HS2: RailUK Opinion Poll: what do you think will happen?

[Alex McKenna]

If somebody actually WANTS to go to Euston, there's still the WCML. Crossrail give you so many more options.

 

[The Ham]

depends on what it is restricted to. I would say a max of 320 kph which is more or less what other high speed lines run at. The difference in time saved between that and 360 kph is small but the energy used is large. Remember that energy will be effect every train, every day. The savings could be huge in ongoing running costs

Based on NR charges of 1.9p/km/coach for a 16 coach HS2 train running from London to Manchester, assuming that we triple the energy use as it's claimed by some, then the bill is £310.

Even with 310 people on a train with 1,100 seats that's £1/person, so hardly going to make a big difference. Especially given that it's unmetered, so a metered use would be lower, and some of that cost is already having to paid anyway.

On the current journey times you have a 5 hour unit cycle time (from leaving London for Manchester to when it gets back and is ready to leave again) based on 9+9+11 coach units that's 145 coaches. Compare that with the 3 hour unit cycle time under HS2 and 3x16 coach units would need 144 coaches.

Likewise rather than 15 drivers you only need 9.

Gaurds and catering staff could likewise reduced or could have more of them without impacting on overall numbers by very much.

For instance you could go from 15 to 9 gaurds and from 30 (1 in first class and 1 for standard) to 27 (1 in first class and 2 in standard) and you'll still see a decrease. Even going to 2 in first class and 2 in standard would only be 36, so hardly any difference especially given the savings seen in other roles which are more expensive.

 

[Camden]

HS2 build route OOC to Crewe and Manchester, lower speed and spec.

The loss of the eastern route resulting in a proposal for Newcastle and Sheffield city centres being reached via an upgraded line from Leeds, which in turn receives its London and Birmingham trains across the Pennines from Manchester.

Journey times predictions, Manchester 80 minutes, Leeds 100 minutes, Sheffield 120 minutes (about same as today).

Further predictions:

Liverpool's recent progress at making inroads to this comes to a screeching halt and it continues to be left off anything significant proposed to be built.

For the portions north of Crewe, these are funded by TfN who get powers to add a charge to council tax and business rates bills throughout the north to pay for it. This results in outrage in those areas not bring served, or being served poorly, sparking legal challenges, referenda and inter-governmental showdowns.

 

[CdBrux]

All phases, including 2b, more or less as planned.
Possibly minus Handsacre junction
Possibly 100% classic compatible trains (&platforms)?
Some costs of northern parts shared with NPR, i.e. Manchester spur, Leeds -> Sheffield north junction, to have costs shared with more politically sellable NPR so as to reduce headline cost of HS2

 

[Bletchleyite]

Possibly 100% classic compatible trains

Already the intention, I believe.

 

[The Planner]

What is NPR? Northern Powerhouse?

BTW i have long felt the bit beyond Birmingham to be very unlikely to happen

Yes, and I strongly think that Handsacre will go as its a white elephant that has little use if it gets to Crewe so bin it and go straight there, will save near enough £5-600 million on that alone.

 

[The Ham]

Yes, and I strongly think that Handsacre will go as its a white elephant that has little use if it gets to Crewe so bin it and go straight there, will save near enough £5-600 million on that alone.

Would that mean either a delay until phase 2a was built, or more likely (given that it's just for about a year) start with the Birmingham services and then move more services over once HS2 reaches Crewe?

 

[PR1Berske]

I suspect the options have been chosen to attempt to skew the result. I.e. three very similar options (Birmingham / Phase 1 / Crewe) to 'split the vote' against the scrapping altogether option.

Nope, I used the options from the original post I quoted from another forum member.

 

[The Planner]

Would that mean either a delay until phase 2a was built, or more likely (given that it's just for about a year) start with the Birmingham services and then move more services over once HS2 reaches Crewe?

Basically, gives people a vague get out clause along the lines of "we have decided it is better to go to Crewe in one go to save money by removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke) but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"

 

[Bletchleyite]

Basically, gives people a vague get out clause along the lines of "we have decided it is better to go to Crewe in one go to save money by removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke) but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"

2-3tph removed from the WCML fast lines will still provide benefits. So that's not an altogether bad idea.

But ideally, go to Euston straight away, not some scummy western suburb with a few extra tower blocks.

 

[158756]

Whilst i agree the options are bizarre and not thought through at all, my two penneth based on what I have said elsewhere...
Phase 1, Euston to Birmingham spur, but the link at Handsacre will get killed off so Stafford, Stoke and Macclesfield get nothing. Phase 2A becomes 1A and it opens to Crewe. Phase 2 to the North East is massively curtailed, it will drop out on the Derby lines at Kingsbury or it gets to Toton, no further. Phase 2 to the North West gets renamed to NPR so it shifts the money on to someone else's books. Through station at Piccadilly so London Leeds is via Manchester but NPRs problem, not HS2. Some sort of new massive NPR parkway station Newton le Willows way. All trains to Scotland come off at Crewe with no link to the WCML further north.

