Government announces independent review into HS2 programme

[PeterC]

As an example of the public failure to understand what HS2 is for I spotted a post on the BBC site under the news article. The poster was saying that instead of HS2 they should improve capacity to Milton Keynes! There were similar posts about other bottlenecks on the route.

 

[Ianno87]

As an example of the public failure to understand what HS2 is for I spotted a post on the BBC site under the news article. The poster was saying that instead of HS2 they should improve capacity to Milton Keynes! There were similar posts about other bottlenecks on the route.

In fairness, I think it genuinely a difficult concept for Joe Public to grasp - other people get the shiny new trains/infrastructure, but the people with the 'old' trains realise the actual benefit.

 

[mmh]

As an example of the public failure to understand what HS2 is for I spotted a post on the BBC site under the news article. The poster was saying that instead of HS2 they should improve capacity to Milton Keynes! There were similar posts about other bottlenecks on the route.

In fairness, I think it genuinely a difficult concept for Joe Public to grasp - other people get the shiny new trains/infrastructure, but the people with the 'old' trains realise the actual benefit.

It's not the public failing to understand, it's the public not being told that the reason for HS2 is to improve capacity to Milton Keynes. They're not being told that for a reason - HS2 is unpopular enough as it is. Tell them that and watch support for it plummet.

 

[Ianno87]

They're not being told that for a reason - HS2 is unpopular enough as it is. Tell them that and watch support for it plummet.

That quite literally makes no sense.

Unless you're touching on in stating that HS2 benefits MK, nobody would beleive them?

 

[Bletchleyite]

As an example of the public failure to understand what HS2 is for I spotted a post on the BBC site under the news article. The poster was saying that instead of HS2 they should improve capacity to Milton Keynes!

That's utterly comedic in terms of the level of ignorance, given that that (among other south WCML stations) is pretty much what HS2 is for.

 

[ScottGallagher]

HS1 and HS2 are different beasts, HS1 was originally called the channel tunnel rail link and I'm fairly sure I read (when I used to buy modern railways) there was apparently no original intention to have domestic high speed services on it, these were at the insistence of Kent county council. These have proved unexpectedly succesful and because of that it's cheekily rebranded as HS1 in the hope it softens opinion for HS2.

As for HS2 it's purpose keeps changing, at the beginning it was sold to the public to avoid the need for a third Heathrow runway (now more or less approved) as there would be fewer domestic fights because people would use the hs2 train to get to Heathrow (which had it's planned link scrapped in 2015). It's no wonder people are cynical.

 

[Brush 4]

https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/08/23-23-august-news-in-brief.html

THE Prime Minister is considering building the northern sections of HS2 first, according to reports. He announced a wide-ranging review of the scheme on Wednesday, to be led by former HS2 chairman Douglas Oakervee and Lord Berkeley, with complete cancellation said to be an option. The Times now says that the review will also consider whether the project should be ‘reprioritised’. Mr Johnson is understood to be interested in the idea of bringing forward the later phase from Crewe to Manchester and Birmingham to Leeds. At the moment, HS2 Phase 1 between London and Birmingham is intended to open first, in 2026, with Phase 2a between Birmingham and Crewe opening a year later. Phase 2b, which consists of the lines between Crewe and Manchester and between the Midlands and Yorkshire, is not currently planned to open until 2033.

I knew it. I've been waiting to see how the Gov. will find a way to cancel HS2 without using the word cancel. If Boris makes this stick, the delay caused by legislation- as outlined by the Comment below the story- will delay the whole project for many years without the need for any announcement about cancelling. If he doesn't, they will have to come up with some other jolly wheeze. It may not be a credible plan but when did that ever stop a Government.

 

[Camden]

There is no comment beneath the story. Did you just make it?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2019/08/23-23-august-news-in-brief.html
I knew it. I've been waiting to see how the Gov. will find a way to cancel HS2 without using the word cancel. If Boris makes this stick, the delay caused by legislation- as outlined by the Comment below the story- will delay the whole project for many years without the need for any announcement about cancelling. If he doesn't, they will have to come up with some other jolly wheeze. It may not be a credible plan but when did that ever stop a Government.

