And limiting the tunnel size will have helped in 'threading the needle' between the many subterranean obstacles beneath central London. I remember in one of the documentaries covering the scheme, the TBM crew stated they were passing within a few centimeters of another working tube tunnel.
-
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!
Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)
- Thread starter ABB125
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Esker-pades
Established Member
Yep. 'Eye of the needle' at Tottenham Court Road - 75cm above the Northern Line, 35cm below an escalator.
(I may have remembered some of those details wrong - please correct me.)
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/hs2-alternative-names.195410/page-2
London & Birmingham High Speed.
Nobody else is benefiting.
London & Birmingham High Speed.
Nobody else is benefiting.
Last edited by a moderator:
Esker-pades
Established Member
Moved from another thread.
Instead of repeating what I've already said on this thread, I'll quote myself:
And other things. Comments like these give the sceptics like @PR1Berske ammunition to scrap it altogether.
Commuter from Bletchley supports the phase that will give them the most benefit, but does not support anything additional!
It is already well established that HS2 funds are reserved for HS2, and that if it isn't spent on that, it isn't going to be spent on other railway projects.
Here are some "emotional" arguments for HS2 Phase 2:
The Manchester to Stockport problem:
Presently, long distance services from London run at 20 minute frequencies, going against the generally half hourly services that are more appropriate for demand across south Manchester commuter destinations. It leaves an inefficient timetable and a poor service at some locations. Congleton cannot get a reasonable service because the paths are required by the InterCity services. I'm sure @agbrs_Jack can give more of an insight into Congleton's chronic lack of services. One cannot solve this without removing other services first. We've already had to turn back the second Mid-Cheshire Line train per hour at Altrincham because of a lack of paths from Stockport to Piccadilly.
Manchester Piccadilly has a platform problem. The southern throat is seriously congested, and the stacking of 2 or 3 trains in a single platform at multiple points throughout the day is a symptom of the lack of available platforms. Remove the constant blocking of 6 and 7 and there's a bit of breathing room.
The bottleneck that is Crewe. Removing the services that pass through non-stop is a good thing.
The Leeds/York arm and the ECML:
More fast paths are required, especially on the Southern section of the ECML. The fast Edinburgh services, fast Leeds services etc. can be replaced to give better services to currently underserved destinations, or to new destinations......
I'm so sorry. My emotions appear to have got the better of me in this comment.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Old post, but your re-quoting it made me pick it up...
I read that, and wondered about the 2tph Cross-Country that run 1tph Manchester - Bournemouth and 1tph Manchester - the West Country - as it would seem to make sense for those trains to use the HS2 line north of Birmingham too. That would then free up a total of 5 paths between Manchester and Stockport. However, looking at the HS2 map, it doesn't look like there's any link planned that would allow trains to run from the Manchester HS2 tracks into Birmingham New Street, so they could continue towards Bristol/Oxford. That seems like a bit of an oversight?
I read that, and wondered about the 2tph Cross-Country that run 1tph Manchester - Bournemouth and 1tph Manchester - the West Country - as it would seem to make sense for those trains to use the HS2 line north of Birmingham too. That would then free up a total of 5 paths between Manchester and Stockport. However, looking at the HS2 map, it doesn't look like there's any link planned that would allow trains to run from the Manchester HS2 tracks into Birmingham New Street, so they could continue towards Bristol/Oxford. That seems like a bit of an oversight?
Esker-pades
Established Member
I don't know if it's an oversight or if it was considered and rejected. But, I agree that it isn't using HS2 to its full potential. Really, XC services from Bournemouth and Devon/Cornwall should be on the HS2 network between Birmingham and Manchester/Leeds. If there is the scope to havea link so that existing XC services could gain access to Curzon Street (rather than New Street), it would be very good. Probably expensive, but (I would argue) worth it.
krus_aragon
Established Member
Have you considered the speed differential between XC rolling stock and HS2 rolling stock, and the impact on capacity for that part of the line?
(I haven't, I just thought of it and figured I'd throw it "out there".)
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,439
Aren’t XC still needed to provide all the intermediate calls at stations not on HS2?
Esker-pades
Established Member
Existing XC rolling stock could not use HS2. It would have to be new rolling stock (IE: the 'classic compatible HS2 stock).
It depends on one's views of what XC is. Really, the answer is both. Speeding up the long-distance non-London services is a important (and something that can be helped if XC services do use HS2 once built), but they will need to be replaced with other services that do the shorter distance commuter stuff (Burton-on-Trent to Birmingham and the like).
Captain Bigwig
Member
- Joined
- 16 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 54
Am I right in thinking the plan is for all the HS2 trains to be electric? If that's the case you'd either have to wire up the XC network (not a bad idea in any case tbh) or else invest in a set of high speed bi-modes specially for those routes.
Yes. But they'd have their current Birmingham-Manchester passengers removed from them, who'd be on HS2 instead. The paths would still be there, but with a greater proportion of more 'local' users on the insteadm
The real benefit of HS2 Birmingham-Manchester services (and equally Birmingham-Leeds/Newcastle) is the huge step-change in journey times (that are currently relatively poor on these flows particularly) that will attract genuinely new demand to rail from road onto a 'new' HS2 service.
PartyOperator
Member
- Joined
- 26 May 2019
- Messages
- 166
The Birmingham-Manchester passengers starting in Birmingham will be removed from XC by getting onto HS2 trains rather than XC trains in Birmingham.
