Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

Railwaysceptic · 18 Feb 2020

Speed43125 said:
Is it just I'm really tired right now, or is it very confusing to discern if this is meant to be sarcastic or not?

My guess is you're really tired. It's pretty obvious the quoted post was an attempt at sarcasm.

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

6Gman said:
It doesn't stop at Milton Keynes because it doesn't (I think) go very close to the place!

Personally I think a station somewhere in the Home Counties (perhaps where it crosses East-West rail) would be useful, but also appreciate the capacity impact it would have.

The whole point of it is that it doesn't stop at MK, it takes those trains that wouldn't have stopped there anyway. MK gains by a massively enhanced classic line service using the paths released. That (south WCML capacity) is the best reason to build it.

This being the case I would not support a "middle of nowhere Parkway" - it should not (and will not) stop between Old Oak and Birmingham Intl.

matacaster · 18 Feb 2020

Unhappily now there are a sizeable group of professional protesters who seem to enjoy being with a group of like minded people. These people are very motivated and turn up to momentum rallies, far right, anti racist and environmental protests. One suspects they aren't always sure what they are protesting about today.

6Gman · 18 Feb 2020

Yossarian22 said:
Personally would want the Y split north of Birmingham which would make not only Machester accessible from Birmingham but also Nottingham, Leeds, and Sheffield. This is going to happen under the current plans but the number of services could be quadrupled in this case (assuming 16tph between Lon and Birm and an equal split of 8 West, 8 East) from 2tph Birm-Leeds to 8 (based of 2013 stopping pattern). The split would probably have to go somewhere between West Bromich and Handsworth, around the M5, don't know the area much myself but based on the fact that it appears to be low-density housing with three golf courses and two parks the route would have to make significant use of tunnels to keep the local population happy

Not sure I understand.

Curzon Street becomes a through station? Presumably at a lower level (is that possible?) so it can then tunnel under central Birmingham. Given what's already under central Birmingham that could be one hell of a challenge. It then tunnels to the Handsworth/ West Bromwich area where it splits. One arm heads towards Staffordshire and Crewe (for Manchester etc) and the other heads NE towards Toton?

Quite apart from the massive extra cost of weaving through built-up Greater Birmingham doesn't this make London - Toton/ Leeds etc significantly slower than the current scheme? To go from Birmingham International/ Airport to Toton via West Bromwich seems bizarre!

Jurg · 18 Feb 2020

matacaster said:
Unhappily now there are a sizeable group of professional protesters who seem to enjoy being with a group of like minded people. These people are very motivated and turn up to momentum rallies, far right, anti racist and environmental protests. One suspects they aren't always sure what they are protesting about today.

One suspects that you've not got a shed of evidence to back up what you're suggesting. Seems a fanciful conspiracy theory you've come up with to lump together a multitude of completely different groups you disagree with.

6Gman · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
The whole point of it is that it doesn't stop at MK, it takes those trains that wouldn't have stopped there anyway. MK gains by a massively enhanced classic line service using the paths released. That (south WCML capacity) is the best reason to build it.

This being the case I would not support a "middle of nowhere Parkway" - it should not (and will not) stop between Old Oak and Birmingham Intl.

If we are seeking modal shift (as well as making commuting from MK/Northampton easier) then a quicker, convenient service from the Oxford/ Buckingham/ Aylesbury/ MK corridor to the likes of Manchester / Leeds etc would be useful.

JamesT · 18 Feb 2020

6Gman said:
If we are seeking modal shift (as well as making commuting from MK/Northampton easier) then a quicker, convenient service from the Oxford/ Buckingham/ Aylesbury/ MK corridor to the likes of Manchester / Leeds etc would be useful.

For Oxford, is a trundle along E/W Rail to change at Calvert going to be significantly better than using the existing line to Birmingham International and changing there for Birmingham Interchange?

quantinghome · 18 Feb 2020

6Gman said:
If we are seeking modal shift (as well as making commuting from MK/Northampton easier) then a quicker, convenient service from the Oxford/ Buckingham/ Aylesbury/ MK corridor to the likes of Manchester / Leeds etc would be useful.

