We need High speed Rail, but Is HS2 really Needed?

[OverSpeed]

Hello All

I was thinking about something the other day in regards to HS2 and the future of High speed rail in the UK in general, first of all i am in full agreement that we need faster rail travel in the uk (And i am not trolling either!) BUT would it be cheaper for the Uk government invest more money into the current infrastructure than creating a whole new one?

I know on my local route (WCML) that they upgraded it to a standard back in the naughties for the trains to run a bit faster, but it has always baffled me that there are units that can go a lot faster than they currently do.
I know that they would have to put in cab signalling and sort out the major bottlenecks on the current network so travel was less restricted, but as a passenger with no links to the railway or not knowing how much stuff exactly costs, would it cost less to upgrade the likes of the WCML for Higher speed, or is the only option to create a complete new railway?

And if it's the latter, will we the Uk people truly benefit from it?

As i looked at some stats the other day, and if what i read was true (Or maybe pure speculation,just like Brexit lol), once HS2 is Linked between Birmingham and London, it will only be 15 minutes quicker to travel by Hs2, which made me think how much will the cost of travelling be between the 2 cities on HS2 and on WCML as i am sure that travelling on HS2 will cost a little bit more than on the Classic route, and would the normal punter want to spend more on saving 15 minutes of Travelling time?

 

[Andy25]

I think the cost of upgrading the existing WCML isn't far off HS2 cost predictions and would take just as long to install.

You'd gain a percentage increase in capacity but not 100% and HS2 effectively gives 100% extra capacity so is more cost effective. And has the added boost of shorter journey times.

 

[jyte]

There's some areas where in order to upgrade the WCML to provide the same capacity (and capacity alone) benefits as HS2 and you're doing most of the same work, for example, you'd need to somehow get an extra pair of running lines to Euston south of Rugby (six track).

North of Rugby you'd want to instate proper four tracking between Rugby and Nuneaton, sort out Colwich Junction (one nasty flyover) and somehow four-track between Stafford and Colwich. Oh and completely remodel Crewe.

And you wouldn't gain any real time advantages. The WCML is just too damn bendy it would require major alignments. A common pro HS2 argument is that 'we're building a new railway, might as well make it quick'. Sure, that 'quick' might be better as 150 or 175mph rather than 225mph, but my understanding is that it's not that cheaper to build it much slower. I can't comment on what the ideal time saved/£ spent speed is between 150-250mph because I've never researched that.

And a quick edit to avoid double posting: it's a major bugbear of mine that when we do major road improvement projects in this country we do them properly - on new, often very different, better alignments (the new Hungington bypass, the Head of the Valleys improvements, the new Pembury bypass). I feel we should be doing that with railways too.

 

[edwin_m]

Basically the mix of fast and slow trains on the WCML means it is full. It's not possible to make all the trains on the fast lines faster because some of them need to stop at different stations. Increasing the speed of some of the fastest trains would mean leaving a longer gap between a slow train and a fast one behind, so fewer trains could run. Adding extra tracks alongside the WCML would mean taking land from at least half of the thousands of houses that back onto the line, as well as re-building much of the existing line and its stations with huge disruption to the train service. So if extra tracks are needed it's better to build them on a new alignment, as remote as possible from people's homes (although with the population density of the UK it's impossible to avoid housing totally).

This means serving only a few stations, but the fastest trains tend to call only at the big cities anyway. Removing these trains from the WCML increases capacity, not only because paths are freed but because the remaining trains are more similar in average speed so more can be fitted in. If you are building new tracks anyway, it costs very little extra to make them suitable for higher speeds, which brings some journey time benefit and therefore extra passengers - but may also reduce costs because a train can do more journeys in a day.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

As i looked at some stats the other day, and if what i read was true (Or maybe pure speculation,just like Brexit lol), once HS2 is Linked between Birmingham and London, it will only be 15 minutes quicker to travel by Hs2, which made me think how much will the cost of travelling be between the 2 cities on HS2 and on WCML as i am sure that travelling on HS2 will cost a little bit more than on the Classic route, and would the normal punter want to spend more on saving 15 minutes of Travelling time?

I suspect this question stems from a mis-understanding of the service pattern once HS2 is up and running: There simply won't be a choice of whether to travel inter-city on WCML versus inter-city on HS2 ("15 minutes quicker at a price premium.") The Euston-Brum inter-city WCML service will cease once the Euston-Brum HS2 service start, so the only inter-city travel option available will just happen to be an HS2 service at whatever price the ticket costs. The only other rail option available will be on a "stopper" doubtless taking much longer and possibly involving changes.

 

[edwin_m]

There may well still be London-Birmingham trains as this is probably the easiest way to give Coventry, Rugby, Milton Keynes and Watford access to both places. So it will be slightly slower but not drastically.

