Building HS2 to Euston and Crewe could pay for itself, analysis finds

[twpsaesneg]

Perhaps "passive provision" would be more accurate then?

CSC requires a full remodelling of Basford Hall and the reconstruction of 2 overbridges, so there's not really much passive provision able to be made. BHIL is purely (now) a resignalling scheme which abolishes Basford Hall Junction, Sorting Sidings North and Salop Goods Junction signalboxes, unfortunately.

There were some minor upgrade works planned but these were defunded when HS2 was cancelled.

Are there any plans anywhere available to look at for the upgrade (if there is one) of Crewe station for HS2?

There's not much available in the public domain. The original plan was to extend three platforms to allow 400m trains to split and join, which meant a shuffling about of the existing bays and the introduction of a new Platform 16 on the back of the existing P12 island. However whatever it will look like in the future will depend on what length HS2 trains are planned to go to Crewe, and as @The Planner says what money is made available to do something (if anything!).

 

[The Planner]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I read that the Basford Hall and Independent lines resignalling this Christmas does make provision for HS2 Phase 2a joining the WCML in the Basford Hall area.

It allows for it in the interlocking etc

CSC requires a full remodelling of Basford Hall and the reconstruction of 2 overbridges, so there's not really much passive provision able to be made. BHIL is purely (now) a resignalling scheme which abolishes Basford Hall Junction, Sorting Sidings North and Salop Goods Junction signalboxes, unfortunately.

There were some minor upgrade works planned but these were defunded when HS2 was cancelled.

Line speed increases on the Independents were hardly minor!

There's not much available in the public domain. The original plan was to extend three platforms to allow 400m trains to split and join, which meant a shuffling about of the existing bays and the introduction of a new Platform 16 on the back of the existing P12 island. However whatever it will look like in the future will depend on what length HS2 trains are planned to go to Crewe, and as @The Planner says what money is made available to do something (if anything!).

The layout was in the public domain, there was a PWI, or similar, video linked on here a good while back that showed the layout. It basically ripped up Crewe and started again.

 

[eldomtom2]

Reuters are now claiming Phase 2a will remain scrapped:

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-say-hs2-railway-will-run-northern-england-lbc-reports-2024-10-17/?utm_source=reddit.com

LONDON, Oct 17 (Reuters) - The new Labour government will not revive a plan to build a high speed railway line from the central English city of Birmingham to northern England, a source said, denying an earlier media report.
LBC Radio said earlier on Thursday the government was set to announce that the HS2 high speed railway line would run as far as Crewe in northern England, in a reversal of the previous administration's decision to cancel the project's second phase.
But that was not on the cards, a government source said.
"We have always said we won't be taking plans for HS2 phase 2 back off the shelf," the source said, adding that the government was, however, committed to improving rail connectivity in northern England.
"Transport is an essential part of the government's mission to rebuild Britain and grow our economy," the source said.

 

[Fazaar1889]

We're back in business boys.

Previously, only going to Birmingham put more pressure between Birmingham and Manchester. Considering that this is not fully to Manchester, would there be more or less traffic on the wcml between the two cities compared to today?

 

[class442]

We're back in business boys.

Government quells HS2 Phase 2a rumours

Downing Street has dampened down suggestions the northern leg of the HS2 rail project could be revived.

www.railmagazine.com

I'm not sure that we are. After all that's gone on, I'll believe it when I see it being built.

 

[Tezza1978]

This sounds like they are waiting to call Brum to Crewe something different - the equivalent of putting glasses, a hat and a false beard on 2A.

The govt are desperate not to give the Tories an open goal at the Budget, The "uncancellng HS2 to Crewe" news story then leads to the (ridiculous) - "you are letting our pensioners freeze to death for HS2!!!" attack line to be rolled out by the Tories and the right wing press.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Will it, won’t it…

I am reminded of that theoretical physics concept of ‘superposition’ - i.e. Until the event either occurs or doesn’t occur (in this case, building 2a) it can be referred to as existing in both states, I.e. both built, and unbuilt. Perhaps given the nature of the politics, it should be called Schroedinger’s Link?

 

[torten]

100% this. Demand regularly exceeds capacity today. The whole point of investing in new infrastructure to run more trains is to provide more capacity, and therefore we either have to run more or longer trains to Manchester than present.

I think you could make some platforms at Piccadilly 300m long, which would open up the possibility of ordering several 300m or 100m Manchester HS2 sets.

