More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[The Planner]

There will be the option to avoid building the Handsacre WCML junction as long as HS2 is built to Crewe.
But that choice is a couple of years away.
It would upset Stafford/Stoke/Macclesfield users who can only be served via the Handsacre link.

Which is the right thing to do if efficiencies need to be made. Its a hideously expensive piece of infrastructure for 1tph.

 

[350401]

Which is the right thing to do if efficiencies need to be made. Its a hideously expensive piece of infrastructure for 1tph.

True. However the latest video released by HS2 on the phasing of the services, does suggest that it is still planned and being built. If you look at 0.57, it’s clear the Handsacre link is in scope still. Also, whilst expensive for 1tph, it does provide for a fair amount of operational flexibility and resilience should there be issues at Crewe junction.

Were I a betting man, I’d expect an incoming Labour government will accelerate phase 2a to the original delivery date of 2031-33 and axe Handsacre. Meaning a preview service in 2030 and full 2a operations by 2033 at the latest.

 

[snowball]

The interactive map on the HS2 website enables one to identify the roads nearest the Handsacre link - Wood End Lane, the A515 and Shaw Lane. You can then "drive" along them on Google Streetview, where they have all been updated recently (May this year). You can see that it's flat country and nothing much has yet been done except topsoil stripping, setting up (extensive) site compounds and temporary fencing.

 

[Roast Veg]

Looks like its just been kicked into the same 18 month/2 year delay for budgeting reasons as the tunnels from OOC to Euston IMO.

The treasury has, despite being told that it will increase the total cost above inflation, elected to cap annual spend on the project. Clearly their aversion to the current high interest rates is sufficient that they believe any borrowing at today's prices will have major repercussions.

Were I a betting man, I’d expect an incoming Labour government will accelerate phase 2a to the original delivery date of 2031-33 and axe Handsacre. Meaning a preview service in 2030 and full 2a operations by 2033 at the latest.

This is a good choice, as a continuous stream of works can help contractors keep their prices down. The government would just need to ensure that any Eastern legs were teed up to start in 2033.

 

[hwl]

Clearly their aversion to the current high interest rates is sufficient that they believe any borrowing at today's prices will have major repercussions.

The "major repercussions" for not capping borrowing would be not having the requisite statement from the OBR confirming that the government could make small token tax cuts before the next election and larger ones before the 2029 election...

 

[Roast Veg]

The "major repercussions" for not capping borrowing would be not having the requisite statement from the OBR confirming that the government could make small token tax cuts before the next election and larger ones before the 2029 election...

This is probably true, though it is entirely speculation. Regardless, it's HMT that are insisting on the delay, so we shall have to wait until the next government for a real change of priorities.

 

[snowball]

Stoke is a city of substantial size and a frequently cited example of one that has suffered economically in recent decades. It made an attempt to be on the HS2 mainline. Dropping its link would be politically damaging for whichever party did it.

 

[The Planner]

True. However the latest video released by HS2 on the phasing of the services, does suggest that it is still planned and being built. If you look at 0.57, it’s clear the Handsacre link is in scope still. Also, whilst expensive for 1tph, it does provide for a fair amount of operational flexibility and resilience should there be issues at Crewe junction.

Were I a betting man, I’d expect an incoming Labour government will accelerate phase 2a to the original delivery date of 2031-33 and axe Handsacre. Meaning a preview service in 2030 and full 2a operations by 2033 at the latest.

It made no sense in the original plan either as no one would address the elephant in the room that was Colwich. Its still expensive even for the tiny resilience aspect at Crewe.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jul 2023 ==

Stoke is a city of substantial size and a frequently cited example of one that has suffered economically in recent decades. It made an attempt to be on the HS2 mainline. Dropping its link would be politically damaging for whichever party did it.

Doubt it considering it would run via Stafford as well. It wont be a massive time saving.

 

[hwl]

This is probably true,

Probably in this case is >99.9999%

 

[eldomtom2]

Were I a betting man, I’d expect an incoming Labour government will accelerate phase 2a to the original delivery date of 2031-33 and axe Handsacre. Meaning a preview service in 2030 and full 2a operations by 2033 at the latest.

Would Labour want to risk the PR hit of the right-wing papers suddenly caring about HS2 and screaming about further cutbacks?

 

[snowball]

Doubt it considering it would run via Stafford as well. It wont be a massive time saving.

If phase 2a went ahead without the Handsacre link, would Stoke have to be served via Rugby and Stafford, worsening its present service in both frequency and journey time?

 

[350401]

If phase 2a went ahead without the Handsacre link, would Stoke have to be served via Rugby and Stafford, worsening its present service in both frequency and journey time?

I think so - Macclesfield and Stoke would be served by the current Avanti service, probably with more stops added, slowing it down further.

