Expanding HS1 - Steer Davis Gleave

[mwmbwls]

Steer, the rebadged consultancy have produced a report for HS1 quantifying the benefits of the route both internationally and domestically. They also cite the capacity for expansion both domestic and international.

Dyan Crowther, the Chief Executive of High Speed set the scene as follows:
https://highspeed1.co.uk/media/vemk...ond-the-economic-impact-of-hs1-march-2020.pdf

HS1 has changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. This report details who these people are and how they have benefited. In terms of the ‘how’, HS1 delivers in three clear areas - for our economy, for our society and for our environment. For the economy, the route produces a staggering £427m of economic benefits every year. Cumulatively since opening this amounts to £4.5bn. In part this has been achieved from productivity gains thanks to faster journeys, but also through new jobs created by the businesses that have set themselves up on the route because of the diverse and skilled international workforce now at their fingertips. For the wider society and the communities we serve, HS1 has brought affordable housing within the reach of tens of thousands of young couples and families. Indeed, it has made the aspiration of owning a home with a garden a reality for many. For our environment, the shorter journey times permitted by HS1 has made near-Europe short-haul flights even less attractive. This has driven a switch from one of the most environmentally harmful forms of transport to one of the most environmentally friendly. We have reduced CO2 emissions by the equivalent of 60,000 short-haul flights every year. We have only achieved these benefits with our partners: HM Government, Southeastern and Eurostar. But as much as looking back, this study is an invitation to look forward… We have capacity on our tracks and with our partners, we can deliver more of the benefits outlined here.

https://www.railwaygazette.com/in-d...ng-the-economic-benefits-of-hs1/56642.article

This report prepared for HS1 Ltd by consultancy Steer analyses the socio-economic benefits of the 106 km line that opened fully between London and the Channel Tunnel in 2007. The key finding in Delivering for Britain and Beyond — The Economic Impact of HS1 was that HS1 generates economic benefits worth £427m a year, racking up a total of more than £4∙5bn since the line opened.

In domestic terms how would you expand the network? Can St Pancras cope with additional services or are we thinking of longer trains. Could/should Hastings be finally drawn in fully as part of the London catchment?

In international terms – what is the lowest hanging fruit? Is it worth even suggesting revisiting an HS1 HS2 link before all the surplus capacity is mopped up by more services to Brussels and Amsterdam or new destinations such as Bordeaux, Düsseldorf, Köln, Frankfurt and Genève?

 

[JonathanH]

Is it worth even suggesting revisiting an HS1 HS2 link

No, there are plenty of threads where the idea of a HS1-HS2 link is rightly discounted as not being a worthwhile idea because the demand for London from services on both HS1 and HS2 vastly outweighs any potential demand for through services and the security aspect can't be overcome.

 

[si404]

From the report's discussion of expanding domestic service:

Some destinations, such as Canterbury, although already served by high-speed services have only one train per hour or even lower frequency in the off-peak. Increasing the frequency will make these destinations more accessible and therefore attractive to visitors, particularly those coming from London and its surrounding area.

I'd speculate that intensifying existing services is more likely than new destinations for domestic services (which aren't mentioned in the report). However, while there won't be wiring up to Hastings, there'd still be infrastructure works to do - because you'd do it by replacing Victoria/Charing Cross services east of Ashford, rather than supplementing them, and so need to lengthen some platforms.

 

[StephenHunter]

Internationally, I'd say - although it would need some work with Tunnel compliant stock and border checks - there is a case for a Nightjet sleeper service to somewhere like Berlin or Hamburg.

 

[Ianno87]

Internationally, I'd say - although it would need some work with Tunnel compliant stock and border checks - there is a case for a Nightjet sleeper service to somewhere like Berlin or Hamburg.

The report specifically mentions Bordeaux, Dusseldorf, Cologne, Frankfurt and Geneva as new destinations with the likely greatest benefits via International day trains.