It's simply that HS2 Phase 1 (to Lichfield) and 2a (to Crewe) are either fully authorised or close to it, while Phase 2b (Crewe-Golborne and Birmingham-Leeds) is still at the drawing board stage with the routes not fixed and no parliamentary timetable for approval.
The NPR aspects are also delaying planning for Phase 2b.
Switching priority to Phase 2b may conceivably bring forward its opening date from 2033 by a few years, but you would have lost any benefits from Phase 1/2a.
In any case, Phase 2b makes very little sense in isolation.

 

[infobleep]

I despair that after all this time there are still people who think HS2 isd about saving 20 minutes to Brum.
For God`s sake, it is about additional capacity, alot of it.
But when you build a new line why build it using Victorian technology and run at 100 mph, you build using the latest tech which happens to run at 200 mph and by default saves 20 mins to Brum (actually a bit more) but that is not the prime purpose. it is a by product.

I live 70 miles from the HS2 route and was only explaining to my neighbour yesterday why we will benefit as she similarly couldn`1t get it but then she isn`t on this forum.
My reply was all the expresses from the large cities would transfer to HS2 leaving the ECML: (and of course WCML and MML) largely free for a whole range of new services that currently cannot operate. That`s what HS2 ios about.

They could even reopen some smaller stations with the expresses off the lines. I'd like to see that happen.

 

[ExRes]

While happily admitting that I'm no supporter of the endlessly rising costs of HS2, I had to laugh this morning when my neighbour told me that there is a report in his newspaper today of another increase, this time a Power company is claiming that they need an additional £35m from consumers to pay for the increased electricity that they will need to supply, it seems that each consumer, yes each consumer, will have to find a further 75p per annum to cover these costs, my wife and I are currently reviewing which of our family heirlooms will have to be sold off

 

[Metrailway]

It's not the public failing to understand, it's the public not being told that the reason for HS2 is to improve capacity to Milton Keynes. They're not being told that for a reason - HS2 is unpopular enough as it is. Tell them that and watch support for it plummet.

That quite literally makes no sense.

Unless you're touching on in stating that HS2 benefits MK, nobody would beleive them?

I think mmh means that the 'relieving the southern WCML' argument feeds into the latent opinion that HS2 is primarily for London and SE England's benefit.

Support for HS2 largely falls away the further north you go. For example, in the West Midlands, a recent ITV poll showed only 34% were in favour of the scheme despite HS2 Ltd, NR and local politicians constantly promoting the benefits of HS2 to the area.

 

[Ianno87]

As for HS2 it's purpose keeps changing, at the beginning it was sold to the public to avoid the need for a third Heathrow runway (now more or less approved) as there would be fewer domestic fights because people would use the hs2 train to get to Heathrow (which had it's planned link scrapped in 2015). It's no wonder people are cynical.

That has never been the primary purpose of HS2.

 

[matacaster]

There is a story here about Metropolitan railway plan to take tube route 'nearly as far as Milton Keynes'. Perhaps some augmented development along these lines might be considerably cheaper than HS2 since all we are worried about is capacity at the southern end of WCML. This would provide a commuter route into London which is the prime purpose of HS2 regardless of what the publicity says.

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/story-behind-long-forgotten-london-3235498

 

[PartyOperator]

I think mmh means that the 'relieving the southern WCML' argument feeds into the latent opinion that HS2 is primarily for London and SE England's benefit.

Support for HS2 largely falls away the further north you go. For example, in the West Midlands, a recent ITV poll showed only 34% were in favour of the scheme despite HS2 Ltd, NR and local politicians constantly promoting the benefits of HS2 to the area.