 

[Fazaar1889]

This sounds like they are waiting to call Brum to Crewe something different - the equivalent of putting glasses, a hat and a false beard on 2A.

Yes that's most likely then they won't "shame" themselves by reversing a decision.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I think you could make some platforms at Piccadilly 300m long, which would open up the possibility of ordering several 300m or 100m Manchester HS2 sets.

Having a sub fleet of units specifically for the Manchester route will not do the future train planners any favours - it reduces efficiency and flexibility, and most likely creates additional crew training cost, plus maintenance if there are any technical differences. Would be a classic case of losing some of the overall benefit to suit a technical ‘descoping’.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Also being reported on other news channels too. Excellent news and thank goodness common sense has prevailed

Agreed. Excellent news and common sense.

 

[350401]

My money is on phase 2a being delivered, but by a new/renamed arms length body who then manages the private sector consortium, with the line being called a different name. Ironically, the plan for a more commercial turnkey design and build contract, with less client involvement, was pretty much the plan for phase 2a anyway before it got scrapped - having expensively learnt the lessons from phase 1.

 

[swt_passenger]

Agreed. Excellent news and common sense.

But then see the link in post #35. Government still denying it…

 

[350401]

But then see the link in post #35. Government still denying it…

They’ve denied that phase 2 “as is” will be revived. A fully integrated North West to Midlands rail link that happens to use the phase 2a trackbed and powers, and also integrate with NPR, being delivered by another government arms length body via Private Sector design and build consortium, is of course nothing like HS2 Phase 2. </cynicmode>

 

[GRALISTAIR]

But then see the link in post #35. Government still denying it…

Waiting for Rachel’s first budget?

 

[hwl]

They’ve denied that phase 2 “as is” will be revived. A fully integrated North West to Midlands rail link that happens to use the phase 2a trackbed and powers, and also integrate with NPR, being delivered by another government arms length body via Private Sector design and build consortium, is of course nothing like HS2 Phase 2. </cynicmode>

Agreed - If you are going to build something along the 2a alignment then Handsacre does make much sense given the pinch point it causes - better not to do it save the cash as there are better alternative options for Manchester via Stoke /Macclesfield services with a slightly resdesigned 2a with junction further west. Also rebuilding Crewe station (part of 2B) is more useful to address overall capacity and operational issues than building the northern part of 2a from Madeley - Basford Hall (at least initially).

You can guarantee it won't be called 2a because it will be slightly different and politically it can't be called 2a.

 

[plugwash]

Previously, only going to Birmingham put more pressure between Birmingham and Manchester. Considering that this is not fully to Manchester, would there be more or less traffic on the wcml between the two cities compared to today?

If HS2 is completed to Crewe I would assume that most of the manchester to london via the WCML trains would be canned to free up paths for HS2 trains. Perhaps leaving 1TPH via stoke for the benefit of Macclesfield/Stoke passengers.

However, the current Manchester to London trains and vice-versa trains don't normally run via Birmingham. The services from Manchester to Birmingham are overwhelmingly crosscountry services, which I would expect to continue more or less as before.

 

[Tetchytyke]

A downgraded version of HS2 2a isn't HS2 2a, and is probably a lot more sensible than the over-engineered and over-budget plans for HS2 2a.

My view is, and always will be, that HS2 is naught but a needlessly grandiose white elephant; a solution looking for a problem. HS2 should never have been started. But, now it has, it may as well be done properly.

The original article is fantastical in its economic projections:

In the analysis by HSRG and the policy group Greengauge 21, the current line from Old Oak Common to Birmingham Curzon Street will cost £47bn, but its limitations mean the railway would have a potential concession value of only £5bn. However, building on to Euston and Crewe, while costing another £11.5bn, could make it worth £20bn.

It's these sort of fantasy maths that got HS2 in this mess in the first place. But, then again, without the fantasy maths the whole white elephant would never have got off the drawing board in the first place...

 

[SeanM1997]

If HS2 is completed to Crewe I would assume that most of the manchester to london via the WCML trains would be canned to free up paths for HS2 trains. Perhaps leaving 1TPH via stoke for the benefit of Macclesfield/Stoke passengers.

However, the current Manchester to London trains and vice-versa trains don't normally run via Birmingham. The services from Manchester to Birmingham are overwhelmingly crosscountry services, which I would expect to continue more or less as before.

