HS2 Northern Branches Discussion

[HSTEd]

I'm not sure that Manchester ends up in the commuter belt since the annual season ticket costs £13904 (with underground, £13272 without) so, assuming the London salary would tip one in to the 40% tax bracket (42% effective rate with the 2% NI above UEL) one could take a pay cut of £23972.41 to work in central Manchester (or £22882.76 if one's office was walkable from Euston) and come out evens financially and with a couple of hours per day spare not spent on a train.

It costs £13904 now.... thanks to the insanely high ticket prices brought about by the rarity factor of seats on peak time trains even today.
High Speed 2 essentially eliminates the scarcity issues and makes tickets available for close to marginal prices in huge quantities.

I make it something close to £6000 for ~350 return journeys to Manchester, although that assumes 100% loadings on the trains in question with no season ticket discount.... and having to repay capital costs on the route (which comes out at over half the ticket price, even using gilts and 37 year payback times).... so yeah.

For reference a season ticket for Grantham-London second class is ~£6560, and Grantham is most certainly in the commuter belt.

 

[Wath Yard]

Even excluding the cost, encouraging people to commute from Manchester - London is a stupid idea and completely at odds with the arguments being used for HS2.

Arguing that house prices might increase 'Up North' is also a ridiculous argument for HS2. That benefits nobody except the current owner of the house and house prices increasing, but wages not, is a very bad thing.

Ticket prices aren't going to reduce. They claim they won't be priced at a premium, and believe that if you want to, but they are certainly not going to half. Ticket prices are based on distance and demand, not duration, so claiming Manchester - London will be the same as Grantham - London because it will take the same amount of time for the journey is nonsensical.

 

[HSTEd]

Even excluding the cost, encouraging people to commute from Manchester - London is a stupid idea and completely at odds with the arguments being used for HS2.

Massively increasing the capacity of the route and effectively generating lots of very high paid jobs for the people of Manchester is at odds with the arguments used?
(And yes, London jobs that can be reached by Mancunians at reasonable cost are just as good as Manchester jobs).

Arguing that house prices might increase 'Up North' is also a ridiculous argument for HS2. That benefits nobody except the current owner of the house and house prices increasing, but wages not, is a very bad thing.

Alright then, look at it from the other angle, it will probably marginally reduce the house prices in the south east by reducing demand for houses there as people will be able to commute from somewhere where houses are cheaper.

Ticket prices aren't going to reduce. They claim they won't be priced at a premium, and believe that if you want to, but they are certainly not going to half. Ticket prices are based on distance, not duration, so claiming Manchester - London will be the same as Grantham - London because it will take the same amount of time for the journey is nonsensical.

Its not just travel time, it is the fact that the costs imposed by such a journey on the operator would be similar to those imposed by a Grantham-London journey and as such the ticket price should be comparable.

That the journey time is similar is just a coincidence and is used in this case because Grantham is the town furthest from London that I personally know is in the commuter belt because I see people commuting from there regularly.

Ticket prices probably won't reduce in reality thanks to the insane system we have been saddled with, but based on all reasonable expectations they should not just fall.... they should collapse.

 

[Wath Yard]

Massively increasing the capacity of the route and effectively generating lots of very high paid jobs for the people of Manchester is at odds with the arguments used?
(And yes, London jobs that can be reached by Mancunians at reasonable cost are just as good as Manchester jobs).

Yes it is, and it obviously is. The argument being used is about regenerating the regions, not making it possible for the select few on very high wages to live further away from London than they do now.

Alright then, look at it from the other angle, it will probably marginally reduce the house prices in the south east by reducing demand for houses there as people will be able to commute from somewhere where houses are cheaper.

How many time do people need to be told? It isn't meant to be about London.

Its not just travel time, it is the fact that the costs imposed by such a journey on the operator would be similar to those imposed by a Grantham-London journey and as such the ticket price should be comparable.

That the journey time is similar is just a coincidence and is used in this case because Grantham is the town furthest from London that I personally know is in the commuter belt because I see people commuting from there regularly.

That is just fantasy.

 

[Geezertronic]

I make it something close to £6000 for ~350 return journeys to Manchester, although that assumes 100% loadings on the trains in question with no season ticket discount.... and having to repay capital costs on the route (which comes out at over half the ticket price, even using gilts and 37 year payback times).... so yeah.

Using a standard 5 day working week across the year, you'd only be looking at around 250 (ish) return journeys not 350

 

[HSTEd]

Yes it is, and it obviously is. The argument being used is about regenerating the regions, not making it possible for the select few on very high wages to live further away from London than they do now.

Allowing people to access high paying jobs while living in Manchester will inject large quantities of money into the local economy and will achieve significant regeneration via that mechanism.
The fact is that businesses simply don't want to locate in Manchester because London has everything Manchester does and more.

The best we can hope is to drag the rest of the country along on London's coat-tails.
We must all become Londoners.

How many time do people need to be told? It isn't meant to be about London.

No, it is allowing Mancunians and people from Yorkshire to access a job market that is other beyond their reach.

If adding towns to the commuter belt does not benefit them why not impose 60mph speed limits on the network to prevent people using it to commute?

That is just fantasy.

Probably, but based on all the things we have been told about the glorious free market brought about by privatisation it should be true :roll:

 

[steamdrivenand]

Just been mulling things over whilst driving back from Nantwich via Crewe bypass and it's awe inspiring (not) view of Crewe's southern approaches.

At what point in its 20 year gestation period should we expect to see fruits of the regeneration HS2 is supposed to drive?

Leaving aside the transitory jobs created by the building of the project and its support infrastructure, when should we commence burgeoning?

For instance I can't see anyone setting up in the area before the project had got the final go ahead, unless they were coming whether or not it was built. There would feel that there's a danger that, say, Crewe could lose its HS2 connection status with a change of mind down in London or that Manchester Airport fell out or something similar.

