HS2 phase 2 cancellation : what could/should happen now?

[daodao]

How many trains per hour is that into Victoria and how many of them are going to terminate there? How does that work with any TRU service increases?

I was envisaging that not more than 8 tph would use platforms 3/4 and 8 tph would use platforms 5/6, of which up to 2 tph each could terminate. In addition, 2 tph stopping trains from the Stalybridge direction could be kept to 4 coaches and terminate in platforms 1/2.

 

[The Planner]

We need another dose of WCML upgrading to help focus minds on starting from scratch rather than tinkering.

What about a solution to replace Phase 2a with a "link" from the North end of HS2 phase 1 to Crewe but save money by not building Handsacre junction ?. How much would that save ?. No link to/from the WCML at Handsacre BUT this could be added in the future if justified later. (no don't say the obvious).

That is building 2A. Handsacre is Phase 1, so you would have to commit to 2A being built now to get rid of Handsacre. It would save probably around a billion quid. In my view that is what should have been done anyway.

I was envisaging that not more than 8 tph would use platforms 3/4 and 8 tph would use platforms 5/6, of which up to 2 tph each could terminate. In addition, 2 tph stopping trains from the Stalybridge direction could be kept to 4 coaches and terminate in platforms 1/2.

TRU is expecting 8tph from the Leeds direction, 6 fast plus 2 slow. You are adding 1tph Southport, 1tph Scotland, 1tph Windermere/Barrow and 1tph Llandudno on top of the Blackburn Rochdale, Wigan Leeds, Clitheroe Rochdale, Southport Stalybridge and Headbolt Lane Blackburn. That is 9tph from the West. Also factor in the new reversing sidings being put in at Hope St and Miles Platting for ECS moves to keep trains out of Victoria. Presumably the Blackpool and Lime St carry on through to the airport?

 

[Peter Sarf]

That is building 2A. Handsacre is Phase 1, so you would have to commit to 2A being built now to get rid of Handsacre. It would save probably around a billion quid. In my view that is what should have been done anyway.

......................

Yup. But it needs presenting in a "better" manner !.

Saving £1bn answers my curiosity.

 

[Energy]

That is building 2A. Handsacre is Phase 1, so you would have to commit to 2A being built now to get rid of Handsacre. It would save probably around a billion quid. In my view that is what should have been done anyway.

So Handsacre costs approximately £1bn, and costs so far for 2a are also about £1bn... so Rishi saved £3bn by amputating HS2? Wonderful.

 

[The Planner]

So Handsacre costs £1bn, and costs so far for 2a are also about £1bn... so Rishi saved £3bn by amputating HS2? Wonderful.

£1bn is a guess but its one less hand over in terms of signaling, assets, 2 miles of huge embankments and two junctions.

 

[Energy]

£1bn is a guess but its one less hand over in terms of signaling, assets, 2 miles of huge embankments and two junctions.

Did the 2a £5bn cost include a handover at Crewe?

 

[Krokodil]

Mothballing the Ordsall curve and running all trains from Warrington BQ/Chester, Southport and Cumbria/Scotland into/through Victoria, which is already quadrupled, should be enough to relieve the Castlefield corridor, with the proviso that some extra sidings for long-distance terminating trains would be needed near Victoria. HS2 phase 2b was irrelevant to rail service issues in Manchester.

You're suggesting that we not only mothball the Ordsall Chord, but the Windsor Link too? In order to take passengers to the station that most of them don't want to go to, with a tram transfer if they want to get to the airport? That's crackers.

 

[Meerkat]

HS2 Euston to Handsacre with an OOC stop

If there is seating capacity wouldn’t the northern trains stop at Birmingham Interchange? I would guess there would be quite a bit of business there.

It would be unlikely if any significant progress could be made between now and the election in terms of these HS2 plans, at least not enough to render it totally unbuildable.

But any new government would have to find the extra funding or cancel some of the Network North funding

Agreed, this a rogue prime minister breaking a decade long consensus on the future of transportation in the UK.

What decade long consensus!?
if there had been consensus that HS2 was the right thing to do it Would probably already be running to Birmingham!

