Even yesterday, the BBC news article still only contained the journey time saving graph between London and a few cities. Which is really not helpful when trying to myth-bust what HS2 is all about.
-
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!
Government announces independent review into HS2 programme
- Thread starter CeeJ
- Start date
- Status
Even yesterday, the BBC news article still only contained the journey time saving graph between London and a few cities. Which is really not helpful when trying to myth-bust what HS2 is all about.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
For all those who wish to stop HS2 what's your response to the data on rail growth?
Before you suggest that rail growth had been slowing, chances are you're using % growth:
+5% of 100 = 5
+4% of 125 = 5
+3.33% of 150 = 5
+2.86% of 175 = 5
+2.5% of 200 = 5
Last year Virgin saw 3.1% growth on a figure of 170 from a baseline in 2009 of 100.
Without an answer I don't see how you're likely to slow the project down and as long as growth continues it is likely that it will come back.
Before you suggest that rail growth had been slowing, chances are you're using % growth:
+5% of 100 = 5
+4% of 125 = 5
+3.33% of 150 = 5
+2.86% of 175 = 5
+2.5% of 200 = 5
Last year Virgin saw 3.1% growth on a figure of 170 from a baseline in 2009 of 100.
Without an answer I don't see how you're likely to slow the project down and as long as growth continues it is likely that it will come back.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
No you won't have to change.
The trains being built for HS2 services will run through to virtually all the current destinations (Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow etc).
They will be compatible with both HS2 and WCML infrastructure.
People seem to be confusing HS2 with a maglev-esque system. It's just an ordinary railway line that happens to be really fast! No different to getting a high speed train from St. Pancras and getting off it at Faversham.
Indeed, the same is true for services to Newcastle which would continue on the existing lines beyond the end of the HS2 track (unlike Hype-loop where you would have to change onto an existing service).
Having said that some may chose to change at Crewe so as to get where they're going sooner than waiting for the next direct service, but that's something different altogether.
For those who wanted a poll, one had been created:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/hs2-railuk-opinion-poll.189539/
Not by me, but rather @PR1Berske so you can thank them.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/hs2-railuk-opinion-poll.189539/
Not by me, but rather @PR1Berske so you can thank them.
SteveOfTheStow
Member
- Joined
- 16 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 169
Ladies and gentlemen, this is what our post-truth society looks like. "I don't have any figures" and "It's as simple as" and "We don't need experts", then asserting views without evidence to make those assertions stand up to scrutiny. Not singling you out, shakey1961, there's plenty of it going round.
But thank you for being open to education. Not correction. Education. Being presented with other information that has basis, comparing it to the information you hold and deciding whether to change your opinion based on likely correctness and depth of each. We need more of this.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The HS2 underground station at Old Oak is not designed as a terminus and won't be capable of holding all the trains needing to be turned round there.
It probably won't save any money, as it will need a much bigger underground footprint.
The enlarged terminal area at Euston has already been purchased and cleared for construction.
Old Oak might work for east-west destinations but does nothing for anybody else.
It will also be a deeply unattractive place to start a long journey, a bit like the Heathrow stations.
Metrailway
Member
I think the 3.1% figure you quote is the growth in the number of tickets sold. It depends whether you believe that equates to passenger loadings. My own experience as a regular VTWC user indicates that there is a lot of 'duplicate' tickets sold i.e. people buy two or three advances or miss their train and buy a new ticket instead.
There is no doubt that passenger loadings have increased but there is plenty of space available on peak trains into London in my experience. Others may have different views!
Additionally, that growth figure would include local journeys such as Coventry to Birmingham or Stoke on Trent to Manchester where local tickets sold have increased substantially due to the introduction of barriers across major WMCL stations.
When HS2 was originally forecast to cost £56 Billion and is now predicted to be over £100 Billion, then YES a review should happen.
Do some think it is acceptable that costs will likely double and that it should just be 'business as usual'?
That extra £40 Billion+ (of OUR money) would be spent on one single, premium priced rail line. The same amount of money would be much better spent elsewhere on the rail network.
Some people on here have whinged and whined (which I also find rather odd attitude on a pro-rail forum) at my previous suggestion of £1 billion a year (over 10 years) for rail re-openings, deeming this suggestion as 'unaffordable' (robbing other public services to pay for this) and a 'waste of money'. Yet these very same people see no issue with £40 billion+ extra being spent on HS2. Double standards I call that.
Try telling the local community wanting their local station re-opened but have so far failed (due to 'no' money), or those passengers who are traveling around on dilapidated rolling stock that they will have to wait even longer as the 'priority' is £40 Billion+ on HS2.
BTW - HS2 at £56 Billion I would have accepted, however at £100 Billion+, no way.
