HS2 - good for the provinces?

[edwin_m]

Even if a 400m platformed-terminal will not be built at Liverpool in the immediate future, is it really the case that a brand new bypass line will not be built to UIC standards for the sake of not including an extendable step on the trains?

As for the rest, I appreciate that Stafford would require some work, but it does sound as if the tail is wagging the dog in certain respects because HS2 was designed solely as a way of reaching London from a small number of cities, and has had little flexibility built into it.

I imagine the bypass would be built to UIC standards if it was new infrastructure or re-opening a long-closed route, but probably not if it was an upgrade of an existing route. HS2 will be UIC gauge so the NPR trains will probably be "classic compatible" with moving steps, even if only to access the platforms at Manchester Airport where there probably isn't room for an Ebbsfleet-type solution with domestic platforms on their own loop tracks.

It could well be that the "new" Liverpool route actually finishes with a junction onto an existing route and trains continuing to Lime Street.

Looks to me like the platforms at Stafford are only just long enough for a Pendolino and the extra 150m or so would involve land take, total re-modelling of at least one end of the station and re-building at least one bridge. Crewe has several platforms which are 400m plus a bit for separating portions, or only a little shorter than that.

 

[B&I]

I imagine the bypass would be built to UIC standards if it was new infrastructure or re-opening a long-closed route, but probably not if it was an upgrade of an existing route. HS2 will be UIC gauge so the NPR trains will probably be "classic compatible" with moving steps, even if only to access the platforms at Manchester Airport where there probably isn't room for an Ebbsfleet-type solution with domestic platforms on their own loop tracks.

It could well be that the "new" Liverpool route actually finishes with a junction onto an existing route and trains continuing to Lime Street.

Looks to me like the platforms at Stafford are only just long enough for a Pendolino and the extra 150m or so would involve land take, total re-modelling of at least one end of the station and re-building at least one bridge. Crewe has several platforms which are 400m plus a bit for separating portions, or only a little shorter than that.

What existing line do you envisage being upgraded, which would actually be capable of sustaining 125 mph expresses, without decimating local services in the process? If this is what HS3 is likely to involve, all for the sake of getting to Manchester 4 minutes quicker, they can keep it.

 

[edwin_m]

What existing line do you envisage being upgraded, which would actually be capable of sustaining 125 mph expresses, without decimating local services in the process? If this is what HS3 is likely to involve, all for the sake of getting to Manchester 4 minutes quicker, they can keep it.

If the new route ended relatively close to Liverpool then sharing an existing route for a short distance wouldn't necessarily cause capacity problems. These arise where a long double track has to be shared by faster and slower trains, as seen for example on the CLC which is effectively at 100% capacity with only four trains per hour. Chat Moss has fewer stops, a four-track section and the opportunity for trains to join/leave at intermediate junctions so isn't so badly affected. But increasing the number of fasts to what NPR suggests would certainly have knock-on effects for the slows unless there was a lot more four-tracking. Also the most important intermediate place is Warrington, not served by the Chat Moss and as noted above the CLC is full already.

 

[MarkyT]

If the new route ended relatively close to Liverpool then sharing an existing route for a short distance wouldn't necessarily cause capacity problems. These arise where a long double track has to be shared by faster and slower trains, as seen for example on the CLC which is effectively at 100% capacity with only four trains per hour. Chat Moss has fewer stops, a four-track section and the opportunity for trains to join/leave at intermediate junctions so isn't so badly affected. But increasing the number of fasts to what NPR suggests would certainly have knock-on effects for the slows unless there was a lot more four-tracking. Also the most important intermediate place is Warrington, not served by the Chat Moss and as noted above the CLC is full already.

Also for that final approach to Liverpool, a largely dedicated pair that would not be used at all normally by local stopping services or freight traffic might be created within an existing corridor. The existing WCML fast pair, after crossing the Mersey from Runcorn near Widnes and Runcorn, forms such a route today but unfortunately today merges messily with CLC line services at Allerton Junction with their mixed stopping patterns towards Edge Hill and central Liverpool. Yet alongside this is a somewhat underused second pair of tracks which might alternatively become a dedicated non stop fast line for HS2/NPR and a small selection of other non conflicting express services that could continue to join from the Runcorn line near Widnes. The current freight line through Widnes South from the Warrington direction would be completely reconstructed and straightened for dedicated HS2/NPR use in this scenario.

 

[edwin_m]

That all sounds reasonable - I'm not highly familiar with the area but my impression is there's a fair amount of underused ironmongery between Ditton Junction and Edge Hill and the ought to be room somewhere around Ditton to bring the new line over to the west side so the slower trains including CLC can stay on the east. From Edge Hill inwards there's probably not much that can be done, short of opening a new station somewhere other than Lime Street.