 

[JamesT]

What decade long consensus!?
if there had been consensus that HS2 was the right thing to do it Would probably already be running to Birmingham!

Proposed by a Labour government, carried on through the coalition and Conservative governments since. Votes in Parliament got massive support from both sides (e.g. the final reading of Phase 1 was 399 for, 42 against).
If that’s not a consensus, what is?

 

[Agent_Squash]

Mothballing the Ordsall curve and running all trains from Warrington BQ/Chester, Southport and Cumbria/Scotland into/through Victoria, which is already quadrupled, should be enough to relieve the Castlefield corridor, with the proviso that some extra sidings for long-distance terminating trains would be needed near Victoria. HS2 phase 2b was irrelevant to rail service issues in Manchester.

Do you work for the road lobby?

There’s a reason that those services were diverted into Piccadilly in the first place - the Airport is far more useful than Victoria.

HS2 Phase 2b would’ve allowed significant service upgrades in the south of Manchester. For example, Stoke would’ve got more than 1tph slow…

 

[Krokodil]

What decade long consensus!?
if there had been consensus that HS2 was the right thing to do it Would probably already be running to Birmingham!

There had been a cross-party consensus for 13 years. It takes a long time to design and construct a major piece of infrastructure.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

What decade long consensus!?
if there had been consensus that HS2 was the right thing to do it Would probably already be running to Birmingham!

The consensus that saw cross-party support for getting the appropriate Bills through Parliament. The reason it has taken so long is due to the overall planning process being designed to be slow. The bureaucracy is part of it, demanding massively detailed appraisals and statements regarding sustainability, environmental impact and so on. Then there is the need to allow objections to be heard which seems to be almost open ended in scope especially if the responsible Minister is persuaded that a public enquiry is needed

In short this country is reaching the point where the only major infrastructure projects than can actually be built are single large buildings or a group of smaller buildings contained within a specific site, often with a regeneration designation attached. New railways, runways, major highways, forget about it. The rest of the world is laughing at us and it's easy to see why.

 

[Energy]

The consensus that saw cross-party support for getting the appropriate Bills through Parliament. The reason it has taken so long is due to the overall planning process being designed to be slow. The bureaucracy is part of it, demanding massively detailed appraisals and statements regarding sustainability, environmental impact and so on. Then there is the need to allow objections to be heard which seems to be almost open ended in scope especially if the responsible Minister is persuaded that a public enquiry is needed

In short this country is reaching the point where the only major infrastructure projects than can actually be built are single large buildings or a group of smaller buildings contained within a specific site, often with a regeneration designation attached. New railways, runways, major highways, forget about it. The rest of the world is laughing at us and it's easy to see why.

HS2 had to find a route that wouldn't annoy too many people while not making too many compromises, then make changes in the Chilterns to appease MPs (though tunneling seems to be on the current budget), and then design.

LGV Sud-Est had similar timescales for design, though construction on HS2 is much longer, but phase 1 is more complex.

HS2 should have learned from the Spanish method of very modular construction, each viaduct on HS2 appears to be its own design rather than reusing. HS2 also should have used development firms, so private companies finance and build the stations and in exchange get a multi-decade concession to lease out oversite development. I would have liked HS2 Birmingham to be done at the same time as New Street redevelopment as well, though HS2 was way past this. HS2 could have also done with pressure from the Treasury to keep costs reasonable earlier, Sunak is partly to blame for this, HS2 had the opportunity to shift stations to private development when he was chancellor.

 

[daodao]

You're suggesting that we not only mothball the Ordsall Chord, but the Windsor Link too? In order to take passengers to the station that most of them don't want to go to, with a tram transfer if they want to get to the airport? That's crackers.

Do you work for the road lobby?

There’s a reason that those services were diverted into Piccadilly in the first place - the Airport is far more useful than Victoria.

