HS2 delayed again?

[FMerrymon]

While short lengths of the GC main line and others (eg Kenilworth-Berkswell) have been reused, the land take for HS2 has been vastly larger (eg at Calvert).
In no sense could the narrow GC route have been used for a 400km/h alignment, especially with sizeable towns now being along the route.

At Calvert, its 4 tracks wide, as is everyone's favourite bat tunnel, which is passive provision for the EWR Aylesbury link.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

While short lengths of the GC main line and others (eg Kenilworth-Berkswell) have been reused, the land take for HS2 has been vastly larger (eg at Calvert).
In no sense could the narrow GC route have been used for a 400km/h alignment, especially with sizeable towns now being along the route.

I suppose that raises the question as to how much extra expense has been caused by building it to 400 km/h standards instead of say 250 km/h.

 

[grove]

Does anyone know if the delay costs have been evaluated? Contract delays, cancellations, retained employee costs, and redundancy? The point is that it will need to be funded or found from within the existing 'budget' (if it can be located).

 

[The Ham]

But 1 in 100 year events happen pretty frequently now.

Which is why there's an allowance for climate change (typically plus 40 to 45 percent).

However, that's kinda the point, by ensuring that such storms don't result in more water heading downstream - as during such storms only a fraction of the water end up in the system.

 

[SynthD]

For these purposes, the M1 corridor was always far more suitable than the Chiltern route.

Is that a forum opinion, or is it in a government document?

But I don't understand why our rail community accepts all of this so readily.

What do you mean by accepts?

HS2 should have had a dual start with both London to Birmingham/Handsacre AND Manchester to Handsacre being constructed simultaneously

That may be a fine plan on the rail side, but as soon as the Treasury starts cutting spending within a year, this plan will be stretched out over longer, more delays.

 

[NCT]

I'm not convinced Chiltern vs M1 would have made much difference to cost and opposition. The M1 route would go through built-up areas a you'd have to tunnel through Leagrave and Newport Pagnell at the very least. Hugging the M1 closely would also mean frequent viaducts or tunnels to get past motorway junctions. Anything that attempts to deviate from these urban areas without going ridiculously far east would end up crossing the Chilterns at almost just a wide a point (e.g. an alignment that stays to the west of Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard).

It seems there have been three main sources of cost increases:

1. Unit costs for the given engineering specification
2. Engineering over specification for the required design parameters - like the reported over-specified piling depths for surface sections
3. Politically induced design parameter choices, like lowering the track into unnecessary cuttings and extension of green tunnels

Factor no. 1 above is the biggest contributor to the cost escalation:

Tier ones to be reviewed after HS2 'stretched market beyond capability' | Construction News

A review into the HS2 project has found it stretched the supply market beyond its capacity and warned the UK's construction capability is not “fit for

www.constructionnews.co.uk

The [Stewart]review noted that the failure of the project’s Main Works Civils Contracts (MWCCs) to deliver reliable outcomes were “by far the most significant contributors to the overall cost increases”

This has nothing to do with Chiltern vs M1. The M1 corridor would have had its own political difficulties. I think posters suggesting Chiltern bad working class houses fair game are being a tad simplistic.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Today at 14:50 ==

Do other countries complete their schemes in one go?

No, at least not recently. HS2 London - Birmingham/Handsacre is one of the biggest single phase railway projects in Europe.

LGV Atlantique was opened to Tours and Le Mans in 1990. Extensions to Bordeaux and Rennes didn't happen for another 27 years. Extensions to Toulouse and Dax are yet to begin construction.

Germany is also notorious for micro-phasing their HSLs.

Or more to the point, how many countries abandon their schemes half way through?

Quite a few, at least in terms of long delays and indefinite pauses with governments going to hot and cold.

Only a small fraction of LGV Rhin-Rhone is operational with future phases with absolutely no commitment.

The previous government pretty much pulled the plug on their entire HSR programme. While the narrative is less clear cut it seems the circumstances are not dissimilar to that of the UK - a fiscal crunch combined with some high-profile project failures and delays (Stuttgart21 and Rastatt Tunnel). It doesn't mean HSR in Germany is completely dead - it's just there's an indefinite pause in providing funding commitments to future projects. Projects like Frankfurt - Mannheim and Gelnhausen - Eisenach are as much 'abandoned' as HS2 phase 2.

===========

In hindsight HS2's original aspirations of Phase 1 by 2026 and Phase 2 by 2033 were always too ambitious, even by European standards. The Stewart Review said that HS2 is using up the entirety of Britain's construction supply chain. At HS2's infancy this problem was identified and HS2 academies were supposed to avoid this problem, but for one reason or another this didn't happen...

I don't know how you solve the problem of political support of large infrastructure projects. This isn't just a UK problem it's across the developed west. Europe clearly needs significant investments in its infrastructure, but almost invariably if a scheme is born at a time someone has just entered the workforce, by the time the scheme is fully open that said someone will be close to retirement.