 

[B&I]

Here's a suggestion. How about building a proper bypass line to Liverpool, rather than a slow and indirect collection of bits of old line where there might be a bit of capacity if you completely ignore the trains currently using them, let alone the long distance services Liverpool should have, or indeed freight flows to its port?

 

[snowball]

Here's a suggestion. How about building a proper bypass line to Liverpool, rather than a slow and indirect collection of bits of old line where there might be a bit of capacity if you completely ignore the trains currently using them, let alone the long distance services Liverpool should have, or indeed freight flows to its port?

They want it to serve Warrington.

 

[Chester1]

Here's a suggestion. How about building a proper bypass line to Liverpool, rather than a slow and indirect collection of bits of old line where there might be a bit of capacity if you completely ignore the trains currently using them, let alone the long distance services Liverpool should have, or indeed freight flows to its port?

They want it to serve Warrington.

Aside from that, it would probably be cheaper to reopen the old tunnels and divert local trains from Lime Street to Central as planned in the 70s and 80s rather than tunnel under most of Liverpool. Removing the EMU stopping services would free up plenty of capacity at Lime Street. If 125-140mph is the target then rebuilding the freight line and Warrington Bank Quay lower level would be adequate and probably the best way of providing a central (ish) station for Warrington.

 

[fowler9]

That all sounds reasonable - I'm not highly familiar with the area but my impression is there's a fair amount of underused ironmongery between Ditton Junction and Edge Hill and the ought to be room somewhere around Ditton to bring the new line over to the west side so the slower trains including CLC can stay on the east. From Edge Hill inwards there's probably not much that can be done, short of opening a new station somewhere other than Lime Street.

That is possibly doable, however, in the peak the slow lines in between Parkway and Edge Hill get used a fair bit especially heading in to Liverpool rather than out. If the new stock for Northern is used on the services down the CLC and is sufficiently faster and has an increase in capacity they may not have to use the current slow lines in order to stop everything becoming a mess.

 

[MarkyT]

That is possibly doable, however, in the peak the slow lines in between Parkway and Edge Hill get used a fair bit especially heading in to Liverpool rather than out. If the new stock for Northern is used on the services down the CLC and is sufficiently faster and has an increase in capacity they may not have to use the current slow lines in order to stop everything becoming a mess.

And if the fasts are removed entirely from the CLC to the new NPR route via Warrington and beyond, that could allow a more frequent stopping service on the route, as well as the significant frequency upgrade proposed for the expresses.

 

[158756]

That is possibly doable, however, in the peak the slow lines in between Parkway and Edge Hill get used a fair bit especially heading in to Liverpool rather than out. If the new stock for Northern is used on the services down the CLC and is sufficiently faster and has an increase in capacity they may not have to use the current slow lines in order to stop everything becoming a mess.

Northern are getting new stock for the faster trains on the CLC (replacing TPE, so if anything they'll be slower than a 185) but nothing for the stoppers. There'll be at least one more franchise change though before HS2 Phase One opens, never mind any ideas beyond that.

 

[Chester1]

Northern are getting new stock for the faster trains on the CLC (replacing TPE, so if anything they'll be slower than a 185) but nothing for the stoppers. There'll be at least one more franchise change though before HS2 Phase One opens, never mind any ideas beyond that.

The withdrawal of pacers and eventual use of refurbished doubled up 150s will definitely improve the stopping service. The CLC would be a good choice for 769s.

 

[aylesbury]

Keep hoping I doubt if anything will go beyond Birmingham as there wont be any money left to progress it ,the money will go into the NHS so get ready for using existing trains.

 

[B&I]

They want it to serve Warrington.

Yes, seems entirely sensible. The line to Liverpool should go through Warrington, and carry HS2 and NPR services to both places.

 

[B&I]

Aside from that, it would probably be cheaper to reopen the old tunnels and divert local trains from Lime Street to Central as planned in the 70s and 80s rather than tunnel under most of Liverpool. Removing the EMU stopping services would free up plenty of capacity at Lime Street. If 125-140mph is the target then rebuilding the freight line and Warrington Bank Quay lower level would be adequate and probably the best way of providing a central (ish) station for Warrington.

That, too, is sensible, particularly if a travellator tunnel was built from Central to Lime Street (golden opportunity there lost to build it at same time as new development on Lime Street itself). Added bonus of better local transit across Liverpool. I would have liked to have seen a similar approach in Manchester, with the Picc-Vic concept revived to get local trains off the approach lines to Piccadilly.

 

[fowler9]

That, too, is sensible, particularly if a travellator tunnel was built from Central to Lime Street (golden opportunity there lost to build it at same time as new development on Lime Street itself). Added bonus of better local transit across Liverpool. I would have liked to have seen a similar approach in Manchester, with the Picc-Vic concept revived to get local trains off the approach lines to Piccadilly.

