Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
About time now if they can give the go ahead to Gatwick and Heathrow being expanded as well as NPR then all is good.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Which infrastructure projects do you think should now be prioritised?
- Thread starter Aictos
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
If Gatwick (very cheap) goes ahead it will be very difficult for Heathrow to make the finances work to do the 3rd runway...
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,520
Now is the time to also commit to Liverpool-Mànchester-Leeds-Hull.
jonesy3001
Established Member
What about the castlefield corridor/northern powerhouse?
Supposed to be announced at the same time
Supposed to be announced at the same time
I suspect that after the "review" of Phase 2b the whole lot will be rebranded into the same scheme as Liverpool to Hull
From what was in The FT last night, it only mentioned TRU being given the green light as well. Sadly, I've used up my articles so can't re-read what was published.
Is there a plan for HS3 rather than a trite collection of aspirations? Northern cities are not known for all pulling in the same direction on major projects so how quickly could a costed plan, with service levels, a defined route and at least a basic geological case for what would be a very technical risk loaded project be prepared. Can TfN even table proposals that adequately define what the government should be committing to?
Last edited:
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Phase 1 (already approved by parliament) can now be delivered, that's fine.
Phase 2a is two-thirds of the way through the parliamentary process (now in the Lords) and should also be OK, especially with Labour support.
Phase 2b has not yet reached parliament and faces many hurdles before final approval and I wouldn't call it "secure", but at least planning can continue.
Even the first London-Birmingham railway had to be rerouted via Weedon to avoid Earl Spencer's estate at Althorp - to the major detriment of Northampton.
But they did build it (with private money*) in less than 5 years.
*It cost £5m, double the original estimate of £2.5m.
Last edited:
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
I think you are probably correct in this assessment.
Hence Heathrow lobbying against Gatwick.
Gatwick has about 30 to 35% spare terminal capacity hence it just need a runway to utilise that. The payback period on a new runway (no terminal) is 6 to 7 years with no increase airport fees. Cargo is then a cheap add on before a new terminal.
Gatwick's position is that both should go ahead.
The complete left field worry for Heathrow is the new runway at Dublin which theoretically needs no new terminal capacity to be fully utilised and has USA pre clearance.
Last edited:
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
Well if Heathrow goes ahead WrATH and SaTH should both go ahead. Rail connections of course. We ain’t got hydrogen planes yet of course!
Heathrow don't want them as pre conditions though as they migh have to pay for them!
Gatwick are contributing to the station rebuild that starts soon.
grumpyoldman01
Member
Just found again Javid's reference to a new trans-Pennine railway - it's on the Guardian's website and is repeating what he said on Sky News this morning:
“Take the north of England for example – I think we need to see much better connectivity between the great cities of the north. We will have a new rail line [from Manchester to Leeds]. We are working with local leaders and businesses in that region to invest in that.”
“Take the north of England for example – I think we need to see much better connectivity between the great cities of the north. We will have a new rail line [from Manchester to Leeds]. We are working with local leaders and businesses in that region to invest in that.”
ExRes
Established Member
How much will it cost and how will it be funded?
About £7bn of public money but there will be tolls for vehicles.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Fleetwood wouldn't be in my top ten re-openings (andre-openings generally
aren't my highest priorities) - given that any Preston - Fleetwood service would come at the opportunity cost of a Preston - Blackpool service - but by wrapping everything together like the Tories have, there's something in the announcement for "left behind" towns (and presumably the bus "investment" will be spread fairly thinly around the country to tick as many boxes as possible) as well as the headline grabbing HS2 announcement.
It's funny that, in order to agree to an unpopular rail investment, they've had to sweeten the pill by throwing in some other public transport investment too - unthinkable a few years ago - there's no "catch" here - just a case of "building some branch lines to smaller places to justify building a high speed line between the biggest cities" (e.g. it's not like a little bit of rail investment is "greenwash" to distract from building a motorway).
aren't my highest priorities) - given that any Preston - Fleetwood service would come at the opportunity cost of a Preston - Blackpool service - but by wrapping everything together like the Tories have, there's something in the announcement for "left behind" towns (and presumably the bus "investment" will be spread fairly thinly around the country to tick as many boxes as possible) as well as the headline grabbing HS2 announcement.
