HS2 rail extension to Leeds set to be scrapped

[Peregrine 4903]

The initial HS2 rolling stock tender specifications give a very good idea of onboard capacity and onboard service / facility levels which is what would get cascaded to the Euston - Leeds Services.

There is a big focus on capacity...

I am aware of that, but we still don't know for certain exactly how much capacity there will be and I doubt it will be a Ouigo model, but I could be completely wrong.

The one certainty I guess is that there will be a lot of capacity on HS2 trains.

 

[Purple Orange]

Based on the latest news, does anyone have a view on potential journey times between Leeds & London and Leeds & Birmingham via HS2?

 

[HSTEd]

The one certainty I guess is that there will be a lot of capacity on HS2 trains.

To be honest, almost an unimaginable amount!

 

[hwl]

Based on the latest news, does anyone have a view on potential journey times between Leeds & London and Leeds & Birmingham via HS2?

See post #117
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-leeds-set-to-be-scrapped.224851/post-5402520

1h40-45min Euston -Leeds
1h10-15min Curzon Street - Leeds

 

[ChrisC]

Do people seriously think Leeds passengers are going to catch a train to Manchester to then travel into London?

Even if its quicker, I find it hard to belive that most will and feel like most people will just opt for the direct train.

To a lesser extent that’s what a lot of people in Nottingham have been saying about the station at Toton if HS2 was to be built in full. Would passengers from Nottingham really want to get a train out to Toton and change when a direct train from Nottingham to St Pancras would not take that much longer. I think Toton had got a good case as a park and ride hub for Nottingham and Derby, although it is close to good road links they are already very congested at peak times.

Nottingham could do quite well out of this if a high speed line is built from Birmingham as far as East Midlands Parkway as it would now get direct fast trains to Euston and also direct trains to Birmingham would be much quicker. If the Erewash Valley Line is upgraded journey times to Sheffield and Leeds could still be a bit less and all without changes of train at Toton.

 

[Manutd1999]

Electrifying Micklefield - Hambleton Jn offers the potential to hack off at least 7minutes from the Leeds - Kings Cross journey time if there is capacity east of Leeds (which Church Fenton -Leeds sections helps with)

This upgrade (which is planned anyway as part of TRU) combined with a non-stop service would give journey times of <1h55, even without any further upgrades on the ECML.

Compared with c. 1hr45 on the revised HS2 plans, is there even any point running Leeds-London via HS2?

You could just run Sheffield-London and Leeds-Birmingham.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Most of the upgrade would be south of York. Things like getting rid of the level crossings and the flat crossing at Retford,

The flat crossing at Retford was removed 50 years ago.

There is still one at Newark though.

 

[21C101]

.

Have to disagree, there was and is support because HS2 is being built and there was the commitment to fund it, what has sunk it is the failure to manage the costs. If HS2 was capable of delivering what it originally promised and a price somewhere close to originally agreed, it would be going ahead in full. Rail projects seem to expect the tax payer to give them a blank cheque, but like any project if the costs escalate then the project design has to be adjusted to control costs. But HS2 had the additional problem of being not only hugely expensive but also providing either no or limited benefits to the communities along the route which doesn't help build public support.

The modified scheme being able to directly serve Derby and Nottingham instead of a useless parkway at Toton illustrates this rather starkly.

The flat crossing at Retford was removed 50 years ago.

There is still one at Newark though.

Doh!

 

[MontyP]

Do people seriously think Leeds passengers are going to catch a train to Manchester to then travel into London?

Even if its quicker, I find it hard to belive that most will and feel like most people will just opt for the direct train.

I can't see how Leeds-Manchester-London will be quicker than Leeds-East Midlands-London on the truncated HS2 unless NPR is built in full which seems highly implausible.

Leeds-Manchester after a full TP upgrade would be around 40(?) mins then allow 10 mins to change plus 1 hr 11 for Manc-London gives a journey time of around 2 hrs.