Not sure where you would put a travellator from Lime Street to Central but much like getting the train between the two it would probably be quicker just walking. Apologies. Drifting off topic.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Keep hoping I doubt if anything will go beyond Birmingham as there wont be any money left to progress it ,the money will go into the NHS so get ready for using existing trains.

I am getting rather tired of having to rebut such nonsense. The money to pay for HS2 will be borrowed by the government on international markets at favourable interest rates due to HS2 generating a "profit" through increased tax revenues arising from the increased economic activity that it will enable. Cancelling any part of HS2 will not release funds for the NHS (or pretty much any other area of government spending) as there is no prospect of such re-directed spending generating any "profit". The only reason now for cancelling any part of HS2 would be on purely ideological grounds to reduce levels of public borrowing and as such would represent a complete unwillingness of government to spend for the wider benefit. Of course a future Conservative government further to the right than now might possibly take just such a decision but by then an awful lot of money will already have been spent and therefore wasted. In purely financial terms the point of no return has just about been passed already.

 

[PR1Berske]

There's no guarantee that HS2 will generate any profit at all. It runs to Birmingham only, as we stand in 2018, nothing North of Birmingham is guaranteed in law. As such, profit for anyone, anywhere, cannot be certain, just as building any inch north of Birmingham is not guaranteed.

It could yet be stopped. It could yet be cancelled. Nothing is set in stone nor ballast, for that matter.

 

[Domh245]

There's no guarantee that HS2 will generate any profit at all. It runs to Birmingham only, as we stand in 2018, nothing North of Birmingham is guaranteed in law. As such, profit for anyone, anywhere, cannot be certain, just as building any inch north of Birmingham is not guaranteed.

(un)luckily for you, that will change tomorrow (30/1/2018) with the second reading of the High Speed Rail (West Midlands - Crewe) Bill which will authorise phase 2a

 

[PR1Berske]

(un)luckily for you, that will change tomorrow (30/1/2018) with the second reading of the High Speed Rail (West Midlands - Crewe) Bill which will authorise phase 2a

Second reading is not Royal Assent, is it?

 

[MarkyT]

It runs to Birmingham only, as we stand in 2018, nothing North of Birmingham is guaranteed in law. As such, profit for anyone, anywhere, cannot be certain, just as building any inch north of Birmingham is not guaranteed.

No, 'it' (the new track) only goes to Birmingham, but the services running over it will serve major destinations in the north west and Scotland, as well as Birmingham, right from day one.

 

[PR1Berske]

No, 'it' (the new track) only goes to Birmingham, but the services running over it will serve major destinations in the north west and Scotland, as well as Birmingham, right from day one.

Not guaranteed.

 

[MarkyT]

Not guaranteed.

Are you seriously suggesting that if the Phase 1 track is built, then there's a chance it won't be used for anything other than the planned 3tph for Birmingham? If that was the case then there wouldn't be a case for the line at all, I agree, but they are ordering a much larger fleet than would be required for that, and constructing junctions onto the classic network to allow these more widespread services to run.

 

[Deerfold]

Not guaranteed.

Really? Has there ever been any suggestion anywhere official that no HS2 trains would go beyond Birmingham for *any* period of time?

 

[Ianno87]

Not guaranteed.

So, PR1Berske, please explain the circumstances in which you think those services would *not* run, even with with the full Phase 1 infrastructure (including WCML connection north of Lichfield) built.

To who (I'm talking funders and specifiers) do you think it would make sense to build a 125-odd mile long High Speed line then only put 3 trains an hour on it, with a significant chunk unused completely?

 

[PR1Berske]

So, PR1Berske, please explain the circumstances in which you think those services would *not* run, even with with the full Phase 1 infrastructure (including WCML connection north of Lichfield) built.

To who (I'm talking funders and specifiers) do you think it would make sense to build a 125-odd mile long High Speed line then only put 3 trains an hour on it, with a significant chunk unused completely?

But that is exactly what HS2 is! Brand new line into Euston, going to Birmingham, and that's it. That is exactly why I oppose the thing. Always will. It's just another line helping people into London. I will always oppose it on that ground, and will never, ever, change my mind.

 

[Ianno87]

But that is exactly what HS2 is! Brand new line into Euston, going to Birmingham, and that's it. That is exactly why I oppose the thing. Always will. It's just another line helping people into London. I will always oppose it on that ground, and will never, ever, change my mind.

....errr, no. Demonstrates your limited grasp of basic facts about the scheme.

Phase 1 is a new line from London Euston connecting onto the WCML at Lichfield to enable through running with through services (designed for 7 trains per hour initially), with a branch into Birmingham (for 3 trains per hour initially).

What on earth do you think the point of the 20-odd miles of high speed route from Birmingham Interchange to Lichfield, part of Phase 1 as passed in law, is then?