(Plus singling out more frequent trains for Canterbury domestically).

I doubt there is any serious strong economic case for night trains (as lovely as they would be).

 

[yorksrob]

Is it really a good use of an international asset to fill up HS1 with more domestic trains ?

They would be better off reinstating an express to Charing Cross for access to the West End.

 

[Ianno87]

Is it really a good use of an international asset to fill up HS1 with more domestic trains ?

According to this report, yes.

Remember, there is a limit to the number of International paths that can fit through the tunnel each hour around the various freight, lorry and car shuttles. Therefore HS1 itself has spare capacity around these, especially consideing that Javelins can split/join at Ashford to combine paths via Dover and via Canterbury.

HS Services via Canterbury are full and standing at weekends, whilst 'classic' services run half-empty. People prefer the fast journey time to St Pancras, not the slow plod (even on a 'fast' train) on the traditional route.

 

[CW2]

It's in the financial interests of HS1 to fill the railway with anything.
That aside, there is a good case for expanding the domestic services. The case for new destinations on the Continent is less clear. Apart from Bordeaux, the main traffic gain is by competing with airlines - hence the choice of destinations stated (Bordeaux, Düsseldorf, Köln, Frankfurt and Genève).
A couple of trains per day (morning and evening) from Düsseldorf via Köln might be a good place to start.
Much though I'd like a night sleeper service through the tunnel, I don't see it happening. The finances simply don't stack up.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Remember, there is a limit to the number of International paths that can fit through the tunnel each hour around the various freight, lorry and car shuttles.

I still think there's a big problem with the Channel Tunnel and using the capacity effectively. For instance, I've just checked for September, and Calais-Folkestone is 210 Euro at night, or 260 Euro during the day.

Incidentally, when on earth did it become so expensive to cross the Channel? I'm looking now, and even daytrips are obscenely expensive.

 

[yorksrob]

According to this report, yes.

Remember, there is a limit to the number of International paths that can fit through the tunnel each hour around the various freight, lorry and car shuttles. Therefore HS1 itself has spare capacity around these, especially consideing that Javelins can split/join at Ashford to combine paths via Dover and via Canterbury.

HS Services via Canterbury are full and standing at weekends, whilst 'classic' services run half-empty. People prefer the fast journey time to St Pancras, not the slow plod (even on a 'fast' train) on the traditional route.

Well, if you stop at every single station up to Sevenoaks and take half an hour longer than you need to, of course people are going to get the fast train, they always have.

According to my family (who use the HS1 a fair amount) they run a lot of services with single units. It would be better to double these up and give people a good choice of where in London they want to go.

 

[CW2]

<snip>
Incidentally, when on earth did it become so expensive to cross the Channel? I'm looking now, and even daytrips are obscenely expensive.

One way is to take a bike with you!
Eurotunnel Bike Service

 

[Ianno87]

Well, if you stop at every single station up to Sevenoaks and take half an hour longer than you need to, of course people are going to get the fast train, they always have.

According to my family (who use the HS1 a fair amount) they run a lot of services with single units. It would be better to double these up and give people a good choice of where in London they want to go.

The single units thing is largely due to the limited size of the 395 fleet.

People can still have a choice. It just involves changing at Ashford to get to Charing Cross et al. Half hourly to one station is universally more attractive than hourly services taking different amounts of time to two stations.

 

[yorksrob]

The single units thing is largely due to the limited size of the 395 fleet.

People can still have a choice. It just involves changing at Ashford to get to Charing Cross et al. Half hourly to one station is universally more attractive than hourly services taking different amounts of time to two stations.

Without a fast service to Charing Cross, it's not much of a choice at present.

 

[mmh]

The single units thing is largely due to the limited size of the 395 fleet.

People can still have a choice. It just involves changing at Ashford to get to Charing Cross et al. Half hourly to one station is universally more attractive than hourly services taking different amounts of time to two stations.