Now I'm not too familiar with the project's timetable, so when will it actually start construction?

Then there's the issue of companies not wishing to set up until the line is built and operating because they want to take advantage of the new line and not suffer the old one.

Indeed would the areas around HS2 actually suffer a disincentive and miss out on opportunities to develop in the interim due to uncertainty?

Your thoughts?

 

[LE Greys]

Just been mulling things over whilst driving back from Nantwich via Crewe bypass and it's awe inspiring (not) view of Crewe's southern approaches.

At what point in its 20 year gestation period should we expect to see fruits of the regeneration HS2 is supposed to drive?

Leaving aside the transitory jobs created by the building of the project and its support infrastructure, when should we commence burgeoning?

For instance I can't see anyone setting up in the area before the project had got the final go ahead, unless they were coming whether or not it was built. There would feel that there's a danger that, say, Crewe could lose its HS2 connection status with a change of mind down in London or that Manchester Airport fell out or something similar.

Now I'm not too familiar with the project's timetable, so when will it actually start construction?

Then there's the issue of companies not wishing to set up until the line is built and operating because they want to take advantage of the new line and not suffer the old one.

Indeed would the areas around HS2 actually suffer a disincentive and miss out on opportunities to develop in the interim due to uncertainty?

Your thoughts?

Well, the old crystal ball's not working very well at the moment. The problem is that it will be impossible to verify the effects of HS2, be it economic growth in Manchester or economic stagnation in Doncaster, without the existance of a parallell universe in which an HS2 does not exist. However, to second-guess this, most likely we will have to look 10-100 years after the line is opened, although some moves may actually occur before opening, companies relocating to Manchester for instance. However, the BBC moved to Salford even before then, so it's impossible to say whether correlation implies causation.

 

[nerd]

latest issue has substntial section on HS2 Phase 2; as might be expected.

Includes a number of comments explicitly sourced to a briefing after the launch by Andrew McNaughton (HS2 Ltd Chief Engineer). Most of these are already in the Phase 2 report, especially the Appendix on rejected station options, but some are new.

- "the modelling had suggsted that non-stop trains to Liverpool would run quite empty, but tha trains stopping at Crewe and Runcorn would be pretty full'

- there is a note (but no text from McNaughton), suggesting that Chester could have direct Phase 2 services via Crewe, if the line were to be electrified.

- the eastern arm could additional support Javelin style CC services running north from Leicester to Leeds and beyond.

- the time penalty for running through central Sheffield rather than Meadowhall would have been "15 minutes" for jorney times to York Leeds and Newcastle. "The city itself only justified an hourly service".

- Piccadilly was preferred to Salford as a Manchester station site becaause of a "local decision to push for a station in South Manchester (by the airport)".

 

[Holly]

Just been mulling things over whilst driving back from Nantwich via Crewe bypass and ...
For instance I can't see anyone setting up in the area before the project had got the final go ahead, unless they were coming whether or not it was built. There would feel that there's a danger that, say, Crewe could lose its HS2
...
Your thoughts?

I think the part of the project least likely to be cut is Manchester Airport.

Piccadilly, Wigan/Golbourne, Liverpool/Runcorn/Warrington, Chester (assuming electrification in the meanwhile) are then all more vulnerable than Crewe. That would suggest that Crewe is as safe as it gets.

If fact Classic Compatible trains could be cancelled entirely leaving Crewe and Manchester Airport as the only HS stations in the North West. Where Crewe becomes an HS terminus. A 1km (non-HS) tunnel could be built under Terminal 2 so as to link Manchester Airport railway station (existing) with Manchester Airport HS station at Davenport Green.

 

[RichmondCommu]

People will likely live further north and commute using HS2, which could easily generate enormous flows.

Having lived in the South East for 24 years, I would say that this is highly unlikely. A few people might move back north but the common perception down here is that its 'grim up north'. Now that's not necessarily true as there is some lovely countryside but there are also some truly awful town's and cities which certainly are grim. And that's before we get on to the weather. I'm from Derby and my wife is from East Lancs and while we are proud of our roots we are in no hurry to move back. In my opinion in terms of benefits there is not another city in the UK that can offer what London has.

As to where off peak traffic will come from.... you have to understand just how cheap it will be to travel between the cities, it means that nights at the theatre in the west end have travel costs that are rounding errors, hell it means that students in London can come experience the Manchester nightlife for almost nothing.

Oh come on, that's a pretty poor example! Any student living in London is permanently skint and doesn't have the money for hotel accomodation in Manchester. A better example would be the northern masses heading for a weekend in the 'Smoke. And as before I'm far from convinced about these 'too good to be true' pricing policies.

A massive cultural shift can be expected, since Manchester ends up somewhere in the vicinity of Northampton or Grantham... firmly within London's orbit and Birmingham ends up somewhere near Northampton.

As I've already stated, the common perception down here is that it's grim up north. While that is not entirely fair, that's their mindset and its unlikely to be changed by fast trains.

2 x 200m sets requires extra staff (since you must provide 2 crews with the exception of a second driver), it reduces capacity on the paths, it leaves rolling stock idle and it confuses passengers.

Well if the trains that busy extra staff won't be factor will it? And would the stock be idle? Those 200m sets could run between London and the East Midlands all day long. As for confusing passengers, the railway has done that for as long as I can get remember! And customers travelling between St Pancras and the north are already used to finding their seats on doubled up sets.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It costs £13904 now.... thanks to the insanely high ticket prices brought about by the rarity factor of seats on peak time trains even today.
High Speed 2 essentially eliminates the scarcity issues and makes tickets available for close to marginal prices in huge quantities.

