More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[Geogregor]

Because Euston has been abandoned. Manchester is in doubt. Leeds has gone, and Sheffield too.

Build it properly and fully, or not at all.

Technically Euston hasn't been abandoned, just postponed.

Anyway, stretch from OOC to Birmingham is so advanced that it just doesn't make any sense to cancel it now. It will get build.

Leg to Manchester might technically get scrapped but potential construction is so far in the future that it can be scrapped and reinstated three times over and it won't change the timeline of physical construction by much. It is all cheap politicking.

When leg to Birmingham opens it will most likely be roaring success and it will fill quickly, as it was the case with the Elizabeth Line. Then it will be pressure to build further. Yes, it will take longer and will cost more (like everything in the UK) but it is the most likely outcome.

Unless the UK economy implodes, possibility of which can't be excluded looking at "management" of this country...

 

[SCDR_WMR]

HS2 has become a line from somewhere west of London to a branch into the run down edge of Birmingham to not sure where so of course, figures no longer add up , support fades and delays happen.

Run down edge of Birmingham? Last I checked it was between Hampton-in-Arden and Solihull. Plenty of millionaire houses around there!

Sure it's not far from Chelmsley Wood, but the majority of the surrounding area is very much NOT the run down edge of Birmingham, pretty much the opposite - see Walsall, Aston, Stechford, etc for the more run down areas

 

[SynthD]

250 kph would be ... easier to extend to places like Scotland.

Why? The trains will slow down on the classic network, whatever their high speed setting is.

Isn't Old Oak Common also a single point of failure for journeys onward and capacity constrained in that it is just the Elizabeth Line from there, and that can be pretty full today.

The Paddington starters will be OOC starters by then. Hopefully there are Overground stations too.

It’s a well known fact that inflation benefits governments in the medium term, reducing the relative cost of (non-indexed linked) debt and increasing tax receipts.

Recent politicians have chosen index linked debt too much.

And the City would see though it, as Hunt himself will be well aware, seeing that he was the Chancellor who reversed most of the disastrous Truss/Kwarteng budget after the financial meltdown it caused.

As we see in many areas, people brought in to clean up a mess are very capable of making the same mess.

In general I wish we had better ways to prove or show to the public that the first stage of a multi stage project works. We can't, because the later stages need to be well in progress before the first stage is opened. HS1 somehow doesn't count for proving HS2, as it was financed in a way that people call different.

 

[The Planner]

Run down edge of Birmingham? Last I checked it was between Hampton-in-Arden and Solihull. Plenty of millionaire houses around there!

Sure it's not far from Chelmsley Wood, but the majority of the surrounding area is very much NOT the run down edge of Birmingham, pretty much the opposite - see Walsall, Aston, Stechford, etc for the more run down areas

I suspect they meant Digbeth, Saltley and Washwood Heath.

 

[camflyer]

Because Euston has been abandoned. Manchester is in doubt. Leeds has gone, and Sheffield too.

Build it properly and fully, or not at all.

Too late to do "not at all". The bare minimum would be OOC to Curzon which would be the worst of both worlds - very expensive and not very useful. The biggest economic benefit of HS2 was always north of Birmingham so scrapping that would be insane.

I expect the Autumn Statement will put a pause on development of Phase 2a/b and then leave it to the next government to deal with.

 

[52290]

All this gadget-bahn-stuff has been "coming soon" since the invention of the railways...can you imagine if the French had taken the view in the 1970s that aerotrains, monorails, flying cars, moon colonies were just around the corner and therefore they shouldn't build the TGV?

I'm sure a Rick and Morty style portal gun is just around the corner ( or just behind the wall)!

 

[Howardh]

So is it going to end at Old Oak Common? If so, what's the journey time from there to central London (say Tottenham Court Rd?) meaning all the time gained using HS2 could be lost transferring to another train (is it on the Elizabeth Line?)? Or is there no loss at all??

I'm not a local so my timings may well be (probably are!!) poor estimates. But here goes....