HS2 Phase 2b would’ve allowed significant service upgrades in the south of Manchester. For example, Stoke would’ve got more than 1tph slow…

Where did I suggest that the Windsor link should be mothballed? Electric trains from Blackpool North via Bolton (2 tph) and stopping electric trains from Liverpool Lime Street (2 tph) running via the Castlefield line would provide adequate connectivity from Merseyside and Central Lancashire to the NW England region's main airport, without overloading this route. Trying to run too many trains via Castlefield with knock-on issues at Slade Lane junction, is the main cause of Manchester's rail issues. There are 4 tracks through Victoria, but only 2 through Castlefield, so 2/3rds of the trains entering Manchester from the west should use Victoria. As all trains from the ex-CLC line via Warrington Central have to join the Castlefield line, this limits the number of other trains that can use it while ensuring a reliable service.

The only station on the Stoke line that is inadequately served is probably Bramhall, so overall a 1 tph stopping train service on this line is probably adequate, with 1 peak hour extra. Congleton's station is very poorly sited, thus limiting its usefulness. Increased WFH means that the current local services on the electrified ex-LNW services in the southern half of Greater Manchester are probably adequate for the foreseeable future, so I don't accept that this was an issue justifying HS2 Phase 2b.

 

[The Planner]

Where did I suggest that the Windsor link should be mothballed? Electric trains from Blackpool North via Bolton (2 tph) and stopping electric trains from Liverpool Lime Street (2 tph) running via the Castlefield line would provide adequate connectivity from Merseyside and Central Lancashire to the NW England region's main airport, without overloading this route. Trying to run too many trains via Castlefield with knock-on issues at Slade Lane junction, is the main cause of Manchester's rail issues. There are 4 tracks through Victoria, but only 2 through Castlefield, so 2/3rds of the trains entering Manchester from the west should use Victoria. As all trains from the ex-CLC line via Warrington Central have to join the Castlefield line, this limits the number of other trains that can use it while ensuring a reliable service.

The only station on the Stoke line that is inadequately served is probably Bramhall, so overall a 1 tph stopping train service on this line is probably adequate, with 1 peak hour extra. Congleton's station is very poorly sited, thus limiting its usefulness. Increased WFH means that the current local services on the electrified ex-LNW services in the southern half of Greater Manchester are probably adequate for the foreseeable future, so I don't accept that this was an issue justifying HS2 Phase 2b.

The Stoke line is crying out for a second train per hour.

 

[Grimsby town]

Where did I suggest that the Windsor link should be mothballed? Electric trains from Blackpool North via Bolton (2 tph) and stopping electric trains from Liverpool Lime Street (2 tph) running via the Castlefield line would provide adequate connectivity from Merseyside and Central Lancashire to the NW England region's main airport, without overloading this route. Trying to run too many trains via Castlefield with knock-on issues at Slade Lane junction, is the main cause of Manchester's rail issues. There are 4 tracks through Victoria, but only 2 through Castlefield, so 2/3rds of the trains entering Manchester from the west should use Victoria. As all trains from the ex-CLC line via Warrington Central have to join the Castlefield line, this limits the number of other trains that can use it while ensuring a reliable service.

The only station on the Stoke line that is inadequately served is probably Bramhall, so overall a 1 tph stopping train service on this line is probably adequate, with 1 peak hour extra. Congleton's station is very poorly sited, thus limiting its usefulness. Increased WFH means that the current local services on the electrified ex-LNW services in the southern half of Greater Manchester are probably adequate for the foreseeable future, so I don't accept that this was an issue justifying HS2 Phase 2b.

What expertise do you have to claim that the current service south of Manchester is sufficient? What about Poynton and Prestbury? Not in GM but within the travel to work area and fairly reliant on access to GM. Sure Congleton station isn't in the town centre but it is convenient for large areas of residential properties as result.

I think you're ignoring the point that local services have to be improved in Manchester if we are to achieve the required modal shift set out in 2040 transport plan. Rearranging services would improve reliability but it's not accommodate more services. 2tph is the very minimum stations in and near Greater Manchester need. To achieve true modal shift, most local stations require 4tph so that services are turn up and go.

It's not just local services to the south of Manchester, how do you accommodate additonal trains to Sheffield? Extending the New Mills stopper would be a compromise initially but are you seriously saying that is as good as it will ever get from Manchester to Sheffield?