The Handsacre link I also think will be cancelled. It wasn't initially planned to benefit Stoke and Stafford, and it would be entirely in keeping with the attitude of Westminster and HS2 towards smaller towns to cancel it. I don't see why they'd bother with any link towards Derby or Toton though - it would have no political support anywhere north of Sheffield, and East Midlands Parkway Mk2 probably isn't worth building on it's own.

I reckon it'll be Euston - Birmingham and Crewe, no Handsacre link and no curve for trains from Birmingham northwards

 

[MarkyT]

... removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke)

Perhaps the engineering connection near Stone could be beefed up as an alternative route to Stoke and Macclesfield (sorry Stafford). A long deceleration lane on the down with a maximum speed turnout, and an additional chord to join the up. Personally for Stafford I'd create a classic connection on approach to Birmingham and drop off half sets at Interchange for New Street, Wolverhampton and Stafford.

but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"

I fail to see any alternative to two pairs of TBMs heading out in opposite directions from the OOC trench simultaneously, so the tunnels going both ways ought to be ready around the same time at least, even if Euston station takes a bit longer. Once passenger train operations start at OOC, I can't see subsequent launching and supplying of further TBMs from the same trench is going to be viable, so not starting the Euston tunnels at the same time as those heading north could render future extensions further east impossible unless the TBMs involved were launched and supplied from the other end, which might rule out going to Euston at all, and will certainly be at far greater cost than simply using the materials handling operation already planned for OOC.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Basically, gives people a vague get out clause along the lines of "we have decided it is better to go to Crewe in one go to save money by removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke) but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"

How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?

Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?

Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?

 

[notlob.divad]

What is the point of delivering any part of HS2 if it's going to be restricted speed?

It is always going to be restricted speed. Remember E=MC^2, the question is only ever what it is restricted too.

 

[Camden]

How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?

Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?

Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?

If there were fewer trains then the OOC site wouldn't need to be enlarged.

 

[158756]

How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?

Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?

Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?

If Euston is still currently planned to have 11 platforms for HS2 for 18tph, then 9 or 10tph without phase 2b might get away with 6 platforms. So OOC would need to be larger if it was a terminus, but it's not the most constrained site, and if it is the case that the service to the whole country has to be designed around a regeneration opportunity/stupidly expensive flats in London that tells you all you need to know about HS2.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Bit slower, London to Brum and the WCML at a convenient point. Much more integration with classic lines. no captive sets. Classic compatible sets to Leeds via Manchester on the Boris Line and perhaps some work to speed up south of Manchester.

 

[6Gman]

What is the point of delivering any part of HS2 if it's going to be restricted speed?

Capacity.

 

[PTR 444]

This is my first time posting on these forums. Having heard a lot about HS2 in the news recently, this is what I expect will happen with the current project.

Considering the current economic climate, I think the most likely outcome will be that Phases 1 and 2a go ahead as planned, but with the latter being completed much later while phase 2b gets put on hold indefinitely. As others have said, the western branch of 2b is likely to be incorporated into the Northern Powerhouse rail project which would allow for London - Leeds services to run via Manchester. This would of course necessitate the need to construct the eastern branch of 2b for the time being, but would be a rather circuitous route and would probably take just as long, if not longer than the existing London - Leeds services operating via the Midland and East Coast main lines. I expect most passengers would continue using the LNER services as they are more direct while the East Coast main line is still pretty fast for British rail lines with a maximum operating speed of 125mph.

50 years or so down the line however, I reckon the HS2 East Midlands branch will still need to be built as more and more rail lines will be operating at capacity by then. Even the London - Birmingham section of HS2 is likely to be overwhelmed at that point as every single high speed train will be funnelling into Euston. This is why I think there should be another high speed line built from a different London terminal. This would be best starting off at King's Cross or St Pancras, heading roughly along the M11 corridor with intermediate stops at Stansted Airport and Cambridge North before turning northwest to follow the A14 towards Huntingdon. Where it crosses the ECML, a connection would be provided to allow high seed trains to serve Peterborough. The HS line would then carry on west from there, skirting the north eastern fringes of Leicester with a possible station there, before finally joining up with the HS2 eastern branch just south of the proposed Toton station. If this was built, all HS services from the North East to London would go that way, allowing for a much shorter journey while it would free up capacity on the HS2 south of Birmingham.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Capacity.

The main purpose of HS2 is to provide an extra pair of fast lines on the south WCML for reasons of capacity.

To increase capacity

Thanks guys, got the message now

 

[RLBH]

heading roughly along the M11 corridor with intermediate stops at Stansted Airport and Cambridge North

Why do people insist on sending trains to the East Midlands and Yorkshire via Birmingham or Cambridge, places thirty or forty miles to the side of the direct path? HS2 runs London-Birmingham-Manchester without intermediate stops. HS-X (could be 3, 4, 5 or something else entirely) should be London-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds without intermediate stops.