With the new stretch to Clayton, upgraded MML via the Old Road and Erewash to EMP and then new HS2 to London the journey time should be 1hr 45 (assuming 125mph running on upgraded existing lines).

 

[Shrop]

But HS2 had the additional problem of being not only hugely expensive but also providing either no or limited benefits to the communities along the route which doesn't help build public support.

Which is one of the reasons why I've always said HS2 is an ill-conceived project

The argument doesn't really hold because studies have found HS2 will take over 100 years for the carbon savings it provides to off-set the carbon produced during construction. If you care about carbon emissions you don't build HS2, it doesn't help. You'd invest the funds in other priorities like an EV charging network for cars and freight, a decent electric bus network or in the existing rail network.

It's not just about this 100 year carbon savings figure, it's about the principle of encouraging transfer away from roads. Not all traffic obviously, but focussing people's minds on something other than taking the car as a default choice, when for many people there are alternatives

 

[Purple Orange]

See post #117
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-leeds-set-to-be-scrapped.224851/post-5402520

1h40-45min Euston -Leeds
1h10-15min Curzon Street - Leeds

Thanks. I wonder if the reason that the south Leeds section is being built is to ensure that Leeds-London & Leeds-Birmingham passengers are not tempted by travelling through Manchester? Those timings will be slightly less than a route through Piccadilly. It also means that Huddersfield passengers will likely travel via Manchester given the news of the high speed section between Manchester & Huddersfield.

 

[CentralTrainer]

To misquote Mark E Smith:

“Sod The North”

 

[Ianno87]

Which is one of the reasons why I've always said HS2 is an ill-conceived project

That's precisely the point HS2 benefits intermediate communities by going nowhere near them, releasing existing network capacity for the likes of Milton Keynes.

It's not just about this 100 year carbon savings figure, it's about the principle of encouraging transfer away from roads. Not all traffic obviously, but focussing people's minds on something other than taking the car as a default choice, when for many people there are alternatives

The "100 year" claim was from a study in about 2013 that made lots of very crude assumptions and ignore lots of factors. For example I believe it took no account of carbon benefits of released existing network capacity. Basically, it's nonsense, but has been latched onto by antis in the same way as the "just about businessmen getting to Birmingham 20 minutes faster" has.

The better statistic is that 60 years of construction and operation of HS2 emits less carbon than the whole UK road network in 1 month.

 

[21C101]

Thanks. I wonder if the reason that the south Leeds section is being built is to ensure that Leeds-London & Leeds-Birmingham passengers are not tempted by travelling through Manchester? Those timings will be slightly less than a route through Piccadilly. It also means that Huddersfield passengers will likely travel via Manchester given the news of the high speed section between Manchester & Huddersfield.

Cynically it is being built because BR shut the fastest and mainly four track main line between Sheffield and Leeds (or at least the central part of it between Wath and Goose Hill Junction via Cudworth which had four tracks along much of it until the day it closed

So the trains currently run over a spatchcocked selection of two track lines, some of which are glorified goat tracks and others of which (eg Wakefield area) are cluttered up with suburban trains in much the same way as Coventry to Birmingham is.

ie, as with London to Crewe, it is needed for capacity reasons and the high speed bit is basically a cheap add on once you commit to building it in the first place so you might as well engineer it for high speeds.

The Birmingham to Toton bit also is a capacity enhancer as the midland main line is currently full south of Bedford (or was until the Thameslink Peak Hour Fasts were suspended due to Coronavirus) and importantly, the St Pancras High Level Midland Main Line Platforms have no more capacity.

That's precisely the point HS2 benefits intermediate communities by going nowhere near them, releasing existing network capacity for the likes of Milton Keynes.

HS2 East also "benefitted" intermediate communities like Nottingham and Derby by going nowhere near them, a situation that the revised plans rectify.

 

[Ianno87]

]

HS2 East also "benefitted" intermediate communities like Nottingham and Derby by going nowhere near them, a situation that the revised plans rectify.