Do some think it is acceptable that costs will likely double and that it should just be 'business as usual'?
That extra £40 Billion+ (of OUR money) would be spent on one single, premium priced rail line. The same amount of money would be much better spent elsewhere on the rail network.
Some people on here have whinged and whined (which I also find rather odd attitude on a pro-rail forum) at my previous suggestion of £1 billion a year (over 10 years) for rail re-openings, deeming this suggestion as 'unaffordable' (robbing other public services to pay for this) and a 'waste of money'. Yet these very same people see no issue with £40 billion+ extra being spent on HS2. Double standards I call that.
Try telling the local community wanting their local station re-opened but have so far failed (due to 'no' money), or those passengers who are traveling around on dilapidated rolling stock that they will have to wait even longer as the 'priority' is £40 Billion+ on HS2.
BTW - HS2 at £56 Billion I would have accepted, however at £100 Billion+, no way.
Last edited:
krus_aragon
Established Member
If that were the case, the question would then be: is this a new phenomenon (in which case some of the new growth would be due to this) or was this happening a few years back too (in which case it'd be included in the baseline measurement)?
Rail freight’s a very competitive market, (against road, coastal shipping etc) which has from personal observations declined significantly on the WCML in recent decades. Is there actually firm evidence demonstrating it’s now going to grow in a major way over the next few decades ?.
As for lots of new regional services, Is there sufficient demand for govt to actually fund them?, thinking back to Regional Eurostar, Nightstar, Glasgow Airport rail link, Croxley link, etc suggest sometimes not
Last edited:
I do worry about what the alternatives to HS2 will need to be to cater for future growth say over the next 70 years.
Will the UK need or desire a second high speed line say within the next 100 years? If so,why not build it now? If not, how will growth be catered for on the West Coast Mainline? And how will carbon targets be met if people resort to airlines? We also need to address the fact that people who fly domestically from North to South and vice versa need to be encouraged to ditch aircraft if it isn't carbon neutral, otherwise how is zero net emissions ever likely to work? Those people would then need to either take a train or drive an electric car. So we need to look at that potential future demand on infrastructure.
What would the cost, and disruption to day to day service be to get headways on the WCML down to say a train every two minutes? Complete ETCS rollout and many more additional tilting trains and track maintained to tilting standards indefinitely?
And, as people become more mobile and intermediate towns such as Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth,Lichfield, and Milton Keynes continue to grow, how will they ever received improved services if the lines are at capacity and no additional services can afford to stop due to headways and journey times?
Is the VHF timetable all that long sighted, as in good enough to cater for serious long term demand?
Will the UK need or desire a second high speed line say within the next 100 years? If so,why not build it now? If not, how will growth be catered for on the West Coast Mainline? And how will carbon targets be met if people resort to airlines? We also need to address the fact that people who fly domestically from North to South and vice versa need to be encouraged to ditch aircraft if it isn't carbon neutral, otherwise how is zero net emissions ever likely to work? Those people would then need to either take a train or drive an electric car. So we need to look at that potential future demand on infrastructure.
What would the cost, and disruption to day to day service be to get headways on the WCML down to say a train every two minutes? Complete ETCS rollout and many more additional tilting trains and track maintained to tilting standards indefinitely?
And, as people become more mobile and intermediate towns such as Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth,Lichfield, and Milton Keynes continue to grow, how will they ever received improved services if the lines are at capacity and no additional services can afford to stop due to headways and journey times?
Is the VHF timetable all that long sighted, as in good enough to cater for serious long term demand?
OK growth rates for Virgin Trains:
2019 - 3.1%
2018 - 1.6%
2017 - 5.6%
2016 - 3.5%
2015 - 8.1%
2014 - 4.9%
2013 - 0.7%
Combined growth over that time period 30.8%.
Yes there's split tickets and better enforcement which will impact on that, but even a 25% increase in 7 years is quite significant.
It's one of the reasons I prefer the London to regions flows as it removes split tickets from the numbers. However that shows 70% growth between the likes of the London and the North West and the West Midlands between 2009 and 2018. Given the limited number of other options to make that journey to the North West it would imply that is where the core of the Virginia growth is.
Travel to the West Midlands could be impacted by the likes of the LNW services and Chiltern services. However the building of HS2 would provide them with the capacity (either thorough removing Birmingham travelers or for LNW by allowing more services to be run) to provide more capacity to/from/between other West Midlands stations.
Shrop
On Moderation
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 649
Ah yes, Maglev. That's the system that was slated by many on the grounds that "people want a through service". Strangely, a great many people are opposed to the HS1-HS2 link because "it's easier to change trains". This does make me wonder what value that passengers, or service providers, or both, really do place on changing trains compared to through services. Because it seems there are many people on both sides the argument, largely with only opinions rather than evidence-based analysis about the value of not having to change trains.
quantinghome
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 2,264
An interesting comment piece from New Civil Engineer - it's behind a paywall so I've reposted. Given Doug Oakervee's views on government cost-benefit analysis, the review may actually conclude the benefits are greater than has previously been assumed.