HS2 OOC > Euston, 5 - 10 mins, Euston > TCR 10-15mins via Northern Line (15-25' total)
OOC > TCR direct via Eliz Line (including 10' transfer + waiting time) 15 mins? (25 mins total)

So, basically, if I'm close, there's no need to spend £b's going to Euston when Old Oak Common will do to get you to Heathrow and Central London with no significant loss of time? Meaning that the money saved there could be spent getting HS2 to Crewe and Manchester, but the downside of ending at old Oak would be anyone wanting to transfer onto Eurostar has to get from there to St Pancras, which would be Eliz line to Farringdon, and then Thameslink to KingsX/St Pancras??

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Seen this below on Twitter which I assume is is from a newspaper article. Can someone explain how scrapping the Manchester leg allows the Government to prioritise NPR given the leg to Manchester forms the first part of NPR?

 

[The Planner]

So is it going to end at Old Oak Common? If so, what's the journey time from there to central London (say Tottenham Court Rd?) meaning all the time gained using HS2 could be lost transferring to another train (is it on the Elizabeth Line?)? Or is there no loss at all??

I'm not a local so my timings may well be (probably are!!) poor estimates. But here goes....

HS2 OOC > Euston, 5 - 10 mins, Euston > TCR 10-15mins via Northern Line (15-25' total)
OOC > TCR direct via Eliz Line (including 10' transfer + waiting time) 15 mins? (25 mins total)

So, basically, if I'm close, there's no need to spend £b's going to Euston when Old Oak Common will do to get you to Heathrow and Central London with no significant loss of time? Meaning that the money saved there could be spent getting HS2 to Crewe and Manchester, but the downside of ending at old Oak would be anyone wanting to transfer onto Eurostar has to get from there to St Pancras, which would be Eliz line to Farringdon, and then Thameslink to KingsX/St Pancras??

That is just assuming everyone wants somewhere on the Elizabeth line.

 

[GJMarshy]

Seen this below on Twitter which I assume is is from a newspaper article. Can someone explain how scrapping the Manchester leg allows the Government to prioritise NPR given the leg to Manchester forms the first part of NPR?

I suspect the move is more tactical. Even if the tories have no intention of delivering it, if they successfully shift the focus to delivering NPR separately without the need for HS2 (even without developed plans) that puts Labour in a very difficult position if it retains its pledge to build 2b. Most support for HS2 in the north west is because it forms part of NPR. If they’re told it can be done without it, bringing 2b of HS2 back will look very bad optics wise for Labour, and possibly lose votes.

The best outcome here is Sunak doesn’t promise NPR without HS2, then labour don’t have to change a thing. They simply build both as planned.

I doubt that though.

 

[HSTEd]

I suspect in part because most are likely to be conservative about it and would rather see something like HS2 which can see rail services continue beyond the extent of the new infrastructure without having to change trains.

Yes, people expect high speed transport systems to act like our existing long distance transport systems, but faster.
Optimisation of a maglev solution likely requires a change in paradigm.

Also isn't there complications with junctions, meaning that most routes to date are simple point to point systems?

Yes, junction pointwork is bulky and relatively slow to change position.
Which, combined with the extreme acceleration, leads towards (in the UK context at least) a strong driver to minimise the number of point moves during the operation of the line.

Which probably drives us to a metro-style single stopping pattern solution, that can be operated with no point moves at all (assuming balloon loops at the end of the line).

Whilst some opposed to HS2 would suggest that they would be better, the benefits are more limited, especially given the main purpose of HS2 is about capacity (the speed is there to ensure that the capacity is actually used and to mean that the trains can be longer without actually needing more rolling stock than is currently required, or at least not much more).

As I've highlighted before, if all the 390's were running around with 12 coaches with around 660 seats (an often cited way of increasing capacity for the WCML) or even an 11 coach 80x with around 825 seats (only 70 of which are first class) they would need more coaches to do the London Manchester run than a 16 coach HS2 train.

11 coaches taking 5 hours to run London, Manchester, London and New ready to run back Manchester again, at 3tph would require 165 coaches.

HS2 would reduce that from 5 hours to 3 hours, so due the same frequency but with 16 coaches per train it would require 144 coaches.

Meglev (assuming the London Manchester journey times is 40 minutes) would reduce the round trip time for the ruling stock to 2:20 (mostly as the turn around times are n't score to be reduced compared to HS2 or even classic trains). To run a 16 coach train would require 112 coaches (however that only really works so well as the service is 3tph.

