HS2 Manchester leg scrapped: what should happen now?

[Cambrian359]

In my opinion HS2 has been poorly sold to the public from the start. Other than myself I’ve spoken to almost no one who supports it, many are openly hostile.

This is the issue! Since day 1 it was sold to the public as a 20minute time saving! I was against it from day one because of this very selling point.
It’s only been the last year or 2 I’ve actually been in support of HS2 as I’ve gained a better understanding of what it’s really about, that being capacity to open existing lines to more services,stops etc the 20 minute time saving is nothing compared to this. But hey,the public only care about saving a few minutes of time so that’s the line that was pushed!

 

[Snow1964]

How much work has happened on phase 2a and I mean actual building as in digging and moving soil etc, (not legal and design stage).

Unless I am mistaken phase 2b is more at the paper stage.

Just trying to work out if cancelling 2a would incur big costs to restore the landscape

 

[GardenRail]

Times front page says Old Oak to Euston has been kept.
Several papers saying this is Sunaks personal decision and hes overriding Cabinet which is broadly against axing it. I believe the Treasury has been briefing the decision has been made even before its been put to Cabinet.

Its hardly gone down well with the Business community

View attachment 144006

The article says could terminate at Old Oak Common. Not that it's kept.

 

[Backroom_boy]

Oh quite so, maybe intention is to force Starmer to agree to fund the lot, then cancel the pricey bits?

I think Euston could be a trap like that; put Labour in a position where have to cancel or say they will spend billions in London on project Sunak has labeled as failed.

 

[Bantamzen]

Assuming for the moment that HS2b is dead in the water, here's what I think will happen next:

• The government announces a "commitment" to Northern Powerhouse Rail, with some further studies to be undertaken as to what route might be use & being funded by what would have been used for HS2b.
• Work continues on Transpennine Route Upgrade, but costs start to spiral as plans for wiring are made.
• The government continues to be "committed" to NPR but will await completion of TRU before finalising a plan.
• Work on TRU starts to overrun, and the government considers some scaleback on wiring the entire route.
• The government says it continues to be "committed" to completing wiring under TRU, but that this will now be done over a longer timescale.
• NPR gets canned

Cynical? Moi?

Edit: 03/10/2023 - 07:43 According to the BBC live feed on the story, Sunak remains "committed" to the North of England. So not only are HS2b & NPR gonners, TRU could be in trouble too...

 

[jon0844]

Maybe Rishi will pretend Labour was going to axe HS2 and he will stand tall (is that possible?) to proudly announce, to great applause, that Manchester will still get HS2!

Standing ovations as he looks like a great leader for saving something that his own party was going to cancel...

...otherwise he's going to dodge the issue and not commit, saying they'll make a decision later. When he's flown back to London.

 

[WatcherZero]

The article says could terminate at Old Oak Common. Not that it's kept.

Times says theyve decided to go to Euston, not the FT. I was posting that to show how unpopular the decision is with the business community.

 

[stuu]

Maybe Rishi will pretend Labour was going to axe HS2 and he will stand tall (is that possible?) to proudly announce, to great applause, that Manchester will still get HS2!

I suspect part of the issue is he doesn't know whether cancelling it or saving it will get more applause. He seems pretty clueless as a politician

 

[The Planner]

How much work has happened on phase 2a and I mean actual building as in digging and moving soil etc, (not legal and design stage).

Unless I am mistaken phase 2b is more at the paper stage.

Just trying to work out if cancelling 2a would incur big costs to restore the landscape

Nothing, just bore holes in the main. Enabling works are still a long way off.

A source of disruption to one existing line is one thing. Combining the principal services on all three lines to the onto one pair of tracks between Birmingham and London is another matter entirely.

As to Stockport. There are rather better value ways of increasing capacity that dont cost tens of billions of pounds. Resignalling properly so that the line isn't operated by Victorian mechanical interlockings would be a good start.

You could also reinstate one of the through roads with a new platform on the other as done at Gravesend and with a bit more effort and removal of one of the through sidings turn the down island platform into two islands with four through roads rather than one island with two through roads and two little used bays.

And if you really want to push the boat out then a flyover south of the station at Adsworth Road north of Levenshulme (like that on the SWML north of Wimbledon) would allow the whole four track section to be paired up down up down eliminating all sorts of conflicting moves and massively increasing capacity on the whole route.