 

[Arkeeos]

But any new government would have to find the extra funding or cancel some of the Network North funding

Yeah, and that's a good thing.

Why are people acting like Labour has to commit to a "plan" made in at best a day, with no proffesional consultation. instead of a project with 10,000s of manhours of planning behind it.

And there is not a single person who believes Network North will ever happen either.

 

[Peter Sarf]

So Handsacre costs approximately £1bn, and costs so far for 2a are also about £1bn... so Rishi saved £3bn by amputating HS2? Wonderful.

+

£1bn is a guess but its one less hand over in terms of signaling, assets, 2 miles of huge embankments and two junctions.

+

Did the 2a £5bn cost include a handover at Crewe?

This is why I had the impression that phase 2a was quite a lot of railway for not a lot of money. Phase 2a seems to be the simplest part to do and builds nicely onto phase 1 probably improving the Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR). It provided another chunk of relief for the Southern West Coast Mainline (WCML). It is why Phase 2 was split in two ?.

The consensus that saw cross-party support for getting the appropriate Bills through Parliament. The reason it has taken so long is due to the overall planning process being designed to be slow. The bureaucracy is part of it, demanding massively detailed appraisals and statements regarding sustainability, environmental impact and so on. Then there is the need to allow objections to be heard which seems to be almost open ended in scope especially if the responsible Minister is persuaded that a public enquiry is needed

In short this country is reaching the point where the only major infrastructure projects than can actually be built are single large buildings or a group of smaller buildings contained within a specific site, often with a regeneration designation attached. New railways, runways, major highways, forget about it. The rest of the world is laughing at us and it's easy to see why.

I agree, lets not forget, HS2 had a lot of support. HS2 still has plenty of support I suspect. But the slow progress with planning approvals means cost increases caused by changes to accommodate environmental concern (rightly or wrongly we trip ourselves up) AND and there has been plenty of time passing for costs to rise.

What I don't like is the compromises now being made to the project that appear to vandalise any future benefits from resumption. For example strangling Euston - at least leave the plot the right size and shape for the burrowing junctions and extra platforms to be added (decades) later.

As for UK construction in general. The message is we are a crowded island, inward looking and un-ambitious (how many high speed lines do the rest of the world have ?). We also don't finish what we start (phase 1 and 2a, rolling program of electrification). Take your investment elsewhere - only refugees accepted here.

 

[HSTEd]

A political consensus behind a project can only survive so long, and tolerate so much, before crumbling.

HS2's political consensus lasted more or less 15 years. If they couldn't get it built in that time they have themselves to blame, honestly.

 

[LYuen]

I think this worth a separate discussion but wonder how many people are interested.

Changing Rolling Stock Formations as Phase 2 Is Scrapped?

With the current orders, HS2 trains are 8 carriages each (200 metres long) and full spec HS2 station platform could accommodate 400 metres long trains.
So an HS2 only service can run in double while through services to traditional lines can run in single where most traditional stations can accommodate 200 metres

Pendolino has 11 coaches maximum, roughly 240 metres long, and has greater capacity than a single HS2 trains.
The key stations WCML serves, like Manchester and Edinburgh, have platform length of 250m-300m, which can accommodate 10 or 12 carriages of HS2 trains.
The issue with modern EMUs are that changing formation isn't exactly easy. However, since it is still the early stage of rolling stock order, I think the formation of HS2 trains should be changed, or otherwise WCML capacity will take a hit rather than being increased.

Could some orders being changed to 10 coaches sets, or 4 coaches set to couple with 8 coach sets could be feasible?

 

[HSTEd]

As for UK construction in general. The message is we are a crowded island, inward looking and un-ambitious (how many high speed lines do the rest of the world have ?). We also don't finish what we start (phase 1 and 2a, rolling program of electrification).

The "rolling plan of electrification" was killed not by Government but by repeated project failures on the Great Western, the North West etc etc etc.

Electrification on the MML now costs so much that almost everything worth electrifying already has been.
The railway won't have the luxury of 30 years to electrify, just as (despite what the BTC liked to think) it didn't have 30 years to get rid of steam after the second world war.
Within a decade or two the diesel railway will look like a terrible anachronism, just as steam did in the 60s.