Modal shift is best achieved by targeting the larger centres of population. HS2 already provides a connection to Oxford and MK at Birmingham International; large towns further south are connected via Old Oak Common. HS2 was never in the business of going after traffic from small market towns (not wishing to diss Buckingham and Aylesbury, I'm sure they are nice places).

MarkyT · 18 Feb 2020

In the speculative thread linked below, I came up with the idea that instead of a Calvert interchange and parkway station, a junction could allow HS2 trains from the north to access Heathrow, via EWR to Oxford, Reading and the airport's proposed western connection. With such trains turning off at Calvert, shadow paths would remain south thereof towards London. A HS2 shuttle service between London and another HS2 junction in the Wendover area could use these to provide service to Aylesbury town station, Aylesbury Vale Parkway and Milton Keynes via EWR. I don't support a station at Calvert itself though as it really is the middle of absolutely nowhere!
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...t-for-a-possible-station.200353/#post-4435832

DynamicSpirit · 18 Feb 2020

The Ham said:
Also the other thing to consider is that calling at Birmingham area quite a lot more time to the journey, as the line speeds drop as you approach Curzon Street so that you can get through the urban area now easily with the track.

This is shown by the journey times being 49 minutes to Birmingham and 68 minutes to Manchester whilst the Birmingham Manchester journey time is 40 minutes (total 89 minutes)

But that 21 minute difference is going to be the result of the actual design of HS2 - it's not an automatic result of having an additional stop. Presumably, if Birmingham had been built as a through HS2 station, the design would have been different, so you'd have seen a much smaller journey time difference. Also, I would guess part of that 21 minutes is to allow for the inevitable conflicting moves outside Curzon Street that are the result of it being a terminal station.

Actually thinking about it, I wonder if there's something else. The spur to Birmingham is 6 miles long. Losing 21 minutes over a 12 mile out-and-back along the spur implies average speeds of not much more than 30mph, which is nowhere near high speed. Are the numbers getting distorted by - perhaps - London-Birmingham timings being based on stopping at Birmingham International, and London-Manchester timings based on not stopping there or something?

MarkyT · 18 Feb 2020

DynamicSpirit said:
But that 21 minute difference is going to be the result of the actual design of HS2 - it's not an automatic result of having an additional stop. Presumably, if Birmingham had been built as a through HS2 station, the design would have been different, so you'd have seen a much smaller journey time difference. Also, I would guess part of that 21 minutes is to allow for the inevitable conflicting moves outside Curzon Street that are the result of it being a terminal station.

Actually thinking about it, I wonder if there's something else. The spur to Birmingham is 6 miles long. Losing 21 minutes over a 12 mile out-and-back along the spur implies average speeds of not much more than 30mph, which is nowhere near high speed. Are the numbers getting distorted by - perhaps - London-Birmingham timings being based on stopping at Birmingham International, and London-Manchester timings based on not stopping there or something?

Good point. The Interchange stop has got to add at least 5 minutes to the Birmingham Curzon St time.

quantinghome · 18 Feb 2020

MarkyT said:
In the speculative thread linked below, I came up with the idea that instead of a Calvert interchange and parkway station, a junction could allow HS2 trains from the north to access Heathrow, via EWR to Oxford, Reading and the airport's proposed western connection. With such trains turning off at Calvert, shadow paths would remain south thereof towards London. A HS2 shuttle service between London and another HS2 junction in the Wendover area could use these to provide service to Aylesbury town station, Aylesbury Vale Parkway and Milton Keynes via EWR. I don't support a station at Calvert itself though as it really is the middle of absolutely nowhere!
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...t-for-a-possible-station.200353/#post-4435832

That's a Very Interesting Idea.

Can't see anyone wanting to use that service to access Heathrow in preference to connecting to HeX at Old Oak Common. It would have all the drawbacks of the Heathrow spur.