Thats why I think that if Euston gets canned half of them will go to Paddington with Heathrow Express and all non intercity stoppers and Semifasts to Oxford and Newbury transferred to Crossrail to make space

Stockport isn't particularly hampered by the old signaling, it runs on 3 minute headways all the way from Crewe to Piccadilly. You aren't going to get much more out of it. Why does Stockport need new platforms? Adswood Road wouldn't resolve Slade Lane, that is where the issues are.

 

[21C101]

Nothing, just bore holes in the main. Enabling works are still a long way off.


Stockport isn't particularly hampered by the old signaling, it runs on 3 minute headways all the way from Crewe to Piccadilly. You aren't going to get much more out of it. Why does Stockport need new platforms? Adswood Road wouldn't resolve Slade Lane, that is where the issues are.

Some Grade separation at Slade lane would be handy too. Ideally have grade separated crossovers from airport side to terminus side north of the junction

In terms of platforms at Stockport I was thinking to allow one train to enter the station before the one in front had left and basing it on the assumption that the original poster knew what he was talking about.

Sounds though that stockport isn't the problem it is conflicting moves in various places negating much of the benefit of having four tracks.

 

[AdamWW]

Will still be vulnerable to people throwing bicycles on the track, peoole throwing themselves on the track and the OHLE knitting will still collapse occasionally

Of course. But it is perhaps considerably less prone to these things (no foot crossings, passing through fewer urban areas, latest design of OLE (no headspans?) and fewer complex areas.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

One could argue it worth "delaying" 2a and 2b to do an 11 platform Euston and domestic station rebuild properly and sooner to be a good plan - but Euston is essential - without it the project is worthless.

I think kinda yes and no. On the one hand, you're correct that if you terminate at Old Oak Common, then you have a not very useful line.

But on the other hand, to my mind, Euston was always a bad, unimaginative idea. We already know that big terminus stations in large cities is a sub-optimal design because of all the conflicting moves in a confined space etc. Modern, better, designs, run the lines through the cities (Crossrail, Thameslink). Making Euston a terminus meant you need the massive 11-platform monster station - and building that underground in the middle of London is basically throwing money away.

I think it would have been much better to have HS2 run through London, making sure it stops at a couple of stations that between them give direct connections to most places in both central and outer London, and then let it split so it could terminate in a few smaller stations that would be cheaper to build. For example, maybe split the line at OOC so some HS2 trains run through to Stratford and Ebbsfleet/Kent, and others, with some new tunnelling, run to Clapham Junction and East Croydon/Gatwick. If Euston was replaced by something like that, a lot of good would come out of it. But on the other hand, maybe too much work has been done and money spent at Euston already.

 

[RobShipway]

The issue is going to be that without HS 2a or 2B, there will be no clearing pf paths for freight as all you will have is a three times an hour shuttle service between Old Oak Common to Curzon Street in Birmingham, with 3 out of the 7 platforms being built in use.

To clear the paths on WCML, you need to be having HS2 into Euston so that any of the trains operating from Euston can be run on HS2 instead. To also make it effective, you also need HS2 going to Manchester, York, Leeds and Hull.

Hopefully NPR if it is supported by the Government will help reduce the effects.

I think kinda yes and no. On the one hand, you're correct that if you terminate at Old Oak Common, then you have a not very useful line.

But on the other hand, to my mind, Euston was always a bad, unimaginative idea. We already know that big terminus stations in large cities is a sub-optimal design because of all the conflicting moves in a confined space etc. Modern, better, designs, run the lines through the cities (Crossrail, Thameslink). Making Euston a terminus meant you need the massive 11-platform monster station - and building that underground in the middle of London is basically throwing money away.

I think it would have been much better to have HS2 run through London, making sure it stops at a couple of stations that between them give direct connections to most places in both central and outer London, and then let it split so it could terminate in a few smaller stations that would be cheaper to build. For example, maybe split the line at OOC so some HS2 trains run through to Stratford and Ebbsfleet, and others, with some new tunnelling, run to Clapham Junction and East Croydon/Gatwick. If Euston was replaced by something like that, a lot of good would come out of it. But on the other hand, maybe too much work has been done and money spent at Euston already.

I agree with your comments about running HS2 through London, but I would have the trains terminate in the platforms at Ashford International that where built for HS1 which seem to have not been used in the last 10 years.

