Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

[camflyer]

There really does seem to be a lot of “carry on regardless” going on here, that HS2 is worth it whatever it costs.
What was the BCR on the original budget, what is it currently, and what cost sends it below one?
“Running out of capacity” isn’t enough to justify massive public spending - there actually has to be a real benefit to the taxpayer for expanding capacity in excess of the cost.
I think Crossrail might have been the final straw for HS2 - not only does it demonstrate a continued inability to deliver major rail schemes to time and budget, but they have destroyed the trust of politicians with what was either a cover up or utter incompetence over knowing the progress.

Or maybe the lessons from Crossrail (and Thameslink etc) are 1) that we should be more realistic about budgets and schedules ahead of time rather than promising that such schemes can be built quickly and cheaply 2) the more we fanny around the more expensive the final bill is.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

Crewe, East Midlands, Sheffield, Leeds.

Preston, Liverpool, York ...

It is still not worth the cost especially when there are other parts of the country are in desperate need of rail investment. The environmental impact is far to great. The money would be better spent on upgrading existing routes as well as re opening old ones.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

Anyone who lives in London, Crewe, East Midlands, Sheffield, Leeds, Preston, Liverpool, York or any other big city who supports HS2 and is able to justify their support for it by moaning about their current service really don't know how good they have it. Yes, Virgin and XC services are often very overcrowded and sometimes unreliable but at least they have a rail service that is operational for at least 360 days per year because, as I have said, many don't have a rail service at all. This overcrowding could be solved by extending platforms and running longer trains. If longer platforms are not an option due to space constraints then selective door opening should be used.

Many towns and cities don't have a rail connection at all and rely on buses every 2 hours. Some lines such as the Riviera and Cornish mainline are often cut of, and receive a hit and miss service during the winter due to adverse weather along the Dawlish sea wall. Then there is the Somerset levels which flood causing major disruption. The money could be better spent reinforcing and better protecting the sea wall as well as building an inland route as a diversion. This route would also provide a rail service to those who don't currently have one and allow access to the rest of the network in adverse weather.

This money could also be spent on acquiring new rolling stock to replace ageing Class 15x units.

 

[Meerkat]

The BCR was based on the estimate as it stands now. Indeed the BCR will be better now, because you don’t include costs already spent.

To clarify, what is the current BCR and budget please?
Surely you do include recoverable costs - ie if most of the spending was on land then that can be sold again.

 

[pt_mad]

Do you mean the Stafford by-pass? There is no other way of doing it as the Queensville curve cannot be straightened out and that is 85mph EPS. Either side you are a mixture of 100, 115 and 125EPS. Colwich would need sorting, I doubt there is much more than 2 minutes.


They aren't that slow, 100mph with bits of 110mph EPS. Considering everything stops at Coventry and Birmingham International you aren't going to get anything.

To add to what @The Planner has said, you’d need to start amending the laws of Physics to get round the Stafford curves at 125mph.

West Coast Route Mod looked at a ‘Stafford cut off’, to resolve that and Colwich; this pretty much became part of the route of HS2 Ph2a.

Re the Stour Valley, the modelling (back in 1996 and again in 1998) showed between Cov and Birmingham that by the time a train has got to 125, it is more or less time to start braking for the next stop. The time saving for 125 vs 100 is 7 seconds a mile, and there are very few miles where it would apply.

re the cab signalling - TASS actually uses part of the ETCS architecture. If cab signalling had been implemented, it would have been ETCS. The originsl plan was that all lines would be controlled this way, with ‘signals away’

Thanks for the info. This may seem a completely crazy and maybe unrealistic question, but what if say a working was to pass through Coventry and/or Birmingham International at linespeed without stopping? Are the linespeeds low through the stations and if so is it due to points, safety of public on platforms or something else?

Is there still a London service in the morning which is right away New Street to Euston?

 

[Bald Rick]

Thanks for the info. This may seem a completely crazy and maybe unrealistic question, but what if say a working was to pass through Coventry and/or Birmingham International at linespeed without stopping? Are the linespeeds low through the stations and if so is it due to points, safety of public on platforms or something else?

Is there still a London service in the morning which is right away New Street to Euston?

There is one train a day off New St which is no. Stop to Euston. The 0730, which is the descendant of the Birmingham Pullman. Linespeed through Inter is 100, Cov is 80 up and 75 down. Don’t know why for the latter, mostly likely alignment and signal spacing.

 

[pt_mad]

There is one train a day off New St which is no. Stop to Euston. The 0730, which is the descendant of the Birmingham Pullman. Linespeed through Inter is 100, Cov is 80 up and 75 down. Don’t know why for the latter, mostly likely alignment and signal spacing.

Hmm so does that mean the 7:30 does the journey say what, 7 mins faster than the typical? Complete Guess.

 

[The Planner]

0730 does New St to Euston in 73 minutes, 0750 which is a 221 does it in 83. 0810 which is a Pendo does it in 83 minutes.

 

[jon0844]

700?!?!

Why the need for 700 when there's someone on here who is I assume working on a timetable right now to prove all of them wrong and prove you don't need HS2 to increase services.