The Planner · 18 Feb 2020

MarkyT said:
In the speculative thread linked below, I came up with the idea that instead of a Calvert interchange and parkway station, a junction could allow HS2 trains from the north to access Heathrow, via EWR to Oxford, Reading and the airport's proposed western connection. With such trains turning off at Calvert, shadow paths would remain south thereof towards London. A HS2 shuttle service between London and another HS2 junction in the Wendover area could use these to provide service to Aylesbury town station, Aylesbury Vale Parkway and Milton Keynes via EWR. I don't support a station at Calvert itself though as it really is the middle of absolutely nowhere!
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...t-for-a-possible-station.200353/#post-4435832

There is clearly something on a fag packet somewhere for development in that area as East West has passive provision for a station at Steeple Claydon.

Peter Kelford · 19 Feb 2020

DynamicSpirit said:
But that 21 minute difference is going to be the result of the actual design of HS2 - it's not an automatic result of having an additional stop. Presumably, if Birmingham had been built as a through HS2 station, the design would have been different, so you'd have seen a much smaller journey time difference. Also, I would guess part of that 21 minutes is to allow for the inevitable conflicting moves outside Curzon Street that are the result of it being a terminal station.

How about a tunnel, like in Lille?

hwl · 19 Feb 2020

The Planner said:
There is clearly something on a fag packet somewhere for development in that area as East West has passive provision for a station at Steeple Claydon.

I hope what every they have planned has good foundations so there isn't subsidence given the local geology and good drainage too...
The name is highly relevant in this case!
The electricity supply there is good so at least some thinking in terms of local development.

Aictos · 19 Feb 2020

Peter Kelford said:
How about a tunnel, like in Lille?

Wonderful, even more unneeded costs...

No thank you, just stick with existing plans!

ohgoditsjames · 19 Feb 2020

For those that are so vehemently opposed to HS2, what do you propose we do instead?

Glenn1969 · 19 Feb 2020

People keep saying just upgrade the classic lines. But that according to Network Rail's letter to the HS2 Review means large scale disruption for the next 25 years

Aictos · 19 Feb 2020

Glenn1969 said:
People keep saying just upgrade the classic lines. But that according to Network Rail's letter to the HS2 Review means large scale disruption for the next 25 years

Which makes the disruption caused by the West Coast upgrade look insignificant in comparison.

In any case, the existing network is being upgraded hence MML Electrification, TPE Electrification, New trains across the network etc...

Ianno87 · 19 Feb 2020

Peter Kelford said:
How about a tunnel, like in Lille?

Not a tunnel, cut and cover I believe. Made possible with the previously undeveloped/brownfield land it was built through. Disruptive if trying such a thing through Birmingham City Centre! And having to go back to powers again, pushing the whole thing back 10-15 years....

Yindee8191 · 19 Feb 2020

At this point, I think everyone who is behind HS2 ought to be supporting what we are getting as much as we can, instead of extra bits that the antis will add to the cost and destruction figures. HS2 is better than no HS2, and getting any HSR built is usually a good way of ensuring more HSR gets built, as governments wake up to the benefits. Still, I suppose this one thread on a (no offence) relatively obscure forum won’t change the government’s mind!

Senex · 19 Feb 2020

ohgoditsjames said:
For those that are so vehemently opposed to HS2, what do you propose we do instead?

A high-speed line, which I'm strongly in favour of, but through Birmingham and Manchester (and perhaps Stoke too) on the way to Preston (and perhaps eventually Scotland), and also a new fast line from Liverpool through Manchester and Leeds to the ECML, sharing a station in Manchester and going direct to Leeds, not deviating through Bradford, together with a long corner-cutting line to get from the first line to the second towards Liverpool.

quantinghome · 19 Feb 2020

Senex said:
A high-speed line, which I'm strongly in favour of, but through Birmingham and Manchester (and perhaps Stoke too) on the way to Preston (and perhaps eventually Scotland), and also a new fast line from Liverpool through Manchester and Leeds to the ECML, sharing a station in Manchester and going direct to Leeds, not deviating through Bradford, together with a long corner-cutting line to get from the first line to the second towards Liverpool.