I'm sorry but this is absolute nonsense. The TOC running HS2 will look to make as much as it can, for both its shareholders and the Government. If the trains prove to be as popular as people think, do you honestly think the TOC is going to decide that its making enough money and doesn't need to make any more?????? Of course it isn't!!!! The shareholders will rightly demand that it makes as much money from passengers as it can. As an example, why do you think East Coast charges a lot more than FCC to travel between Peterborough and Kings Cross? Or why Virgin charges the earth to travel out of Euston during the peak? It has nothing to do with train length, Virgin simply charge what they can get away with.

Not only that but how do you explain why tickets from Euston on Virgin trains are so expensive during the peak? It has nothing to do with scarcity of tickets as the trains are only 60% full! It has everything to do with the fact that TOC's will always charge the most at times of high demand regardless of many people are on the train.

 

[steamdrivenand]

Having lived in the South East for 24 years, I would say that this is highly unlikely. A few people might move back north but the common perception down here is that its 'grim up north'. Now that's not necessarily true as there is some lovely countryside but there are also some truly awful town's and cities which certainly are grim. And that's before we get on to the weather. I'm from Derby and my wife is from East Lancs and while we are proud of our roots we are in no hurry to move back. In my opinion in terms of benefits there is not another city in the UK that can offer what London has.

Oh come on, that's a pretty poor example! Any student living in London is permanently skint and doesn't have the money for hotel accomodation in Manchester. A better example would be the northern masses heading for a weekend in the 'Smoke. And as before I'm far from convinced about these 'too good to be true' pricing policies.

That's a touch patronising Richmond.

As one who was fed up to the rear molars after nearly 30 years on and off commuting into London I leapt at the chance to 'emigrate' to North Yorkshire in '93. This despite my daughter saying she'd never be able to wear a T shirt again

I can't say I noticed any change in the weather, in fact if you look at meteorology temperature charts the difference is on average one or two degrees. What we did find was that in a very short time we knew everyone in our village and were involved in all sorts of social and community activities, something that never happened 'darn sarf'. Altogether we found it an enlightening and soul enhancing experience.

You've obviously not travelled on many trains in the north on Fridays, or shared the delights of weekend XC journeys from Leeds to Bristol etc. They're generally full of younger people out for a good time, heading to stag weekends, hen parties, football/rugby trips and students heading to/from home. So the flow isn't all southwards to London, it also heads towards Edinburgh, Glasgow, York, Leeds, Manchester etc which all have their attractions for travellers.

 

[HSTEd]

Oh come on, that's a pretty poor example! Any student living in London is permanently skint and doesn't have the money for hotel accomodation in Manchester. A better example would be the northern masses heading for a weekend in the 'Smoke. And as before I'm far from convinced about these 'too good to be true' pricing policies.

Well its good that the system will not require large scale maintenance isn't it.
The modern infrastructure associated with High Speed Rail and its relatively simple trackwork will permit a closer approach to the holy grail that is the 24 hour railway.

Why would they need hotel accomodation when there is a train home after they are finished?

As I've already stated, the common perception down here is that it's grim up north. While that is not entirely fair, that's their mindset and its unlikely to be changed by fast trains.

Perhaps not in one year.
But this is a very long term project, wtihin a decade we will likely see significant social change that tends towards the whole north south divide blending into one.

You can see it today in that it has become significantly harder to tell where someone lives to within 20 miles simply by what accent they have.

Well if the trains that busy extra staff won't be factor will it? And would the stock be idle? Those 200m sets could run between London and the East Midlands all day long. As for confusing passengers, the railway has done that for as long as I can get remember! And customers travelling between St Pancras and the north are already used to finding their seats on doubled up sets.

So you will run 200m sets at all times with no attempt to make full use of teh available platform space?
If you want to cater capacity to demand you have to have the capacity to meet the rush hour demand anyway, so you might as well use that equimpent at all times.

The "cycle times" are so short with High Speed rail on the distances we have in Britain that a large fraction of the entire fleet of trainsets will pass through the London terminus during the "peak".
This means that a large fraction of the trainset fleet will have to be doubled up anyway, so why not just make the entire fleet double-length and remove the need to split them up and so on?

And "extra staff not being a problem" seems to be a rather massive contrast to your argument below about how all the companies care about is increasing profit.
Why pay the extra staff when they can avoid doing so?

And I am not referring to the finding of seats on a doubled up set.... I am referring to the fact that the only place available to stable the extra sets without requiring valuable paths for ECS moves will be in the ends of the platforms.
Passengers might be annoyed and confused at the train, which is effectively as long as all other main line trains in Britain, parked next to the buffer stops not being in service and that they have to work an eighth of a mile to reach the actual train.

I'm sorry but this is absolute nonsense. The TOC running HS2 will look to make as much as it can, for both its shareholders and the Government. If the trains prove to be as popular as people think, do you honestly think the TOC is going to decide that its making enough money and doesn't need to make any more?????? Of course it isn't!!!! The shareholders will rightly demand that it makes as much money from passengers as it can. As an example, why do you think East Coast charges a lot more than FCC to travel between Peterborough and Kings Cross? Or why Virgin charges the earth to travel out of Euston during the peak? It has nothing to do with train length, Virgin simply charge what they can get away with.

Because I am pretty sure East Coast has to pay more in costs per passenger-kilometre than FCC.
Ditto Virgin compared to say London Midland. (More staff, fewer seats per tonne of train, higher energy costs).
With High speed rail the dominant force on the costs of the system are downwards thanks to drastically reduced staffing per seat and the drastically reduced number of trainsets required to maintain the service.

High Speed Rail can make huge profits and still crush the conventional operators on seat prices.

Not only that but how do you explain why tickets from Euston on Virgin trains are so expensive during the peak? It has nothing to do with scarcity of tickets as the trains are only 60% full! It has everything to do with the fact that TOC's will always charge the most at times of high demand regardless of many people are on the train.

