Enginering firm's idea for Cross City Connect - HS2-HS1 link via Southwark

[si404]

Considering the enormous opposition to HS2 on the basis that it will only benefit London

So spending a load more money on a cross-London link whose primary users* will be London & SE passengers (eg Kent to Heathrow changing at OOC, SW London to Canary Wharf changing at Waterloo/South Bank) will be a really dumb idea to try and sell the scheme to the North...

And that's without dealing with the issue that international journeys on HS1 would still go to St Pancras, which is the other side of London from this new place where northerners end up, but rather having some-of-the-north to Paris trains that won't save much off the journey (and none at all if TGV Picardie is built) vs changing between limited-stop more-frequent services in London due to having to stop everywhere to maximise journey opportunities.

Far far better to build a quality Euston-St Pancras walkway (with travelators and the like) for a tenth of the price of the supposed £3bn additional cost of this (ignoring the sunk costs of the mass of construction that's already happened at Euston).

*when it was direct between OOC and Stratford International, it was modelled as being about 90% of those using the avoid-London route having one end of their journey in Greater London or the SE, and about a third having both ends in it. Add in a South Bank station, and you'd gain some short hoppers doing OOC-South Bank or South Bank-Canary Wharf via the line. Even more London/SE bias!

 

[VagueShot]

Some - indeed many - will change at OOC (the plans rather depend on it!) but for much of the London suburbs, the SE generally and parts of Central London, Euston/Kings Cross will still work better. Not to mention that if everyone alighted at OOC the Elizabeth and West London lines wouldn't cope.

BTW is Mid-Town a new name for the City?

As a resident of Dalston, I'll probably use the North London Line, as I'll be pushing up daisies before Crossrail 2 is built!

 

[w1bbl3]

It sure won't be as big as a terminating station, but you are looking at a minimum of 4 400m-long platforms. It's still an uber cavern!

We constantly hear from Crossrail and those who've been down there about how big those stations are. This requires at least 4 times the footprint for platforms.

I suspect the thinking is/was to avoid the traditional cavern station and form the platforms along an oversized tunnel bore, but yes it still requires a massive subterranean station relative to other stations. I'd assume this would have to be a very deep level station to avoid the Thames and existing tunnels anyway with much of money spent on Euston land acquisition and clearance I just can't see how the cost different would still be so small.

This feels like an optionering reminder piece by the proponents to try and secure some VE review work under any forthcoming HS2 cost reduction study.

Far far better to build a quality Euston-St Pancras walkway (with travelators and the like) for a tenth of the price of the supposed £3bn additional cost of this (ignoring the sunk costs of the mass of construction that's already happened at Euston).

Personally I'd sort out access Circle / Hammersmith & City / Met line from Euston so St Pancras is just a single tube hop away. It is crying shame already considering that the line was cut and cover construction under Euston Road that the opportunity to move the station nearer to Euston hadn't been done years ago.
A underground travelator route to St Pancras would be complex to avoid the extensive basements of the Crick and British Library, neither would or should come anywhere close to he £3bn odd wanted by the CCC idea and as you note provide far more journey opportunities.

 

[Horizon22]

Sorry if I've missed it (or indeed the point) but surely a HS2 - HS1 link could be made by extending Crossrail from Abbey Wood?

 

[Bald Rick]

Sorry if I've missed it (or indeed the point) but surely a HS2 - HS1 link could be made by extending Crossrail from Abbey Wood?

You have missed the point. There will be no connections at OOC between HS2 and Crossrail (and they would be difficult to provide). But if they were provided (at great expense) there would be no capacity in the Crossrail tunnels for high speed services unless at least two consecutive Elizabeth Line services were removed for each high speed service, ie creating a 7.5 minute gap. And if the services were removed, the high speed services would take the same journey time as an Elizabeth Line service for the trip (about half an hour to Abbey Wood, then another 15-20 minutes to Ebbsfleet). Even then the high speed services would be unable to call at any Elizabeth Line station as the trains would be too long for the platforms and the door configurations would be wrong. Then there’s the issue that the HS2 trains would need equipping with a metro style signalling control system (CBTC) in addition to their ETCS and conventional systems, which is currently the cause of much strife in the Crossrail project.

But other than that...

 

[The Ham]

As I've suggested in the past, whilst such a link might appear to be useful now there's an element of how useful it would be if there were to be future high speed lines built.

