HS2 Eastern Leg updates

[NoRoute]

Yeah this is really odd and risks making transport connectivity worse in the Midlands, rather than better. The MML is pretty crowded and you can see that from limited service in large towns like Belper.

Belper is barely a small town, population only around 22,000 people, there's bigger towns with no railway station or rail service at all. The service to Belper says little about the MML, it's lucky to have a rail service given its size.

 

[NoRoute]

Whilst I disagree with you regarding the overall scheme, I fully agree that it would be extremely silly to only do half a job. Unfortunately, politics doesn't often align with this argument...

But the problem comes from the escalating costs of the HS2 Project, it was originally sold to the public and the politicians with a cost figure of around £30 Billion, which soon became over £50 Billion, then it advanced toward £100 Billion and now there's so much uncertainty on what the Eastern Leg will cost we don't know what the final figure is.

If costs are simply out of control, then inevitably a point is reached where some parts of the project have to be cut, or at the very least put on hold until a later date when further funding can be secured. To write any project a blank cheque is hugely wasteful when there's other projects and investment which provide a better return or public benefit.

 

[KeithP]

...regardless of your perspective on HS2, it is undeniable that the Eastern Leg provides the most value out of the whole project. To remove it will significantly reduce the benefits HS2 was designed to provide.

Really?

I thought the 'major benefit of HS2' was to relieve pressure on the southern parts - between London and Birmingham - of the West Coast Mainline.

But we digress...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yep. The important thing is, whatever is initially built is done in such a way not to prevent the full shebang being completed at a later date.

Exactly. The reduced-size Euston is a concern in this regard, but I reckon you'd be able to extend the HS2 side at the expense of a couple of classic-line platforms later should that be necessary (which could be achieved by rejigging layover locations on the LNR services to reduce platform occupancy at Euston itself, possibly as well as using the very long platforms for 2 8-car trains rather than just one*), so it's not the case that 10 platforms now means 10 forever.

* Platforms 1 and 12 (or was it 15?) can take a 16-car Cally plus the shunt and train locomotives, so they could also take 2 x 8-car 350s with the right signalling tweaks should this be necessary.

 

[Hadders]

Really?

I thought the 'major benefit of HS2' was to relieve pressure on the southern parts - between London and Birmingham - of the West Coast Mainline.

But we digress...

Yes, but if the London to Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Edinburgh traffic is put onto HS2 then it relieves the southern ends of the MML and ECML which means better connectivity for places like Newark, Grantham, East Anglia, etc etc.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

HS2 is a very expensive replacement for the southern WCML.
Its economics, and the wider network benefits, improve significantly if you add MML and southern ECML replacement to the business case, without the need to build more new lines from London.

 

[Bletchleyite]

HS2 is a very expensive replacement for the southern WCML.
Its economics, and the wider network benefits, improve significantly if you add MML and southern ECML replacement to the business case, without the need to build more new lines from London.

You don't of course have to do it now for that business case to be valid, though.

The business case for the Channel Tunnel was better with HS1, but it operated for 20-odd years before that opened.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Exactly. The reduced-size Euston is a concern in this regard, but I reckon you'd be able to extend the HS2 side at the expense of a couple of classic-line platforms later should that be necessary (which could be achieved by rejigging layover locations on the LNR services to reduce platform occupancy at Euston itself, possibly as well as using the very long platforms for 2 8-car trains rather than just one*), so it's not the case that 10 platforms now means 10 forever.

* Platforms 1 and 12 (or was it 15?) can take a 16-car Cally plus the shunt and train locomotives, so they could also take 2 x 8-car 350s with the right signalling tweaks should this be necessary.

Platform 15 not 12.

 

[KeithP]

But the phrase I objected to is...

...it is undeniable that the Eastern Leg provides the most value out of the whole [HS2] project.

"the most value"?
That simply is not true.

 

[WatcherZero]

Yes, there isnt any crunch on the southern end of the ECML, there is on the northern end. Its about the least value of the project.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes, but if the London to Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Edinburgh traffic is put onto HS2 then it relieves the southern ends of the MML and ECML which means better connectivity for places like Newark, Grantham, East Anglia, etc etc.

It only relieves the southern MML in the sense of removing passengers, not removing trains, and curtailing the eastern leg at East Midlands Parkway would deliver that benefit equally. Something very similar to the existing 4TPH service will be needed to serve the intermediate stations that don't benefit from HS2.

 

[Jozhua]

Is an East Midlands Parkway link really going to be going ahead? Even though the Toton route has already done design and consultation?

