High Speed Rail Scotland

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,143
Going by the artists impressions the bridge will be a walk across a station concourse between two lifts/escalators.

Given the difficulty of providing HS2 service to Heathrow itself, and the small numbers you expect to use HS2 to get there, I'm curious about what you would suggest instead. The Midlands has no connecting flights to Heathrow whatsoever, so for an international destination that can't easily be accessed via another airport our choices are train to London and a slow tube, or tube then Hex, or driving or coach round the M25. Even with the complication of getting to Toton and changing at OOC, HS2 provides a far better route.
Your post got me wondering, given that there's going to be areas where air can't act as a link to hub airports why not run a plus train for long distance flights (akin to plus bus for trains).

You could have a regional based map which determined the cost, but would allow travel from every station within that zone (as an example every station within Birmingham). You would have to check-in with an app on your phone or at a manned ticket office by a set time to guarantee your connection to your flight (as an example to enable you be on a train which gets you to the airport by 2 hours before your flight, but could be used for up to 30 hours beforehand, to enable an overnight stay, with the return leg needing to be completed 30 hours after arrival), the app would then track you and you could report delays as you go along. If you've checked in at a ticket office you'd then need to contact a guard to provide updates, although the system would be tracking any delays anyway.

By being able to use any station it would make it easier than regional flights, where that often requires travel to an airport and the extra costs that involves.

By having the 30 hour window it would allow you to use it for an overnight and maybe a bit of a look around somewhere, if anyone wants a longer break (say to look around London for a weekend) then advanced tickets would work well.

For many could work well, I'm aware that it's not going to suit everyone, but it would certainly save the airlines the need to try and serve areas which otherwise wouldn't be viable routes.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,048
For enough people, there's a significant difference between having to lift your luggage onto a check-in belt, in an environment where there are trolley are readily available, versus lifting it onto the train and then onto the rack.
I don't think those folks move the needle much on HSR business cases though... pretty marginal. This isn't being built for Granny X's once a year trip off-peak. She probably 'flies orange; anyway, and is being picked up and headed to a home vs a central location/office - so I'd suggest flying might end up being the better shout.

Aside from the impaired or unable, hardly anybody (not connecting) checks in a bag LON-Scotland either, so it's quite a moot tangent for HS2, especially given everything has wheels these days too.
 

FQTV

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2012
Messages
720
For enough people, there's a significant difference between having to lift your luggage onto a check-in belt, in an environment where there are trolley are readily available, versus lifting it onto the train and then onto the rack.
This is absolutely correct, and for those in Scotland commencing a domestic to international itinerary (and at the other end on their way back), that placing of the bag on the belt really is the point at which they become ‘protected’.

As you allude to, that means a great deal to many passengers, and indeed actually means that some folks can maintain a level of mobility that other modes of travel, and combinations thereof, don’t currently cater for - nor will unless other changes are made to, as I said above:

.....political, legislative, competitive and governmental circumstances.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,143
This is absolutely correct, and for those in Scotland commencing a domestic to international itinerary (and at the other end on their way back), that placing of the bag on the belt really is the point at which they become ‘protected’.

As you allude to, that means a great deal to many passengers, and indeed actually means that some folks can maintain a level of mobility that other modes of travel, and combinations thereof, don’t currently cater for - nor will unless other changes are made to, as I said above:
In what ways does rail need to improve its offering, given that there's support available for those who need it.

As a case study, I was aware of someone who was blind who was able to commute on a daily basis during the rush hour as staff put then onto the train and took them off the train.
 

FQTV

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2012
Messages
720
In what ways does rail need to improve its offering, given that there's support available for those who need it.

As a case study, I was aware of someone who was blind who was able to commute on a daily basis during the rush hour as staff put then onto the train and took them off the train.
This thread relates specifically to High Speed Rail to Scotland, and the contributions that I have made are with particular focus on the potential for High Speed Rail to affect the number of, or demand for, domestic flights in the U.K., principally to and from London Heathrow.

Special assistance provision for point to point journeys on the domestic rail network is, of course, critically important to those who need it, but I confess that I have no particular experience of it, still less with reference to passengers travelling to and from Scotland.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,143
This thread relates specifically to High Speed Rail to Scotland, and the contributions that I have made are with particular focus on the potential for High Speed Rail to affect the number of, or demand for, domestic flights in the U.K., principally to and from London Heathrow.

