HS2 Northern Branches Discussion

[Padav]

@steamdrivenand: "I recall a lot of PR driven stuff about through trains to Paris etc from Edinburgh and Leeds etc way back in the mid '90's but it never happened. I never heard what stopped it and wonder if this time with HS2 will be the same."

This BBC webpage and Wiki article provide some insight into this story - it touches a raw nerve with me - I could go on and on......and on about the machinations/skulduggery involved and how the peripheral Regions were, yet again, sold down the river by London-centric political élites!

We should recall that HS1 and its wonderfully rebuilt St. Pancras terminus only saw the light of day because the UK taxpayer underwrote its funding - approx £6.1bn for HS1 - that's UK taxpayer as in ALL of us (me included) but who benefits from the connectivity it brings - who can (to plagiarise a strapline from a previous Eurostar advert) board a train to Paris on a whim "just because it's Saturday" - well not me that's for sure!

Just another moral argument (if we needed any more) in support of HS2?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My grateful thanks are extended to both steamdrivenand and to Padav for their postings upon this matter, in response to my request.

 

[steamdrivenand]

Reading the articles suggests to me that the reason it didn't happen was nothing to do with viability but everything to do with not being able to run passport and immigration controls at so many destinations. Indeed people could change at those destinations and eventually leave railway premises at any station they choose on the network. I'm left wondering how they might manage that come HS2 and how much money such a short sighted control freak issue has dropped in the pockets of Ryanair etc.

 

[Padav]

@steamdrivenand: "Reading the articles suggests to me that the reason it didn't happen was nothing to do with viability but everything to do with not being able to run passport and immogration controls at so many destinations."

You hit upon an issue of profound impact - something that will begin to resonate ever louder over the coming years as the UK public becomes more sceptical about the notion of European integration.

I hold what might be described as "non-mainstream" views on this complex topic, which I won't go into here. Suffice to say that I believe the single biggest obstacle to development of a more comprehensive UK wide High Speed Rail (HSR) network isn't money but the UK's non-participation in Schengen.

You should read up on what is euphemistically called the "Lille Loophole" - if you link to this article on Nick Kingsley's blog and my subsequent comment in response, you begin to appreciate the scale of the issue and how it's simply going to get bigger in years to come

 

[si404]

Suffice to say that I believe the single biggest obstacle to development of a more comprehensive UK wide High Speed Rail (HSR) network isn't money but the UK's non-participation in Schengen.

Firstly European access is far from a pressing and driving thing for HS2 or other lines, nor would it make the case for them better - 14+tph to London is always going to outweigh European access, even if you could get 2tph from the north to Europe (which is a chuffing big ask, given London can't quite manage that). As such, a train every 3 hours would be a big upstep of demand, and the problem is that anything less frequent would be too infrequent to attract people. Sleepers and trains from the chunnel terminating at OOC might be the way to get NoL through to HS1 services, though a link between Euston and St Pancras would be better than the latter...

Secondly, Schengen is a red herring even on that: the problem with demand to Europe is far more that 20-mile stretch of water between Dover and Calais than waving your passport at a border guard (and we can have all the border control at the UK stations - they made room at St Pancras certainly - goodbye 'Lille Loophole').

I agree that money isn't the main issue stopping a UK HSL network - gauge, existing high speeds, compact and narrow country, dense population, great gravitational pull of London, political will, etc are bigger issues.

I hold what might be described as "non-mainstream" views on this complex topic, which I won't go into here.

There's a reason why your views are non-mainstream...
And it is probably the reason why you won't go into it here...
...because they are loopier than border rules regarding Lille!

 

[Padav]

oooo.....errrr; do I detect an incursion from the anti-HS2 community in our midst?