Logically the high speed fare shouldn't be significantly higher as the whole aim is to make capacity available on the existing route and that won't happen if nobody uses the high speed service! My personal preference would be for normal walk-up tickets to be the same price by either route but for seasons to be more expensive by high speed so as to encourage use for purposes other than commuting. There might be some kind of off-peak bargain basement option for through services on the classic route, but only where there are seats that would otherwise be empty.

 

[OverSpeed]

Thanks guys for your replies first of all, honestly thought i'd get none!


From the way i see it now, and from what some of you have said i think it would be either the same or if not, more expensive to re-adjust the WCMl to a true high sped railway.
But i do wonder though, that since it was announced many moons ago, that HS2 was going to be a thing, how much cash has been spent so far in the planning of it all, and why on earth it's taking so chuffing long to pull out their fingers and start building it!
I am sure that other countries do not have this issue when building a new rail infrastructure!

I suspect this question stems from a mis-understanding of the service pattern once HS2 is up and running: There simply won't be a choice of whether to travel inter-city on WCML versus inter-city on HS2 ("15 minutes quicker at a price premium.") The Euston-Brum inter-city WCML service will cease once the Euston-Brum HS2 service start, so the only inter-city travel option available will just happen to be an HS2 service at whatever price the ticket costs. The only other rail option available will be on a "stopper" doubtless taking much longer and possibly involving changes.

So will that definitely happen,what ever TOC is in charge of the main Franchise on WCML come HS2 will cease to run a InterCity service from New Street to euston? I can see where you are coming from, and the general consensus from people on here and in general Presume that Hs2 will have the main Inctercity service, and everything else along the classic routes will be a regional slower service, but is that exactly going to happen when the main bulk of Current WCML Commuters Travel to and from Places like Birmingham,Coventry,Rugby, Milton Keynes to Euston prefer Travelling on a faster Virgin service over a LNR slower service?

Logically the high speed fare shouldn't be significantly higher as the whole aim is to make capacity available on the existing route and that won't happen if nobody uses the high speed service! My personal preference would be for normal walk-up tickets to be the same price by either route but for seasons to be more expensive by high speed so as to encourage use for purposes other than commuting. There might be some kind of off-peak bargain basement option for through services on the classic route, but only where there are seats that would otherwise be empty.

The way i see it is, that at first once HS2 is up and running surely rail fare prices will be quite pricey on there, just so they can try and recoup some of the money they have spent on building the line!

 

[jyte]

.
But i do wonder though, that since it was announced many moons ago, that HS2 was going to be a thing, how much cash has been spent so far in the planning of it all, and why on earth it's taking so chuffing long to pull out their fingers and start building it!
I am sure that other countries do not have this issue when building a new rail infrastructure!

Lots of other (functionally democratic) countries do have a similar kinda timeframe for major construction projects. HS2 taking approx a decade from conception to construction isn't any worse than Heathrow Terminal 5, or Brandenburg Airport in Berlin.

LGV Sud Est was 5 years from announcement to groundbreaking, and then 5 years from groundbreaking to opening.

In fairness the french seem quite fast once the diggers start...

 

[NSEFAN]

Lots of other (functionally democratic) countries do have a similar kinda timeframe for major construction projects. HS2 taking approx a decade from conception to construction isn't any worse than Heathrow Terminal 5, or Brandenburg Airport in Berlin.

LGV Sud Est was 5 years from announcement to groundbreaking, and then 5 years from groundbreaking to opening.

In fairness the french seem quite fast once the diggers start...

I get the impression that the French also have had a long-term high speed plan for some time, whereas planning HS2 has started relatively recently. I'd much rather it was planned and implemented properly, instead of the complete hash that was the WCML upgrade in the 2000s.

 

[Ianno87]

In fairness the french seem quite fast once the diggers start...

In France, the vast majoirty of LGV routes are in easy building open country.

Meanwhile, here in the UK, the rate of progress on the A14 new alignment around Huntingdon is quite something to look at. But not so much the bit closer to Cambridge that's widening the existing road.

 

[AM9]

So will that definitely happen,what ever TOC is in charge of the main Franchise on WCML come HS2 will cease to run a InterCity service from New Street to euston? I can see where you are coming from, and the general consensus from people on here and in general Presume that Hs2 will have the main Inctercity service, and everything else along the classic routes will be a regional slower service, but is that exactly going to happen when the main bulk of Current WCML Commuters Travel to and from Places like Birmingham,Coventry,Rugby, Milton Keynes to Euston prefer Travelling on a faster Virgin service over a LNR slower service?

