Publication of Integrated Rail Plan for the North and Midlands

[Peter Lanky]

I've never been able to understand why this obvious concept has not been mentioned by anyone on any discussion about HS2. There should be an analysis of why so many people feel the 'need' or are somehow 'required' to go to London in the first place, because I'm convinced that a significant number of journeys are completely unnecessary. Is it for meetings that could almost certainly be held elsewhere? It it long distance commuters (who will increase when HS2 is implemented)? Is it to get to certain facilities that are only in London that could be located elsewhere? Is it to take a flight from LHR that could better be served by better scheduling at other UK airports? Is it UK tourists going for a visit? Is it foreign tourists travelling to other parts of the UK because nobody has told them there are airports elsewhere? Another reason?

If the number of unnecessary journeys was reduced, then HS2 would not be necessary at the southern end, and more effort could be put into fully funding all the non-London connections in all parts of the country, rather than trying to find a watered down solution as seems to be happening.

 

[HSTEd]

The only way you get are getting those journey time savings via the ECML is simply to start running trains non stop to Leeds.

It just reads like magical thinking.

140mph is not fast enough.

 

[Ianno87]

I've never been able to understand why this obvious concept has not been mentioned by anyone on any discussion about HS2. There should be an analysis of why so many people feel the 'need' or are somehow 'required' to go to London in the first place, because I'm convinced that a significant number of journeys are completely unnecessary. Is it for meetings that could almost certainly be held elsewhere? It it long distance commuters (who will increase when HS2 is implemented)? Is it to get to certain facilities that are only in London that could be located elsewhere? Is it to take a flight from LHR that could better be served by better scheduling at other UK airports? Is it UK tourists going for a visit? Is it foreign tourists travelling to other parts of the UK because nobody has told them there are airports elsewhere? Another reason?

One word: Agglomeration.

 

[deltic]

Erm - no, that's not what it says.

Whilst the HS2 East Mids - Leeds extension isn't happening, it does say about a new Trans Pennine link between Warrington and Standedge.

But basically your whinge is there isn't a new line being built in Yorkshire - regardless of the fact much can be achieved through the upgrade of the existing infrastructure ? A little selfish, no?

Not sure the good citizens of Bradford will agree or those of Hull.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2021 ==

Doesn't have to be the Airport stumping up for all of the funding gap.

Not clear who else will be dipping into their pockets

 

[stuu]

I suppose that’s another Kings Cross throat remodelling then. There’s only a couple of platforms that get anywhere near long enough…

It actually says "up to three extra carriages", which isn't the same thing as 12 car azumas

 

[Ianno87]

Not clear who else will be dipping into their pockets

Why would it be at this stage? Presumably plenty of scope for private development surrounding the station, and hook some funding out of that. This document is merely setting the strategy for placing a station there, which seems credibly like it could attract sizeable private sector investment.

 

[deltic]

I've never been able to understand why this obvious concept has not been mentioned by anyone on any discussion about HS2. There should be an analysis of why so many people feel the 'need' or are somehow 'required' to go to London in the first place, because I'm convinced that a significant number of journeys are completely unnecessary. Is it for meetings that could almost certainly be held elsewhere? It it long distance commuters (who will increase when HS2 is implemented)? Is it to get to certain facilities that are only in London that could be located elsewhere? Is it to take a flight from LHR that could better be served by better scheduling at other UK airports? Is it UK tourists going for a visit? Is it foreign tourists travelling to other parts of the UK because nobody has told them there are airports elsewhere? Another reason?

If the number of unnecessary journeys was reduced, then HS2 would not be necessary at the southern end, and more effort could be put into fully funding all the non-London connections in all parts of the country, rather than trying to find a watered down solution as seems to be happening.

Because some 9m people live there many of whom have friends and relatives in the rest of the country and rail is the easiest way of getting to and from there.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2021 ==

Why would it be at this stage? Presumably plenty of scope for private development surrounding the station, and hook some funding out of that. This document is merely setting the strategy for placing a station there, which seems credibly like it could attract sizeable private sector investment.

The requirement for private sector funding of the airport station has been in the public domain for a long time and no-one has shown any interest in funding it, a lot of the land around the airport is in the Green Belt and easily accessible off the motorway network - not clear what benefit the railway would bring to occupiers - it is mainly a parkway station for south Manchester and North Cheshire and now Crewe is to be served by HS2 its rationale further dimishes

 

[Starmill]

I guess you wouldn't want to build something between Sheffield and Leeds, only to then be incompatible/abortive with whatever you wanted to do long-term to connect Leeds into HS2.

The long term decision looks to me like it will probably be not to connect Leeds or the North East to HS2. They could be served with trains to Birmingham via East Midlands Parkway.

A key indicator here is that there's no Leeds station HS2 infrastructure.

 

[MontyP]

Erm, no.

So let's do a simple explanation of this - the base scope of the Transpennine Upgrade is in delivery (which will benefit Leeds).

The first phase of enhancement of that is at development and design phase - will be seen in the short / medium term.

