More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[slowroad]

Arguably it makes some sense for energy use/pollution, though it ignores things like how many people are travelling per train (which obviously has a big impact on pollution per passenger), but road congestion? Which road do you think is more congested, the 100km road with one car or the 1km road with 100 cars?

Give a fixed length of road of 100km (and the length of the road network is more or less fixed), compare 10 trips of 100km , 1000 trips of 1km, and 1 trip of 1000km. Traffic volume and risk of congestion is same in all cases.

 

[eldomtom2]

Give a fixed length of road of 100km (and the length of the road network is more or less fixed), compare 10 trips of 100km , 1000 trips of 1km, and 1 trip of 1000km. Traffic volume and risk of congestion is same in all cases.

No, that's nonsensical. If only one person is driving then by definition there can be no congestion.

 

[slowroad]

No, that's nonsensical. If only one person is driving then by definition there can be no congestion.

Just multiply all the trips by x, then.

 

[LalRattyMember]

Give a fixed length of road of 100km (and the length of the road network is more or less fixed), compare 10 trips of 100km , 1000 trips of 1km, and 1 trip of 1000km. Traffic volume and risk of congestion is same in all cases.

Bit worried this is turning into "topic-drift" but here's my two-penn'orth from the perspective of a traffic congestion user(!).
That seems to me to be a definition of volume rather than density. It's density that causes the congestion - how many "trips" pass a point on the route in a given time. The A34, my least favourite road ever, has had frequent density issues which have lost me hours of my life I'll never get back!!!

 

[Greybeard33]

The pause of the north end of Phase One has now been officially confirmed in the HS2 Corporate Plan 2023-2026.

HS2 Corporate Plan 2023 to 2026

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd’s Corporate Plan covers the three-year planning period 2023 to 2026.

www.gov.uk

Balfour Beatty VINCI (BBV), our main works contractor for the northern section of Phase One, is continuing to make significant construction progress, with much more to come. However, some planned activities between Curdworth in North Warwickshire and Handsacre in Staffordshire will not be mobilised as originally planned as we manage cost pressures.
On that particular section of the route, there will still be an expected 80% increase in activity this year as we progress through peak construction. BBV will continue as planned with works that are underway and affect major assets like critical utilities, A-roads, motorways and the conventional rail network. This means works around the A38 at Streethay, and works to create a box bridge underneath the West Coast Main Line, near Lichfield Trent Valley, are unaffected by the rephasing.

Curdworth is just north of the triangular junction where the Birmingham spur joins the mainline.

It seems that Phase One has effectively been subdivided into three sub-phases:
1a OOC - Curzon Street
1b Curdworth - Fradley/Handsacre
1c OOC - Euston.

The Plan says:

We remain in the range of target dates to launch HS2 services between Birmingham and Old Oak Common in the early 2030s.

That seems to deprecate the first half of the 2029-2033 target "window".

 

[AndrewE]

That seems to deprecate the first half of the 2029-2033 target "window".

Don't understand "deprecate." You mean makes less likely? or confirms it?

 

[Greybeard33]

Don't understand "deprecate." You mean makes less likely? or confirms it?

Rules out. If they expected to open in 2029 or 2030 they would not have used the phrase "the early 2030s".

 

[tomuk]

Who knows how optimistic we can be about it being achieved in significant degree outside of urban areas (and inter-city travel) but just because nowhere has really cracked it yet doesn't mean that it can't happen. And there are quite a few fast moving technological developments that might influence things in a number of ways we can't quite predict.

The only technological developments I can think of that may influence this are batteries for electric cars which is just going to erode the case for modal shift.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Impressive though HS2 is so far until Euston is opened what real benefits will HS2 actually provide. Old Oak Common will be useful for many passengers but its not going to create a shift from Avanti WCML services unless there is a forced reduction of services. If this was all about releasing capacity on WCML its not going to be seen for another 15 years minimum just as well covid has savaged demand and economy flatlining has reduced demand for intermodal traffic.

You have to question whether taking 5B per year from othr more worth transport projects actually makes sense.

 

[chris2]

Just to come back to a previous discussion on OOC terminus capacity, how much of the system can you build before OOC - acting as a terminus - becomes the main constraint?

Obviously we know it’s capable of handling the initial trains to Curzon St.

But what after then?

Handsacre is the final part of phase 1. But do all the services it enables fit into OOC?

And would it make sense to introduce these before what 2A would enable (plus the associated journey time benefits)?

In short, can OOC realistically accommodate lots of services from the north on top of the Birmingham trains? At what point does it constrain what you can get out of the interim phases?

 

[Greybeard33]

Just to come back to a previous discussion on OOC terminus capacity, how much of the system can you build before OOC - acting as a terminus - becomes the main constraint?