Special assistance provision for point to point journeys on the domestic rail network is, of course, critically important to those who need it, but I confess that I have no particular experience of it, still less with reference to passengers travelling to and from Scotland.
The point that I was making was that if the railways are willing to provide support to someone using rail every day then it would do so for any trips. In fact in another occasion I witnessed a guard providing someone in a wheelchair details of how to get support, having worked hard to get them onto the service without being informed in advance of then traveling.

I'm unaware of many news stories of people being inconvenienced by rail when they have a disability, compare this to stories like this which have made nation news:

 

Noddy

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
355
Location
UK
The point that I was making was that if the railways are willing to provide support to someone using rail every day then it would do so for any trips. In fact in another occasion I witnessed a guard providing someone in a wheelchair details of how to get support, having worked hard to get them onto the service without being informed in advance of then traveling.

I'm unaware of many news stories of people being inconvenienced by rail when they have a disability, compare this to stories like this which have made nation news:


Generally rail is pretty good for disabled people (except for a lack of toilets on some new trains which I find unacceptable), but so is air, and there are always going to be bad examples of both.


I think the issue with, for example in this case a Heathrow-Scotland transfer trip, is that baggage is handled throughout by your carrier throughout. You can just wait comfortably in the pub or browse the shops in the terminal with your hand luggage. If you are going by train you have to unload your heavy bag at Heathrow, get it down to the platform, get it onto the train, get it somewhere secure on the train, get it off the train, at OOC you’ll need to do a platform change, which will probably involve a bridge/underground walkway and at least one change of level, get it on the next train (which may already be busy from Euston), get it secure on that train, get it off that train. It’s a lot of work. There might be help, but there might not be. You might not feel ‘eligible’ for that help.

And the bigger issue FQTV was raising, I think, was what happens if you miss you connection due to a late flight or late train. You have to pay a walk on fare, or a hotel yourself. If you’re on a through plane that’s all handled and paid for by your carrier giving much more peace of mind.
 
Last edited:

Mordac

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2016
Messages
1,859
Location
Birmingham
Generally rail is pretty good for disabled people (except for a lack of toilets on some new trains which I find unacceptable), but so is air, and there are always going to be bad examples of both.


I think the issue with, for example in this case a Heathrow-Scotland transfer trip, is that baggage is handled throughout by your carrier throughout. You can just wait comfortably in the pub or browse the shops in the terminal with your hand luggage. If you are going by train you have to unload your heavy bag at Heathrow, get it down to the platform, get it onto the train, get it somewhere secure on the train, get it off the train, at OOC you’ll need to do a platform change, which will probably involve a bridge/underground walkway and at least one change of level, get it on the next train (which may already be busy from Euston), get it secure on that train, get it off that train. It’s a lot of work. There might be help, but there might not be. You might not feel ‘eligible’ for that help.

And the bigger issue FQTV was raising, I think, was what happens if you miss you connection due to a late flight or late train. You have to pay a walk on fare, or a hotel yourself. If you’re on a through plane that’s all handled and paid for by your carrier giving much more peace of mind.
Air France does codeshares with SNCF TGV services, where it's sold as a through ticket with the same protections as if the train segment was a flight. I wonder if the fares framework would allow BA to do something similar.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,130
Location
Nottingham
Air France does codeshares with SNCF TGV services, where it's sold as a through ticket with the same protections as if the train segment was a flight. I wonder if the fares framework would allow BA to do something similar.
I think that would only work if HS2 went to a Heathrow station as long-distance trains do at CDG and Schiphol. Having a local train connection in the chain probably introduces too much risk of things going wrong that the airline has no control over. However that benefit isn't enough to route HS2 via Heathrow, increasing cost and journey time for the benefit of a small minority of passengers. It would only really have been possible if we'd considered future national rail connections when choosing the site for our main airport.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,143
Generally rail is pretty good for disabled people (except for a lack of toilets on some new trains which I find unacceptable), but so is air, and there are always going to be bad examples of both.


I think the issue with, for example in this case a Heathrow-Scotland transfer trip, is that baggage is handled throughout by your carrier throughout. You can just wait comfortably in the pub or browse the shops in the terminal with your hand luggage. If you are going by train you have to unload your heavy bag at Heathrow, get it down to the platform, get it onto the train, get it somewhere secure on the train, get it off the train, at OOC you’ll need to do a platform change, which will probably involve a bridge/underground walkway and at least one change of level, get it on the next train (which may already be busy from Euston), get it secure on that train, get it off that train. It’s a lot of work. There might be help, but there might not be. You might not feel ‘eligible’ for that help.