This is what confuses me - how much will it cost to entirely re-engineer this leg? I'm assuming it will be pretty significant.

I'm going to make a prediction - once they actually calculate the cost of whatever half baked plan they have up their sleeves, they'll realise it costs 90% of the Eastern leg, while providing 50% the benefit. Once they realise this, the fact will either be buried, or the whole thing will be shelved.

Now, they have about ~5 years till they need to be breaking ground. I'm not sure how this will work with entirely new community engagement, especially for those living next to the existing routes, for which significant heavy engineering will need to be done.

HS2 is a very expensive replacement for the southern WCML.
Its economics, and the wider network benefits, improve significantly if you add MML and southern ECML replacement to the business case, without the need to build more new lines from London.

100%

But the phrase I objected to is...

"the most value"?
That simply is not true.

Eh, I mean, it allows HS2 to bypass two more mainlines than it would otherwise, while also improving the dire cross country services from Birmingham to the east.

Manchester to Birmingham links are currently awful, so HS2 will at least address this which is good, but HS2 East also offered to provide a East Midlands - North West link via Birmingham that would be faster than by existing means.

It only relieves the southern MML in the sense of removing passengers, not removing trains, and curtailing the eastern leg at East Midlands Parkway would deliver that benefit equally. Something very similar to the existing 4TPH service will be needed to serve the intermediate stations that don't benefit from HS2.

It's worth saying though that connections to those destinations isn't so great with the current service, as most just go non-stop to London after Leicester. Post-HS2, they can be a bit more leisurely and serve more intermediate destinations, as well as provide some more express alternative for Thameslink.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

At least if you build some of it, it's easier to add to it later. If you can the whole thing it'll never happen.

Yep. The important thing is, whatever is initially built is done in such a way not to prevent the full shebang being completed at a later date.

That has been my view all along - together with incremental electrification too btw.

 

[Starmill]

It only relieves the southern MML in the sense of removing passengers, not removing trains, and curtailing the eastern leg at East Midlands Parkway would deliver that benefit equally. Something very similar to the existing 4TPH service will be needed to serve the intermediate stations that don't benefit from HS2.

It's a very significant virtual capacity increase for Leicester to London though, which is going to continue to be a very major flow. If there are 2tph non-stop, almost the entire capacity of the train will be available for Loughborough and Leicester to London custom.

 

[edwin_m]

It's worth saying though that connections to those destinations isn't so great with the current service, as most just go non-stop to London after Leicester. Post-HS2, they can be a bit more leisurely and serve more intermediate destinations, as well as provide some more express alternative for Thameslink.

Not so. Leicester will still need a 2TPH fast London service as HS2 doesn't benefit it at all. About the most that can be hoped for is for the slower ones to make extra calls.

It's a very significant virtual capacity increase for Leicester to London though, which is going to continue to be a very major flow. If there are 2tph non-stop, almost the entire capacity of the train will be available for Loughborough and Leicester to London custom.

Only if you believe that most of the Derby and Nottingham passengers will want to trek out to Toton to catch a train there, for a net time saving of probably less than 10min.

 

[Glenn1969]

Not so. Leicester will still need a 2TPH fast London service as HS2 doesn't benefit it at all. About the most that can be hoped for is for the slower ones to make extra calls.

Only if you believe that most of the Derby and Nottingham passengers will want to trek out to Toton to catch a train there, for a net time saving of probably less than 10min.

But HS2 is going to East Midlands Parkway and not Toton if you believe the most recent articles. Then a newly electrified MML to Sheffield and NPR on to Leeds

 

[Jozhua]

In regards to cost:

HS2 is more expensive compared to other HSR projects:
The scope of HS2 is much larger than most European HSR projects, because it is essentially trying to address 50 years of delayed infrastructure upgrades. Euston, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds were all due significant station upgrades, which HS2 provides. This is combined with tunnelling to provide extra track capacity in to the cities - remember many European HSR projects use existing lines into city centres. The UK does not have that kind of spare capacity remaining.

Costs have increased:
So the cost increases are complicated, but not perticularly related to the physical infrastructure plans. They surround things like contracting and long term planning.

HS2 is in the position of having to build new skills, supply chains and the like to construct a railway, which isn't something we have done for a while. The cost of this is significant, and unrealiable stop/start funding for infrastructure has been estimated to add 1/3rd to construction costs for projects on the existing railway.