Long term there are some more things to consider. But to say you won't have any improvements by 2030 is dishonest.

View attachment 105811

So which improvements will we have by 2030 that weren't already planned to be completed by that date? I don't have any confidence that anything other than the PACE3 items will be delivered by that date, and they are both already approved / under way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Used as a parkway station by much of the Wirral and North Wales to get to London. More frequent service than Chester and easier to access from the A55 / M56.

If it's a parkway then it doesn't matter as much because they can drive to somewhere else instead.

Edit: it's not a more frequent service than Chester. Both are 1tph. Unless you want the LNR service, and that will continue to serve Runcorn.

 

[Starmill]

During prime ministers question time yesterday Boris said it was about giving the North local commuter networks similar to London and the South East. Other than possibly removing some expresses from local lines, how does this do any of this?

Arguably it actually makes it worse in some areas. Between East Midlands Parkway and Nottingham more paths need to be found now for HS2 services. Taking local trains away is one way to do that.

 

[Ianno87]

The requirement for private sector funding of the airport station has been in the public domain for a long time and no-one has shown any interest in funding it, a lot of the land around the airport is in the Green Belt and easily accessible off the motorway network - not clear what benefit the railway would bring to occupiers - it is mainly a parkway station for south Manchester and North Cheshire and now Crewe is to be served by HS2 its rationale further dimishes

Given it is still well over a decade away, it would be weird if any private sector body had committed hard funding at this stage. Lots of businesses would be clamoring to be next to a station as well-connected to the compass points as Manchester Airport will be. But it's important to get it into the alignment to preserve this opportunity.

 

[quantinghome]

But basically your whinge is there isn't a new line being built in Yorkshire - regardless of the fact much can be achieved through the upgrade of the existing infrastructure ? A little selfish, no?

How do you work that out? We both know that the report says nothing about possible alternatives to the HS2 eastern leg in Yorkshire.

 

[WesternLancer]

Clapped out by 2032 ? They haven`t been built yet !"

The announcement of MML electrification will probably now be used as a justification to cancel that spend on Aurora's and just refurb the meridians as a stop gap measure....

 

[lachlan]

How do you work that out? We both know that the report says nothing about possible alternatives to the HS2 eastern leg in Yorkshire.

I've got to agree with others here that Yorkshire and the northeast is losing out. If Edinburgh trains are sent via the ECML, we have no capacity release. Meanwhile, the proposed 140 mph running and the already happening loss of intermediate stops will reduce connectivity. Any word on the proposed Newcastle/York to Birmingham HS2 services? These were set to bring big journey time reductions to Newcastle, Darlington, Durham, York to Birmingham. Another thing I've noticed that I don't think has been mentioned yet is the line to Hull does not appear to be receiving any upgrades at all, under previous EWR plans this was set to be upgraded.

That being said I was always skeptical about the East Midlands Parkway station and am open to the idea of running to Derby and Nottingham city centres.

 

[HSTEd]

Given it is still well over a decade away, it would be weird if any private sector body had committed hard funding at this stage. Lots of businesses would be clamoring to be next to a station as well-connected to the compass points as Manchester Airport will be. But it's important to get it into the alignment to preserve this opportunity.

Which, given the glacial progress rate of infrastructure in the UK means it won't get built.

Given that they will have to pay at least a decade in advance of anything happening.

It's enough to make someone wish for a dose of Chinese style totalitarianism and viaduct railways......

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've got to agree with others here that Yorkshire and the northeast is losing out. If Edinburgh trains are sent via the ECML, we have no capacity release.

There will still be (slower) Edinburgh trains on the ECML just as there will still be (slower) Manchester trains on the WCML, but I would consider it unconceivable that there wouldn't be at least 1tph to Edinburgh on HS2 because it requires no additional capacity at all to do that - the Glasgow will certainly run, and you can't run a 400m train there, so it's just a second portion on that.

Golborne appears to allow a second train per hour, but there would absolutely be one. Glasgow is not going to lose its service to London. It would be unconceivable for that to happen.

 

[WesternLancer]

That being said I was always skeptical about the East Midlands Parkway station and am open to the idea of running to Derby and Nottingham city centres.

But surely any half sensible previous plan would have envisaged some services running off the HS lines into Derby and Nottingham city centres anyway (classic compatible HS trains just like most other European HS lines have). So that would have already been delivered by the previous (now scrapped) plans?

 

[HSTEd]

There will still be (slower) Edinburgh trains on the ECML just as there will still be (slower) Manchester trains on the WCML, but I would consider it unconceivable that there wouldn't be at least 1tph to Edinburgh on HS2 because it requires no additional capacity at all to do that - the Glasgow will certainly run, and you can't run a 400m train there, so it's just a second portion on that.

Well the cost of modifying the rolling stock order to get a subfleet of ~300m trains is tiny compared to the cost of anything else.....

 

[43066]

Sigh. Electrification already underway then. Happy?

Just trying to help .