In a world where people only travel all the way to London, perhaps. But probably not - suggest that services on Southern should only go to either Victoria or London Bridge and await the commuter outrage. On Southeastern, it was suggested a few years ago that the Hayes line be "simplified" by having a single destination (I can't remember if a particular one was mentioned or not) and people were up in arms. And that's only between Charing Cross and Cannon Street. People get very attached to their train route, and with good reason.

 

[mmh]

In Crayonworld, I might not have been as opposed to HS2 if it had linked to HS1. Not so that unused trains could be sent to the continent but to turn trains somewhere easier than Euston. A commuter service to Birmingham from Kent. Ashford could have become the powerhouse it was promised by the channel tunnel. Instead HS2 focused on places it would never get to.

 

[Ianno87]

In a world where people only travel all the way to London, perhaps. But probably not - suggest that services on Southern should only go to either Victoria or London Bridge and await the commuter outrage. On Southeastern, it was suggested a few years ago that the Hayes line be "simplified" by having a single destination (I can't remember if a particular one was mentioned or not) and people were up in arms. And that's only between Charing Cross and Cannon Street. People get very attached to their train route, and with good reason.

People in Kent insisted no-one wanted to go to St Pancras....now look at the trains a decade later.

Of course people will be up in arms about losing direct link to a terminal.

Remember how the South London Line used to run Victoria-London Bridge? Turns out that a service that now goes to neither is vastly more successful... Different quite often means better if the historic attachments are forgotten.

 

[farci]

It's in the financial interests of HS1 to fill the railway with anything.
That aside, there is a good case for expanding the domestic services. The case for new destinations on the Continent is less clear. Apart from Bordeaux, the main traffic gain is by competing with airlines - hence the choice of destinations stated (Bordeaux, Düsseldorf, Köln, Frankfurt and Genève).
A couple of trains per day (morning and evening) from Düsseldorf via Köln might be a good place to start.
Much though I'd like a night sleeper service through the tunnel, I don't see it happening. The finances simply don't stack up.

Genuine question from a train enthusiast with no technical railway knowledge. Plans for sleeper trains from Austria, Sweden, Denmark to Germany/Begium are predicated on an environmentally replacement for air travel but presumably will make money. Why would similar services from London not be competitive and at least marginally profitable?

 

[MarcVD]

Because of track access charges, that are obscenely expensive in France, and even more so in the channel tunnel. You'll notice that Nightjet does not make any plans to go to Paris or other places in France, and for a good reason. In a recent interview, Oebb boss said he would love to, but it is just unfeasible financially. SNCF wants no other trains than their own on French rails.

 

[farci]

Because of track access charges, that are obscenely expensive in France, and even more so in the channel tunnel. You'll notice that Nightjet does not make any plans to go to Paris or other places in France, and for a good reason. In a recent interview, Oebb boss said he would love to, but it is just unfeasible financially. SNCF wants no other trains than their own on French rails.

Thanks for the info!

I couldn't possibly accuse SNCF of double standards yet it appears they will not hesitate to export their low-cost passenger brand to Spain
'...having been awarded a package of open access paths on the Spanish high speed network as part of a liberalisation process, Rielsfera expects to launch its first low cost high speed domestic services from the December 14 timetable change. The trains will operated under the Falbala brand, which is based on the Ouigo concept being rolled out in France...'
https://www.railwaygazette.com/firs...ory Link&utm_campaign=RGInewsletter- 20200612

 

[30907]

Because of track access charges, that are obscenely expensive in France, and even more so in the channel tunnel. You'll notice that Nightjet does not make any plans to go to Paris or other places in France, and for a good reason. In a recent interview, Oebb boss said he would love to, but it is just unfeasible financially. SNCF wants no other trains than their own on French rails.

And of course the wellknown issues over borders and security that plague Eurostar....
To be fair the passenger arm of SNCF suffers from high TACs too - hence the only sleepers (couchettes) are the ones the govt pays for to remote areas.