 

[Krokodil]

If they couldn't get it built in that time they have themselves to blame, honestly.

Have you sent them your CV? I take it that you have experience in delivering one of the largest infrastructure projects in Europe and would be able to do it in record time. Perhaps you were involved in Berlin Brandenburg Airport, which was famously delivered on-time and on-budget. Oh wait, no it wasn't.

 

[MTR380A]

I imagine that eventually UK has to move to the East Asian model, in which rail constructions are partially funded by oversite developments (perhaps even offsite if oversite is not enough). It will be controversial as it might look like the government confiscate private assets and resell them at higher value, so some kind of reasonable compensation options have to be offered. Otherwise I can't imagine any trunk lines getting built, ever.

 

[HSTEd]

I imagine that eventually UK has to move to the East Asian model, in which rail constructions are partially funded by oversite developments (perhaps even offsite if oversite is not enough). It will be controversial as it might look like the government confiscate private assets and resell them at higher value, so some kind of reasonable compensation options have to be offered. Otherwise I can't imagine any trunk lines getting built, ever.

I fear the real answer is that no new railway infrastructure is going to be built.

Upgrades keep failing and now new construction apparently does too.

 

[Peter Sarf]

A political consensus behind a project can only survive so long, and tolerate so much, before crumbling.

HS2's political consensus lasted more or less 15 years. If they couldn't get it built in that time they have themselves to blame, honestly.

This is the risk. Time marched on. Then Covid came and demand slithered down the plug hole temporarily but for long enough.

I think this worth a separate discussion but wonder how many people are interested.

Changing Rolling Stock Formations as Phase 2 Is Scrapped?

With the current orders, HS2 trains are 8 carriages each (200 metres long) and full spec HS2 station platform could accommodate 400 metres long trains.
So an HS2 only service can run in double while through services to traditional lines can run in single where most traditional stations can accommodate 200 metres

Pendolino has 11 coaches maximum, roughly 240 metres long, and has greater capacity than a single HS2 trains.
The key stations WCML serves, like Manchester and Edinburgh, have platform length of 250m-300m, which can accommodate 10 or 12 carriages of HS2 trains.
The issue with modern EMUs are that changing formation isn't exactly easy. However, since it is still the early stage of rolling stock order, I think the formation of HS2 trains should be changed, or otherwise WCML capacity will take a hit rather than being increased.

Could some orders being changed to 10 coaches sets, or 4 coaches set to couple with 8 coach sets could be feasible?

I would be tempted to say no new trains will be built. Perhaps new 400m (200+200) for Birmingham so the released Pendolinos can go to the North Wales Coast line if that really does get electrified.

Have you sent them your CV? I take it that you have experience in delivering one of the largest infrastructure projects in Europe and would be able to do it in record time. Perhaps you were involved in Berlin Brandenburg Airport, which was famously delivered on-time and on-budget. Oh wait, no it wasn't.

I am not disagreeing. But that is the problem - expecting politicians to hang on for 15 years is asking for miracles. That is probably why big projects are unlikely and will be less likely in the UK from now onwards. Back to the likes of a WCML upgrade I fear and lessons to be re-learnt.

Of course this would matter less if the knee jerk panic review of HS2 had refrained form vandalising Euston. That could cripple HS2 long into the future and undermines the potential of the rest of phase 1. Really letting phase 2a go ahead would have capitalised on phase 1 for none of the eye watering costs of Phase 2b.

I think some of the motivation for switching to other small projects is that these won't start costing serious money until after the next general election. How many are shovel ready ?. The worst thing is that nothing will happen for a while and roughly half the money will no longer be spent on rail.

We are going to see a few "Leamside" phenomena !.

We can only dream. Not in my lifetime I suspect.

 

[Sonik]

I think some of the motivation for switching to other small projects is that these won't start costing serious money until after the next general election. How many are shovel ready ?. The worst thing is that nothing will happen for a while and roughly half the money will no longer be spent on rail.

This is exactly what it is, deferring all expenditure on the basis that anything new will take 10+ years to get through planning & parliament. It's simply austerity by stealth.