Apart from the large parts of Derby and Nottingham (and surrounding area) to whom Toton would be much nearer than the present (difficult to access) City centre stations, of course.

 

[21C101]

Apart from the large parts of Derby and Nottingham (and surrounding area) to whom Toton would be much nearer than the present (difficult to access) City centre stations, of course.

Which is why of course East Midlands Parkway was such a roaring flop.

 

[Ianno87]

Which is why of course East Midlands Parkway was such a roaring flop.

The whacking great river in the way is the issue there. Plus most of the immediate surrounding area being a Power Station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The initial HS2 rolling stock tender specifications give a very good idea of onboard capacity and onboard service / facility levels which is what would get cascaded to the Euston - Leeds Services.

There is a big focus on capacity...

Is there? I have seen it and it seems to give a lot of weight to comfort, with things like window alignment being specified and decent (as per 80x) minimum legroom.

The capacity will come from them being 400m rather than 265m long.

The whacking great river in the way is the issue there. Plus most of the immediate surrounding area being a Power Station.

Neither of those affect its ability to act as a parkway station for places on the M1.

 

[Class83]

Two an hour running from Euston to Leeds via Toton will also ease the path situation.

An interesting point that the ECML might really need 2 main types of services after HS2 opens.

• London to Newcastle/Leeds stopping quite a lot.
• London to Edinburgh/Aberdeen/Inverness calling at York, Newcastle and quite a lot north of Newcastle.

Though this relies on there being a London-Leeds and London-Edinburgh hourly, or ideally 30 minute service. Which the Leeds plans as I understand them will support, but without the western part of phase 2 in full, will be difficult for Edinburgh. I think the join will need to be north of Weaver Junction, and even then daytime freight might need to be reduced or removed from the northern WCML and trains flighted to get; Edinburgh Express (1tph), Glasgow Express (1tph), alternating Glasgow/Edinburgh via Birmingham with more stops in the North West (1tph), various Liverpool/Manchester to Edinburgh Glasgow (2 tph) and work around the various local services using the route between Wigan and Oxenholme. If a reduction in air travel is planned an extra Edinburgh and Glasgow Express each hour is probably called for.

 

[21C101]

The whacking great river in the way is the issue there. Plus most of the immediate surrounding area being a Power Station.

Its a parkway station next to the major arterial road. As it is designed for people to drive to, the power station and river are irrelelevant.

Prior to Coronavirus East Midlands Psrkway got about 300,000 passengers a year, half as many as use Long Eaton or Beeston.

Repeating the same mistake two miles further north was just silly. Thank goodness common sense has prevailed before a large amount of taxpayers money was wasted.

 

[NoRoute]

The "100 year" claim was from a study in about 2013 that made lots of very crude assumptions and ignore lots of factors. For example I believe it took no account of carbon benefits of released existing network capacity. Basically, it's nonsense, but has been latched onto by antis in the same way as the "just about businessmen getting to Birmingham 20 minutes faster" has.

It was still being discussed in 2020 in both the Times and the Guardian so if the claim was widely out of line then by now there should be ample evidence to show a carbon benefit, given the amount of investment you might expect a clear and unambiguous carbon reduction but there doesn't appear to be.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Its a parkway station next to the major arterial road. As it is designed for people to drive to, the power station and river are irrelelevant.

Prior to Coronavirus East Midlands Psrkway got about 300,000 passengers a year, half as many as use Long Eaton or Beeston.

Repeating the same mistake two miles further north was just silly. Thank goodness common sense has prevailed before a large amount of taxpayers money was wasted.

I must admit I found Gareth Whatshisname's suggestion on the Beeb that Toton was the key piece was nonsensical. I don't agree with the descoping, but the most important bit is Euston-Brum (as that relieves the south WCML, the whole reason the idea ever even came up), and the second most important is the bit to Manchester as that is the biggest IC flow in Europe, and also needs the classic line decluttering for improved Merseyrail style local services. Toton comes very low down the list. And actually I think I would consider MML electrification to Sheffield and an order of more 80x to allow all trains to be doubles would be of more value than HS2 East, if one had to choose.