And the bigger issue FQTV was raising, I think, was what happens if you miss you connection due to a late flight or late train. You have to pay a walk on fare, or a hotel yourself. If you’re on a through plane that’s all handled and paid for by your carrier giving much more peace of mind.
With missed connections I suggested this setup a few posts back:

Your post got me wondering, given that there's going to be areas where air can't act as a link to hub airports why not run a plus train for long distance flights (akin to plus bus for trains).

You could have a regional based map which determined the cost, but would allow travel from every station within that zone (as an example every station within Birmingham). You would have to check-in with an app on your phone or at a manned ticket office by a set time to guarantee your connection to your flight (as an example to enable you be on a train which gets you to the airport by 2 hours before your flight, but could be used for up to 30 hours beforehand, to enable an overnight stay, with the return leg needing to be completed 30 hours after arrival), the app would then track you and you could report delays as you go along. If you've checked in at a ticket office you'd then need to contact a guard to provide updates, although the system would be tracking any delays anyway.

By being able to use any station it would make it easier than regional flights, where that often requires travel to an airport and the extra costs that involves.

By having the 30 hour window it would allow you to use it for an overnight and maybe a bit of a look around somewhere, if anyone wants a longer break (say to look around London for a weekend) then advanced tickets would work well.

For many could work well, I'm aware that it's not going to suit everyone, but it would certainly save the airlines the need to try and serve areas which otherwise wouldn't be viable routes.
 

si404

Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
951
I think that would only work if HS2 went to a Heathrow station as long-distance trains do at CDG and Schiphol. Having a local train connection in the chain probably introduces too much risk of things going wrong that the airline has no control over.
If you are using Terminals 1 or 3 at CDG you have to use an airport train connector (CDGVAL) from the TGV station.

It would be the same at Heathrow - except if you have to change terminal at Heathrow, then it's HEx/TfL Rail/Piccadilly line - which the airlines deem acceptable. So it shouldn't be a problem to use that same link from OOC.

And, given the preferred option for an HS2 Heathrow spur was a station about a quarter of a mile west of Terminal 5, OOC is closer to Terminal 2 timewise - similar time on the train, but less time walking!

While OOC is primarily not really about Heathrow access, it's rather good at it.
 

Oveloel

Member
Joined
20 May 2018
Messages
15
I think that would only work if HS2 went to a Heathrow station as long-distance trains do at CDG and Schiphol. Having a local train connection in the chain probably introduces too much risk of things going wrong that the airline has no control over. However that benefit isn't enough to route HS2 via Heathrow, increasing cost and journey time for the benefit of a small minority of passengers. It would only really have been possible if we'd considered future national rail connections when choosing the site for our main airport.
RAF Northolt is right next to the NNML (and therefore the precise route of HS2)!
 

Roast Veg

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
943
Does anybody really expect Crossrail between Heathrow and Old Oak to be so unreliable as to be any sort of issue? The depot is very close at hand and it would take a total meltdown to prevent a shuttle running.
 

Speed43125

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2019
Messages
379
Does anybody really expect Crossrail between Heathrow and Old Oak to be so unreliable as to be any sort of issue? The depot is very close at hand and it would take a total meltdown to prevent a shuttle running.
It adds another layer for things to go wrong on, and relies on the passengers to make the connection themselves, I can imagine Airlines would have problems where people claim the train had an issue that caused them to miss their flight. Could also be quite confusing as non of the signage is going to be explicitly for heathrow bound passengers.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
18,130
Location
Nottingham
RAF Northolt is right next to the NNML (and therefore the precise route of HS2)!
Unfortunately Heathrow has (on a very quick measurement) about six times the land area and nearly three times the runway length. The closest we got to an integrated site was probably the Cublington proposal on the 1960s, which was abandoned after fierce local opposition. This would have been in a lightly populated area between Aylesbury and Leighton Buzzard, the approach and takeoff would have been more clear of major population centres, and although HS2 is several miles away it could probably have been routed further east at little extra cost, to create an airport station with fast direct access to most of our major cities.
 

si404

Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
951
Could also be quite confusing as non of the signage is going to be explicitly for heathrow bound passengers.
Who's your tip for the 2025 Epsom Derby?