One thing I’m not sure HS2 have taken into account is the impact of having HS2 services running via 2a from Stockport and Wilmslow for a period of around 5 years, then only to pull these stops and reroute all services via the airport. There will be loud shrieks of outrage from these areas, who having got used to a fast HS2 service via Crewe, suddenly either find their services axed or taking a lot longer with more stops; or having to double back into Manchester. I suspect there will remain 1tph going Manchester, Stockport, Wilmslow and joining HS2 at Crewe. The line is designed to support 14tph on 2a so it’s probably doable.

 

[thomalex]

True. However the latest video released by HS2 on the phasing of the services, does suggest that it is still planned and being built. If you look at 0.57, it’s clear the Handsacre link is in scope still. Also, whilst expensive for 1tph, it does provide for a fair amount of operational flexibility and resilience should there be issues at Crewe junction.

Were I a betting man, I’d expect an incoming Labour government will accelerate phase 2a to the original delivery date of 2031-33 and axe Handsacre. Meaning a preview service in 2030 and full 2a operations by 2033 at the latest.

And cancel the Euston link to pay for it running HS trains on existing tracks into Euston.

 

[350401]

And cancel the Euston link to pay for it running HS trains on existing tracks into Euston.

It’s not possible, as the HS2 tracks at OOC are in an deep tunnel. To join the tracks to Euston near Willesden Junction would require quite a steeply inclined ski ramp, more like the DLR. If money really is too tight for Euston, the better option would be to properly set up OOC as the terminus and set up the connecting links properly. The Elizabeth line will provide 18tph to the West End, City and Canary Wharf. Then build the planned overground stations and up the frequency to 6tph, to provide links to Clapham Junction. And have a properly signed and designed, well lit, walking route to North or East Acton central line - with a well designed direct walking connection its only a 5-10 minute walk; currently the walking routes take a very long route around which could be shortened. Don’t forget that all GWR trains will also stop at OOC, providing a 1 stop hop to Paddington and good connections to the West of England.

 

[Manutd1999]

Were I a betting man, I’d expect an incoming Labour government will accelerate phase 2a to the original delivery date of 2031-33 and axe Handsacre. Meaning a preview service in 2030 and full 2a operations by 2033 at the latest.

This would be a reasonable compromise IMO. I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect Phase 2a to be completed by 2033 though.

Stoke, Stafford and Macclesfield could be served by Avanti services, running non-stop to Stafford. Not great journey times, but not terrible either. Passengers would also have the option of using local services to Crewe and transferring to HS2 there.

If money really is too tight for Euston, the better option would be to properly set up OOC as the terminus and set up the connecting links properly.

Agreed. 6 platforms at OOC will be plenty to accomodate the Phase 2a services. Something like 8ph (3ph Curzon Street, 2ph Manchester via Crewe, 1ph Liverpool, 1ph Liverpool/Lancaster, 1ph Scotland).

 

[Greybeard33]

This would be a reasonable compromise IMO. I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect Phase 2a to be completed by 2033 though.

Now that Phase 2a has been paused and the contractors stood down, I doubt that an incoming government next year could do much to recover the two year delay.

 

[350401]

This would be a reasonable compromise IMO. I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect Phase 2a to be completed by 2033 though.

Stoke, Stafford and Macclesfield could be served by Avanti services, running non-stop to Stafford. Not great journey times, but not terrible either. Passengers would also have the option of using local services to Crewe and transferring to HS2 there.



Agreed. 6 platforms at OOC will be plenty to accomodate the Phase 2a services. Something like 8ph (3ph Curzon Street, 2ph Manchester via Crewe, 1ph Liverpool, 1ph Liverpool/Lancaster, 1ph Scotland).

Don’t forget the trains can be 2x200m trains which can split and attach. This gives a lot of options - eg run a 400m train to Interchange with 200m to Curzon St and 200m to Manchester via Crewe. This would save on some paths into OOC.

 

[The Planner]

If phase 2a went ahead without the Handsacre link, would Stoke have to be served via Rugby and Stafford, worsening its present service in both frequency and journey time?

No, it could still be served with a fast via Hixon.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Stoke, Stafford and Macclesfield could be served by Avanti services, running non-stop to Stafford. Not great journey times, but not terrible either. Passengers would also have the option of using local services to Crewe and transferring to HS2 there.

Avanti (or whoever has the WCP contract) will be running both HS2 and WCML services.
It would put Stoke/Stafford/Macc in the same position as Chester/North Wales is now, with no through trains on HS2.

Handsacre could also be built much more cheaply as a flat single-lead junction to/from HS2, for the 1tph via Stafford.

 

[The Planner]

Handsacre could also be built much more cheaply as a flat single-lead junction to/from HS2, for the 1tph via Stafford.

That option didnt even get off the fag packet.

 

[Tezza1978]

It’s not possible, as the HS2 tracks at OOC are in an deep tunnel. To join the tracks to Euston near Willesden Junction would require quite a steeply inclined ski ramp, more like the DLR. If money really is too tight for Euston, the better option would be to properly set up OOC as the terminus and set up the connecting links properly. The Elizabeth line will provide 18tph to the West End, City and Canary Wharf. Then build the planned overground stations and up the frequency to 6tph, to provide links to Clapham Junction. And have a properly signed and designed, well lit, walking route to North or East Acton central line - with a well designed direct walking connection its only a 5-10 minute walk; currently the walking routes take a very long route around which could be shortened. Don’t forget that all GWR trains will also stop at OOC, providing a 1 stop hop to Paddington and good connections to the West of England.