 

[BlyRF]

Scrap this waste of money of a project and inject the rest of the money into more electrification for deferred projects and crossrail

 

[cambsy]

I’m a taxi driver and talking o a passenger the other day, was interesting to hear from outside the enthusiast fraternity that the word on the street is that HS2 etc wont go ahead, will get binned, he said a lot of his colleagues don think it will go ahead, and i agree, with 100 billion cost its just way too high, and can see it being white elephant as if seats are too cheap it will never cover itself and if say 30 pounds extra will most people pay that to save 20 mins or less and end up only in Birmingham, then conventional lines, so lose any big time savings, and all the economic benefits are ropey to say the least, it may be of economic benefit to Birmingham and there it will stop having big impact, I’m not sure the country can afford it, as my passenger said with Brexit and possible financial implications that money may be needed to shore up the economy, rather than a 100 billion spent on HS2, I personally would back it if it was going to Scotland or would only coast say 30 billion but its getting to the stage where the economic return etc is massively exceeded by the cost.

 

[al78]

It is always going to be restricted speed. Remember E=MC^2, the question is only ever what it is restricted too.

I think you are using the wrong equation for the situation. I normally see that used to calculate the energy output from nuclear fission/fusion, it equates mass and energy, and tells you a quantity of mass can be changed to a (large) quantity of energy.

What you need is Newtonian dynamics, force = mass x acceleration, and power = force x speed if you want to look at the limits of energy consumption and associated running costs.

 

[The Planner]

Perhaps the engineering connection near Stone could be beefed up as an alternative route to Stoke and Macclesfield (sorry Stafford). A long deceleration lane on the down with a maximum speed turnout, and an additional chord to join the up. Personally for Stafford I'd create a classic connection on approach to Birmingham and drop off half sets at Interchange for New Street, Wolverhampton and Stafford.

They layout of the engineering depot at Stone isn't conducive to that, it would need a complete new flying junction and chord.

How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?

Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?

Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?

One per hour, originally a Liverpool train calling at Stafford and Crewe which got changed as the second Liverpool via phase 2a caught it up. It got changed to a Stafford, Stoke, Macclesfield terminator. If the Leeds and further north trains were via Manchester then the platform requirement shouldn't be any different.

 

[Geezertronic]

Scrap this waste of money of a project and inject the rest of the money into more electrification for deferred projects and crossrail

No HS2 = no money, it's a common misconception that HS2 takes away funding from existing line improvements

 

[class26]

I’m a taxi driver and talking o a passenger the other day, was interesting to hear from outside the enthusiast fraternity that the word on the street is that HS2 etc wont go ahead, will get binned, he said a lot of his colleagues don think it will go ahead, and i agree, with 100 billion cost its just way too high, and can see it being white elephant as if seats are too cheap it will never cover itself and if say 30 pounds extra will most people pay that to save 20 mins or less and end up only in Birmingham, then conventional lines, so lose any big time savings, and all the economic benefits are ropey to say the least, it may be of economic benefit to Birmingham and there it will stop having big impact, I’m not sure the country can afford it, as my passenger said with Brexit and possible financial implications that money may be needed to shore up the economy, rather than a 100 billion spent on HS2, I personally would back it if it was going to Scotland or would only coast say 30 billion but its getting to the stage where the economic return etc is massively exceeded by the cost.

And your passenger was an expert ? .The public sadly are so ill informed which is partly HS2`s fault so lets say it once again -

HS2 IS NOT ABOUT SAVING 20 MINUTES TO BRUM , IT IS ABOUT A MASSIVE INCREASE IN EXTRA CAPACITY and a side benefit is that it will save time to many destination (read back on this forum for the details)

If we spent 100 billion (and there`s no guarantee it will cost as high as 100 b) and then that money was taken (it will not be) and spent on sections of the existing network infinitely less would be achieved. The west coast modernisation cost 8 billion many years ago now and didn`t give that much but caused massive operational restrictions for a decade. HS2, being a new build can be worked on at any time, no need to wait for the last train to depart and pack up before the first train arrives. No compensation to pay to existing companies for blockades. There is not so much more that can be done with our Victorian network.

 

[PTR 444]

Why do people insist on sending trains to the East Midlands and Yorkshire via Birmingham or Cambridge, places thirty or forty miles to the side of the direct path? HS2 runs London-Birmingham-Manchester without intermediate stops. HS-X (could be 3, 4, 5 or something else entirely) should be London-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds without intermediate stops.

I just think a high speed route serving Cambridge would be beneficial for East Anglia as it is the fastest growing region in the country. A brand new HS line paralleling the M1 might as well be an extension of a Birmingham or Cambridge route unless you plan to serve Luton, Milton Keynes and Northampton.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just think about it as 6-tracking the WCML south of Rugby / Crewe (depending which bits go ahead). It makes total sense then. The journey time improvements are an incidental benefit.

 

[matacaster]

I think you are using the wrong equation for the situation. I normally see that used to calculate the energy output from nuclear fission/fusion, it equates mass and energy, and tells you a quantity of mass can be changed to a (large) quantity of energy.

What you need is Newtonian dynamics, force = mass x acceleration, and power = force x speed if you want to look at the limits of energy consumption and associated running costs.

However, if we eventually get nuclear powered trains and there is a meltdown, then said equation of Einstein's will be most appropriate!