• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

HS2 and the coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.

SouthEastBuses

On Moderation
Joined
15 Nov 2019
Messages
1,800
Location
uk
Have to admit, HS2 is useless in my opinion.

Whilst I love high speed rail in general, this project is useless. We already have two mainlines that work (the WCML and ECML), with trains capable of reaching 201 km/h (225 km/h in the future on the ECML!) and the journey times are really quick (about 2 hours from London to Manchester for example), so why bother wasting millions onto a new project that all it does is that it will cut journey times by maximum 30 minutes. Money spent on HS2 would be better spent on electrifying all the railway lines in the UK that are still unelectrified.

And for capacity increase, how about two new tracks on the WCML compatible of speeds for 300 km/h instead of a completely new useless railway?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
And for capacity increase, how about two new tracks on the WCML compatible of speeds for 300 km/h instead of a completely new useless railway?

HS2 *is* the new WCML fast lines....just freed from the hassle and constraint of having to follow the WCML's alignment and the built up areas they would impact (which is nowhere near fit for even 300kmh anyway)
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,553
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Whilst I love high speed rail in general, this project is useless. We already have two mainlines that work (the WCML and ECML), with trains capable of reaching 201 km/h (225 km/h in the future on the ECML!) and the journey times are really quick (about 2 hours from London to Manchester for example), so why bother wasting millions onto a new project that all it does is that it will cut journey times by maximum 30 minutes. Money spent on HS2 would be better spent on electrifying all the railway lines in the UK that are still unelectrified.

Because it's not about speed, it's about capacity. Speed is a happy consequence, as if you're building a new railway it doesn't cost that much more to build a high speed one, so you might as well.

And for capacity increase, how about two new tracks on the WCML compatible of speeds for 300 km/h instead of a completely new useless railway?

I'd suggest a ride on the WCML then coming back and telling us where you think those tracks might go.
 

SouthEastBuses

On Moderation
Joined
15 Nov 2019
Messages
1,800
Location
uk
Because it's not about speed, it's about capacity. Speed is a happy consequence, as if you're building a new railway it doesn't cost that much more to build a high speed one, so you might as well.



I'd suggest a ride on the WCML then coming back and telling us where you think those tracks might go.

I've been on it quite a few times, precisely on a Virgin Trains 390 Pendolino. They would go in the middle of the current 4 tracked line, between London euston all the way as far as Warrington Bank quay.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
I've been on it quite a few times, precisely on a Virgin Trains 390 Pendolino. They would go in the middle of the current 4 tracked line, between London euston all the way as far as Warrington Bank quay.
Well, maybe between the down fast line and up fast line? If there is enough space of course

I love the idea that HS2 has been in design development for well over a decade now by hundreds of highly skilled engineers, but who all apparently just missed the obvious trick of "put it in the middle of the WCML".
 

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,045
Location
Birmingham
The only way you could use WCML alignment would be to have the new tracks on a viaduct above the existing ones. I hardly see how that would save much money.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,284
Have to admit, HS2 is useless in my opinion.

Whilst I love high speed rail in general, this project is useless. We already have two mainlines that work (the WCML and ECML), with trains capable of reaching 201 km/h (225 km/h in the future on the ECML!) and the journey times are really quick (about 2 hours from London to Manchester for example), so why bother wasting millions onto a new project that all it does is that it will cut journey times by maximum 30 minutes. Money spent on HS2 would be better spent on electrifying all the railway lines in the UK that are still unelectrified.

And for capacity increase, how about two new tracks on the WCML compatible of speeds for 300 km/h instead of a completely new useless railway?

In the last decade we've seen rail travel between London and the region's served by the WCML increase by over 70% (for every 100 passengers on 2009 there's now 170).

Screenshot_20200414-102620.png

Given that HS2 was assumed, at opening of Phase 2, to have seen growth of 77%, the WCML is clearly in need of extra capacity.

Whilst WFH will have an impact on rail travel about 50% of rail travel is business related and then 50% of jobs are suitable to be done from home.

Even then not all those jobs will be done by any working from home (say 75% will be at least some of the time) and even then most people who will work from home will only do so some of the time that's likely to be between 95% of the time and 5% of the time. However likely to be an average of between 25% and 75% of the time, that puts the fall in rail travel in the 10-15% range.

However that fall isn't likely to be equal across all the railway. Chances are the impact for London commuter trains would be much higher than long distance travel.

However where there's often >100% loading on quite a lot of London Peak hour commuter services from within the M25 and wider South East/Home Counties chances are they would (even if the extra space didn't attract people to use rail) just end up being comfortably loaded.

As an example a train with a loading of 130% pre Covid-19 a 40% fall would still be 78% full. Whilst increase it to 140% would be 84% full.

Even a small increase from those sorts of passenger loadings would get us back to 100% full.

However, even then it's probably not enough to justify shortening 12 coach trains to 8 (a 40% fall to 78% loading would be 117% loading on an 8 coach train Vs a 12 coach train).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top