Alex McKenna
Member
- Joined
- 5 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 29
I'm amazed that anyone would suggest "straightening" the WCML. Like it ran through open prairie-land, not closely hemmed-in by towns and cities. The curves were there for practical reasons. So, unless you could literally shift towns and hills to one side bodily, to make room, a new line is required to bypass the existing route. Nobody wants another ten years of WCML closures. Also, the old HS1-HS2-Link chestnut is obviously a red herring - a waste of time, given the likely usage. Using Crossrail to distribute HS2 passengers from Old Oak Common to their South East destinations is adequate, I would have thought; and if anyone REALLY wants to go to Euston they have the WCML, as that won't be closed. (Or being rebuilt yet again..) Improving the turn-back facility at OOC would be a mere trifle, compared to the tunneled route to Euston, I would have thought.
But it wouldn`t allow any more trains to run ! Going faster on the WCML probably means less trains running unless ALL trains on the fasts can achieve 140 mph
MidlandMainlie
Member
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2011
- Messages
- 779
This is something I have wondered too? Assuming that phase 1 & 2a go ahead to Crewe and the rest of the approaches into Manchester are shunted into Northern Powerhouse rail and the eastern arm postponed. Then I can see the case for a second high speed line being built in the 2040's to alviate the East side of the country. This would primarily relieve the ECML but could also with spurs onto existing lines to Cambridge and Nottingham.
jfowkes
Member
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 884
Yes, it is. This was part of the 2013 increase of the projected spend. £7.5B is currently budgeted for rolling stock.
I don't see why the HS1 HS2 link is a red herring. Given the growing environmental awareness of short haul flights, I can see a massive increase in people wanting a low carbon option for travel to the continent, from all parts of the UK.
Flights are going to have to be either much more heavily taxed or rationed in order to hit net zero carbon, so long distance train travel becomes a much easier choice than at present. But only of the infrastructure is there!
Flights are going to have to be either much more heavily taxed or rationed in order to hit net zero carbon, so long distance train travel becomes a much easier choice than at present. But only of the infrastructure is there!
Here in Northumberland, thanks to the cuts that David Cameron immediately instigated, just about all our local public transport was scrapped, ostensibly because of a lack of money.
Every single PTE and their varients have had their socially necessary transport budget virtually eliminated by the Conservative government
Tony Blairs government's invested heavily in local public transport. The torys are on record as stating that there's no money anymore.
And yet, there's almost unlimited taxpayers funding available for Hs2 and projects such as crossrail
Doesn't 2 plus 2 add up anymore
Is it just me who can't see the absurdity it current logic towards public transport funding?
Instead of route duplication policies we need to be investing in local public transport. Only today, MPs have unequivocally stated that we need to cut car usage if we are to meet our carbon emissions targets. We are killing this planet in the same way as we have effectively killed public transport in the UK.
Does anyone remember the term, integrated transport system?
And then thatcher came along with bus deregulation which killed (legally) any notion of an integrated transport system. It's actually illegal for rival operators to communicate with each other
Re Hs2 planning and costs. A group of architects received over 20m of public money for their services before they declared a conflict of interest. How much did they have to pay back?
That money would have funded socially necessary transport services all over the UK. And where is it? In someone's pocket who will never ever need to use public transport in their lives
If we can't afford to fund a regular bus service from keilder to Hexham how can we afford Hs2?
Hopefully Hs2 will be scrapped. Sadly the money that's been allocated for it will never find its way down to local grass roots to provide much needed local transport for those who are effectively cut off from the wider world
Every single PTE and their varients have had their socially necessary transport budget virtually eliminated by the Conservative government
Tony Blairs government's invested heavily in local public transport. The torys are on record as stating that there's no money anymore.
And yet, there's almost unlimited taxpayers funding available for Hs2 and projects such as crossrail
Doesn't 2 plus 2 add up anymore
Is it just me who can't see the absurdity it current logic towards public transport funding?
Instead of route duplication policies we need to be investing in local public transport. Only today, MPs have unequivocally stated that we need to cut car usage if we are to meet our carbon emissions targets. We are killing this planet in the same way as we have effectively killed public transport in the UK.
Does anyone remember the term, integrated transport system?
And then thatcher came along with bus deregulation which killed (legally) any notion of an integrated transport system. It's actually illegal for rival operators to communicate with each other
Re Hs2 planning and costs. A group of architects received over 20m of public money for their services before they declared a conflict of interest. How much did they have to pay back?