Additionally, the government went around contracting in a silly way. They decided to off-board all the risk to the contractors, with punishment for not delivering on time. When you are building the most major infrastructure project in Europe, in a country that has constructed relatively little new rail in the past century, risks of delays and overruns are high. Therefore the bids that returned were significantly higher than they would have been otherwise, in order for the contractors to feel comfortable taking on that risk. It doesn't really make any sense, because the government is essentially the country's biggest insurance company and can take on risk itself, saving itself lots of money when hanging out contracts. - Worth noting that Metrolinx in Toronto is trying rewarding contractors with extra cash for delivering on time. This appears to not only be working well, but also saving money.

Add to this the constant redesigns, studies, redesigns again, inquiries and you start to see why costs are going up and up. Too many cooks, too few shovels. Just get on with the damn thing before the costs go even higher.

Yep. The important thing is, whatever is initially built is done in such a way not to prevent the full shebang being completed at a later date.

Totally agree.

 

[daodao]

Let's wait and see what is actually published/proposed, instead of hypothesising (which is mere speculation). All being well, the Treasury will reign in Bojo's profligacy.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Assuming the Water Orton-East Midlands Parkway HSL line is built, the East Midlands/Sheffield HS2 services will be localised/slowed, and London-Leeds services remain on the ECML until the missing link is built, unless there's an NPR solution via Manchester.
Leeds-Birmingham will still get a speed uplift, but not as much as originally planned.
We then need to look at the NPR route to see what else is in store.
The Church Fenton branch also looks superfluous now.

This means they must be looking at reopening Rotherham Masborough or a nearby site as a Sheffield/Rotherham parkway. I know it's the DaFT, but they can't surely be thinking of sending all of the HS2 east leg through the existing Sheffield station, can they?

 

[WestRiding]

This means they must be looking at reopening Rotherham Masborough or a nearby site as a Sheffield/Rotherham parkway. I know it's the DaFT, but they can't surely be thinking of sending all of the HS2 east leg through the existing Sheffield station, can they?

Guessing they might be going to 'upgrade' the old road via Beighton and Barrowhill, to Chesterfield Tapton Jn. No way can everything go through Sheffield Midland.

 

[snowball]

All being well, the Treasury will reign in Bojo's profligacy.

All the proposals date from before Johnson was PM.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Exactly. The reduced-size Euston is a concern in this regard, but I reckon you'd be able to extend the HS2 side at the expense of a couple of classic-line platforms later should that be necessary (which could be achieved by rejigging layover locations on the LNR services to reduce platform occupancy at Euston itself, possibly as well as using the very long platforms for 2 8-car trains rather than just one*), so it's not the case that 10 platforms now means 10 forever.

Can you swap the platforms like that? I was under the impression the HS2 platforms will be underground and heading West out of Euston, completely separate from the NW-heading classic platforms, and therefore there's no way for a train on the HS2 lines to reach the 'classic' tracks/platforms?

 

[Speed43125]

Can you swap the platforms like that? I was under the impression the HS2 platforms will be underground and heading West out of Euston, completely separate from the NW-heading classic platforms, and therefore there's no way for a train on the HS2 lines to reach the 'classic' tracks/platforms?

They are at a far lower level, I believe the original plan was to lower the classic line platforms to the same level to have a more integrated station but that was ditched on cost grounds. The platforms are parallel though. So I think the idea mooted here is to demolition parts of the classic station to build more HSR platforms as the discrepancy in height isn't enough to fit them on them on top of each other.

 

[tomuk]

Exactly. The reduced-size Euston is a concern in this regard, but I reckon you'd be able to extend the HS2 side at the expense of a couple of classic-line platforms later should that be necessary (which could be achieved by rejigging layover locations on the LNR services to reduce platform occupancy at Euston itself, possibly as well as using the very long platforms for 2 8-car trains rather than just one*), so it's not the case that 10 platforms now means 10 forever.

* Platforms 1 and 12 (or was it 15?) can take a 16-car Cally plus the shunt and train locomotives, so they could also take 2 x 8-car 350s with the right signalling tweaks should this be necessary.

The 10 platform Euston has no effect on the Eastern Leg. The full 17tph can be run just fine.

 

[yorkie]

Well it's all guesswork at present but the main rumour has been that the south end of the eastern leg would be built, from where it divides from the western leg near Curdworth, to join the MML near East Midlands Parkway.

Let's wait and see what is actually published/proposed, instead of hypothesising (which is mere speculation). All being well, the Treasury will reign in Bojo's profligacy.

Until things become clearer, if anyone wants to speculate, anyone is welcome to create a new speculative thread in the Speculative Ideas section to discuss potential solutions.

In the meantime, I suggest we keep this updates thread locked until further clarifications are made. If anyone has any updates, please report this post and include in your report a draft of what you would like to post. Thanks