A maglev can harness its short journey times to carry a lot more passengers in a given space though.
If we assume a simple jump of London-Birmingham-Manchester, we would be talking about journey times on order of 21 minutes Lonton-Birmingham, and about 15 minutes Birmingham-Manchester. Total journey time on order of 38-39 minutes.

21 minutes southbound from London St Pancras on Thameslink gets you to a few minutes south of Blackfriars, 40 minutes basically gets you to East Croydon!
Even northbound from St Pancras gets you to St Albans and Luton respectively.

If we had a 400m class 700 we would be looking at a capacity of nearly 3000 people!
And turnarounds would be much smaller in this mode of operation given that the line would be essentially operating as a tube system, not a conventional railway.

The stopping distance headway, even limited to a comparatively pedestrian 1.3m/s/s of service brake is only about 55 seconds. So 10-12 trains per hour is certainly achievable in practice with plenty of wiggle room to absorb disruption.

Termini station would likely have two platforms on the balloon loop (one main, one reserve), through stations would probably have three or four, holding a platform in reserve for failures of trains etc.

EDIT:

I know we are committed to the extant HS2 project, I am simply using London-Birmingham-Manchester as an example of an intercity axis, other axes exist in the UK and are available etc etc etc.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I suspect the move is more tactical. Even if the tories have no intention of delivering it, if they successfully shift the focus to delivering NPR separately without the need for HS2 (even without developed plans) that puts Labour in a very difficult position if it retains its pledge to build 2b. Most support for HS2 in the north west is because it forms part of NPR. If they’re told it can be done without it, bringing 2b of HS2 back will look very bad optics wise for Labour, and possibly lose votes.

The best outcome here is Sunak doesn’t promise NPR without HS2, then labour don’t have to change a thing. They simply build both as planned.

I doubt that though.

All Labour need to say in its manifesto is “We will build Northern Power House Rail in full staring with the Crewe to Manchester leg as the first phase“ (essentially rebranding phase 2b as part of NPR). Is is the only part of NPR that is planned and designed and unless the Tories stop the bill legislated for.

 

[Howardh]

That is just assuming everyone wants somewhere on the Elizabeth line.

Indeed, although unless you required somewhere very close to Euston, and admittedly St Pancras/King'sX would come under that, it makes little difference, seeing as you would have to transfer on to somethign to get to your destination? Has the Eliz Line the capacity to cope with extra traffic though?

 

[GJMarshy]

All Labour need to say in its manifesto is “We will build Northern Power House Rail in full staring with the Crewe to Manchester leg as the first phase“ (essentially rebranding phase 2b as part of NPR). Is is the only part of NPR that is planned and designed and unless the Tories stop the bill legislated for.

Except you can’t do that. Crewe to Manchester without the spurs toward Warrington and Marsden does nothing for east-west trains. You’d have to build the whole lot in full, for which there aren’t developed plans. So you’d basically delay 2b even further because it has no benefit to building it sooner without HS2.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Indeed, although unless you required somewhere very close to Euston, and admittedly St Pancras/King'sX would come under that, it makes little difference, seeing as you would have to transfer on to somethign to get to your destination? Has the Eliz Line the capacity to cope with extra traffic though?

TfL say they need more trains to extend the EL Paddington terminators to OOC.
So that would be more cost for the HS2 project.

 

[Energy]

TfL say they need more trains to extend the EL Paddington terminators to OOC.
So that would be more cost for the HS2 project.

A few 345s will be a drop in the ocean for HS2. The government and TfL will probably fight over who pays, TfL would get a lot of passengers from connecting with HS2.

Seen this below on Twitter which I assume is is from a newspaper article. Can someone explain how scrapping the Manchester leg allows the Government to prioritise NPR given the leg to Manchester forms the first part of NPR?

Nothing quite like this government than cancelling the short, relatively cheap bit of HS2 from Handsacre to Crewe...

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Except you can’t do that. Crewe to Manchester without the spurs toward Warrington and Marsden does nothing for east-west trains. You’d have to build the whole lot in full, for which there aren’t developed plans. So you’d basically delay 2b even further because it has no benefit to building it sooner without HS2.