That money would have funded socially necessary transport services all over the UK. And where is it? In someone's pocket who will never ever need to use public transport in their lives
If we can't afford to fund a regular bus service from keilder to Hexham how can we afford Hs2?
Hopefully Hs2 will be scrapped. Sadly the money that's been allocated for it will never find its way down to local grass roots to provide much needed local transport for those who are effectively cut off from the wider world
TheManOnThe172
Member
- Joined
- 1 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 344
Given the length of the HS trains relative to local trains, there will need to be a generous connection time to allow passengers from the wrong end of a 400m HS train to reach the nearest coach of a local train. If you wanted to offer cross-platform connections in two directions (eg, for Toton: Derby and Nottingham) you could stick two four-coach 100m locals symmetrically opposite a 400m HS train (say 350m net of power cars) - but I reckon that makes a maximum walk of about 260m if you allowed passengers to choose their HS coach regardless of connecting destination. And 260m takes more than three minutes to walk at a typical 1.4 m/s - much more if you are allowing for the less fit and less able.
jfowkes
Member
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 884
You are correct in that the real enemy is deregulation and austerity politics. The way to increase local transport budgets is not to pick high-profile, high-cost transport projects and cancel them - this is just austerity politics in another form. The way to increase local transport budgets is to increase local transport budgets. HS2 doesn't have to be part of that discussion. We are a wealthy country and can afford both things. Northumberland (and the rest of the country) should have decent local transport AND decent long distance transport.
Last edited:
The infrastructure will be a mega-station Euston-StPancras-KingsCross which will act as a single hub station with three terminals linking domestic services with the HS1 line to the Continent. There really isn't any justifiable demand for direct Manchester to Paris services which wouldn't be quicker flying. I'm a big supporter of HS2 but dropping the HS1 link is one cut I can live with.
For those who say that Hs2 will give faster journey times.
Well the Sheffield to Birmingham Hs2 journey will be 8 minutes faster than the current journey times
Standard time for late running xc trains from Sheffield to Birmingham is 56 minutes. And paths are easily found for these journeys. Current journey times are grossly inflated.
For example. Someone calculated that A Plymouth to Glasgow journey via Sheffield and Leeds had 167 minutes standing time.
So we must be very careful about exaggerating time saving benefits of Hs2. I regularly travel from Birmingham to newcasle and my trains stand for at least 30 minutes on every journey. This does notlw for early arrival due to an excess of recovery time
Well the Sheffield to Birmingham Hs2 journey will be 8 minutes faster than the current journey times
Standard time for late running xc trains from Sheffield to Birmingham is 56 minutes. And paths are easily found for these journeys. Current journey times are grossly inflated.
For example. Someone calculated that A Plymouth to Glasgow journey via Sheffield and Leeds had 167 minutes standing time.
So we must be very careful about exaggerating time saving benefits of Hs2. I regularly travel from Birmingham to newcasle and my trains stand for at least 30 minutes on every journey. This does notlw for early arrival due to an excess of recovery time
While ever greater speed has its costs in wear and tear, there are saving to be made on fleet size and crew establishment from reducing the round trip cycle time. Most world high speed operations running over largely dedicated infrastructure have set a ceiling of 320 or 350kph as a sweet spot for maximum service speed, not the 400kph design speed for the new HS2 infrastructure. That the trains may not be going the full alignment speed is no bad thing as that preserves some margin for future further speed upgrades when the technology costs can be managed, and in the meantime actually reduces wear on the curves that are "overspecced". Reducing the design speed further of the new alignments on the open air segments will save very little I suspect. The same argument applied in the 1840s might have seen Brunel being forced by cost conscious shareholders to incorporate cheap tight 60mph design speed curves into his Great Western Railway alignment.
sprinterguy
Established Member
I'm not sure how relevant the journey times of late running trains are - Most passengers are looking to avoid late running trains, I believe.
As far as the vast majority of passengers are concerned the current journey time is 1 hour 15 minutes, because that's what the trains are (mostly) scheduled to achieve. In my experience, late running Crosscountry trains only become later, due to the constraints of operating on the congested UK network. High Speed 2 services would bypass that issue.Though the recent promotional "fast" run between Birmingham and York did demonstrate that there are some improvements that could be made to the schedules of existing services in light of the Derby remodelling works. If it's possible to reduce journey times on the "classic" network to something more akin to the projected HS2 journey times then that lessens the case for the eastern arm, as long as (in my view) HS2 services can still reach Leeds via Manchester, though still at some detriment to the London - East Midlands/South Yorkshire market.
Last edited:
4141
Member
- Joined
- 21 Dec 2015
- Messages
- 170
I must be getting old - I thought for a moment I was reading a thread on the Somerset and Dorset!
- Status