I suggest the services on the WCML will cease to be run as 'Inter-city' in name and in nature. Of course London and Birmingham are still likeky to be the end destinations but not timed to encourage end to end travel. Long-distance commuting travellers would see the line operating as an 'express regional service'.
Coventry, Rugby & MK may be supplemented with Watford Junction as an off-peak stop - as was the case before increased long distance travel traffic made it impractical, and maybe Birmingham International could also be includede to scoop up/deliver passengers using Birmingham metro services that terminate there. It could also provide interchange facilities to/from Cross Country services, reducing the load on New Street. The LNR services would probably run as stoppers north of MK as now (via the Northampton loop) and semi-fast south of it (Bletchley, Tring and Watford).

The way i see it is, that at first once HS2 is up and running surely rail fare prices will be quite pricey on there, just so they can try and recoup some of the money they have spent on building the line!

The line is a strategic infrastructure investment and recouping all or even a significant part of the cost through fares would require them to be high enough to discourage most travel for decades. The TOC(s) running the services wouldn't need to cover the costs of the line's construction either, only the impact of running the trains.

 

[AM9]

Duplicate message removed.

 

[jyte]

I get the impression that the French also have had a long-term high speed plan for some time, whereas planning HS2 has started relatively recently. I'd much rather it was planned and implemented properly, instead of the complete hash that was the WCML upgrade in the 2000s.

Yes they do. They have routes planned to open in the late 2030s, slowly but surely replacing busy trunk routes with LGVs and reducing the need for TGVs to run on slower, older routes.

In France, the vast majoirty of LGV routes are in easy building open country.

Also true. I'm not sure if it's a cultural thing, less nimbyism, better project communication or less recourse for complaints by locals but TGV routes are mostly flat and at grade, no 'green tunnels' to appease residents of certain communities.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes they do. They have routes planned to open in the late 2030s, slowly but surely replacing busy trunk routes with LGVs and reducing the need for TGVs to run on slower, older routes.

Also true. I'm not sure if it's a cultural thing, less nimbyism, better project communication or less recourse for complaints by locals but TGV routes are mostly flat and at grade, no 'green tunnels' to appease residents of certain communities.

However there must be some doubt how much of it will happen. The routes where there is enough traffic to justify a LGV pretty much have them already.

 

[snowball]

I thought France had cut back its future LGV plans, or at least greatly slowed down the proposed rate of construction, for financial reasons.

 

[Ianno87]

Yes they do. They have routes planned to open in the late 2030s, slowly but surely replacing busy trunk routes with LGVs and reducing the need for TGVs to run on slower, older routes.



Also true. I'm not sure if it's a cultural thing, less nimbyism, better project communication or less recourse for complaints by locals but TGV routes are mostly flat and at grade, no 'green tunnels' to appease residents of certain communities.

There is at least some opposition to LGV building in France, see: http://limogespoitiers.com/ (in French, obviously)

[This was for the LGV branch of the Atalntique/Oceane route from Poitiers to Limoges, now kicked into the long grass due to lack of funding. Unusually proposed as a predominantly single track LGV route, telling you something about its potential to meet actual demand!]

 

[PR1Berske]

I suspect this question stems from a mis-understanding of the service pattern once HS2 is up and running: There simply won't be a choice of whether to travel inter-city on WCML versus inter-city on HS2 ("15 minutes quicker at a price premium.") The Euston-Brum inter-city WCML service will cease once the Euston-Brum HS2 service start, so the only inter-city travel option available will just happen to be an HS2 service at whatever price the ticket costs. The only other rail option available will be on a "stopper" doubtless taking much longer and possibly involving changes.

I sincerely hope this isn't true.

I will never, ever, use HS2, not a single inch of track or a square centimetre of rolling stock. HS2 is supposed to be an option, not a replacement.

 

[Ianno87]

I sincerely hope this isn't true.

I will never, ever, use HS2, not a single inch of track or a square centimetre of rolling stock. HS2 is supposed to be an option, not a replacement.

Not even if it offers a faster service at the same price than you paid before?

 

[Clip]

Not even if it offers a faster service at the same price than you paid before?

Their posting history on the subject suggests not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd go the other way.

High speed is not needed, but a 5th and 6th track on the south WCML (3rd and 4th on the branch to Birmingham) is needed for capacity reasons, and the cost difference to make it high speed is not outrageous so it might as well be. Consider the Swiss Neubaustrecke concept rather than the French high speed concept.

Though TBH I'd have topped it out at 186mph per HS1 rather than the much higher speed they are going for which does increase cost a bit.

 

[AM9]

I sincerely hope this isn't true.

I will never, ever, use HS2, not a single inch of track or a square centimetre of rolling stock. HS2 is supposed to be an option, not a replacement.

Then if you need to go to London by train once HS2 is operational, it will probably take much longer than it does now, involve changes and maybe cost more than by HS2. Similar to driving from Preston to London without going on any motorways. Still, it will be your choice.

 

[PR1Berske]

Not even if it offers a faster service at the same price than you paid before?