 

[steamdrivenand]

Thinking about border controls I assume they'd have to modify all stations where the Euro originated trains were likely to stop. Presumably the modifications would have to be such that the relative platforms would need to be secure and passengers could not be able to transfer to other platforms or hide away until a non-Euro train arrived and nip on board. All a tad draconian and sort of limits flexibility if operational and other problems arise. It also limits where a TOC can operate from/to unless the mods are done in advance of a new stop being added. It does make it all sound a bit ridiculous and small minded.

 

[PR1Berske]

oooo.....errrr; do I detect an incursion from the anti-HS2 community in our midst?

Well anti-HS2 community (who I disagree with) seem to be meeting anti-London community (who I agree with), so I'm in a right pickle!

 

[LE Greys]

Thinking about border controls I assume they'd have to modify all stations where the Euro originated trains were likely to stop. Presumably the modifications would have to be such that the relative platforms would need to be secure and passengers could not be able to transfer to other platforms or hide away until a non-Euro train arrived and nip on board. All a tad draconian and sort of limits flexibility if operational and other problems arise. It also limits where a TOC can operate from/to unless the mods are done in advance of a new stop being added. It does make it all sound a bit ridiculous and small minded.

All of these problems were solved on the many, many trains that crossed Europe, including the Iron Curtain, for over a century before the Schengen Agreement came on-stream. They simply stopped the train at the border, checked everybody's passports, ran customs procedures, searched the train if they needed to, then let it go on its way. All they need to do is dedicate a specific place as 'the border' and do the same, we have to use Stratford International for something after all.

 

[HSTEd]

All of these problems were solved on the many, many trains that crossed Europe, including the Iron Curtain, for over a century before the Schengen Agreement came on-stream. They simply stopped the train at the border, checked everybody's passports, ran customs procedures, searched the train if they needed to, then let it go on its way. All they need to do is dedicate a specific place as 'the border' and do the same, we have to use Stratford International for something after all.

This is unacceptable in today's "security concious environment".
You cannot search all the baggage practically with a reasonable amount of manpower without taking it all off the train.

You can't practically remove the baggage from the train with reasonable amounts of manpower without taking all the passengers off the train.

The border checks in continental europe were cursory compared to those on Eurostar today.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I also believe barring some unforeseen and bizarre decision on the part of Justice Ousely (who is presiding over the Judicial Review of phase 1 brought by 51M, HS2AA & Aylesbury Golf Club) we shouldn't have to wait too long to find out - I think the announcement of a preferred route for phase 2 will be forthcoming by second week of January?

That, hopefully, will give the "death-knoll" to some of the more fanciful route suppositions that have been bandied about. Both my wife and I thought the comment by steamdrivenand concerning the Alderley Edge NIMBYs and the vision of Ferraris and Bentleys lined up 10 deep at the barricades, extremely humorous as it is in its pictorial vision, certainly captured the true spirit of what would most certainly ensue at such an occasion. Does anyone realise that the constituency of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a certain Mr George Gideon Oliver Osborne, is rather central to that location of a projected onward route.

 

[Rational Plan]

I'll just repost some figures I gathered about actual numbers of airline passengers per day between Northern cities and various Northern European destinations.

Looking at the figures from this table I created, the number of passengers per day from various regional airports to Northern European airports.

Paris has demand for 2810 passengers per day,

Amsterdam 4693,

Brussels 1065,

Frankfurt 1688

Ruhr 1174 per day.

The difficulty here is figuring out transfer passenger numbers. I suspect that Amsterdam, Frankfurt and then Paris have the largest numbers.
A Valero D has 460 seats.

There are lots of ways you could divide this. Just looking at city pairs.

All these figures assume a 100% market share.

Paris – Birmingham = 2 trains a day

Paris – Manchester = 3 trains a day.

This could translate to three trains a day from Paris that either split at Birmingham International towards Birmingham Curzon and Manchester, or three double units to Manchester with a stop in Birmingham International. It will be interesting to find out how many people, a stop at Old Oak common could pick up, especially as it would be a great interchange for Great western customers. It could add a couple of frequencies to Paris, to say 4 or 5 a day

Amsterdam/Brussels – Manchester = 5 trains a day

Amsterdam/Brussels – Birmingham = 4 trains a day

Cutting back for transfers I suspect three trains a day maybe enough for Brussels and Amsterdam.