Perhaps they do, but the fact is the cost base of High Speed Rail is so small that unless the government lets them make ROIs that are absurd even by the high standards of rail transport they will still end up cheaper than conventional rail.

 

[RichmondCommu]

That's a touch patronising Richmond.

Maybe, maybe not. Let me give you an example. I adore the KWVR railway; its a wonderful little railway with beautiful scenery but Keighley itself is frankly awful

I can't say I noticed any change in the weather, in fact if you look at meteorology temperature charts the difference is on average one or two degrees. What we did find was that in a very short time we knew everyone in our village and were involved in all sorts of social and community activities, something that never happened 'darn sarf'. Altogether we found it an enlightening and soul enhancing experience.

Ok, in many respects it's each to their own. However, in terms of climate its not uncommon for the SE and in particular Greater London to be three of four degrees warmer than the East Midlands, let alone Lancashire. And we certainly get a lot more sunshine down here. Heading up north on a frequent basis, both for work in Manchester; (HS2 would help here) and to visit family, I certainly notice the difference.

In terms of village life, I can perhaps understand the novelty factor but you don't have to move up north to enjoy? village life. In all fairness, both my wife and I grew up in villages and for teenagers it was terribly restrictive. Getting involved in community activities is not really our thing but hey what ever floats your boat

You've obviously not travelled on many trains in the north on Fridays, or shared the delights of weekend XC journeys from Leeds to Bristol etc. They're generally full of younger people out for a good time, heading to stag weekends, hen parties, football/rugby trips and students heading to/from home. So the flow isn't all southwards to London, it also heads towards Edinburgh, Glasgow, York, Leeds, Manchester etc which all have their attractions for travellers.

Well I do, the point is that I can afford it! My point was that other than to travel home, students rarely have the money to travel. Now I would agree with your examples but customers don't need HS2 to enable them to do that! I regulary travel by train to visit inlaws in Lancashire and to watch Derby County play (well someone has to!) but HS2 will be of no real use to me. In fact in terms of getting to Pride Park it could potentially be a hinderance!

I'll reply to other your other post when I can.

Richmond

 

[steamdrivenand]

Maybe, maybe not. Let me give you an example. I adore the KWVR railway; its a wonderful little railway with beautiful scenery but Keighley itself is frankly awful

I'd agree Keighley is not Haslemere, but there are parts that given sunshine and leaves on the trees are OK AND the beauty is you can be out on the hills with not another soul or a car in sight in minutes. In the south east there are lots of places you'd have to travel an hour or more to find countryside. Parts of London and quite a few other places in the south east can match the worst bits of the north for deprivation. And road traffic in the south east is abysmal and presumably set to get worse and worse.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Well it’s good that the system will not require large scale maintenance isn't it.
The modern infrastructure associated with High Speed Rail and its relatively simple track work will permit a closer approach to the Holy Grail that is the 24 hour railway.

Why would they need hotel accommodation when there is a train home after they are finished?

Clearly you are not familiar with the LGV lines in France, where TGV's are prevented from running at night whilst maintenance is carried out. There is no reason at all to suggest that HS2 will be any different.

Perhaps not in one year. But this is a very long term project, within a decade we will likely see significant social change that tends towards the whole north south divide blending into one.

You can see it today in that it has become significantly harder to tell where someone lives to within 20 miles simply by what accent they have.

In terms of London then yes I would agree that you can hear a multitude of accents from all over the UK but I certainly wouldn’t say that this is the case for any of the other major cities. Walk around Manchester and all you will hear is the same accent although some maybe be broader than others. The only possible exception will be the student population.

The common perception down here will be always be that its grim up north and its going to take a lot more than HS2 to change that.

So you will run 200m sets at all times with no attempt to make full use of the available platform space?
If you want to cater capacity to demand you have to have the capacity to meet the rush hour demand anyway, so you might as well use that equipment at all times.

The "cycle times" are so short with High Speed rail on the distances we have in Britain that a large fraction of the entire fleet of train sets will pass through the London terminus during the "peak".
This means that a large fraction of the train set fleet will have to be doubled up anyway, so why not just make the entire fleet double-length and remove the need to split them up and so on?

Clearly you have not bothered to read this thread properly. I have only suggested running 200m trains from Derby and Nottingham to Birmingham before linking up to run to London. There also of course plenty more examples where these trains could run. I'm afraid that Toton will be as popular as East Midlands Parkway. If we are to run classic compatible stock lets make full use of it!

And "extra staff not being a problem" seems to be a rather massive contrast to your argument below about how all the companies care about is increasing profit.
Why pay the extra staff when they can avoid doing so?

Well if the trains are going to be as busy as you suggest than as a percentage the cost of labour will be minimal! And yes, all privately owned companies are driven by maximising profit or else they wouldn't exist.

And I am not referring to the finding of seats on a doubled up set.... I am referring to the fact that the only place available to stable the extra sets without requiring valuable paths for ECS moves will be in the ends of the platforms.
Passengers might be annoyed and confused at the train, which is effectively as long as all other main line trains in Britain, parked next to the buffer stops not being in service and that they have to work an eighth of a mile to reach the actual train.

I've not read anything that suggests that the platforms will be any longer than 400m. If indeed you have I would be grateful if you could post a link on here.

Now I apologise in advance for being pedantic but I think you'll find that 800m is not an eighth of a mile.

With High speed rail the dominant force on the costs of the system are downwards thanks to drastically reduced staffing per seat and the drastically reduced number of train sets required too maintain the service.

You seem to forget that these trains will be much longer than anything else on the network and much faster so I'm not sure that the maintenance costs will be that much lower.

High Speed Rail can make huge profits and still crush the conventional operators on seat prices.