With regards to trains to East Croydon/Gatwick, I would have those connect into the line through Kensington Olympia but be extended down to Brighton if the paths are available.

 

[trebor79]

What utter rubbish. HS2 was/is being built for high speed passenger services - taking fast IC trains off the WCML frees up many more paths than moving freight onto its own dedicated line. And building a brand new route for freight only would never get through parliament and such a scheme would have even less support from the public than HS2 does.

"Railway to take a lot of trucks off the road and make your motorway journeys quicker" would probably have much greater support than "high speed railway to knock 15 minutes off a rich businessman's journey from Brum to London".

 

[AdamWW]

But on the other hand, to my mind, Euston was always a bad, unimaginative idea. We already know that big terminus stations in large cities is a sub-optimal design because of all the conflicting moves in a confined space etc. Modern, better, designs, run the lines through the cities (Crossrail, Thameslink). Making Euston a terminus meant you need the massive 11-platform monster station - and building that underground in the middle of London is basically throwing money away.

Do you have an example of a modern better railway where long distance trains do this?

Maybe I'm just lacking in imagination but it doesn't see such a great idea to me.

The reasonably self-contained nature of HS2 should make it much less susceptible to knock-on delays than the ECML and WCML. Obviously trains at the northern end still have the potential to cause trouble (though I seem to recall reading at one point that the plan was just to refuse any trains presenting themselves more than a few minutes late.) but now you have it at both ends.

Never mind what happens if there is disruption and you now have train crew spread out all over the place at the different London termini.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

"Railway to take a lot of trucks off the road and make your motorway journeys quicker" would probably have much greater support than "high speed railway to knock 15 minutes off a rich businessman's journey from Brum to London".

Not all businessmen are rich, it is just a left-wing method of speech.

 

[stuu]

But on the other hand, to my mind, Euston was always a bad, unimaginative idea. We already know that big terminus stations in large cities is a sub-optimal design because of all the conflicting moves in a confined space etc. Modern, better, designs, run the lines through the cities (Crossrail, Thameslink). Making Euston a terminus meant you need the massive 11-platform monster station - and building that underground in the middle of London is basically throwing money away.

Euston is not going to be underground.

One thing that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up, is that with the Eastern leg completely dead, Euston doesn't even need 10/11 platforms, so a smaller scale terminus could be built

 

[trebor79]

Not all businessmen are rich, it is just a left-wing method of speech.

I know that, just as I know the original rraison de etre of HS2 was about capacity. But like it or not that's how HS2 is presented in a lot of media - and as it gets pruned and chipped away in scope that's actually an increasingly accurate portrayal.

I honestly think the whole thing should be stopped, today. Just pay whatever is necessary to make sites safe and exit contracts and be done with it. Sell the land off to recoup some of the cost and never do something so foolish every again.

Euston is not going to be underground.

One thing that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up, is that with the Eastern leg completely dead, Euston doesn't even need 10/11 platforms, so a smaller scale terminus could be built

But then it's completely hobbled for eternity with no chance of the Eastern leg ever being resurrected.

We should just admit that it's been completely botched from the start and scrap it.

As someone said upthread, it came out of nowhere in the dying days of the Labour government and I'm not wholly unconvinced it wasn't a deliberate albatross to pay the Tories back for the Millenium Dome debacle.

 

[The Planner]

I know that, just as I know the original rraison de etre of HS2 was about capacity. But like it or not that's how HS2 is presented in a lot of media - and as it gets pruned and chipped away in scope that's actually an increasingly accurate portrayal.

I honestly think the whole thing should be stopped, today. Just pay whatever is necessary to make sites safe and exit contracts and be done with it. Sell the land off to recoup some of the cost and never do something so foolish every again.


But then it's completely hobbled for eternity with no chance of the Eastern leg ever being resurrected.

We should just admit that it's been completely botched from the start and scrap it.

As someone said upthread, it came out of nowhere in the dying days of the Labour government and I'm not wholly unconvinced it wasn't a deliberate albatross to pay the Tories back for the Millenium Dome debacle.

Would hardly call the Dome overspend comparable to HS2.

 

[RobShipway]

Do you have an example of a modern better railway where long distance trains do this?

I believe that the DB ICE trains run through many of the cities in Germany. They certainly use the low level platforms 11 & 12 at times at Cologne Messe/Deutz station.