Phase 1 also helps people get into Birmingham and Coventry too, by shifting passengers off existing trains on the Coventry corridor onto HS2 trains.

And giving better links between (for example) Birmingham and Milton Keynes.

But you are correct in that the main point of *Phase 1* (note emphasis) is capacity into London. Because that is where people have a habit of wanting to go.

As explained ad nauseum to you before, *Phase 2* is about supporting economic growth in the Midlands and North, with a higher BCR than Phase 1 (in part because Phase 1 will have already covered the chunkiest costs of the core infrastructure, and because of the Wider Economic Impacts).

And before you say it, yes Phase 2 is nowhere near Royal Assent yet. But also as already explained to you, all major projects are split into phases to smooth the consents and delivery process (e.g. CTRL). But as it stands, can you offer *any* evidence to suggest why Phases 2A and 2B will not follow Phase 1 down this route? We just simply haven't got there yet, because these things take time, money and parliamentary diaries to happen. It can't all be consenste in one go - it's too huge a project.

All we can say is that Phase 2A is entering this process now, and plans are for 2B to do likewise later in the year.

My view is that it in any case renegeing on Phase 2 now would be pretty much politically untenable for the North.

I accept that you oppose the scheme, although I think you are drawing erroneous conclusions from reading between the lines where there is nothing to be read. I accept that HS2 is a colossally expensive scheme, but one that I think will benefit many, many people directly and indirectly, if admittedly not everybody. No scheme ever can - that's the harsh reality.

 

[The Ham]

I accept that you oppose the scheme, although I think you are drawing erroneous conclusions from reading between the lines where there is nothing to be read. I accept that HS2 is a colossally expensive scheme, but one that I think will benefit many, many people directly and indirectly, if admittedly not everybody. No scheme ever can - that's the harsh reality.

I would go further and suggest that there's likely to be some people who will benefit from HS2 that many (or even any) won't have thought of.

 

[TBirdFrank]

HS2 the biggest con perpetrated on the UK since - err well - possibly rail privatisation. It is of no earthly use to anyone who lives more than fifteen minutes from the stops being built and everyone else - yes - everyone - is diminished by being excluded from a viable national network, seeing funds that should be being used to create resilience and diversionary capacity that could benefit large areas of the remainder of Britain starved of investment and journey choice - No sorry HS2 isn't and never was the answer to anything but a London Centric wet dreamer!

 

[The Ham]

HS2 the biggest con perpetrated on the UK since - err well - possibly rail privatisation. It is of no earthly use to anyone who lives more than fifteen minutes from the stops being built and everyone else - yes - everyone - is diminished by being excluded from a viable national network, seeing funds that should be being used to create resilience and diversionary capacity that could benefit large areas of the remainder of Britain starved of investment and journey choice - No sorry HS2 isn't and never was the answer to anything but a London Centric wet dreamer!

Let's go through each of your objections:

1) of no earthly use due anyone who lives more than 15 minutes from the stops. One HS2 is built it is likely to be quicker (or at least no slower) to go by train from Southampton (or anywhere along the XC service route between Reading and Poole) to Manchester by changing at Reading and Old Oak Common. As the current journey time from Reading to Manchester is just over 3 hours, yet the early documents about HS2 list Heathrow via Old Oak Common (when Heathrow was still on the line) is about 1:20, add in an hour for getting from Reading and likely change times and your looking at 2:20. Even if you allow another half an hour on that due to poor connections and it's still faster.

Likewise passengers on the line south of Guildford would be able to get to Reading at about the same time as Waterloo and then to Old Oak Common about the same time as Euston and then be in Birmingham faster, which even allowing for the less frequent service to Reading and change times at Guildford is likely to be at least a similar journey time. If the Southern Approach to Heathrow is built then journey times would improve.

Portsmouth, Southampton, Guildford, Winchester, Basingstoke and quite a lot of the outer stations on the SWML are not writing 15 minutes of HS2 and yet are likely to benefit from faster journey times.

That doesn't even include those from places like Oxford who will see an increase in space on their trains towards Birmingham.

2) with regards to resilience and diversionary capacity the best way to provide this would be a new line. If that new line isn't HS2 (which will benefit most major cities) then what other line(s) should there be? Bearing in mind that things like East West Rail is also happening, as could Crossrail 2 and a number of other schemes that could be built by the time that HS2 is finished.

3) HS2 will improve journey times between Birmingham and any places in the North, as indicated above there'll be lots of places that will now no longer need to go into central London to get faster journey times. As such there's going to be a lot of people who don't live in London nor wish to travel into central London who could benefit from HS2.

The other thing that is with bearing in mind is with dedicated HS2 platforms that frees up other platforms (and therefore paths) for other local services, and so you could see more local services around the stations served by HS2.

As I've said before, there's probably going to be some surprising winners from HS2 and a lot of them are likely to be well outside of London.