I would expect to see some small changes should Crewe Phase open:
MAN-EUS
2ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Wilmslow, Crewe, Birmingham Interchange, Old Oak Common, London Euston
1ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford, Birmingham Interchange, Old Oak Common, London Euston

MAN-BHM
2ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Wilmslow, Crewe and Birmingham Curzon Street
1ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham New Street (and beyond)

The Crewe - Stafford local, which is proposed to be extended to Manchester Airport, could probably be extended further to Birmingham to allow another Stoke-Birmingham link

Northern would probably then be able to do another stopper between Manchester Piccadilly and Crewe

Manchester Piccadilly platform capacity then becomes the issue for an extra Birmingham and Stoke local service. Also, the politics of reducing the Stoke-London service in half could be an issue

 

[Mikey C]

Having a sub fleet of units specifically for the Manchester route will not do the future train planners any favours - it reduces efficiency and flexibility, and most likely creates additional crew training cost, plus maintenance if there are any technical differences. Would be a classic case of losing some of the overall benefit to suit a technical ‘descoping’.

If an 11 car Class 390 is 265m, it makes no sense to stay with the current order for 200m trains, when the chance of 2*200m ever operating is so small.

 

[The Planner]

A downgraded version of HS2 2a isn't HS2 2a, and is probably a lot more sensible than the over-engineered and over-budget plans for HS2 2a.

My view is, and always will be, that HS2 is naught but a needlessly grandiose white elephant; a solution looking for a problem. HS2 should never have been started. But, now it has, it may as well be done properly.

The original article is fantastical in its economic projections:



It's these sort of fantasy maths that got HS2 in this mess in the first place. But, then again, without the fantasy maths the whole white elephant would never have got off the drawing board in the first place...

What was over-engineered about 2A? If HS2 should never have been started, what was the solution to growth and capacity?

Northern would probably then be able to do another stopper between Manchester Piccadilly and Crewe

That is the elephant in the room, with 2 fast London's via Crewe, the stoppers will have trouble.

 

[cle]

I would expect to see some small changes should Crewe Phase open:
MAN-EUS
2ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Wilmslow, Crewe, Birmingham Interchange, Old Oak Common, London Euston
1ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford, Birmingham Interchange, Old Oak Common, London Euston

MAN-BHM
2ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Wilmslow, Crewe and Birmingham Curzon Street
1ph Manchester Piccadilly, Stockport, Macclesfield, Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham New Street (and beyond)

The Crewe - Stafford local, which is proposed to be extended to Manchester Airport, could probably be extended further to Birmingham to allow another Stoke-Birmingham link

There is no way that 3tph from London to Manchester would call at Birmingham Interchange - or that 2 would call at Wilmslow. Stockport I think would remain - but not sure if it could take 400m trains if they ever went there. You might see 1tph 400m non-stop from OOC or Crewe only.

The Manchester-Stoke stopping service is more likely to be extended to Curzon St.

Also remember 1tph traditional (Euston/Watford/MKC/Rugby...) to Manchester is likely to still be a requisite. So something will have to give at Stockport. Maybe the Stoke stopper extension begets one of the Birmingham paths, and could be sped up a bit. With something else in its place (a Stockport terminator) - or something is diverted from the Hope Valley to not run via Stockport potentially.

Stockport needs a rebuild, ideally with the ability to terminate some extra local services from the south.

 

[stuu]

It's these sort of fantasy maths that got HS2 in this mess in the first place. But, then again, without the fantasy maths the whole white elephant would never have got off the drawing board in the first place...

A white elephant is something that is never/barely used... HS2 has cost far too much but there is no chance of it being unused, even if it takes longer than originally planned to reach it's potential

The whole thing is a good example of this country's pathetic approach to infrastructure though - our neighbouring countries have nationwide plans for rail (and other infrastructure) to be implemented over time as funds allow. We instead decide to do it all in one go, with one headline price, and then get cold feet and cancel it. Then (maybe) uncancel it. No wonder it costs a fortune to build anything

 

[Tetchytyke]

What was over-engineered about 2A?

All of it.

If HS2 should never have been started, what was the solution to growth and capacity?

The fantasy of endless growth that will never actually happen.

Inner-WCML commuter services are so over-subscribed that, er, *checks notes*, LNR/WMT are handing their 350/2 units back to the leasing company without a replacement. And Avanti services are so over-subscribed that they're buying new trains with only five carriages.

But, as I said, now that we've started building it we may as well do it properly.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

This sounds like they are waiting to call Brum to Crewe something different - the equivalent of putting glasses, a hat and a false beard on 2A.