Obviously we know it’s capable of handling the initial trains to Curzon St.

But what after then?

Handsacre is the final part of phase 1. But do all the services it enables fit into OOC?

And would it make sense to introduce these before what 2A would enable (plus the associated journey time benefits)?

In short, can OOC realistically accommodate lots of services from the north on top of the Birmingham trains? At what point does it constrain what you can get out of the interim phases?

The Phase One Full Business Case assumed that OOC to Curzon Street and Handsacre would open before OOC to Euston, and that Phase 2a might also open before Euston. The modelling indicated that a maximum of 6tph could terminate at OOC, increasing to 10tph when Euston opened (with or without Phase 2a).

The respective service specifications were:

From OOC (with or without Phase 2a):
3tph Curzon Street
1tph Manchester
1tph Liverpool
1tph Glasgow

From Euston without Phase 2a:
3tph Curzon Street
3tph Manchester
2tph Liverpool
1tph Lancaster
1tph Glasgow

From Euston with Phase 2a:
3tph Curzon Street
3tph Manchester
1tph Liverpool/Lancaster splitting at Crewe
1tph Liverpool
1tph Glasgow
1tph Macclesfield via Stafford and Stoke.

HS2 Phase One full business case

The full business case for the HS2 Phase One route from Birmingham to London.

www.gov.uk

More recently, there has been a standoff between TfL and the Government over funding for additional Elizabeth Line trains to increase passenger capacity between OOC and central London. Rail Minister Huw Merriman refused to commit to more than 3tph terminating at OOC before Euston opened, when giving evidence to the Transport Select Committee in June 2023.

 

[BRX]

Impressive though HS2 is so far until Euston is opened what real benefits will HS2 actually provide. Old Oak Common will be useful for many passengers but its not going to create a shift from Avanti WCML services unless there is a forced reduction of services. If this was all about releasing capacity on WCML its not going to be seen for another 15 years minimum

Once OOC is open why would the number of WCML services from Euston not be reduced, allowing some capacity to be released?

For a lot of people OOC will be no more difficult to get to than Euston, so I don't see why we'd not expect a partial shift, which would become a greater shift once HS2 reaches Euston.

The main thing that could prevent this would be if it turned out the Elizabeth line capacity was a problem.

 

[The Planner]

Once OOC is open why would the number of WCML services from Euston not be reduced, allowing some capacity to be released?

For a lot of people OOC will be no more difficult to get to than Euston, so I don't see why we'd not expect a partial shift, which would become a greater shift once HS2 reaches Euston.

The main thing that could prevent this would be if it turned out the Elizabeth line capacity was a problem.

I suspect you will lose 1tph from Birmingham initially prior to whatever is decided with Handsacre. Depends how much politics comes in to telling Coventry they are going to get a reduced fast service.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I doubt losing 1tph to Birmingham is enough to reorganise the whole WCML south timetable.
You might find a path for the next fast-line priority - but plans by then will be skewed towards HS2 transition.

The HS2 Corporate Plan 2023-26 (link in #1355) does give a bit more detail on progress and plans, notably the impact of the 2-year pauses to Euston/Handsacre, with the ongoing work itemised.
The station construction contracts are not finalised yet, with final "target prices" yet to be agreed - that will be a tough one with inflation.
Railway contracts (track/signalling etc) will now be placed in 2024, also liable to inflation.
The Hitachi/Alstom rolling stock contract has 3 design phases before production starts, and they have finished Phase 1 (concept design).
They are now into Phase 2 (preliminary design), with interior/exterior mockups as part of that.
Phase 3 is detailed design.
The first train will be available to HS2 for testing in 2028.
The future HS2 operator WCP (First Group/Trenitalia) is mentioned as having been "asked for their views" on the design - which doesn't suggest much influence.
It's all still world class, of course.

 

[snowball]

It's all still world class, of course.

We might have hoped to escape that, with Johnson now being the last prime minister but one.

 

[Greybeard33]

I suspect you will lose 1tph from Birmingham initially prior to whatever is decided with Handsacre. Depends how much politics comes in to telling Coventry they are going to get a reduced fast service.

Maybe 1tph from Crewe/beyond could be diverted from the Trent Valley to call at Birmingham International and Coventry (using the Bescot - Perry Bar route)? Thereby improving interchange options at Birmingham Interchange as well as maintaining the Coventry - Euston frequency.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

We might have hoped to escape that, with Johnson now being the last prime minister but one.

It's also called "the biggest construction project in Europe" (as was Crossrail during its construction).
I'm having to think about that one.
I wouldn't be surprised if metro work in Paris and Istanbul, or HSL construction in Italy, or tunnelling in Austria, were bigger.
Some countries manage multiple HSL constructions at the same time (but maybe not so much at the moment).