Nope. Made myself quite clear on this, for reasons repeated quite often.

I'm really surprised at learning for the first time that HS2 is a replacement, I was under the impression it was an extra line, not reducing the WCML to the status of a Beeching era branch line. Genuinely amazed, actually.

 

[AM9]

Nope. Made myself quite clear on this, for reasons repeated quite often.

I'm really surprised at learning for the first time that HS2 is a replacement, I was under the impression it was an extra line, not reducing the WCML to the status of a Beeching era branch line. Genuinely amazed, actually.

It is extra capacity provided by releiving the current (nominally) four track route of it's non-stop inter-city services. There will be some 'Regional' expresses running on the classic routes but they will be stopping at some of the smaller settlements that have been deprived of through trains because of the volume of inter-city demands on the finite number of paths.

 

[jyte]

It is extra capacity provided by releiving the current (nominally) four track route of it's non-stop inter-city services. There will be some 'Regional' expresses running on the classic routes but they will be stopping at some of the smaller settlements that have been deprived of through trains because of the volume of inter-city demands on the finite number of paths.

In fact, intermediate stations will probably gain a better service. It's easier to run more trains if they're travelling at similar speeds (aka regular stopping pax trains and freights). I imagine regular stoppers will return to Rugby, for example.

 

[PR1Berske]

It is extra capacity provided by releiving the current (nominally) four track route of it's non-stop inter-city services. There will be some 'Regional' expresses running on the classic routes but they will be stopping at some of the smaller settlements that have been deprived of through trains because of the volume of inter-city demands on the finite number of paths.

Ordinary people suffer greater costs and worse services just so rich commuters get a dedicated line into Euston for a 10 minute reduction in travel time, you mean to say.

I was accused of being "over the top" when I suggested that HS2 would make some major towns and cities actually reduce or lose their London services. I've been proved right!

 

[Bletchleyite]

In fact, intermediate stations will probably gain a better service. It's easier to run more trains if they're travelling at similar speeds (aka regular stopping pax trains and freights). I imagine regular stoppers will return to Rugby, for example.

Indeed. I would expect that all residual WCML IC services will most probably call at a standard pattern of Watford Jn, Milton Keynes Central and Rugby, and most probably a couple of Trent Valley stations too.

 

[jyte]

Ordinary people suffer greater costs and worse services just so rich commuters get a dedicated line into Euston for a 10 minute reduction in travel time, you mean to say.

I was accused of being "over the top" when I suggested that HS2 would make some major towns and cities actually reduce or lose their London services. I've been proved right!

Okay. Where the f*** does this '10 minute' claim come from? Even if you take the fastest current VT service, and the slowest planned HS2 service... you don't get 10 min time saving.

Secondly, post HS2 service patterns are not set in stone yet and won't be for a long while. I'd be amazed if any major towns (or even towns full stop) were to loose their service post HS2.

Edited because my outrage led me to make a claim that's not quite factually accurate...

 

[PR1Berske]

Okay. Where the f*** does this '10 minute' claim come from?

The original claim for the benefit of HS2 was a reduction in 10 minutes into the new line into Euston. I've always remembered it and quoted it even when supporters of HS2 have forgotten it.

 

[DavidGrain]

I heard an absolute classic comment on the TV some years ago. The French Minister of Transport said when comparing British and French planning processes 'When we want to drain the swamp we don't consult the frogs', You could not make that up!

 

[jyte]

The original claim for the benefit of HS2 was a reduction in 10 minutes into the new line into Euston. I've always remembered it and quoted it even when supporters of HS2 have forgotten it.

And the fact that every piece of literature since shows at least 20 min saving is irrelevant?

 

[NSEFAN]

Nope. Made myself quite clear on this, for reasons repeated quite often.

I'm really surprised at learning for the first time that HS2 is a replacement, I was under the impression it was an extra line, not reducing the WCML to the status of a Beeching era branch line. Genuinely amazed, actually.

"Beeching era branch line" is a bit dramatic to say the least. All that would happen is the existing WCML timetable be changed so that services stop more often (not necessarily all stops) to provide a more frequent regional service. Meanwhile the HS2 line is used for expresses to the North and Scotland (i.e. It replaces the current purpose of the fast lines on the existing WCML, so that they can be used for something else). This is better for everyone, because both the southern section of the WCML and destinations North of there can get more trains. The only price to pay is that some stations on the southern WCML may get a slightly slower service, inasmuch that the trains stop at more stations.

You speak of amazement, but what is amazing that you appear to be unable to listen to what people are saying. How is it so difficult to understand the concept of another pair of running lines, just built on a more convenient and cheaper alignments (i.e. in the countryside and not through big towns)? You seem to be latching on to a soundbite about saving 10 minutes for "the rich" or such, and any attempt to try and help you understand falls on deaf ears.