Given you apparently know what the signage at Old Oak Common will be before it's designed, it's not much of a stretch to ask what horse that will be 3 years old in 5 years time will be looking good! ;)
 

Roast Veg

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
943
Codeshare would mandate some signage. Perhaps even some authentic black on yellow illuminated ones in the style of airports, or doubly branded NR and BA.
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
2,535
Location
UK
Airlines sell itineraries where people transfer between Heathrow and Gatwick, and even London City, and overnight transfers between terminals at heathrow have to involve public bus, heathrow express/connect, or maybe the disgusting "hopper", so I don't see why HS2/Heathrow Express/Crossrail journey wouldn't be doable. Even if HS2 ran right through T2, people heading to T4 and T5 would have to take crossrail to get to the terminals.

Might find that the minimum connection time is higher than that of planes - say 2h from OOC rather than 1h30 for inter-terminal connections. It's never going to beat a 1h30 flight from Glasgow and a 60 minute MCT for T5, so 2h30 from wheels up at Glasgow to wheels up at Heathrow, or 3h30 from arriving at Glasgow.

HS2 Connections would be for people travelling from Manchester and Birmingham especially, for non-BA airlines.

Best place for a new airport to replace Heathrow and the abomination that is Luton would be in Buckinghamshire, at the HS2/East-West junction. Major Gatwick flights could also move, leaving Gatwick for holiday destinations. Added benefit of annoying the NIMBYs even more than HS2.
 

GetTaeFalkirk

Member
Joined
23 Feb 2020
Messages
52
Location
Falkirk
Airlines sell itineraries where people transfer between Heathrow and Gatwick, and even London City, and overnight transfers between terminals at heathrow have to involve public bus, heathrow express/connect, or maybe the disgusting "hopper", so I don't see why HS2/Heathrow Express/Crossrail journey wouldn't be doable. Even if HS2 ran right through T2, people heading to T4 and T5 would have to take crossrail to get to the terminals.
I don't understand the anxiety about the transfer between OOC and Heathrow.

I've never felt any anxiety about the reliability of the Edinburgh Trams, Gatwick monorail, JFK Link train or Birmingham shuttle.

Not even the shuttle from T5 to T5B or T5C - though I usually take the "secret" pedestrian tunnel for a good brisk walk pre-flight.
 

Noddy

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
355
Location
UK
I don't understand the anxiety about the transfer between OOC and Heathrow.

I've never felt any anxiety about the reliability of the Edinburgh Trams, Gatwick monorail, JFK Link train or Birmingham shuttle.

Not even the shuttle from T5 to T5B or T5C - though I usually take the "secret" pedestrian tunnel for a good brisk walk pre-flight.
Because everything you’ve indicated in your posts (including this one) suggests

A) you’re a confident traveller
B) you’re confident at using various forms of public transport
C) you’re not worried about missing your flight or train
D) you’re not elderly
E) you’re not disabled
F) you’re not travelling on your own with three kids

That’s fine. But some (or even all) of the above will apply to many other users. For them even the perception of additional risk will be enough to put them off.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,143
Because everything you’ve indicated in your posts (including this one) suggests

A) you’re a confident traveller
B) you’re confident at using various forms of public transport
C) you’re not worried about missing your flight or train
D) you’re not elderly
E) you’re not disabled
F) you’re not travelling on your own with three kids

That’s fine. But some (or even all) of the above will apply to many other users. For them even the perception of additional risk will be enough to put them off.
As I've said before, few in here are expecting air travel to be totally wiped out by improved rail travel. As such there's likely to still be air travel.

However there's ways to overcome some of the above.

A+B - plus train app giving travelers better information about when and where to go
C - plus train app advising the last train to use and as long as you do so you'll be put on the next flight of there's problems with the trains.
D+E - assistance support being highlighted within the booking process, possibly even with a call from the airline to discuss support for all stages of travel.
F - I suspect that traveling with three kids would be stressful whatever the mode of travel. Although the level of this stress would depend on the age of the children involved. Although personally it's easier to entertain a small child on a train than when flying as there's more to see and it's easier to stop them kicking the seat of the person in front (not least as they can have their own seat aged 18 months and the legroom is better and a group of 4 you can get a table to sit around).
 

Noddy

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
355
Location
UK
As I've said before, few in here are expecting air travel to be totally wiped out by improved rail travel. As such there's likely to still be air travel.

However there's ways to overcome some of the above.