Slightly surprising given that most of the stations served by HS2, and most of the population near these stations, are outside of London. Roughly a third of the UK's population lives within 10 miles of a station that will be served by HS2, with two thirds of those people being outside London. Additionally, about half of the UK's population lives within 25 miles of the new high-speed railway itself and should therefore benefit from the extra capacity released on existing railways near them. Seems like the benefits will be pretty widely distributed.

To look at it another way - the population living within 25 miles of the HS2 route is greater than that of the Benelux region, in half of the land area. Obviously it's relatively expensive to build here, but this also leads to much greater benefits.

 

[matacaster]

I think mmh means that the 'relieving the southern WCML' argument feeds into the latent opinion that HS2 is primarily for London and SE England's benefit.

Support for HS2 largely falls away the further north you go. For example, in the West Midlands, a recent ITV poll showed only 34% were in favour of the scheme despite HS2 Ltd, NR and local politicians constantly promoting the benefits of HS2 to the area.

Of course if the journey to london from say west yorkshire took 8 hours and you cut 2 hours off it or you simply couldn't get a train as they were all full, then HS2 would be popular with people up north. Taking Leeds as an example, the current 2 hours is pretty decent and saving half an hour at most seems a ridiculously small saving which could be achieved by business types simply getting up 30 minutes earlier for the morning peak trains. As far as capacity is concerned, the biggest issue in the north is the ridiculously short trains which ply our network. Its only an hour or so from Leeds to Manchester, the most overcrowded of the TPE routes and they are at last increasing trains from 3 to 5 coaches, but even 5 coaches will merely catch up to current demand, it will soon be far too little. DfT authorise as little as they can get away with and then rarely allow further build when the original build is completely inadequate.

 

[matacaster]

Slightly surprising given that most of the stations served by HS2, and most of the population near these stations, are outside of London. Roughly a third of the UK's population lives within 10 miles of a station that will be served by HS2, with two thirds of those people being outside London. Additionally, about half of the UK's population lives within 25 miles of the new high-speed railway itself and should therefore benefit from the extra capacity released on existing railways near them. Seems like the benefits will be pretty widely distributed.

To look at it another way - the population living within 25 miles of the HS2 route is greater than that of the Benelux region, in half of the land area. Obviously it's relatively expensive to build here, but this also leads to much greater benefits.

Can you provide some more detail regarding your assertions above please?
How far from the centre is your 'outside London'. I presume your figures include places like York, Newcastle, Middlesbrough, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, all the South East and the South West 10 miles from your definition of 'outside London', notwithstanding the whole of Northern Ireland.

Whilst some extra capacity for additional services on conventional routes would doubtless be available, these rely on a North / South axis, so there would be hardly any benefit at all to any East - West journeys. Huge tracts of Northern England are more than 10 miles from any HS2 station as the population is spread out more.

 

[daodao]

It's simply that HS2 Phase 1 (to Lichfield) and 2a (to Crewe) are either fully authorised or close to it, while Phase 2b (Crewe-Golborne and Birmingham-Leeds) is still at the drawing board stage with the routes not fixed and no parliamentary timetable for approval.
The NPR aspects are also delaying planning for Phase 2b.
Switching priority to Phase 2b may conceivably bring forward its opening date from 2033 by a few years, but you would have lost any benefits from Phase 1/2a.
In any case, Phase 2b makes very little sense in isolation.

HS2 Phases 1 and 2a have a credible case in terms of increasing capacity; the current LNW lines London-Birmingham-Crewe are full.

Phase 2b does not have such a case, nor does HS3. The trans-pennine capacity issue can be resolved for the short-distance trips involved by increasing train length to at least 6 carriages. The ex-LNW lines north of Crewe are not congested, nor is the current ex-Midland route from Birmingham to Derby/Sheffield/Leeds.

 

[Ianno87]

. The ex-LNW lines north of Crewe are not congested, .

I beg to differ for the Stockport corridor, and also the Winsford-Weaver Jn section of WCML.