I've never been able to understand why this obvious concept has not been mentioned by anyone on any discussion about HS2. There should be an analysis of why so many people feel the 'need' or are somehow 'required' to go to London in the first place, because I'm convinced that a significant number of journeys are completely unnecessary. Is it for meetings that could almost certainly be held elsewhere? It it long distance commuters (who will increase when HS2 is implemented)? Is it to get to certain facilities that are only in London that could be located elsewhere? Is it to take a flight from LHR that could better be served by better scheduling at other UK airports? Is it UK tourists going for a visit? Is it foreign tourists travelling to other parts of the UK because nobody has told them there are airports elsewhere? Another reason?

Because, like it or not, the economic powerhouse of the U.K. is centred around London and the south east, with London being something like seven times larger than second city Birmingham in terms of population (depending on measure), and London alone accounting for over 22% of UK GDP. It’s therefore safe to assume they many economically significant journeys will be to and from the capital.

 

[Ianno87]

Given that they will have to pay at least a decade in advance of anything happening.

Or the Government borrows/underwrites funding on behalf of the future private investor, or something.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well the cost of modifying the rolling stock order to get a subfleet of ~300m trains is tiny compared to the cost of anything else.....

Not going to happen. This is in the realms of conspiracy theory.

 

[TravelDream]

Is there any update on the Barnett consequentials from today's announcement?

Also possible. We'll find out in the Union Connectivity Review.

When are we to expect that report? I thought it was due this year?

 

[HSTEd]

Or the Government borrows/underwrites funding on behalf of the future private investor, or something.

The future private investor will then go to great lengths to wriggle out of paying and very little, if any, of the "private money" will ever be recovered.

At that point its just state funding with extra steps to try and hide the cost from the taxpayer.

 

[A0]

Not sure the good citizens of Bradford will agree or those of Hull.

Hull wasn't benefitting from HS2 either way. Paradoxically it *might* actually benefit from today's announcements as its London services may benefit from the infrastructure improvements on the ECML.

It will benefit from the Trans Pennine upgrades which will be happening.

 

[swt_passenger]

But surely any half sensible previous plan would have envisaged some services running off the HS lines into Derby and Nottingham city centres anyway (classic compatible HS trains just like most other European HS lines have). So that would have already been delivered by the previous (now scrapped) plans?

I thought the earlier idea was to use Toton as the interchange for a diverted line or maybe a tram extension between Nottingham and Derby. People usually criticised HS2 on the basis it didn’t go to either of the two major destinations at all.

 

[lachlan]

There will still be (slower) Edinburgh trains on the ECML just as there will still be (slower) Manchester trains on the WCML, but I would consider it unconceivable that there wouldn't be at least 1tph to Edinburgh on HS2 because it requires no additional capacity at all to do that - the Glasgow will certainly run, and you can't run a 400m train there, so it's just a second portion on that.

Golborne appears to allow a second train per hour, but there would absolutely be one. Glasgow is not going to lose its service to London. It would be unconceivable for that to happen.

Agreed re Glasgow. Would journey times to Edinburgh be quicker via HS2 without the Golbourne link and with the improvements to the ECML? The journey via HS2 was expected to take 3:48

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Nov 2021 ==

But surely any half sensible previous plan would have envisaged some services running off the HS lines into Derby and Nottingham city centres anyway (classic compatible HS trains just like most other European HS lines have). So that would have already been delivered by the previous (now scrapped) plans?

Not with the former plans, I don't believe there was any provision for a link between HS2 and the existing network that would have allowed such services. There were proposals to run classic trains to the new Toton station, but I never saw any mention of those services continuing on to HS2 track.

 

[Skymonster]

But surely any half sensible previous plan would have envisaged some services running off the HS lines into Derby and Nottingham city centres anyway (classic compatible HS trains just like most other European HS lines have). So that would have already been delivered by the previous (now scrapped) plans?

The only issue was the the previous plan wasn’t half sensible - there would have been no HS2 trains into Nottingham or Derby

The announcement of MML electrification will probably now be used as a justification to cancel that spend on Aurora's and just refurb the meridians as a stop gap measure....

It certainly seems like bi-mode Auroras will be wasted within ten years of their introduction as, once the MML is fully electrified in the early/mid 2030s they will run all the way under wires - the only benefit of the Diesel engine will come for occasional diversions over the Erewash Valley

 

[A0]

If it's a parkway then it doesn't matter as much because they can drive to somewhere else instead.

Edit: it's not a more frequent service than Chester. Both are 1tph. Unless you want the LNR service, and that will continue to serve Runcorn.

It is - currently Chester services are only running to Crewe and that's also the case after timetable change as well.

The earliest Avanti from Chester gets into London at 9.40 am and the last leaves at 18.10 whereas the Runcorn's the first arrives at 7.43 and the last back leaves at 21.07.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is - currently Chester services are only running to Crewe and that's also the case after timetable change as well.

The current post COVID situation won't extend past HS2 opening - the service will get reinstated.