Any day now I'm sure we'll see a timetable that can be submitted for approval and job done. £100bn in the bank.

 

[The Planner]

There are only half that number as it is, where the 700 came from I don't know, bit a boo boo there.

 

[Dr Hoo]

There are only half that number as it is, where the 700 came from I don't know, bit a boo boo there.

Well, I was quoting from the main ORR 'overview' document (actually for England & Wales but I think that this bit was for the whole network):
"41. In addition, we have approved Network Rail’s proposals for a substantial increase in expenditure by the SO, to approximately £270m over CP6. This will support investment in timetabling systems and enable an increase of around 100 in staffing levels, on top of the 700 already working in this area. These extra resources need to be used wisely."

What is the average tax-payer supposed to make of that?

 

[6Gman]

Why the need for 700 when there's someone on here who is I assume working on a timetable right now to prove all of them wrong and prove you don't need HS2 to increase services.

Any day now I'm sure we'll see a timetable that can be submitted for approval and job done. £100bn in the bank.

Or maybe "the person of whom we speak" hopes £100bn for the NHS means he'll get a pay increase?

 

[6Gman]

Well, I was quoting from the main ORR 'overview' document (actually for England & Wales but I think that this bit was for the whole network):
"41. In addition, we have approved Network Rail’s proposals for a substantial increase in expenditure by the SO, to approximately £270m over CP6. This will support investment in timetabling systems and enable an increase of around 100 in staffing levels, on top of the 700 already working in this area. These extra resources need to be used wisely."

What is the average tax-payer supposed to make of that?

To staff a department covering the entire timetable, including short-term alterations, across the entire network ... 700 doesn't seem unlikely.

 

[jon0844]

Or maybe "the person of whom we speak" hopes £100bn for the NHS means he'll get a pay increase?

That's surely coming from the £350m a week we're getting soon.

 

[The Planner]

Well, I was quoting from the main ORR 'overview' document (actually for England & Wales but I think that this bit was for the whole network):
"41. In addition, we have approved Network Rail’s proposals for a substantial increase in expenditure by the SO, to approximately £270m over CP6. This will support investment in timetabling systems and enable an increase of around 100 in staffing levels, on top of the 700 already working in this area. These extra resources need to be used wisely."

What is the average tax-payer supposed to make of that?

I see, if its all of System Operator then its a different story then and its probably correct as that takes in the strategic planning of the network, re-franchising etc.... It originally came across as timetabling only, which is way off the mark.

 

[Bald Rick]

I see, if its all of System Operator then its a different story then and its probably correct as that takes in the strategic planning of the network, re-franchising etc.... It originally came across as timetabling only, which is way off the mark.

That’s my take on it. all of system operator is nearer 800 nationwide.

 

[Bald Rick]

0730 does New St to Euston in 73 minutes, 0750 which is a 221 does it in 83. 0810 which is a Pendo does it in 83 minutes.

And in the ‘old days’ the 0733 Birmingham Pullman was due into Euston at 0902, ie 89 minutes, with an International stop. And occasionally, it did!

 

[6Gman]

All roads through Cov and International take you through a platform (and those at International are not over-wide in parts). Not sure I'd want to see too much going through at a lick.

 

[Bald Rick]

All roads through Cov and International take you through a platform (and those at International are not over-wide in parts). Not sure I'd want to see too much going through at a lick.

Agreed, but it happens at plenty of other busy platforms around the country. Perhaps the most worrisome is the up fast platform 3 at St Albans, when 800 people have alighted a service on the Down slow platform (2), trying to get up a 3 metre wide footbridge coincident with a pair of up EMTs coming through 3 minutes apart at 100mph.

 

[6Gman]

Agreed, but it happens at plenty of other busy platforms around the country. Perhaps the most worrisome is the up fast platform 3 at St Albans, when 800 people have alighted a service on the Down slow platform (2), trying to get up a 3 metre wide footbridge coincident with a pair of up EMTs coming through 3 minutes apart at 100mph.

Oh indeed. Nuneaton always frightens the life out of me; and I saw a potentially nasty example at Wigan when - just as a (stopping) Euston service was due - a Charter bucketed through at speed, complete with passengers moving forward to try to board! And don't get me started on Freightliners through 13/14 at Piccadilly!

But perhaps best not to introduce new ones ...

 

[kylemore]

You want to put more trains on the "underused" Chiltern line so I was hoping you were clear on this!

"Underused" as in an asset that could be improved to contribute more to the overall London-Midlands capacity - is the infrastructure of the Chiltern line impossible to improve?

 

[6Gman]

"Underused" as in an asset that could be improved to contribute more to the overall London-Midlands capacity - is the infrastructure of the Chiltern line impossible to improve?

In effect it's been doing that over the past decade or more (some of us remember when the trains out of Marylebone only went to Banbury - and that not very often, and on awful Suburban-style units!), and lengthening trains would provide a little more capacity. But it only really addresses the Birmingham issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh indeed. Nuneaton always frightens the life out of me; and I saw a potentially nasty example at Wigan when - just as a (stopping) Euston service was due - a Charter bucketed through at speed, complete with passengers moving forward to try to board! And don't get me started on Freightliners through 13/14 at Piccadilly!