I can only assume from this that you want to see that likes of East Midlands Trains driven out of business. So in other words no more fast trains from Lancashire to London, or for that matter from Leicester to London? Or from Leicester to Sheffield or Manchester to Milton Keynes?

Perhaps they do, but the fact is the cost base of High Speed Rail is so small that unless the government lets them make ROIs that are absurd even by the high standards of rail transport they will still end up cheaper than conventional rail.

Trust me, the Government will want to extract as much money as it possibly can from the TOC running HS2. Indeed the tax payers will demand that it does so. In turn, in order to stick to its contract with the DfT and to satisfy its shareholders the TOC will need to make as much money as possible. Which basically means one thing; premium prices compared to the TOC's running on classic lines. And if you still don't believe me listen to what Margaret Hodge has to say on the subject. Or wait for the report from the National Audit Office.

 

[steamdrivenand]

The 'grim up north' factor is inaccurate and outdated, driven by southern based media living on preconceptions that never really existed in the first place.

Quite why so many people like living in such a crowded and traffic bedevilled area as south east England is beyond me. I was born and raised in London's north west outer suburbs, worked as a rep. all over London and commuted into the West End or The City for 20 years and I'd never, ever go back.

 

[nerd]

Trust me, the Government will want to extract as much money as it possibly can from the TOC running HS2. Indeed the tax payers will demand that it does so. In turn, in order to stick to its contract with the DfT and to satisfy its shareholders the TOC will need to make as much money as possible. Which basically means one thing; premium prices compared to the TOC's running on classic lines. And if you still don't believe me listen to what Margaret Hodge has to say on the subject. Or wait for the report from the National Audit Office.

This is basic micro-economics.

High Speed Rail has a high fixed capital cost for the construction of the lines and captive stations;

But the variable costs on the captive lines - leasing the rolling stock, staffing costs, maintenance costs, are much, much lower than on classic lines.

- the trains will be around 50% cheaper to buy per unit length,
- the trains will have a higher passenger capacity per unit length
- the trains will run quicker and turn round quicker, so covering much more revenue-earning distance per day,
- the whole system will be less complicated to run, and staffing levels will be lower,
- being new, maintainance will be lower and there will be many fewer knock-on costs due to hardware failure.
- overall system capacity will be much greater.

All this adds up to low marginal costs, indeed marginal costst that will be much lower than the variable costs for classic lines.

So the profit maximissing strategy for the TOC operating High Speed Rail will be:
- firstly to reduce standard fares to a level where they generate sufficient demand to fill their seating capacity. That is highly likely to mean that these fares will undercut price per mile on classic lines;

- secondly to differentiate higher-specificastion first-class service (face-to face tables for all seats, 2+2 seating) as compared to standard class ( 2+3 seasting, fewer tables, double-deck cars,)

As you say, Margaret Hodge was horrifed at this; as it would clearly create political difficulties if high speed travellers were not only getting much better service than classic line passengers, but paying much less too. But the only way to make that woprk polcitically would be for increased public subsidy to the classic TOCs so they can reduce their fares in line. She is saying that. policitcally, there will have to be a surcharge.

Which creates a political dilemma; the government wil want to maximise the benefit to taxpayers from HSR, which will require lower HSR fares; buit also doesn't want to be forced to find extra subsidy for classic lines wants to appear politically fair, which demands higher HSR fares.

HS2 Ltd have consistently ducked this political hot potato by applying a standard assumption that there will be no differentiation in fare levels; but in practice, once the HSR system is running, I can only see the basic ecnomics leading to effective fares (advance purchase discounts etc) dropping. The question will be whether the classic operators can match these fare reductions.

 

[Martin222002]

As you say, Margaret Hodge was horrifed at this; as it would clearly create political difficulties if high speed travellers were not only getting much better service than classic line passengers, but paying much less too. But the only way to make that woprk polcitically would be for increased public subsidy to the classic TOCs so they can reduce their fares in line. She is saying that. policitcally, there will have to be a surcharge.

Which creates a political dilemma; the government wil want to maximise the benefit to taxpayers from HSR, which will require lower HSR fares; buit also doesn't want to be forced to find extra subsidy for classic lines wants to appear politically fair, which demands higher HSR fares.

Well if I am interpreting you right then fares (on the day tickets, anytime etc) would be the same on both HS2 and the classic lines, but in reality there would be a premium/surcharge on the HS2 fares in doing so.

However that would have no effect on what the price off advance tickets, which on HS2 could be sugnificatly cheaper than on classic lines services due to the trains greater capacity. There could also potentially be HS2 only tickets (ie a HS2 only off peak return), just as there are currently LM only and VT only tickets on the WCML, which could be cheaper than classic line fares.

 

[steamdrivenand]

It would be interesting to see the reaction of the Great British Public if the Government announced that HS2 tickets were going to be 50% of the price of equivalent mileage journeys by Classic rail.

The 'it's going to all be at a massive premium' people would have to eat their hats. I suspect all those town centre-ites would suddenly be able to afford both the time and money to travel to the likes of Meadowhall and Toton. That the cities served by HS2 stations and their hinterlands would say a big thankyou, but those on the current main lines south of HS2 wouldn't be happy.

 

[LE Greys]

It would be interesting to see the reaction of the Great British Public if the Government announced that HS2 tickets were going to be 50% of the price of equivalent mileage journeys by Classic rail.

The 'it's going to all be at a massive premium' people would have to eat their hats. I suspect all those town centre-ites would suddenly be able to afford both the time and money to travel to the likes of Meadowhall and Toton. That the cities served by HS2 stations and their hinterlands would say a big thankyou, but those on the current main lines south of HS2 wouldn't be happy.

We're already unhappy.

Most likely, they'll make up the money on connections. Hopefully, HS2 tickets will be interchangable with existing tickets, so most likely the equivalent prices will be exactly the same for Anytime and Off-Peak. If there is a price war (which sounds likely) it will be waged on the Advance front.