NPR like HS2 is going to have to be built in phases. The Liverpool to Manchester section uses the upgraded Fiddlers Ferry line via Warrington then I assume a new section from where the line crosses the ship canal passing south of Lymm to link up with phase 2b to Manchester, that would be quicker to build as most of it is already planned or in existence while NPR from Manchester to Marsden isn’t much more than a line on a map at this stage.


EDIT: Section from a BBC article from on the development of Labours policy

Labour is emphasising it will not borrow to fund day-to-day spending in a policy blueprint seen by the BBC.

In rules that it says are "iron-clad" and 'non-negotiable' it sends a crystal clear message both to voters and party members that if they push for more spending commitments, they will be disappointed.
Party sources insist this underlines how much Labour has changed since the Corbyn era.
However, commitments to fund HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail are there as borrowing for investment is allowed under the party's fiscal rules, albeit with some constraints.

So looks like the Party is still committed to both HS2 and NPR although no I don’t expect they will give any specific timescale.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

NPR like HS2 is going to have to be built in phases. The Liverpool to Manchester section uses the upgraded Fiddlers Ferry line via Warrington then I assume a new section from where the line crosses the ship canal passing south of Lymm to link up with phase 2b to Manchester, that would be quicker to build as most of it is already planned or in existence while NPR from Manchester to Marsden isn’t much more than a line on a map at this stage.

Lots of time and money went into planning the Millington-Golborne section of HS2, and it entered the parliamentary process with Crewe-Manchester.
But it didn't stop the Tories cancelling it.
I doubt if Ditton-Warrington-Millington has a detailed plan, it won't be an easy build despite the old line still mostly being there.

 

[Xavi]

Recent politicians have chosen index linked debt too much.

I agree, however, it’s still only 25% of the total.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Nothing quite like this government than cancelling the short, relatively cheap bit of HS2 from Handsacre to Crewe...

It is already legislated for so wouldn’t be that difficult for an incoming Labour Government to reinstate.

Lots of time and money went into planning the Millington-Golborne section of HS2, and it entered the parliamentary process with Crewe-Manchester.
But it didn't stop the Tories cancelling it.
I doubt if Ditton-Warrington-Millington has a detailed plan, it won't be an easy build despite the old line still mostly being there.

Some of the route does look quite constrained by housing but I guess it would be rebuilt in a similar fashion to EWR. The most difficult bit would be the viaduct over the Ship canal.

 

[snowball]

I doubt if Ditton-Warrington-Millington has a detailed plan, it won't be an easy build despite the old line still mostly being there.

There will have to be at least about 9km that is not on any old rail alignment and has not yet been published.

It is possible that the Manchester-Marsden section could end up being much less problematic in getting authorised, if it ends up being nearly all in tunnel as has often been suggested.

 

[Richardr]

Seen this below on Twitter which I assume is is from a newspaper article. Can someone explain how scrapping the Manchester leg allows the Government to prioritise NPR given the leg to Manchester forms the first part of NPR?

It doesn't, but they are only thinking of the next election, and nothing new will be built by then (or now started by then). It will be pure PR.

 

[Xavi]

they are only thinking of the next election

Strange strategy, the red wall is how they won last time.

 

[GardenRail]

Gosh, after reading the last couple of pages, people really do believe Labour will save the day with everything public transport don't they..... Truth is, no political party has the want to invest in the network, new or old.

 

[GJMarshy]

Strange strategy, the red wall is how they won last time.

From what I can make out the strategy is to put labour in the position of looking like they’re wasting on what many northerners believe are “vaninity projects”

Ask any northerner what they think of HS2 and they’ll say something along the lines of:

“I don’t care about getting to London faster, we need better connections across the North”

Now we know that’s a false premise, but politicians will use that to their advantage.

If this government can successfully separate both schemes (HS2 & NPR) Labour would look terrible if they were seen to row-back on the decision to build NPR separately and bring back the “controversial” HS2.

Strategy. That’s about the only thing this government has going for it.

 

[Sussex Star]

Indeed, although unless you required somewhere very close to Euston, and admittedly St Pancras/King'sX would come under that, it makes little difference, seeing as you would have to transfer on to somethign to get to your destination? Has the Eliz Line the capacity to cope with extra traffic though?