 

[CW2]

Add to all the above the fact that you would need a fleet of bespoke rolling stock to meet Channel Tunnel fire safety and evacuation requirements, with top-and-tail locos through the tunnel. Of course such a fleet was built when it was originally planned to run "Nightstar" sleeper serices from such unlikely locations as Plymouth and Swansea. When the magnitude of this folly was realised, the coaches were sold off to Canada - as seen in recent Portillo wanderings on TV.

 

[swt_passenger]

Add to all the above the fact that you would need a fleet of bespoke rolling stock to meet Channel Tunnel fire safety and evacuation requirements, with top-and-tail locos through the tunnel.

But that’s no longer true, and has not been for quite a while. Distributed traction is now ok, and trains no longer have to span two escape connections.

 

[CW2]

But that’s no longer true, and has not been for quite a while.

Oh, OK, I stand corrected. Still need to build a fleet of coaches (to UK gauge if going off HS1 to serve beyond London) capable of haulage in the UK and Continent.

 

[swt_passenger]

Oh, OK, I stand corrected. Still need to build a fleet of coaches (to UK gauge if going off HS1 to serve beyond London) capable of haulage in the UK and Continent.

I was trying to remember the date, but I think it was all sorted in time for the 374 order from Siemens. There were numerous objections from Alstom at the time, but I think the regulators saw through the ”safety” issues and saw the protectionism...

 

[Ianno87]

I was trying to remember the date, but I think it was all sorted in time for the 374 order from Siemens. There were numerous objections from Alstom at the time, but I think the regulators saw through the ”safety” issues and saw the protectionism...

I might be mis-remembering, but wasn't it challenged by DB for their (now abandoned) plan to run 2x200m ICE sets to serve Amsterdam and Frankfurt?

 

[swt_passenger]

I might be mis-remembering, but wasn't it challenged by DB for their (now abandoned) plan to run 2x200m ICE sets to serve Amsterdam and Frankfurt?

I think you’re right, that was also a factor...

 

[farci]

And of course the wellknown issues over borders and security that plague Eurostar....
To be fair the passenger arm of SNCF suffers from high TACs too - hence the only sleepers (couchettes) are the ones the govt pays for to remote areas.

Except, there seems to be some doubt about whether the TAC in France are set at a level that suits the near monopoly operator SNCF
The purpose of this legislation was to separate ownership of the rail infrastructure (devolved to RFF) from its operation (devolved to SNCF). However, under the terms of the 1997 Act, SNCF is responsible for managing and maintaining the infrastructure on behalf of RFF. The services to be provided by SNCF and the related fee arrangements are specified in an agreement between RFF and SNCF

 

[Chris125]

In Crayonworld, I might not have been as opposed to HS2 if it had linked to HS1. Not so that unused trains could be sent to the continent but to turn trains somewhere easier than Euston. A commuter service to Birmingham from Kent. Ashford could have become the powerhouse it was promised by the channel tunnel. Instead HS2 focused on places it would never get to.

It doesn't work. Birmingham to Kent is never going to justify the vast cost of extending HS2 out the other side of London, building a through station equivalent to OOC in Central London is impractical, and there's no capacity on HS1 for HS2 services nor could they interwork.

 

[mmh]

It doesn't work. Birmingham to Kent is never going to justify the vast cost of extending HS2 out the other side of London, building a through station equivalent to OOC in Central London is impractical, and there's no capacity on HS1 for HS2 services nor could they interwork.

HS2 the other side of London is called HS1. There is lots of spare capacity on HS1.

 

[Ianno87]

HS2 the other side of London is called HS1. There is lots of spare capacity on HS1.

There, quite simply, is not. A path or two an hour, maybe. Eighteen? Nope.

And any spare capacity needs to be used for its most valuable purpose. Which is London to Canterbury domestically, or to Bordeaux/Cologne/Geneva etc Internationally, as outlined in the report.