Ruhr/Frankfurt – Manchester= 3 trains a day

Ruhr/Frankfurt – Birmingham= 3 trains a day

Again two a day to start with might be enough.

So we could see 3 double trains a day to Paris covering Manchester and Birmingham
Another 3 double trains a day from Birmingham/Manchester to Brussels and Amsterdam.
Followed by two trains a day to Ruhr and Frankfurt.
I can see a few extra one train a day services deeper into Germany, Eastern Europe and Italy.

The eastern leg to Leeds just can’t sustain direct services. Their best bet would be to transfer passengers at Birmingham international or Old Oak Common.

 

[steamdrivenand]

I can't figure out why the figures from Leeds are so low.
I suspect that there are a lot of people that travel by car or train over the Tops to Manchester to travel to Europe by air because the relevant services aren't available from Yeadon.
I used to occasionally travel to Heathrow from Leeds and more regularly to Bristol but over the years airlines have played fast and loose with the services.
If it is the case that Manchester is mopping up the Yorkshire travellers then they'll likely revert to Leeds departing trains rather than involve a drag over the M62 if the services ever come to fruit.

 

[HSTEd]

460 seats is not going to cut it.

We are looking at 400m formations for international trains in line with the precedent set by Eurostar and the new Siemens rolling stock.

So really we are looking at a single train per day for most of the city pairs.

Which isn't really worth providing security for.

 

[Stats]

The economics of European services from the regions do not add up. To build security facilities at regional stations and employ border and security staff for at most 2-3 services a day is not economically justifiable. The HS1-HS2 link is intended for access to Heathrow from HS1 and for HS services to replace short haul European services from Heathrow.

 

[Chris125]

The HS1-HS2 link is intended for access to Heathrow from HS1 and for HS services to replace short haul European services from Heathrow.

I'm not sure what's given you that impression but it is not intended for such a service - it's likely to have very limited capacity and the Heathrow branch of HS2 is only expected to have a north facing junction.

It wouldn't surprise me though if it's used for some international service's to terminate at OOC via Stratford International and/or some HS2 service vice versa - a more attractive interchange between the two while still providing an attractive service for passengers to the capital.

Chris

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

460 seats is not going to cut it. We are looking at 400m formations for international trains in line with the precedent set by Eurostar and the new Siemens rolling stock.

So really we are looking at a single train per day for most of the city pairs. Which isn't really worth providing security for.

Hopefully, none of the numerous terrorist organisations who are not overly-enamoured of Britain have members who regularly read the postings of members of this website...:roll:

 

[HSTEd]

Hopefully, none of the numerous terrorist organisations who are not overly-enamoured of Britain have members who regularly read the postings of members of this website...:roll:

I meant in that since security is not worth providing there is no way we could have the service.

And the security doesn't protect against anything really since terrorists are not going to resort to a bomb on the train in order to destroy it, there are far easier and more effective ways.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I meant in that since security is not worth providing there is no way we could have the service.

And the security doesn't protect against anything really since terrorists are not going to resort to a bomb on the train in order to destroy it, there are far easier and more effective ways.

But how are we to know what novel ways they might employ to achieve their ends, as suicide bombing is now an accepted weapon espoused by certain organisations. Matters such as that employed by the "shoe-bombers", whilst unsuccessful in past attempts, could lead them to be even more creative in their thinking.

 

[HSTEd]

But how are we to know what novel ways they might employ to achieve their ends, as suicide bombing is now an accepted weapon espoused by certain organisations. Matters such as that employed by the "shoe-bombers", whilst unsuccessful in past attempts, could lead them to be even more creative in their thinking.