 

[HSTEd]

What the timetable planners are comfortable commiting OOC to and what it turns out to be able to handle in practice are likely to be too two significantly different things.

 

[The Planner]

Whats the timetable planners are comfortable commiting OOC to and what it turns out to be able to handle in practice are likely to be too significantly different things.

This. People are wasting their time quoting what Wiki or some other document says as it stands.

 

[Nottingham59]

Just to come back to a previous discussion on OOC terminus capacity, how much of the system can you build before OOC - acting as a terminus - becomes the main constraint?

Obviously we know it’s capable of handling the initial trains to Curzon St.

But what after then?

Handsacre is the final part of phase 1. But do all the services it enables fit into OOC?

And would it make sense to introduce these before what 2A would enable (plus the associated journey time benefits)?

In short, can OOC realistically accommodate lots of services from the north on top of the Birmingham trains? At what point does it constrain what you can get out of the interim phases?

Whats the timetable planners are comfortable commiting OOC to and what it turns out to be able to handle in practice are likely to be too significantly different things.

I understand the limitation of Old Oak is its track layout at the western throat. It was designed as a through station and any reversals would have lots of conflicts. Only the middle two platforms (out of 6) can normally be used for reversals. Any other platforms require reversing trains to use the scissors crossover well to the west of the station, with wrong-line running to get to the other platforms.

Also, I suspect the passenger flow modelling has been designed for one-way flows - trains to Euston are disembark only, and vice versa. So offloading a full 400m train, reversing the escalators and then loading it will take lots of time.


(from https://www.hs2.org.uk/in-your-area/in-your-area-map/#16/51.5247/-0.2502/)

If track to the east could be used for reversing too, with minor modifications, then it would all be considerably easier. Trains could arrive at the two northern platforms (P1 and P2), disgorging their passengers in just 3-5 minutes. (The full 18tph service spec requires offloading half of a full 400m train in just 3 minutes). Then proceed towards Euston empty and reverse into the southern platforms (P5 and P6) to embark a full trainload in another 3-5 mins. This would require minor slews of the track at the eastern end of P2 and P5. I reckon a reversing pattern of P1>P5; P2>P6; P3 and P4 reverse in situ; could deliver a consistent 12tph.

But the space at the eastern end of OOC is needed for spoil removal and tunnelling works access, so the tunnels would have to be built all the way to Euston before using the eastern throat to reverse.

 

[chris2]

From OOC (with or without Phase 2a):
3tph Curzon Street
1tph Manchester
1tph Liverpool
1tph Glasgow

Thanks for this. Interesting to see that according to this plan, adding phase 2a after handsacre wouldn’t change the service spec, so effectively phase 2a makes the handsacre link redundant until you get Euston built. I wonder if this is leading to the thinking that if they can get phase 2a built in good time, they could fold handsacre into phase 2b work, to open alongside Euston, when you could actually make use of it.

If track to the east could be used for reversing too, with minor modifications, then it would all be considerably easier.

Sounds like a good solution to me.

 

[Greybeard33]

I understand the limitation of Old Oak is its track layout at the western throat. It was designed as a through station and any reversals would have lots of conflicts. Only the middle two platforms (out of 6) can normally be used for reversals. Any other platforms require reversing trains to use the scissors crossover well to the west of the station, with wrong-line running to get to the other platforms.

Also, I suspect the passenger flow modelling has been designed for one-way flows - trains to Euston are disembark only, and vice versa. So offloading a full 400m train, reversing the escalators and then loading it will take lots of time.

View attachment 139445
(from https://www.hs2.org.uk/in-your-area/in-your-area-map/#16/51.5247/-0.2502/)

If track to the east could be used for reversing too, with minor modifications, then it would all be considerably easier. Trains could arrive at the two northern platforms (P1 and P2), disgorging their passengers in just 3-5 minutes. (The full 18tph service spec requires offloading half of a full 400m train in just 3 minutes). Then proceed towards Euston empty and reverse into the southern platforms (P5 and P6) to embark a full trainload in another 3-5 mins. This would require minor slews of the track at the eastern end of P2 and P5. I reckon a reversing pattern of P1>P5; P2>P6; P3 and P4 reverse in situ; could deliver a consistent 12tph.

But the space at the eastern end of OOC is needed for spoil removal and tunnelling works access, so the tunnels would have to be built all the way to Euston before using the eastern throat to reverse.

It might well be that the Full Business Case, which was published in 2020, assumed that the Euston tunnels would be available for reversals during the initial period of 6tph operation from OOC. Now that those tunnels have been paused it might not be feasible to reliably turn around 6tph.