Yes, 12 trains per hour would start empty from OOC.

 

[Chris 76]

Except you can’t do that. Crewe to Manchester without the spurs toward Warrington and Marsden does nothing for east-west trains. You’d have to build the whole lot in full, for which there aren’t developed plans. So you’d basically delay 2b even further because it has no benefit to building it sooner without HS2.

Amongst all the tea-leaf gazing about every possible permutation of HS2 sectional cancellation, delay, 'rephasing', priority of this bit or that bit in relation to NPR..... a few points strike me as worth setting out:
1. HS2 phase 1 must be completed not just to Birmingham but to the WCML in Staffordshire. There's a lot of speculation about the future of the Handsacre junction, but this would be the best place to stop HS2 construction if govt decides on delaying or 'cancelling' (more likely long-term delay) the section to Crewe and Manchester. Then at least HS2 trains can run from Old Oak Common to the North West using WCML north of Handsacre. Even if the first HS2 trains run only from OOC to Birmingham Curzon Street, there should be a commitment to HS2 trains from OOC to the North West via Handsacre junction starting within a year, 2 years at most, of the Birmingham service starting.
2. Why can't NPR go ahead without HS2 Phase 2b (Crewe-Manchester)? The Manchester-Manchester Airport-Liverpool section of NPR could be built sooner than HS2 Phase 2b with passive provision for HS2 junctions towards Crewe. There are plenty of economic and political reasons for prioritising NPR over HS2, as many people have said here.
3. Silver linings: Delays to constructing the northern sections of HS2 give time to rethink its scope and purpose. For example, links from HS2 to Chester and North Wales. HS2 should serve as much of the country as possible, given its cost and status as a transformational project.
4. The basic flaw of HS2 is that it was conceived and promoted by vain and glory-seeking politicians rather than by the rail industry. If the rail industry had been asked around 2000 what it would would like to spend £100bn on over the next 40 years it would have come up with a sensible mix of electrification, capacity improvements (including high speed sections and bypasses on the West and East Coast lines), and S-bahn type networks in every conurbation. It's ironic, but this would have been better for the politicians as well as the rail industry and its users. Everyone would have experienced a steady stream of improvements, all over the country. Politicians of whatever party was in power at the time could have justifiably said, 'look at all we've done, and will go on doing', and it would have been as useful, uncontroversial, and boring as the development of the motorway network between the 1960s and 1990s.

 

[Energy]

From what I can make out the strategy is to put labour in the position of looking like they’re wasting on what many northerners believe are “vaninity projects”

Ask any northerner what they think of HS2 and they’ll say something along the lines of:

“I don’t care about getting to London faster, we need better connections across the North”

Now we know that’s a false premise, but politicians will use that to their advantage.

If this government can successfully separate both schemes (HS2 & NPR) Labour would look terrible if they were seen to row-back on the decision to build NPR separately and bring back the “controversial” HS2.

Strategy. That’s about the only thing this government has going for it.

It would be pretty easy for Labour to carry on, the controversial section is Phase 1. 2b (Crewe to Manchester) would be pretty easy to package as part of NPR, 2a (Handsacre to Crewe) is a fairly short stretch without long tunnels and isn't that expensive.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

2. Why can't NPR go ahead without HS2 Phase 2b (Crewe-Manchester)? The Manchester-Manchester Airport-Liverpool section of NPR could be built sooner than HS2 Phase 2b with passive provision for HS2 junctions towards Crewe. There are plenty of economic and political reasons for prioritising NPR over HS2, as many people have said here.

Because HS2 phase 2b and NPR are the same thing. You still have to build the most expensive parts (the tunnels from Manchester Airport and the station at Picadilly. Not building the relatively short section between where the NPR line diverges towards Warrington/Liverpool and Crewe means that HS2 Manchester services would still have to use the line via Stockport and not provide any capacity relief.

 

[camflyer]

Strange strategy, the red wall is how they won last time.

A lot of those voters won't know anything about HS2 and just see it as a waste of money so announcing it being scrapped and making some vague promises about spending more money on rail in the north could be politically popular for them

Of course, there s a big difference between what is popular and what is the right thing to do.