I was referring to simply have a 4x4 or transit van type vehicle filled with explosives ram the security fencing on HS1 and plow into the side or front of a train running at 180mph before exploding.

 

[Haydn1971]

I was referring to simply have a 4x4 or transit van type vehicle filled with explosives ram the security fencing on HS1 and plow into the side or front of a train running at 180mph before exploding.

You wouldn't need anyone as big - simply a small charge on a rail would be enough to break the rail and cause a derailment - as popularised in the Second World War by both sides.

If we sit and worry about this stuff, the terrorists have won, best to carry on about your day and don't worry about it, because if you do and indeed, I was involved in a anti-terror assessment of the motorway network years ago, needless to say, a handful of small explosions could bring the nation to its knee for months, perhaps years. I just get annoyed that we have given in to the terrorist scum and have to go through such a performance each time we travel on aircraft - shoes off, empty pockets, turn electronic gadgets off, can't take a drink through security - we have lost the battle already, terror costs us billions already :-/

 

[Holly]

... we have given in to the terrorist scum and have to go through such a performance each time we travel on aircraft - shoes off, empty pockets, turn electronic gadgets off, can't take a drink through security - we have lost the battle already, terror costs us billions already

Yes. This is the nation that stood alone against evil and came through World War 2 after all. We couldn't do it these days with the attitudes that prevail.

The way to deal with immigration and passports is on the train, on the move, during the international section. Inspectors riding to and fro and mini lock-ups (gaols) on the train to detain transgressors pending pick up by police at the next station. Checked luggage can be X-rayed, carry-ons need not be.

That way the non-international segments could remain non-international and people who (for instance) want to travel from Manchester or its airport to the far reaches of Kent would have a good option. Just an example, there are plenty of others, an not worth a service on its own, but nonetheless a useful add-on. Not to mention the unfashionable concept of actually providing the public with a useful service.

 

[steamdrivenand]

I believe that Michael Portillo mentioned in his Continental Rail Journeys on TV a few weeks back that in many European capitals the main stations are through platforms rather than termini. It would make a lot of sense for us to move to through lines without the massive costs of full stop termini and the much greater flexibility for passengers. Surely it was just an historic accident that the railways all ended in London. There's surely no need to keep on building an anachronistic system in the 21st Century.

 

[HSTEd]

Just need a place we can dig relatively cheaply to put in central underground stations linked to the outskirts of london by tunnels at each end...

London parks are probably best for this (the parks would be put back afterwards obviously).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I believe that Michael Portillo mentioned in his Continental Rail Journeys on TV a few weeks back that in many European capitals the main stations are through platforms rather than termini. It would make a lot of sense for us to move to through lines without the massive costs of full stop termini and the much greater flexibility for passengers. Surely it was just an historic accident that the railways all ended in London. There's surely no need to keep on building an anachronistic system in the 21st Century.

Now I see the error of my cogniscence of what was stated as the ends of the Manchester and Leeds arms of the "Y-axis", as I must have been somewhat fallaciously informed by a very senior engineer in an organisation that I am not now at liberty to disclose, that terminal stations in both of these two northern cities was an option that had received serious consideration in the very preliminary discussion stages.

Now being well into my third year of retirement from our Consultancy, I no longer feel the need to be in touch with such matters, as being 67 years of age at the present time, I do not forsee myself being overly concerned by the effects of HS2 when eventually it does penetrate "the leafy lanes of Cheshire", as the site of my mausoleum being affected by the route will be the only matter of concern to my dependents....:roll:

 

[steamdrivenand]

Leafy lanes Paul? Not many of they round Crewe tha knows. Better get a viewing platform built into the mausoleum.

Of course some of the Eurostar sets that were presumably destined for regional routes ended up being hired by GNER to supplement their ECML fleet. Not having been on ECML since GNER foundered I'm wondering if they're still being used that way?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Leafy lanes Paul? Not many of they round Crewe tha knows. Better get a viewing platform built into the mausoleum.