 

[matacaster]

Could a compromise option run some trains into Euston, but others terminate at OOC? EG Birmingham trains go to Euston as these have always been commuter trains which benefit London busineses in my view. Others go to OOC. I can't see why all trains need to go to Euston.

Another suggestion is to split long Scottish trains into 2 parts so they can fit into other London stations. This would need additional long sidings where the trains would be split somewhere convenient.

 

[The Planner]

Could a compromise option run some trains into Euston, but others terminate at OOC? EG Birmingham trains go to Euston as these have always been commuter trains which benefit London busineses in my view. Others go to OOC. I can't see why all trains need to go to Euston.

Another suggestion is to split long Scottish trains into 2 parts so they can fit into other London stations. This would need additional long sidings where the trains would be split somewhere convenient.

Not sure what you are suggesting here. To start with all you can run is Curzon St to OOC, there are no connections to any other lines.

 

[350401]

Not sure what you are suggesting here. To start with all you can run is Curzon St to OOC, there are no connections to any other lines.

The “preview” service is 3tph captive to Curzon street only. From reading the annual report, it’s clear the Handsacre link is still being built, albeit at a slower pace. Once that’s open, given the option to split trains at Interchange, it’ll be possible to run 3tph to both Birmingham and Manchester - with a 400m train splitting at interchange and a portion going to each. The published timetables are indicative, and it’ll be up to train timetable planners later this decade to work out what can be done. However, with a 6 platform station, even given the limits mentioned up thread, surely a 6tph service can be run? Which given the ability to split trains, does give a range of options.

 

[The Planner]

The “preview” service is 3tph captive to Curzon street only. From reading the annual report, it’s clear the Handsacre link is still being built, albeit at a slower pace. Once that’s open, given the option to split trains at Interchange, it’ll be possible to run 3tph to both Birmingham and Manchester - with a 400m train splitting at interchange and a portion going to each. The published timetables are indicative, and it’ll be up to train timetable planners later this decade to work out what can be done. However, with a 6 platform station, even given the limits mentioned up thread, surely a 6tph service can be run? Which given the ability to split trains, does give a range of options.

Too right they are indicative. 6tph from 6 platforms would be easy. As soon as anything is decided to run through Handsacre is when you switch off classic services. Handsacre is paused, slower pace is spin.

 

[snowball]

From reading the annual report, it’s clear the Handsacre link is still being built, albeit at a slower pace.

But it it could still be cancelled and seems to be subject to the two-year pause that has been imposed on phase 2a. The bridge that has just gone in under the WCML is needed equally for either phase 2a or the Handsacre link. Likewise the bridge under the Lichfield-Burton line which (according to the press release) is to be placed using the same transporter, and the bridge under the A38.

As far as I can see the only big items of expenditure that would prove a firm commitment to the Handsacre link are

* the bridge at Fradley that would carry the London-bound line from Handsacre over the HS2 mainline

* the bridge that would carry the northbound Handsacre track over the WCML

and, a good deal smaller,

* the bridge to take the Handsacre link over or under the A515.

[Edit: there are also a couple of viaducts over small rivers/streams.]

I bet all these are subject to the 2-year pause and highly cancellable.

 

[350401]

Too right they are indicative. 6tph from 6 platforms would be easy. As soon as anything is decided to run through Handsacre is when you switch off classic services. Handsacre is paused, slower pace is spin.

I’m not sure that’s quite true here - the report indicates that a lot of the work is still being done. The WCML has diversions for Manchester services this week to allow for a new bridge to be installed for HS2. In projects, when it comes to cost, time, and quality, you can usually only pick two. So it’s being slowed down to notionally reduce costs - the theory being that you have less people doing the same scope of work, which reduces cost. I still think that Handsacre will open, probably around 2032 or 2033; with the captive service being around 2030.

 

[The Planner]

I’m not sure that’s quite true here - the report indicates that a lot of the work is still being done. The WCML has diversions for Manchester services this week to allow for a new bridge to be installed for HS2. In projects, when it comes to cost, time, and quality, you can usually only pick two. So it’s being slowed down to notionally reduce costs - the theory being that you have less people doing the same scope of work, which reduces cost. I still think that Handsacre will open, probably around 2032 or 2033; with the captive service being around 2030.

The work done this week isn't for Handsacre, its for the main trace and was too late to pull.

 

[Xavi]

So it’s being slowed down to notionally reduce costs - the theory being that you have less people doing the same scope of work, which reduces cost.

No one has claimed there is reduced costs, even HMT acknowledges it will cost more by delaying. It’s all about HMT cash flow and increasing chances of a pre-election tax cut.