I don't think that option for OOC as a terminus is really a goer - given the large amount of work that has already been done at Euston and the fact that to get the main benefits of 2b you would need the capacity that Euston provides.

Clearly the govt realise that - hence the commitment by them (and Labour) to run to Euston and the request to redesign a cheaper version of the new station.

Given the disruption that Camden has had there would be utter uproar too if after this they dont get the development benefits and additional business brought in by the Euston link

 

[jfowkes]

Stoke is a city of substantial size and a frequently cited example of one that has suffered economically in recent decades. It made an attempt to be on the HS2 mainline. Dropping its link would be politically damaging for whichever party did it.

I'd assume dropping it would come with a lot of promises to increase local/regional transport spending. That might be politically favourable, the "HS2 is a London-centric white elephant" line probably plays well somewhere like Stoke (by which I mean post-industrial, economically depressed, politically ignored). I'm sure local business leaders want HS2 for Stoke, but more realistically they simply want *any investment at all*.

 

[tomuk]

I think so - Macclesfield and Stoke would be served by the current Avanti service, probably with more stops added, slowing it down further.

One thing I’m not sure HS2 have taken into account is the impact of having HS2 services running via 2a from Stockport and Wilmslow for a period of around 5 years, then only to pull these stops and reroute all services via the airport. There will be loud shrieks of outrage from these areas, who having got used to a fast HS2 service via Crewe, suddenly either find their services axed or taking a lot longer with more stops; or having to double back into Manchester. I suspect there will remain 1tph going Manchester, Stockport, Wilmslow and joining HS2 at Crewe. The line is designed to support 14tph on 2a so it’s probably doable.

It is going to be no more dificult in fact probably easier for the denizens of Wilmslow and Stockport to get to Manchester Airport HS2 then it is to the existing town\city centre stations. Wilmslow to HS2 is 5 miles from the new station just the other side of the airport and Stockport is a 9 miles hop along the Motorway.

 

[AndrewE]

It is going to be no more dificult in fact probably easier for the denizens of Wilmslow and Stockport to get to Manchester Airport HS2 then it is to the existing town\city centre stations. Wilmslow to HS2 is 5 miles from the new station just the other side of the airport and Stockport is a 9 miles hop along the Motorway.

Has it not occurred to you yet that we need to reduce car mileage? Assuming people are entitled to do "a 9 mile hop along the M60" or will/should drive to the out-of-town airport station is why we are where we are: worse polluted and more congested than most of our neighbours.

 

[The Planner]

Has it not occurred to you yet that we need to reduce car mileage? Assuming people are entitled to do "a 9 mile hop along the M60" or will/should drive to the out-of-town airport station is why we are where we are: worse polluted and more congested than most of our neighbours.

There are plenty of stations that if you removed those who drove to them would have a significant drop in usage. Why can't it be a system and use of EVs is going to increase by the time 2B ever opens as well.

 

[AndrewE]

There are plenty of stations that if you removed those who drove to them would have a significant drop in usage. Why can't it be a system and use of EVs is going to increase by the time 2B ever opens as well.

because congestion won't evaporate just because the cars are battery-powered, for a start? And because heavier BEVs generate more tyre debris?
And we need to use less energy overall... which means much more shanks' pony, bikes, buses and more long-distance public transport than now. Which would also make a big difference to the nation's health too...

 

[Greybeard33]

Wilmslow to HS2 is 5 miles from the new station just the other side of the airport and Stockport is a 9 miles hop along the Motorway.

The "9 miles hop along the motorway" between Stockport and the Airport involves the bottleneck of the 2-lane Sharston Link between the M60 and M56. Delays of up to an hour are not uncommon in the peaks.

But passengers between Stockport and London will be able to use Piccadilly HS station (8 minutes rail journey, plus interchange time) rather than travel by road to/from the Airport HS station.

 

[The Planner]

because congestion won't evaporate just because the cars are battery-powered, for a start? And because heavier BEVs generate more tyre debris?
And we need to use less energy overall... which means much more shanks' pony, bikes, buses and more long-distance public transport than now. Which would also make a big difference to the nation's health too...

Makes no difference, there will be a vast amount of people that won't ever make the change.

 

[AndrewE]

Makes no difference, there will be a vast amount of people that won't ever make the change.

I despair...

 

[matacaster]

because congestion won't evaporate just because the cars are battery-powered, for a start? And because heavier BEVs generate more tyre debris?
And we need to use less energy overall... which means much more shanks' pony, bikes, buses and more long-distance public transport than now. Which would also make a big difference to the nation's health too...

I'll believe the hype when I see all MPs, civil service, councils and business leaders leading by example and abandoning cars first. Many vehicles are low tax perks which many people don't have access to.