The govt are desperate not to give the Tories an open goal at the Budget, The "uncancellng HS2 to Crewe" news story then leads to the (ridiculous) - "you are letting our pensioners freeze to death for HS2!!!" attack line to be rolled out by the Tories and the right wing press.

Absolutely this budget is shaping up to be a big issue for Labour and they will want it to land well as it need to se the tone for the rest of this parliament. They can already see the right wing press are blazing all guns against them no need to give them another easy target. My take is will see the foundations being laid that will allow the Street/Burnham proposal to be brought to fruition so its owned by the regions.

 

[The Planner]

All of it.

Thats helpful.

 

[chazi898]

If an 11 car Class 390 is 265m, it makes no sense to stay with the current order for 200m trains, when the chance of 2*200m ever operating is so small.

I was thinking this; 400m trains is an aspiration that should be achieved in the future, not now. If 11 car pendolinos are brimming while being 265m long, the last thing we need is 200m trains that have to be coupled in the middle (last, not never). I can see it from a mile away; faulty fleet so train is formed of 1 unit today... Pendolino might not have a lot of seats, but it can technically hold a lot of people. We need something more achievable like 300m trainsets, markedly more seats and more room than a pendolino, and perhaps the subfleet is the 200m units, which could get additional units over time.

 

[Italianauto]

All of it.


The fantasy of endless growth that will never actually happen.

Inner-WCML commuter services are so over-subscribed that, er, *checks notes*, LNR/WMT are handing their 350/2 units back to the leasing company without a replacement. And Avanti services are so over-subscribed that they're buying new trains with only five carriages.

But, as I said, now that we've started building it we may as well do it properly.

You've forgotten that 88% of the miles travelled in the UK aren't by rail. The potential market that doesn't currently use rail is therefore quite big. Currently, Generalised Journey Time (GJT) by rail is uncompetitive with air for longer UK trips and often car when the journey isn't city-centre to city-centre. Probably typical of the longer trips most of us might make. The faster the 'middle bit' of the journey by rail between 'south', London & Heathrow - the midlands - and North West England, North Wales and Scotland, the more GJT by rail shrinks relative to other modes who cater for most of the demand today. In it's original form HS2 was a fast-enough step-change in journey time to spread GJT savings by rail quite widely across our mainland medium - long distance north-south corridors. Be assured if I stood on my nearest bridge across the M6 I'd see a Pendolino's worth of cars passing by every few minutes. Albeit not all are making HS2-sized trips, but that's just the M6, not the M1, A1 and so on. Transport forecasting shows journey time is critical to demand. In an age of domestic flights and door to door free to use motorways, and market share by rail didn't keep up and fell far behingd. HS2 as originally specified would shift a chunk of travel demand that's not captured by rail now, on to rail. However the benefits of measurable mode shift won't float everyone's boat and there will be other candidates transport or otherwise for this level of borrowing.

 

[matacaster]

A major issue is the seeming inability to produce believable estimates despite spending mega millions on the process. Indeed spending a fortune on estimates seems designed to
a) tell the commissioner what they want to hear
b) provide excuses to delay or alternatively support go ahead of a project
c) provide long term employment for project managers, architects, estimators etc

Estimates to the nearest billion or two should require years to produce.

Political interference and overbearing regulation also do not help, nor does architects trying to enhance their status at the expense of utility and indeed expense.

Even if accurate estimates were produced, without having watertight contracts with significant financial skin in the game, contractors will take every opportunity to gold plate.

 

[DjU]

Inner-WCML commuter services are so over-subscribed that, er, *checks notes*, LNR/WMT are handing their 350/2 units back to the leasing company without a replacement. And Avanti services are so over-subscribed that they're buying new trains with only five carriages.

I'd suggest you *check your notes* a bit better next time or get news notes...

LNR are quite literally replacing the 350/2 with stock which will be a massive increase over them... like nearly 50%

350/2 - 37 x 4 (20m)
The equivalent of 12 full length 240m formations

730/2 - 36 x 5 (24m)
The equivalent of 18 full length 240m formations

Equally the Avanti units are a mix of 5 AND 7 car and the 5 cars are reasonably longer than 5 car they replace and the 7 cars are nearly as long the shorter Pendolinos. And between the 5 and 7 car units there are more units than they replace...

Both are exactly the opposite of the point what you seem to wanting to make.