(I also don't get why his opinions, which are often wrong, get so much airtime, just because he happens to do some sort of engineering job on the railway!)

 

[tomuk]

The whacking great river in the way is the issue there. Plus most of the immediate surrounding area being a Power Station.

Which will be decommissioned in at most 3 years and will then be a prime site for development

 

[InOban]

I hate to think how long this thread will be by the time the IRP is published on Thursday!

 

[21C101]

An interesting point that the ECML might really need 2 main types of services after HS2 opens.

• London to Newcastle/Leeds stopping quite a lot.
• London to Edinburgh/Aberdeen/Inverness calling at York, Newcastle and quite a lot north of Newcastle.

Though this relies on there being a London-Leeds and London-Edinburgh hourly, or ideally 30 minute service. Which the Leeds plans as I understand them will support, but without the western part of phase 2 in full, will be difficult for Edinburgh. I think the join will need to be north of Weaver Junction, and even then daytime freight might need to be reduced or removed from the northern WCML and trains flighted to get; Edinburgh Express (1tph), Glasgow Express (1tph), alternating Glasgow/Edinburgh via Birmingham with more stops in the North West (1tph), various Liverpool/Manchester to Edinburgh Glasgow (2 tph) and work around the various local services using the route between Wigan and Oxenholme. If a reduction in air travel is planned an extra Edinburgh and Glasgow Express each hour is probably called for.

An interesting point.

.

 

[ohgoditsjames]

I hate to think how long this thread will be by the time the IRP is published on Thursday!

Some Thursday next year?

 

[Ianno87]

.

Repeating the same mistake two miles further north was just silly.

But its not the same is it? EMH would be immediately accessible from the local population (without driving), plus a tram connection and probably several bus routes.

 

[coppercapped]

It goes down often enough, and matters less because all it carries is one or two high speed trains an hour plus a bunch of jumped up commuter trains on 125mph schedules.

There would no longer be crack intercity trains on those routes, the trains will be slower and have far more stops and wouldn't have the capacity for all the HS2 passengers to suddenly arrive in any case.


Reversible signalling is not much mitigation when you are trying to run 17 trains an hour.

The ECML still being a crack Anglo Scottish Intercity route is such mitigation by providing what is called in communications networks redundancy (ie a completely diverse path) or what Beeching called wasteful duplicate routes.

M'lud, a point of order...

The Dr. Beeching mentioned above did not, as far as I can determine refer to 'wasteful' duplicate routes. In fact he wrote on page 14 of his Report:

Competitive railway building in the past led not only to duplication of main arteries between some of the principal cities, but also to duplication of passenger stations and all the ancillary facilities such as carriage and cleaning sidings, motive power depots, buildings and equipment, which go with large terminals. Very little has been done, so far, to rationalise the main line passenger services which use alternative routes and terminals, but it is clear, in many cases, that concentration on selected routes and stations would provide equal or better services and permit substantial economies.

More nuanced then my honourable friend implies.

 

[21C101]

But its not the same is it? EMH would be immediately accessible from the local population (without driving), plus a tram connection and probably several bus routes.

Enough of them to make it as well used as Long Easton or Beeston or maybe even Loughborough I grant you, but I don't think that is quite what they had in mind.

 

[jfowkes]

It was still being discussed in 2020 in both the Times and the Guardian so if the claim was widely out of line then by now there should be ample evidence to show a carbon benefit, given the amount of investment you might expect a clear and unambiguous carbon reduction but there doesn't appear to be.

Any carbon reduction is dependent on government policies (transport, energy, housing among others) and the wider economy and so much more. There is no single clear and unambiguous figure, only estimates, each with a ton of assumptions and guesses behind them.