It's funny that, in order to agree to an unpopular rail investment, they've had to sweeten the pill by throwing in some other public transport investment too - unthinkable a few years ago - there's no "catch" here - just a case of "building some branch lines to smaller places to justify building a high speed line between the biggest cities" (e.g. it's not like a little bit of rail investment is "greenwash" to distract from building a motorway).
What is the "TRU", please?
Thank you. It would be helpful if posters could at least once per thread explain any unofficial abbreviations as required by the forum protocol.
tavistock
Member
How about reopening the Leamside line through County Durham to Newcastle and Sunderland? It would please a lot of newly elected Conservative MPs there. Not forgetting those that switched their allegiance to them
Well, that's Sheffield and Bradford offended.
And Liverpool, Hull, Halifax ...
Northern unity eh?
There's certainly a fair amount of "what does Scotland get out of HS2?", as it doesn't have any new line within it.
Not that matters to Johnson so much as the Conservatives don't need to win seats there to have a majority.
However announcing something, even a study into a High Speed Line to link towards his bridge, would quell some of that unrest.
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
The only thing is that Heathrow is competing more against Amsterdam Schiphol and Paris Charles de Gaulle for connections as they are more of a rival then Dublin or Gatwick.
Hence Heathrow needs a third runway to be able to compete with those two.
But Scotland will receive via the Barnett consequentials the appropriate share of money spent on HS2. If they wished they could start building southwards !
1) Extra runway for both Heathrow and Gatwick
2) Western and Southern rail links to Heathrow
3) Crossrail 2
4) Welwyn tunnel/viaduct on ECML
As for Scotland, is there anything (apart from money) to stop the Scottish government from starting its own HS network and building one to put England's to shame?
2) Western and Southern rail links to Heathrow
3) Crossrail 2
4) Welwyn tunnel/viaduct on ECML
As for Scotland, is there anything (apart from money) to stop the Scottish government from starting its own HS network and building one to put England's to shame?
Gatwick cannot compete on that top tier as its unable to build a second runway due to the Government blocking it - but if it did build it would be. It's an artificial thing and Heathrow knows it - hence why they are so aggressively against Gatwick getting approval for second runway (even if it would be allowed to build its third as well).
And "for connections" - London's airports deal with 5 passengers for every 4 that its nearest rival New York can muster, and numbers 162% of those of Paris - the only other European city in the top ten globally. London sees as many air passengers a year as Paris and Amsterdam combined. Do we really need to focus on people connecting like some second tier city? Runway capacity is what is needed as that's the biggest bottleneck in the busiest airspace in the world - that's the issue, not a lack of connections.
London, New York, Tokyo and Paris have multiple big airports - despite having a large top-30 airport (Tokyo is 4th, Heathrow 7th, CdG 10th, JFK 21st), they have another big one (Gatwick is 39th, Newark 40th, Orly and Narita aren't top 50 but aren't far off it) and perhaps some mid-tier ones too - because they are destinations. Second-tier cities like Atlanta, Dubai, Amsterdam need to have a big hub with a focus on connections because their city needs a load of people going elsewhere to fill flights to it.
We shouldn't reject hubbing, but we don't need a massive hub - we already have what's far and away the top destination, and two airports (despite only 2 and 1 runways respectively) working as hubs (one large hub that's bigger than its European rivals despite its constraints, one smaller because of its constraints). Heathrow might have less destinations than Charles de Gaulle, but London has more than Paris. Heathrow doesn't want you to know that - not least as many of the 'new' destinations they use to sell R3 are already Gatwick ones.
I really don't know why it's in the UK's interest to cement the market dominance of a private company by not allowing it's main UK competitor to expand.
I think both the Western and Southern accesses to Heathrow should go ahead regardless of whether the Airport expansion does or doesn’t. The Southern access in particular will unlock even more benefits for HS2 since some trains from the South Coast can be routed into Old Oak Common via the new link. With this in place, I suspect it will become quicker to get from Bournemouth and Southampton to Birmingham and Manchester via OOC rather than using the direct Cross Country service.
- Status