I wouldn't however give up hope completely. It's a long shot because Labour are being very non-committal, but that's almost certainly to avoid getting caught in the various political traps Sunak has attempted to create.

However Starmer's entire plan for government is based on growing the economy rapidly, and Rachel Reeves plans to deliver this growth with a kind of 'Bidenomics'. Essentially that involves massive debt funded government sponsored private investment, which acts as a fiscal stimulus to drive GDP, which then increases the tax base to repay the debt - just as the Chinese have been doing for years (albeit they push it way too far and build many things that are questionable)

That needs big shovel ready projects. They will off course need to pick over the bones but HS2 offers many opportunities, even if only in parts, and perhaps with private investment like HS1, which will help control costs because investors with skin in the game will be all over it.

They also intend to make radical changes to the planning system, to make projects much easier/quicker to approve, mainly for things like housing, wind farms and power lines, but presumably railways too.

 

[Meerkat]

Proposed by a Labour government, carried on through the coalition and Conservative governments since. Votes in Parliament got massive support from both sides (e.g. the final reading of Phase 1 was 399 for, 42 against).
If that’s not a consensus, what is?

There had been a cross-party consensus for 13 years. It takes a long time to design and construct a major piece of infrastructure.

So a consensus in Parliament, not the country at large, and one that has got shakier and shakier as the business case collapsed.

Yeah, and that's a good thing.

Why are people acting like Labour has to commit to a "plan" made in at best a day, with no proffesional consultation. instead of a project with 10,000s of manhours of planning behind it.

And there is not a single person who believes Network North will ever happen either.

There is a list of projects and a budget. Rishi can start the decent ones and delay the no hopers.
If he won Starmer would have to cancel the projects to free the money. That’s not going to go down well.
I would have thought all this was obvious from Labour’s clear failure to say they would reinstate HS2.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

So a consensus in Parliament, not the country at large, and one that has got shakier and shakier as the business case collapsed.

So what's the alternative? How else are democracies supposed to work? Any form of elected government will only ever be able to genuinely please some of the people some of the time. And a good one will only occasionally displease most of the people. Perhaps big decisions (though how do you define big?) should be subject to approval by referendum. Because that works so well here... The issue is not just the process, it's the quality of people involved in the political part of the process.

There is a list of projects and a budget. Rishi can start the decent ones and delay the no hopers.
If he won Starmer would have to cancel the projects to free the money. That’s not going to go down well.
I would have thought all this was obvious from Labour’s clear failure to say they would reinstate HS2.

The only projects Sunak will start are the pot-hole fillers: easy to start, relatively cheap and reasonably visible. The rest is just a smokescreen to hide yet further austerity. Including Gobowen to Oswestry on the list of could-bes was an insult to the intelligence of anyone who knows anything about the costs and benefits of heavy rail schemes. For sure Labour will have some bigger fish to fry but philosophically at least their instinct is to favour public transport in ways that Tories never will. Their problem is keeping public sector minds focused on sensible cost control all the way down the chain.

 

[Krokodil]

There is a list of projects and a budget. Rishi can start the decent ones and delay the no hopers.

Pretty much nothing will start.

If he won Starmer would have to cancel the projects to free the money. That’s not going to go down well.

The projects won't even have been costed, let alone had money committed.

 

[Arkeeos]

So a consensus in Parliament, not the country at large, and one that has got shakier and shakier as the business case collapsed.

There is a list of projects and a budget. Rishi can start the decent ones and delay the no hopers.
If he won Starmer would have to cancel the projects to free the money. That’s not going to go down well.
I would have thought all this was obvious from Labour’s clear failure to say they would reinstate HS2.

There's no evidence the business case collapsed.

And Starmer wouldn't have to cancel the projects, because 25% goes on pothole fixing, which isn't capital expenditure and we don't know exactly what the finances are right now. so we can't really make that claim.

Given most the stuff is projects that were already planned it seems to me that this is effectively moving HS2 funding to regional funding so you can not spend as much on regional funding and then save overall, likely to afford tax cuts before the next election.