and when that's built, that will be interchanging with Crossrail 1 at TCR. And it would be good to have a one-change interchange from Euston HS2 to KXSP ,but,apart from Eurostar and HS1 domestic services that head to Kent which apparently aren't good enough destinations for through services ,why would anyone coming into Euston on HS2 go straight back north on the MML/WCML/ECML when they just come a long way south? Sorry, but to me,the North London suburbs don't scream to me "central business district". I will concede your point on the Victoria and Piccadilly which is why they should have put a XR1 station at Oxford Circus. There's probably a good reason that I am unaware of to prevent that happening however,before I drag this thread miles off topic.

Fair point about the Bakerloo - moment of amnesia!

I suppose the key point is: how many places can be reached with a change at Euston now, and how many can be reached by a change at Old Oak Common. Euston wins hands down.

 

[edwin_m]

The problem is the "Midlands Northern" section of HS2 is almsot useless without the trunk section.
There would be a tiny handful of trains running on it.
Even with the trunk the branches will never be particularly heavily loaded, if we only built the northern bits we would be better speccing a Spanish style single track line......

That ignores the use of the "spare" capacity further north for regional trains.