How would such lines link? Even if this was just at station hubs. If you opt for a Central London station then any future line would be requested to also serve it. That could get very expensive and would likely end up with very deep platforms so as to not spread out too much.

Alternatively if you had an Eastern Coast HS line serve some other Central London station and then a Great Western HS line then link Old Oak Common, an outer London hub in the Eastern Coast HS line and then onto HS1 it would allow a good connection between the three lines and the two Central London stations (as well as Paddington from Old Oak Common).

Depending on how well planned the Eastern Coast HS line and the Great Western HS line were for each other the hub station could be built in such a way to allow services to run from either HS line to the Central London station as well as between each other. Especially if the Great Western HS line served Heathrow.

Passengers from the three latest HS lines would then change trains at Stratford to gain access to services through the Channel Tunnel. Whilst this would require the changing of trains twice from HS2 services, and potentially from the Eastern Coast HS line depending on the design, to get to a Channel Tunnel service; the Great Western HS line would provide a good connection through and with people desiring to change from one to another is unlikely to get overloaded.

By taking an outer London route there wouldn't be the underground congestion that there would be for a through the centre of London route and so could probably run at higher speeds to negate the extra distance traveled.

The Eastern Coast HS line would probably run to Cambridge before running North to serve York and Newcastle. Whilst the Great Western HS line would serve Stratford, Eastern Coast HS line hub station, Old Oak Common, Heathrow, Salisbury and then split to serve South Wales and the South West (probably not be track all the way, but rather with through trains) as well as probably services from Southampton. (Then await the complaints about how it's going to lead to slower journey times from places like Reading and Basingstoke, much as there is about Coventry).

 

[edwin_m]

Personally I'd sort out access Circle / Hammersmith & City / Met line from Euston so St Pancras is just a single tube hop away. It is crying shame already considering that the line was cut and cover construction under Euston Road that the opportunity to move the station nearer to Euston hadn't been done years ago.
A underground travelator route to St Pancras would be complex to avoid the extensive basements of the Crick and British Library, neither would or should come anywhere close to he £3bn odd wanted by the CCC idea and as you note provide far more journey opportunities.

The Euston HS2 work includes a pedestrian tunnel to the east end of Euston Square - not sure if it's a moving walkway. They aren't moving the station, but the current entrance is at the very west end so the eastern end of the platforms isn't too far from Euston. This would also provide step-free access to both platforms and I agree looks like a pretty good way of getting to and from St Pancras for those unwilling/unable to walk.

 

[Domeyhead]

Exactly that was done in 2009-2010. http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=3140

The 27 options include Beneath the Thames and Waterloo, both discarded at the first sift. Unfortunately I can't trace any further details of these options.

Thank you - valuable research.

 

[MarkyT]

The Euston HS2 work includes a pedestrian tunnel to the east end of Euston Square - not sure if it's a moving walkway. They aren't moving the station, but the current entrance is at the very west end so the eastern end of the platforms isn't too far from Euston. This would also provide step-free access to both platforms and I agree looks like a pretty good way of getting to and from St Pancras for those unwilling/unable to walk.

While the new connection to Euston Square will be very useful for many journeys, using it to get to St. Pancras will involve at least as far a walk in total as going via the surface streets on foot as well as a wait for a possibly very crowded train.

 

[Horizon22]

You have missed the point. There will be no connections at OOC between HS2 and Crossrail (and they would be difficult to provide). But if they were provided (at great expense) there would be no capacity in the Crossrail tunnels for high speed services unless at least two consecutive Elizabeth Line services were removed for each high speed service, ie creating a 7.5 minute gap. And if the services were removed, the high speed services would take the same journey time as an Elizabeth Line service for the trip (about half an hour to Abbey Wood, then another 15-20 minutes to Ebbsfleet). Even then the high speed services would be unable to call at any Elizabeth Line station as the trains would be too long for the platforms and the door configurations would be wrong. Then there’s the issue that the HS2 trains would need equipping with a metro style signalling control system (CBTC) in addition to their ETCS and conventional systems, which is currently the cause of much strife in the Crossrail project.

But other than that...

Apologies I didn't realise it was about actually linking through HS1/HS2 services together. Should teach to try and read posts at ridiculous hours of the morning!