There are parts of Cheshire that Hyacinth Bucket would regard as "Cheshire" and it is in these hallowed areas where I do so reside, but having had the experience of standing on Crewe bus station waiting for the number 38 bus to Macclesfield, I do concur there is indeed a north-south divide in Cheshire, as well as in the country at large...

 

[si404]

oooo.....errrr; do I detect an incursion from the anti-HS2 community in our midst?

Nope, not at all. I would wonder where you had got that idea, but then again, my post responding to yours was me wearing my anti-logicfail community hat on, so the reason why won't make sense.

This is unacceptable in today's "security concious environment". <snip>
The border checks in continental europe were cursory compared to those on Eurostar today.

Nope - it's the added security checks that take the time - the border checks are still small.

The problem is the 20-mile tunnel, not the border checks.

terminal stations in both of these two northern cities was an option that had received serious consideration in the very preliminary discussion stages.

You mean through stations? If Manchester's is at Mayfield, then it would be better for Scotland trains to join the classic network there there than via the presumed-WCML link at Crewe.

Surely it was just an historic accident that the railways all ended in London.

Yes and no - certainly many places had several termini that weren't linked and then (WW2 destruction helped on the mainland) merged them together.

London mega-terminus ideas were considered, but the traffic arriving at one station would be far far too much. More Parisian solutions (after all they have Nord, l'Est, St Laziere, Montpasse, Lyon - and that's with some merging - is Bercy still a terminus?) of through-the-middle routes for suburban branches to relieve terminals happened with the Underground in the 1860s onwards to WW2 and then Crossrails were proposed to do that and didn't get built (Ada, Phyllis etc finally putting a stop to that - Thameslink being a reopening and upgrade of a 19th century scheme).

There's surely no need to keep on building an anachronistic system in the 21st Century.

Other than it being near-impossible to disperse that massive volume of traffic - even if you get the middle distance stuff (if not the long-distance stuff as well) stopping at a couple of stops (say 3 or 4 E-W, and 2 or 3 N-S) as it heads through Central London. Oh, and most of our terminals are listed historical sites. Even dealing with the approach tracks (Marylebone 2, Fenchurch Street 2, Paddington 2 (Crossrail takes the slows), St Pancras 4, Kings Cross 2, Liverpool Street 6, Waterloo 8, London Bridge 11, Victoria 8, Euston 4) and pairing them up, you still get a whopping 24 tracks needing to call at this Hauptbahnhopf.

 

[steamdrivenand]

Tell me pray in which part does Warrington reside, north or south?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even dealing with the approach tracks (Marylebone 2, Fenchurch Street 2, Paddington 2 (Crossrail takes the slows), St Pancras 4, Kings Cross 2, Liverpool Street 6, Waterloo 8, London Bridge 11, Victoria 8, Euston 4) and pairing them up, you still get a whopping 24 tracks needing to call at this Hauptbahnhopf.

I wasn't thinking of one gurt great wanging central station, but pairing up the lines so they run through, thereby maybe reducing the number of big main line stations by 40% or so.

Don't bother with Euston for HS2 but take it a mile or so down the road to link with HS1 at St Pancras. Run all the local stuff from St P & KX through to Brighton etc. Use Crossrail lines to link Padd and Liverpool Street lines etc etc.

Jobs a good 'un.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Tell me pray in which part does Warrington reside, north or south?

Warrington was historically part of the County Palatine of Lancashire and matters progressed over the years, but in 1998 it became an independent unitary authority, but in very special ceremonial purposes, it retains a link to Cheshire in respect of matters such as the Lord Lieutenancy. However the recent administrative divide of Cheshire now sees both Cheshire West and Cheshire East councils administering governance. Look at my forum profile to see in which sub-division I reside.

Heavens above, I nearly thought for a moment that I was making one of my usual arcane associations with explanations affixed (as is my want) on the Settlement Association Quiz....