 

[PartyOperator]

Can you provide some more detail regarding your assertions above please?
How far from the centre is your 'outside London'. I presume your figures include places like York, Newcastle, Middlesbrough, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, all the South East and the South West 10 miles from your definition of 'outside London', notwithstanding the whole of Northern Ireland.

Whilst some extra capacity for additional services on conventional routes would doubtless be available, these rely on a North / South axis, so there would be hardly any benefit at all to any East - West journeys. Huge tracts of Northern England are more than 10 miles from any HS2 station as the population is spread out more.

Sure. Being relatively crude (feel free to check the numbers), I make the population within 10 miles of one or more of these stations (in millions):

Euston/OOC: 7
Interchange/Curzon Street: 2
East Midlands: 1
Manchester, Manchester airport, Liverpool, Warrington: 4.3
Leeds: 1.3
Sheffield: 1
Glasgow: 1.3
Edinburgh: 0.6
Crewe, Stafford: 0.5
Preston to Carstairs: 0.9
Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, York: 1.9

Total: 21.8, of which 7 million are in London.

You could include all 9 million Greater London if you wanted given generally better public transport links but even then it's over 60% outside of London.

"Huge tracts" of England are relatively unimportant if nobody lives there. Half of the population of the UK as a whole lives within 25 miles of the HS2 route (just the high-speed bit, not including lines served by classic-compatible trains). A fast transpennine route is also important since there are so many people living on either side, but it's not an either/or thing.

Have a play around with the population mapping tool here:
https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/mapping/popest/gpw-v4/

 

[matacaster]

Sure. Being relatively crude (feel free to check the numbers), I make the population within 10 miles of one or more of these stations (in millions):

Euston/OOC: 7
Interchange/Curzon Street: 2
East Midlands: 1
Manchester, Manchester airport, Liverpool, Warrington: 4.3
Leeds: 1.3
Sheffield: 1
Glasgow: 1.3
Edinburgh: 0.6
Crewe, Stafford: 0.5
Preston to Carstairs: 0.9
Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, York: 1.9

Total: 21.8, of which 7 million are in London.

You could include all 9 million Greater London if you wanted given generally better public transport links but even then it's over 60% outside of London.

"Huge tracts" of England are relatively unimportant if nobody lives there. Half of the population of the UK as a whole lives within 25 miles of the HS2 route (just the high-speed bit, not including lines served by classic-compatible trains). A fast transpennine route is also important since there are so many people living on either side, but it's not an either/or thing.

Have a play around with the population mapping tool here:
https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/mapping/popest/gpw-v4/

Err, but Liverpool, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, York, whole of Northern Ireland are all in the UK and nowhere near an HS2 station ... and being within 10 miles of an HS2 station is what you said in your original post.

 

[The Planner]

A dedicated HS2 station, or a station that HS2 trains call at?

 

[PartyOperator]

Err, but Liverpool, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Newcastle, Durham, Darlington, York, whole of Northern Ireland are all in the UK and nowhere near an HS2 station ... and being within 10 miles of an HS2 station is what you said in your original post.

I said "stations served by HS2", which the ones I listed will be. Maybe "stations served by HS2 trains" would be clearer? If you can get on a high-speed train that runs from your station onto HS2 to take you to the most popular long-distance destinations, you're benefiting directly from HS2. Glasgow to London will be 54 minutes quicker after HS2. Birmingham to Newcastle will be an hour and seven minutes quicker. They'll benefit from the quicker lines and not having to deal with the most crowded bits of the classic network like the South WCML and New Street station, and everywhere along the HS2 route will benefit from not having to accommodate the fast trains. If HS2 generates so much extra traffic on the northern reaches of the classic network that it becomes congested too, it can be upgraded too. Currently, that's not the issue.

The second point about 50% of people in the UK living within 25 miles of the HS2 network is hopefully clear. That's where the people are, that's where the capacity is most needed, that's where new lines can deliver the most benefit.