Could you provide an example of a democratic country which has built new high speed lines through established city centres, as opposed to bypassing or using existing lines to get into cities?

Ianno87 · 19 Feb 2020

Senex said:
A high-speed line, which I'm strongly in favour of, but through Birmingham and Manchester (and perhaps Stoke too) on the way to Preston (and perhaps eventually Scotland), and also a new fast line from Liverpool through Manchester and Leeds to the ECML, sharing a station in Manchester and going direct to Leeds, not deviating through Bradford, together with a long corner-cutting line to get from the first line to the second towards Liverpool.

Birmingham is now set in stone, with parliamentary powers, as a terminal station. Change that, and the whole thing goes back 10-15. For dubious advantage.

For the purposes of this discussion, can I propose that HS2 Phase 1 (and probably 2a too) is taken as a de-facto defined scheme that cannot sensibly be now changed, whether or not it is 'perfect' is missing the point.

quantinghome said:
Could you provide an example of a democratic country which has built new high speed lines through established city centres, as opposed to bypassing or using existing lines to get into cities?

Only generally where there is available brownfield strip strategically left aside through the city centre, and subsequently developed after the High Speed line was built; Lille and Berlin (Hauptbahnhof low-level) are the obvious ones.

LNW-GW Joint · 19 Feb 2020

Andrew Stephenson has been appointed HS2 minister in the DfT.
He was already minister for Northern Powerhouse Rail.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51560290

Andrew Stephenson has been appointed minister for HS2 - the high-speed rail link connecting London with Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
He was already the rail minister with responsibility for the Transpennine and Northern Powerhouse Rail routes.
Earlier this month Boris Johnson said he would appoint a minister to "restore discipline" to HS2

It's about 185 years since a Stephenson (actually two of them, father and son) was in charge of constructing new railway lines from London to Birmingham and Manchester to Leeds.

I would put this in the "HS Given the Go-ahead" thread, but it's locked.

Lucan · 19 Feb 2020

quantinghome said:
Could you provide an example of a democratic country which has built new high speed lines through established city centres,

The UK - at Ashford?

LNW-GW Joint · 19 Feb 2020

quantinghome said:
Could you provide an example of a democratic country which has built new high speed lines through established city centres, as opposed to bypassing or using existing lines to get into cities?

Belgium (Antwerp, deep level) and France (Lille) come close.
In Germany, a deep level west-east tunnel under the Stuttgart Hbf terminus is under construction for a new NBS loop through the city.

D365 · 19 Feb 2020

LNW-GW Joint said:
Belgium (Antwerp, deep level) and France (Lille) come close.
In Germany, a deep level west-east tunnel under the Stuttgart Hbf terminus is under construction for a new NBS loop through the city.

"Neubaustrecke" (new build route) for those that aren't familiar with German acronyms.

quantinghome · 19 Feb 2020

Lucan said:
The UK - at Ashford?

True enough. A complex cut and cover tunnel and flyover arrangement. I'd like to see how that would work going through Birmingham or Manchester.

quantinghome · 19 Feb 2020

LNW-GW Joint said:
Belgium (Antwerp, deep level) and France (Lille) come close.
In Germany, a deep level west-east tunnel under the Stuttgart Hbf terminus is under construction for a new NBS loop through the city.

These examples make for interesting comparison with the idea of running high speed lines through Birmingham or Manchester. Antwerp Centraal was a huge project, also one that needed only a relatively small amount of tunneling and relies on existing lines on the approaches. Stuttgart has been beset by arguments for years.

These cases also show the drawbacks of having the main line running through the centre of cities: they slow down overall journey times. The contrast with the Paris-Marseilles and Paris-Bordeaux TGV routes is instructive.

There are good reasons why the UK's main lines avoid cities and connect to them on branches. HS2 simply replicates this sensible approach.

Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member