 

[WatcherZero]

We're already unhappy.

Most likely, they'll make up the money on connections. Hopefully, HS2 tickets will be interchangable with existing tickets, so most likely the equivalent prices will be exactly the same for Anytime and Off-Peak. If there is a price war (which sounds likely) it will be waged on the Advance front.

I think it will be waged on the times of journeys rather than pure price, they will be trying to sell the seats on the quiet trains on the classic WCML through heavy discounting. Something like get the 10:00 from London Euston to Manchester and save 25% of the price on a HS2 ticket.

edit: 10:00 at night that is, not in the morning.

 

[HSTEd]

Clearly you are not familiar with the LGV lines in France, where TGV's are prevented from running at night whilst maintenance is carried out. There is no reason at all to suggest that HS2 will be any different.

This is simply the practice of SNCF in relation to not running its TGV services at night to allow for the easy scheduling of maintenance.
Since the engineers on HS2 will be british we can expect practice to more closely align with current British practice which does tend to run quite a few night time trains.

There is no need to take possesion of the system every single night for maintenance purposes, even with a route as intensively operated as HS2 will be.

In terms of London then yes I would agree that you can hear a multitude of accents from all over the UK but I certainly wouldn’t say that this is the case for any of the other major cities. Walk around Manchester and all you will hear is the same accent although some maybe be broader than others. The only possible exception will be the student population.

The common perception down here will be always be that its grim up north and its going to take a lot more than HS2 to change that.

People from London proper assume the same about Watford and yet large numbers of commuters still move there.
They will complain that it is "grim up north" and then move to leafy Cheshire or somewhere which is still cheaper than the nicer areas of the South East.

Clearly you have not bothered to read this thread properly. I have only suggested running 200m trains from Derby and Nottingham to Birmingham before linking up to run to London. There also of course plenty more examples where these trains could run. I'm afraid that Toton will be as popular as East Midlands Parkway. If we are to run classic compatible stock lets make full use of it!

I put the proposed Toton station less than 800m from the current projected terminus of NET Line 3 at the Toton Lane Park and Ride facility.
The cost of extending it across the open fields to the Toton station will be negligible (although I imagine that entire field will likely become an expansion to the P&R facility connected to the High Speed station).

We will be looking at something like 20-25m transfer time from the existing central station to Toton via the Tram, with a somewhat shorter 15-20m possible by Heavy Rail (using Long Eaton as a stand in as it is a similar distance from nottingham on similar track).

Current best guess journey time for Nottingham into STP by the time HS2 opens will be roughly 1hr40 at best.
Assuming the trams have a turn up and ride frequency that means wait time for them can be neglected we are looking at having to beat 1hr15 to be competitive.
Best guess for High speed rail will put it under an hour.

So by going to Toton people will save 20 minutes and it is likely that the Tram Fare added to the High Speed fare will be cheaper than the "classic fare" for reasons we have already outlined.

You seem to be labouring under the impression that Classic Compatible trains are a good thing.
They are not, they are an operational nightmare forced upon HS2 by a Government that is too weak to admit that HS2 is supposed to be for large urban areas and not traditional railway destinations and too cheap to simply pay for the network we need.

They should be used to the smallest possible degree as they block up paths on valuable infrastructure that could be more profitably used by captive trains. (This applies primarily to the core, Classic Compatible trains are especially useful on non london flows due to the lower traffic densities on the rest of the network which means it is unlikely to be 100% utilised otherwise)

Well if the trains are going to be as busy as you suggest than as a percentage the cost of labour will be minimal! And yes, all privately owned companies are driven by maximising profit or else they wouldn't exist.

And yet you seem to think they should act in a way that will reduce those profits.
The labour cost of a ~200m CC type train with a minibuffet will be on order of 3 staff members per 500 passenger seats.
The labour cost of a ~400m train of the type I have outlined will be 3 staff members per 1350 passenger seats.

This means that for the former type the train will be rather more expensive to run in labour terms.
And even at minimum wage for onboard crew members the costs add up quickly in terms of man hours.

I've not read anything that suggests that the platforms will be any longer than 400m. If indeed you have I would be grateful if you could post a link on here.

Now I apologise in advance for being pedantic but I think you'll find that 800m is not an eighth of a mile.

Since you seem to be proposing to be able to source destinations for 36 200m sets per hour at all hours there would be no sets to sore.
But I can't really think of that many destinations that would be suitable for operating single CC sets to.

That means you will have to double up trains to some destinations.
Which means that if you try to match supply to demand you will have trainsets idle.

They will have to sit somewhere and it will likely be in platforms, leaving 200m of the platform clear for another set to use it operationally.

(And an eighth of a mile is approximately 200m, which is the distance they will have to walk passed the stored set to reach the active one).

You seem to forget that these trains will be much longer than anything else on the network and much faster so I'm not sure that the maintenance costs will be that much lower.

It has been shown that maintenance costs scale strongly with the weight of the trainset.
A TGV Duplex trainset is rather lighter (700kg versus nearly a tonne) per seat than a Class 390 is.

I can only assume from this that you want to see that likes of East Midlands Trains driven out of business. So in other words no more fast trains from Lancashire to London, or for that matter from Leicester to London? Or from Leicester to Sheffield or Manchester to Milton Keynes?

No, I do not want them to be "driven out of business", but your argument seems to be that we should hamstring HS2 to preserve their existing business models.

These Classic Compatible trains we have been lumbered with will provide journeys to Lancashire in a limited capacity at the convenience of the network until such time that some sort of captive spur is built. (Which I doubt it ever will be since the Eastern route to Scotland makes so much more sense... but oh well).