 

[matacaster]

I said "stations served by HS2", which the ones I listed will be. Maybe "stations served by HS2 trains" would be clearer? If you can get on a high-speed train that runs from your station onto HS2 to take you to the most popular long-distance destinations, you're benefiting directly from HS2. Glasgow to London will be 54 minutes quicker after HS2. Birmingham to Newcastle will be an hour and seven minutes quicker. They'll benefit from the quicker lines and not having to deal with the most crowded bits of the classic network like the South WCML and New Street station, and everywhere along the HS2 route will benefit from not having to accommodate the fast trains. If HS2 generates so much extra traffic on the northern reaches of the classic network that it becomes congested too, it can be upgraded too. Currently, that's not the issue.

The second point about 50% of people in the UK living within 25 miles of the HS2 network is hopefully clear. That's where the people are, that's where the capacity is most needed, that's where new lines can deliver the most benefit.

Thanks for clarifying that.

Does this mean that all the stock, or some of it, which will run on HS2 will be new and classic compatible (have the costs for all these new trains which will run off the HS2 new bits been factored in to estimates?) or will existing classic sets run on HS2 and will they get in the way as they are not as fast?

As only HS2 phase 1 is actually approved (subject to review which may delay things) what is the likely real completion date for the first phase?

HS2 later phases now seem to be being morphed into NPR, none of which has Parliamentary approval (think its 2022 by the time planning permission gets granted) and the politicians oop north seem to be determined to argue about where and what NPR should serve (Bradford Central would cost a fortune). Andy Burnham is wanting a very expensive tunnel into Manchester presumably because London has one and he's jealous? Its all in the melting pot whether there is a phase2a, 2b, NPR, terminus at Manchester Piccadilly or through station, same at Leeds. Sheffield looks left out completely.

So, I cant really see these later plans coming to fruition in my lifetime- would you like to hazard a guess as to when Manchester and Leeds might actually be connected from HS2 / NPR via a (not so) high speed line?

 

[Robertj21a]

Well, all I know is that if HS2 is honestly intended to help the north then someone is doing a very poor job of selling it as such. All I hear is that '......the WCML is 'full', particularly south of MK'.

I'm sure most people in the north know only too well that it will probably never improve their lives, in any realistic timescale. It's not surprising that most of them are far more likely to want improvements across the area, from Liverpool to Hull, and all between.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think mmh means that the 'relieving the southern WCML' argument feeds into the latent opinion that HS2 is primarily for London and SE England's benefit.

It is. That isn't a reason to can it, it's a reason to build NPR as well, as that benefits the whole North and not the South East.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well, all I know is that if HS2 is honestly intended to help the north then someone is doing a very poor job of selling it as such. All I hear is that '......the WCML is 'full', particularly south of MK'.

I'm sure most people in the north know only too well that it will probably never improve their lives, in any realistic timescale. It's not surprising that most of them are far more likely to want improvements across the area, from Liverpool to Hull, and all between.

It is, but how's about they pack in the resentment and campaign for both?

 

[Ianno87]

It is, but how's about they pack in the resentment and campaign for both?

And the case for the north is made stronger still (indeed, made credible) by building the south bit too.

 

[Neen Sollars]

HS2 not worth the £100 + billion it will cost. Serious Fraud Office moving in on HS2 Ltd. See new article below from MOS.

"https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ontracts-Troubled-rail-scheme-new-crisis.html"

 

[krus_aragon]

Does this mean that all the stock, or some of it, which will run on HS2 will be new and classic compatible (have the costs for all these new trains which will run off the HS2 new bits been factored in to estimates?) or will existing classic sets run on HS2 and will they get in the way as they are not as fast?

Going from memory, there was no intention to run existing stock (what you describe as "classic") on the new infrastructure. If built with fully-featured ERTMS, Pendolinos would require compatible equipment to be refitted before they could venture on, anyway. I'm pretty sure that rolling stock costs are included in the price tag.

The plan as I recall was for the first rolling stock order (for phase 1) to be of the classic-compatible variety, with the captive stock ordered later.