But perhaps best not to introduce new ones ...

Bletchley used to be a bit frightening when a VT came through at 125 when you'd just got off a LM. The anti-suicide fences are actually quite good at reducing the effect.

You've also got MKC platform 6, which despite being new is quite narrow (being built basically exactly mirroring 5 with all fittings identical, which might well have gained it some measure of grandfather rights), and again Pendolinos run through at the full 125.

 

[anme]

"Underused" as in an asset that could be improved to contribute more to the overall London-Midlands capacity - is the infrastructure of the Chiltern line impossible to improve?

What railway can't be improved? However I'm not sure upgrading the Chiltern line brings the same benefits as HS2.

 

[The Ham]

What railway can't be improved? However I'm not sure upgrading the Chiltern line brings the same benefits as HS2.

Quite, all this talk of extra coaches, electrification, etc. for the Chiltern line would help, but not by very much.

Currently there's 3tph London to Birmingham on the WCML, let's assume that they have 1,640 seats (so a 9 coach 390 and 2*11 coach 390). To provide a 50% increase in seats (820 seats) by providing extra coaches would require about 12 extra coaches with 70 seats in each on the Birmingham services.

However what do you then do to provide the extra capacity for Manchester? The simple way is to remove trains from Birmingham on the WCML and divert then to Manchester, however that would then require even more coaches being added to Chiltern services. Let's say another 10, so that's a total of 22 extra coaches on Chiltern services. Could you even for in that many extra coaches to Chiltern services?

However Coventry has gone from 3tph to 2tph, which is something that those opposed to HS2 would say wasn't acceptable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing that has proven very successful in terms of additional capacity for Scotland where people are more price than time sensitive is VTWC's masterstroke of combining Euston-Wolves with Brum-Scotland. This is quite possibly the best decision they have made in recent years, as it has opened extra journey opportunities and added capacity to near enough nobody's disadvantage and has proven far more successful than I reckon any of the "short EMUs" ideas would have done. (It did remove 1tph of half empty ICs from Wolves to Brum and vice versa, but I bet nobody has actually noticed given how few people used them).

If the 3tph to Manchester are actually full (are they? I didn't think they were?) one reasonable option could be to bring the self contained Manchester-Birmingham trains (1tph I think?) into West Coast (complete with the Voyagers used to run them) and do something similar to a second of the Birmingham trains?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It seems to me that one of the ironies in this sub-debate about the Chiltern line is that the best thing for the Chiltern line could well be.... building HS2!!!

The reason? The Chiltern line currently suffers from a similar problem to the Southern WCML with lots of trains missing missing most of the stops. Hence most of the stations see a much lower level of service than they'd otherwise get. And - despite there being 5tph on the line as far as Bicester, most local journeys are only possible hourly. A big culprit here is the Marylebone-Birmingham trains, which tend to do skip-stopping, presumably in part in order to speed up journeys for the people going all the way London to Birmingham. Just like with the WCML, HS2 is likely to absorb many of those passengers, making it more plausible for those trains to stop at more places. Result: Places like High Wycombe, Princes Risborough and Thame might well get more frequent services.

Having said that, Chiltern line trains do often tend to be ridiculously short, and the lack of electrification going into London is very noticeable. I'd hope both of those issues would eventually get fixed independently of HS2.

 

[Ianno87]

One thing that has proven very successful in terms of additional capacity for Scotland where people are more price than time sensitive is VTWC's masterstroke of combining Euston-Wolves with Brum-Scotland. This is quite possibly the best decision they have made in recent years, as it has opened extra journey opportunities and added capacity to near enough nobody's disadvantage and has proven far more successful than I reckon any of the "short EMUs" ideas would have done. (It did remove 1tph of half empty ICs from Wolves to Brum and vice versa, but I bet nobody has actually noticed given how few people used them).

If the 3tph to Manchester are actually full (are they? I didn't think they were?) one reasonable option could be to bring the self contained Manchester-Birmingham trains (1tph I think?) into West Coast (complete with the Voyagers used to run them) and do something similar to a second of the Birmingham trains?

There are no self-contained Manchester-Birmingham trains. The XC service from Manchester is 1tph to Bristol, 1tph to Bournemouth.

I think the 3tph Manchester service is now reasonably well-loaded most of the day anyway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are no self-contained Manchester-Birmingham trains. The XC service from Manchester is 1tph to Bristol, 1tph to Bournemouth.

Ah, sorry, I'm about 15 years out of date, then.

Would it be viable to run the Bristol and Bournemouth portion worked (as 2 x 4-car Voyager) and the other one to Euston?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I think the 3tph Manchester service is now reasonably well-loaded most of the day anyway.

My experience is that Euston-Manchester trains have been pretty full whenever I've been on them.

The ones that do seem to be very lightly loaded in my experience are the Euston-Chester trains. To the point that I do wonder if there's a better use for the paths they take up. It would probably help if they stopped at more places, but I'm guessing ... do Voyagers have a lower acceleration that makes more stops difficult to path?