Since HS2 will not effect flows from Manchester to Milton Keynes (or similar non london flows) significantly I imagine some sort of service will continue, but it will be of a type more suited to the business on that flow. (I think 110mph Flat Fronted EMUs would likely be most suitable)

Trust me, the Government will want to extract as much money as it possibly can from the TOC running HS2.

So they will want to run with the highest possible number of passengers on the route, allowing them to both extract additional premiums from the HS2 operator and to withdraw loss making services on the classic network that will no longer be needed.

Indeed the tax payers will demand that it does so. In turn, in order to stick to its contract with the DfT and to satisfy its shareholders the TOC will need to make as much money as possible.

Meaning they will have to fill as many seats as possible, as the ultra expensive parts of the system will already have been ordered (the trackwork and stations themselves).

Which basically means one thing; premium prices compared to the TOC's running on classic lines. And if you still don't believe me listen to what Margaret Hodge has to say on the subject. Or wait for the report from the National Audit Office.

No it doesn't.
It means lower prices than classic lines to increase patronage and allow ridiculously expensive to run services on said classic lines to be downgraded or withdrawn.

Margaret Hodge is a politician who is terrified of what happens if the lower costs of HS2 come to light in the general press and raise questions about why the government is not willing to finance a greater deployment of high speed rail since it can be shown to exert significant downward forces on costs and thus on tickets.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Though I am not opposed in principal to a high speed rail network it should be something that actually does benefit the nation as a whole and not based on a relatively short term return for "interested" parties. Something that is going to have such a vast amount of public investment should have some imput from the people who are going to end up paying for it. Before the costly enquiries start can't we have the case for and against and let those of us who will pay for it decide.

Far from developing the rest of the country all HS2 will do is make more places dormitory suburbs of London

The money will be better spent creating industry as opposed to commuters.

http://stophs2.org/

 

[HSTEd]

HS2 will enable classic operators to have reduced subsidies as expensive to provide services could be withdrawn.

For instance a 225 set almost certainly costs far more to operate than a 4 car 125mph EMU would, even if you maintain a full buffet on said EMU.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Given that Classic Compatible trainsets by their very nature will (as the above poster mentions) be a less efficient use of capacity, and will cost more to build, It got me thinking...

Maybe rather than ordering new-build Compatibles, the order for the Captives could also include full HS-gauge replacements for the existing 373 sets- given that the per-unit cost of HS stock is significantly lower. A heavy refurb of the 3C and NoL sets would cost less than building new and they'd be good for another 10-15 years.

Of course, they'd still need replacing sooner than the captives, but it would delay a reasonable chunk of the startup costs. Some infrastructure adjustments would still be needed along the Classic routes (apart from York and Leeds pre-phase 2) and some platform lengthening- but all that would still be needed for new-build compatibles anyway.

EDIT: Just realised that would only really work if we built it yesterday- we'd do well to get another 5 years out of the 373s by 2020!

 

[steamdrivenand]

The money will be better spent creating industry as opposed to commuters.
http://stophs2.org/

So are you suggesting we subsidise industry to the tune of £33bn over the next 20 years.

Quite apart from the fact that a fair bit of that £33bn will be going into UK businesses to pay for HS2 anyway, I doubt that EU competition rules will allow such blatant feather bedding AND think how efficient and competitive (not) our industries would be having had that money thrown at them?

 

[RichmondCommu]

The 'grim up north' factor is inaccurate and outdated, driven by southern based media living on preconceptions that never really existed in the first place.

People down here don't need the media to tell us that it's grim up north. I work for a company that has offices in London, Manchester and Cheshire. Staff in the London head office hate going up to Manchester because of the weather. You cannot argue that the difference in weather (in terms of temperature or sunshine) is inaccurate or outdated.

I'll give you another example. A girl who works for me travelled to Middlesborough last summer to visit a friend who had recently moved up there. Her exact words were "if we go now we won't have to visit for awhile and at least the weather might be tolerable". I wont repeat how she described it the following week. None of this is fueled by the media; its down to peoples experiences.

The countryside is beautiful but you cannot deny that many of the towns and cities are pretty awful. Yes, there are some rough areas in the SE but not to the extent that you see in the North. I lived in Derby until I was 18, the Peak District is a wonderful place but the small towns on the edge are not nice places at all.

Quite why so many people like living in such a crowded and traffic bedevilled area as south east England is beyond me. I was born and raised in London's north west outer suburbs, worked as a rep. all over London and commuted into the West End or The City for 20 years and I'd never, ever go back.

Given how good the public transport network in the South East is, congestion on the roads is not too much of an issue to motorists. Certain bus routes can be heavily congested at times but its just a case of planning your journey. I accept that its not great for delivery drivers but the congestion charge has made a bit of a difference in the centre.

While I would accept that commuter routes are very busy, I'm prepared to accept this because of my job and salary and all the opportunties that London has to offer. Despite being in our mid 40's, my wife and I still enjoy nights out that are unrivaled anywhere else in the uk. Go to any of the lovely parks and commons on a summers day and you would not know that you were in such a big city. Whilst raising a family in a flat is not easy, there are at least plenty of open spaces for children to let off steam. And of course sunny days!

It's pretty obvious that you have little time for London and I respect your opinion. However you cannot deny that it remains a very popular place to work and live for people from all over the UK, many of whom have no intention of moving back. And this includes my wife and I!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

HS2 will enable classic operators to have reduced subsidies as expensive to provide services could be withdrawn.

For instance a 225 set almost certainly costs far more to operate than a 4 car 125mph EMU would, even if you maintain a full buffet on said EMU.

But hang on a minute, HS2 is no use to any of the towns and cities on the ECML with the exception of Leeds and possibly Wakefield. Why should the likes of Doncaster and Peterborough have a reduced level of service when they won't benefit from HS2?

 

[nerd]

Well if I am interpreting you right then fares (on the day tickets, anytime etc) would be the same on both HS2 and the classic lines, but in reality there would be a premium/surcharge on the HS2 fares in doing so.