Likewise anyone from Reading or further south would join HS2 at Old Oak Common. Even with a change at Reading, Bournemouth-Manchester via HS2 would be quicker and probably more comfortable and reliable. Trains from the South Coast direct to Old Oak Common would make things even easier.
For XC passengers heading to Manchester from more distant stations between Reading and Birmingham (e.g. Leamington), changing to HS2 using the people mover from Birmingham International to Interchange would save time by avoiding a trip into/through central Birmingham altogether and would presumably be easier than lugging bags between New Street and Curzon Street.
This XC service between Bournemouth and Manchester then becomes almost exclusively a series of semi-fast local services stuck together rather than a real long-distance service. Once HS2 is in place, would it make more sense to split it into something like Bournemouth-Paddington and Paddington-Manchester services (both via Old Reading and Oak Common)? No need to use the same trains (or train operator) for both as nobody will be going all the way.
Likewise anyone from Reading or further south would join HS2 at Old Oak Common. Even with a change at Reading, Bournemouth-Manchester via HS2 would be quicker and probably more comfortable and reliable. Trains from the South Coast direct to Old Oak Common would make things even easier.
For XC passengers heading to Manchester from more distant stations between Reading and Birmingham (e.g. Leamington), changing to HS2 using the people mover from Birmingham International to Interchange would save time by avoiding a trip into/through central Birmingham altogether and would presumably be easier than lugging bags between New Street and Curzon Street.
This XC service between Bournemouth and Manchester then becomes almost exclusively a series of semi-fast local services stuck together rather than a real long-distance service. Once HS2 is in place, would it make more sense to split it into something like Bournemouth-Paddington and Paddington-Manchester services (both via Old Reading and Oak Common)? No need to use the same trains (or train operator) for both as nobody will be going all the way.
In reality, XC is already a series of semi fast local services stitched together.
No chance of extra trains to Paddington. The place is full.
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
Have you looked at the likely journey time after HS2 is built for getting from Southampton to Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds by changing trains at Old Oak Common?
Once you've done so (feel free to use Euston and Paddington for the journey times) come back and let us know what you find.
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
Can you tell me what the difference will be between Glasgow/Edinburgh/Aberdeen/Inverness/Newcastle/Liverpool?
Esker-pades
Established Member
That isn't what you said. You said that only London and Birmingham would benefit from HS2. That is utter rubbish. If you'd like to explain why it isn't utter rubbish, go ahead.Yeah the benefits to Scotland are quiet clear
"London and Birmingham are the only beneficiaries of HS2" and whatever your point about Scotland is are 2 totally different things. Unless you think the UK is only made up of London, Birmingham, and Scotland.
Only if you can tell us how Great Western electrification benefits Scarborough.
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
"London & Birmingham High Speed.
Nobody else is benefiting."
Is what I said actually.
Scotland will see no benefit in the scheme therefore I see no point in debating it with you. Cheers!
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
SNAP!
Polarbear
Established Member
Regarding the Birmingham- Manchester flow on HS2, I would suggest that once the main trunk flow is moved over, there may well be some re-mapping of the XC network. Whilst there's likely good demand for through services such as Manchester - Bristol & Manchester - Reading, it probably won't be necessary to operate hourly services on each of those flows?
Given what you say simply is not true, not worth debating with you either.
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
Your post was stating that only London and Birmingham would benefit, I'm in no doubt that not everywhere to everywhere will benefit (just like any rail project) directly from HS2. However by the time of the full opening of HS2 it's highly likely that:
- many more miles of electrification will have happened in Scotland
- there's likely to be firm and costed (if not work started) scheme for Northern Powerhouse Rail benefiting East West rail travel
- fairly few 2 coach trains anywhere on the network (whilst there's likely to still be two coach units they will probably rarely travel on their own)
- passenger numbers on HS2 exceeding those predicted (given that in 2009 it was expected that at the opening of Phase 1 for every 100 passengers in 2009 there'd be 150 and we've already reached that level and between some regions we've reached 170 for every 100 in 2009)
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,439
Rerouteing XC has already been mentioned in the depths of the vast amount of online documentation about HS2, one example I recall being XC Reading - Newcastle trains running to Hull instead. Probably covered in earlier discussions, but I wouldn’t know where to find it now...
I can tell you how the Reading remodeling benefits South Wales and Cornwall, but there's always going to be places which are some distance apart which aren't going to benefit from schemes elsewhere.
Other than to say that if the government of the day is investing in railway projects then chances are that there'll be a scheme which will benefit most places. As such investment for area A is likely to see area B get something at some point. It's when the government of the day isn't investing in railway schemes that you need to worry.
As such the electrification of the GWML will likely mean that there's likely to be a project which will benefit Scarborough.
Given that those hourly services existed when passenger numbers were much lower, for instance since circa 2000 passenger numbers have increased by about 70% between the South East and the North West.
As such you could see a significant fall in passenger numbers and it could still justify an hourly service, it would just be made up of shorter distance passengers.
<< I was parodying GrimShady's Straw Man Argument >>
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,439
Still going to be loads doing eg Bournemouth or Southampton and wider south coast to Oxford, or Oxford to Brum as well, within that flow you mention...
GrimShady
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Dec 2016
- Messages
- 1,740
How about Midlands High Speed?
Again still the same benefits.
When High Speed Rail benefits all the the city's in the UK then it's money well spent. Untill that point...meh.
Like most projects in this country, not grand enough, too late and too slow.
Again still the same benefits.
When High Speed Rail benefits all the the city's in the UK then it's money well spent. Untill that point...meh.
Like most projects in this country, not grand enough, too late and too slow.
- Status