 

[A0wen]

The Great Central is otherwise known as "Chiltern Railways", and removing all the commuter services from it to turn it into a freight line would be rather unpopular, not least in a key Tory heartland. So not happening.

That is not correct.

The GCR never ran to Birmingham, Stratford upon Avon or Oxford.

The only original Great Central metals Chiltern runs on are Marylebone - Finchley (Canfield Place).

After opening the GC extended from Canfield Place to just south of Harrow on the Hill running parallel to the Met (1903) and then from Neasden to South Ruislip (1906) to join the newly built GW / GC joint. These are also in use by Chiltern. But none of Chiltern's current running lines were "pure" GC, the majority of Chiltern's traffic heads through High Wycombe and that was GWR served before the GW / GC joint. If anything Chiltern is the spiritual successor to the original Great Western Railway's ambitions to serve the West Midlands.

 

[AdamWW]

I believe that the DB ICE trains run through many of the cities in Germany. They certainly use the low level platforms 11 & 12 at times at Cologne Messe/Deutz station.

Obviously long distance trains make intermediate stops in cities.

But do they then terminate spread across the suburbs at the end of their routes, which is what the suggestion seemed to be here?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Obviously long distance trains make intermediate stops in cities.

But do they then terminate spread across the suburbs at the end of their routes, which is what the suggestion seemed to be here?

The problem is that there's nowhere logical to send them. Long distance trains run through Birmingham because there is, but London is in the bottom right hand corner with no major intercity destinations to the south and east.

 

[A0wen]

A circumstance that some say ultimately lies at the feet of the original NIMBYs in the 1830s.

Wrongly so - the issue was the relative power of the locos of the time and the ability of the engineers of the day to build a line into Northampton which was manageable.

Northampton railway station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The decision to omit Northampton was not due to local opposition but rather engineering decisions taken by the railway company's engineer Robert Stephenson.[7][8] The 120 ft (37 m) difference in gradient in the 4 mi (6.4 km) between Northampton and Blisworth, on the floor of the Nene Valley, is likely to have played a key role in the decision.[9] Robert Stephenson is reported to have said that he could easily get trains into the town but not out again.[

 

[AdamWW]

The problem is that there's nowhere logical to send them. Long distance trains run through Birmingham because there is, but London is in the bottom right hand corner with no major intercity destinations to the south and east.

The suggestion I think was to fan out after Euston to terminate at places like Stratford, Clapham Junction and Gatwick rather than to other Intercity destinations.

 

[Austriantrain]

I think it would have been much better to have HS2 run through London, making sure it stops at a couple of stations that between them give direct connections to most places in both central and outer London,

While it sounds like a good idea in theory, there is no way that this would turn out like Crossrail. To run 18 long-distance trains an hour (lots of passenger interchange, lots of luggage, long dwells etc), every station would need to look like Old Oak Common, namely six very broad (and long) platforms and six tracks. Building this several times beneath London would be a challenge, to say the least.

 

[dangie]

It's laughable that Sunak is saying he doesn't want to be 'rushed' into making a decision. Please remind me, just how long has HS2 been in the planning?

 

[A0wen]

Unless they were going to change OOC to a larger terminus, it doesn't. Euston isn't just needed because it's in Central London (but it is very much needed for that reason), it's also because OOC won't have the capacity to reverse and service 9tph, which is what's required to move the full WCML fast service onto HS2.

On what basis are you saying OOC as planned "won't have the capacity" to handle 9tph ?

It's planned to have 6 HS platforms - for comparison St Pancras EMR has 4 platforms and despatches 6 tph. And from what I can gather the Japanese Shinkasen network achieves the level of throughput to that which would be required at OOC.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I believe that the DB ICE trains run through many of the cities in Germany. They certainly use the low level platforms 11 & 12 at times at Cologne Messe/Deutz station.

Also noteworthy in this regard that Stuttgart is currently being deliberately rebuilt from a terminus into a through station so that long distance trains can run through it - in the process reducing the number of platforms.

I'm afraid I'm not sufficiently familiar with railways abroad to more fully answer @AdamWW's request for examples.

 

[12LDA28C]

Of course. But it is perhaps considerably less prone to these things (no foot crossings, passing through fewer urban areas, latest design of OLE (no headspans?) and fewer complex areas.

You forgot to mention plenty of tunnels. Hard to chuck a bike onto a railway line that's underground.