However that would have no effect on what the price off advance tickets, which on HS2 could be sugnificatly cheaper than on classic lines services due to the trains greater capacity. There could also potentially be HS2 only tickets (ie a HS2 only off peak return), just as there are currently LM only and VT only tickets on the WCML, which could be cheaper than classic line fares.

I know Margaret Hodge had assumed there would be a surcharge; and got very angry with HS2 Ltd and their officials when they refused point-blank to accept that assumption.

The context of course is that nobody now thinks that the fare earnings from HS2 will be sufficient to pay back its construction costs. But then few national passenger railway systems ever have; even in the Victorian age. It wouild certainly be possible for the Govenment to load higher repayments onto the HSR operator; but that would simply encourage profit maixisation, and hence lower prices to increase earnings. I suppose they could levy an excise charge on HSR tickets (like on petrol), but that would look bizarre, and obviously counterproductive.

Otherwise, I think there will simply be a continued applicaiton of fare controls; which in this country tends towards reducing differences. My guess therefor is that standard prices on HSR will formally be the same for the same journey as on stopper classic lines; but that there will be considerable numberws of easily available advance tickets for much less.

I should point out that there are many commentators that take an opposite view, on the basis that most EU HSR systems apply fare surcharges;

but:

- most EU systems (France, Germany, Sweden, ,Holland) have built HSR lilnes between cities, but share track running into city centres. This saves construction costs, but negates many of the operational cost advantages.

- surcharges for faster trains are an accepted part of the rail culture in most of Europe; but not in the UK.

- much of the cost advantage for HSR comes less because the HS system is cheap as because the UK classic system is expensive. Building trains for unique UK gauges is always going to be more epensive than buying a Euro-guage unit of the shelf; fitting mechanical kit within the more constricted UK guage is always going to cost more; having to share station throat and platforms with regional and commuter trains will always constrain ability to turn units round swiftly.

- no HSR system in Europe is planning quite the capacity expansion that we see in Phase 2 to Leeds and Manchester. Attracting new business implies keeping fares down.

The lessons perhaps are two-fold:

a. the cost advantages are almost all specific to the captive services. To keep fares low, as little as possible should be run using classic-compatible stock.

b. A lot depends on being able to attract new business by holding prices down. That implies a belief in a large current unmet demand for long-distance travel; that could be unlocked by a combinaltion of faster trains, lower fares, and more space.

 

[RichmondCommu]

What people don't seem to be able to fathom is that HS2 is talking about coping with the situation in 20 years time. 20 years! A quarter of a lifetime. It's not next week, next year, in 5 years or even a decade. Traffic on the railways has been growing fast for 15 years and additional coaches and other improvements will help, but even if growth is only 2% a year the traffic will increase by 50%, half as much again as travel now.

Whilst I would agree that HS2 will be certainly be popular in the peak from the West Midlands conurbation and perhaps Greater Manchester, I've seen nothing to suggest that services from Leeds will be anything like as busy. Now as my original post concerned the East Midlands, there is nothing to suggest to that there not be enough capacity to support direct HS2 trains from Nottingham and Derby. Don’t forget that for much of Yorkshire the ECML will still be a far more attractive method of getting to London.

Arguing that Virgin expresses leaving Euston now, at peak times, have spare capacity (and conveniently forgetting that LM and other local services are rammed), is completely missing the point that potentially when HS2 comes on line demand could be around 50% higher, maybe more, maybe less, but we have to plan to cope.

Admittedly the largest proportion of passengers are within 30 miles of London, but they will be catered for by the paths that HS2 allows to be cleared of long distance expresses. That by definition will mean that WCML and probably MML will be slower with many more stopping trains. So the MML may not be so enticing, as whilst it might be cheaper it could take much longer as even with faster running speeds there'll be more stops.

Yes I would agree that that WCML is already very busy but you have forgotten that there will still be a need for fast 125 (possibly 140) mph services on that route. Towns and cities in the NW including Liverpool and Stoke have all been ignored by HS2. There will also be a market for fast trains from Manchester to Milton Keynes and from Milton Keynes to London, all avoiding intermediate stations. Which with cheaper fares creates competition for HS2. And as you have already stated on another thread where customers have to travel an extra 10 - 15 minutes they will think twice about using HS2.

And then we have the MML which for me is at the heart of the matter. There will still be a need for fast trains from Leicester to London and to the rest of the East Midlands and Sheffield. There is no reason why these trains can't start from Sheffield. There will be still be a strong market for trains from Chesterfield to London. Long Eaton is ideal for Toton (at least something is!). East Midlands Parkway is a White Elephant and is not likely to improve and Loughborough is unlikely grow. This all represents opportunities to run fast trains on the MML to London. And with cheaper fares than HS2 Toton will require a very hard sell.

And that's before we get on to the ECML with the NE, York, Doncaster, Newark, Grantham and Peterborough all well out of reach of HS2. HS2 is certainly going to have a run for its money and none of the above supports the notion that trains from Leeds will be packed to the rafters.

HS2 will be for ultra fast train travel to somewhere near large conurbations serving, that horrible term 'City/Regions' and really enormous conurbations will get central stations at the end of spurs. So don't expect more of what railways have done since Victoria reigned, this will be different and needs looking at in a different, possibly open minded way.

Outside of London and other metropolitan areas, the biggest barrier to public transport is the lack of integration. Insisting that high speed trains exclusively use Toton is only going to make the situation worse. There is a lot of negativity towards HS2 at the moment and ignoring cities like Nottingham and Derby is not going to win hearts and minds. It's also worth bearing in mind that people in this country don't like changing trains as it’s too much of an inconvenience, especially if you have children and luggage. In my opinion its very naive to think that there will be a change in this mindset.