A+B - plus train app giving travelers better information about when and where to go
C - plus train app advising the last train to use and as long as you do so you'll be put on the next flight of there's problems with the trains.
D+E - assistance support being highlighted within the booking process, possibly even with a call from the airline to discuss support for all stages of travel.
F - I suspect that traveling with three kids would be stressful whatever the mode of travel. Although the level of this stress would depend on the age of the children involved. Although personally it's easier to entertain a small child on a train than when flying as there's more to see and it's easier to stop them kicking the seat of the person in front (not least as they can have their own seat aged 18 months and the legroom is better and a group of 4 you can get a table to sit around).
Absolutely, there are ways. However some/all of them could have already been done and haven’t. With through tickets it would be easy enough for GWR. Why didn’t Virgin do this when they had the WCML franchise?

There’s a failure to recognise that there might be an issue (gettaefalkirk) and not everyone will/can go via train via OOC, even if it’s cheaper/quicker.

Re the last point I do disagree though. Much better to entertain in an airport lounge (with your bags held by your carrier), where you have more space (and at Heathrow, things to do) than train/plane, with multiple transfers and on Heathrow-OOC leg no guarantee of getting seats etc, likewise if you miss the right HS2 train due to a late flight.
 
Last edited:

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,143
Absolutely, there are ways. However some/all of them could have already been done and haven’t. With through tickets it would be easy enough for GWR. Why didn’t Virgin do this when they had the WCML franchise?

There’s a failure to recognise that there might be an issue (gettaefalkirk) and not everyone will/can go via train via OOC, even if it’s cheaper/quicker.

Re the last point I do disagree though. Much better to entertain in an airport lounge (with your bags held by your carrier), where you have more space (and at Heathrow, things to do) than train/plane, with multiple transfers and on Heathrow-OOC leg no guarantee of getting seats etc, likewise if you miss the right HS2 train due to a late flight.
Part of the reason that is not been done before is that the numbers who couldn't get a reasonable flight had been small.

With a fall in the number of regional flights, with more of the country wishing to use rail, potentially even a lot fewer people flying overall and so on; then the need to make changes and not carry on doing what was done in the past becomes more important.

If you can charge someone only slightly more than it would cost then to get to their nearest airport but make them go to the major hub airport by train then not only have you saved the cost of running those regional flights but not increased your passengers costs then that's going to make it attractive to some passengers.

At the moment there's a need to run regional flights between London/South East and Manchester, once you impact further on those flows then they are likely to be cut like the London and Birmingham flights have been.

The smaller the network of flights that you've got to run then the more expensive it is to carry each passenger on the remaining flights. Especially if you have lost passengers to rail anyway and you aren't running as many flights or the flights are being run with smaller aircraft on the remaining routes.

The other factor which is likely to come in to play is carbon emissions, there's going to come a point when air is still burning a lot of fuel to move the aircraft around, to hit carbon neutral (even if you ignore international flights) then there's going to be a need for fewer people to fly internally. With those who still do do will then need to carbon offset for their flights, that's going to make flying even more expensive.

The guidance is that each person should produce 0.6 tonnes of emissions per year, that's comparable to one of:
10,000 miles by EV (current energy generation)
3,300 miles by petrol/diesel cars
10,000 miles by train (current diesel/electric mix)
2 return flights from Glasgow to London

(That assumes that you create zero emissions by any other source, however EV and rail are likely to improve over time due to fewer diesel trains and more green energy. It also doesn't account for infrastructure emissions which are worse for roads than rail, with rail being about 40% of that of road per mile. Nor does it take into account manufacturer of the vehicles, with batteries being about double that of ICE vehicles, something which electric trains generally don't have a problem with).

I wouldn't be surprised if we started to see personal carbon credits being brought in, with people able to buy additional credits by carbon offsetting and selling credits if they don't use their full allowance.

That would have a significant impact on the numbers wishing to fly, unless aircraft are able to go electric (even hydrogen isn't great). However even if they do the power requirements for getting then airborne is going to be significant.

The graph below compares rail's fuel source and the emissions created, as you can see even just on traction batteries are worse than using OHLE, with Hydrogen being worse again:
Screenshot_20200516-151522.png

It is why hydrogen is only ever going to be part, and probably a fairly small part at that, of the powering of rail.

As such, even though using hydrogen to power aircraft would be better than the current situation is still going to be worse than using rail.

The other thing to consider would be, without the need for so many airports, they would be an ideal source of brownfield development sites.

On the flying/train with children, I know someone who is a flying nut. Loves all things flying, wanted to be a pilot, can identify aircraft from the ground, etc. When they and their family go to Paris (last time for Euro Disney with 2 under 6's) guess how they got there? It was by Eurostar (including traveling for an hour by train into and across London) as they find it less stressful than flying. OK that is worth two adults, but they don't use rail week in week out (maybe about a dozen times a year) and would have to navigate the tube.

They are on a booked service, so have to get there on time, are fairly confident at traveling by rail but not all the time travelers, they have small children and luggage and are needing to navigate across Central London. I suspect that they would be fairly typical of those wishing to use HS2 and as such Old Oak Common would be much easier to navigate than the tube network. As such a fair number of people would be willing to make the change if there was a bit of extra help, which is what would likely happen if there was a plus rail app.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,048
The volumes (and ROI) of HS2 are not predicated around the elderly or those with three kids. I would suggest trains are preferable to both groups anyway. But neither are regular users, and both traditional train services and flights will not disappear, so they are free to go with whatever works best. They are marginal groups here.

Most people are either able-bodied or able to use the accessibility options (which are always spiffy on new infrastructure) - and most people don't travel within the UK with tons of luggage. So can we move on from grannies' annual trips?
 

si404

Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
951
most people don't travel within the UK with tons of luggage.
Given we're talking replacing flying, we're looking at stuff people can move about with relative ease anyway as they have to move it around the airports and are weight and quantity limited.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,048
Given we're talking replacing flying, we're looking at stuff people can move about with relative ease anyway as they have to move it around the airports and are weight and quantity limited.
And yet lifting luggage onto racks or up steps onto trains is mentioned, vs lifting up into hand luggage lockers or onto a scale, or up and down any stairs in any journey on any mode. I think it nets out.
 

Noddy

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
355
Location
UK
The volumes (and ROI) of HS2 are not predicated around the elderly or those with three kids. I would suggest trains are preferable to both groups anyway. But neither are regular users, and both traditional train services and flights will not disappear, so they are free to go with whatever works best. They are marginal groups here.

Most people are either able-bodied or able to use the accessibility options (which are always spiffy on new infrastructure) - and most people don't travel within the UK with tons of luggage. So can we move on from grannies' annual trips?
Given we're talking replacing flying, we're looking at stuff people can move about with relative ease anyway as they have to move it around the airports and are weight and quantity limited.
And yet lifting luggage onto racks or up steps onto trains is mentioned, vs lifting up into hand luggage lockers or onto a scale, or up and down any stairs in any journey on any mode. I think it nets out.
We’re talking about the 60% (quoted earlier) of ‘domestic’ U.K. travellers, who transit at Heathrow here. So the choice is I lift my main heavy bag once on to an airport scale somewhere in the world and then don’t see it again until I collect it again at my destination airport (in this case probably Glasgow/Edinburgh), or I get it back at Heathrow where it’s my responsibility again, to get across the airport, two stations and on and off two trains. I’m not a granny so I ‘can’ take it but I know which I’d prefer.

Yes the numbers here and their impact on HS2 is likely to be small to tiny. But, in the context of this thread, we’re talking about the number of passengers who fly between the central belt and Heathrow and vastly reducing those numbers (or not).

In my view the only way to do that would be to have really significant cost penalty (unlikely) or really significant time penalty. The later really only happens if HS2 is continued all the way to the central belt. Which, if you are basing your potential numbers on the people travelling by plane isn’t going to happen (but that’s flawed imo anyway).
 
Last edited:

Austriantrain

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2018
Messages
20
While I have no intention to weigh in on the merits of a through HSL to Scotland and of serving Heathrow, I just want to mention that having long-distance trains stop at major airports and offer through-ticketing so as to guarantee connections is not so rare on the continent. German Rail has done this for years and recently it is being done in Austria as well - ÖBB trains to Vienna Airport have replaced some domestic flights and carry Austrian Airlines flight numbers.

While it is not for everyone, it is a good alternative for lots of people, especially the huge „fly to XYZ for the weekend with a carry-on-bag“ crowd as well as for business travellers, who usually avoid large amounts of luggage. Pressure to reduce short-haul-flying is only going to increase.

Once HS2 and NPR reach Manchester Airport, something very similar could be established in the UK.
 

Top