• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What happened to the proposed HS1-HS2 link?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
No ! Like Basle in Switzerland where they have 100 trains every hour arriving from
N, S, W, E, Europe and departing that same hour in the opposite direction. see
Michael Portillo's visit to the Basle Station signal box.

Ah Basle. A city of 500,000 people. Much like Sheffield.

In other news, Sheffield has a single station, with trains to N, S, W, E of the U.K. It also has more trains per hour than Basle. (Which, incidentally, is nowhere near 100 each way). #factcheckfirst

There are plenty of stations in Europe that could do with linking, but aren't. Similarly there's plenty of stations in the UK that are linked.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
In the particular case of Gare de l'Est and Gare du Nord these are both very significant international and domestic stations with a spacing similar to Euston and St Pancras. Authorities claim 26,000 daily interconnections between the two main line terminals on foot, and there is a proposal to connect the two stations more effectively by the early 2020s, with options including better surface walkways and underground passageways, incorporating Magenta station on RER line E. There was a public consultation held last year and it seems the proposal received very high levels of support:
http://www.nouvelle-liaison-gare-nord-est.fr/

They are rather closer than Euston and St Pancras old chap: 150m apart at their closest. In fact it's a shorter walk from GdN to Gdl'E than it is from one side of GdN to the other.
 

dissident

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2018
Messages
16
I do not see how anybody can know, in advance, that there is no demand from non-Paris France
to non-London UK also in the reverse direction. There might be a small demand at first which
would build up if the service were provided. You are telling the whole of the UK that they cannot
go anywhere in France/Belgium without going to Euston first. You are telling the whole of France/Belgium
that they cannot go anywhere in the UK without going to St Pancras first. Is that not somewhat
self-defeating. I would have thought that the rule was: provide the service and then advertise it.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
I do not see how anybody can know, in advance, that there is no demand from non-Paris France
to non-London UK also in the reverse direction. There might be a small demand at first which
would build up if the service were provided. You are telling the whole of the UK that they cannot
go anywhere in France/Belgium without going to Euston first. You are telling the whole of France/Belgium
that they cannot go anywhere in the UK without going to St Pancras first. Is that not somewhat
self-defeating. I would have thought that the rule was: provide the service and then advertise it.

There are already direct services from the 'regions' of the UK to Paris. They just so happen to be operated with aircraft rather than a train. Enough to give an indication of the overall size of the market.

In (say) Manchester's case if *all* current flight demand shifted to rail, then you might just fill a single Eurostar each day, maybe a bit over. And then that Eurostar would have to be timed precisely to meet all those passengers travel needs. Clearly impossible.

And then you're having to justify c. £1bn or so (which could alternatively be spent on something else) of infrastructure for a handful of trains per day in a market that is already catered for.
 

dissident

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2018
Messages
16
I am talking about the HS 1 and 2 services, not air travel. (Railways travel on the ground, aeroplanes in the air). So I am concerned at the moment with the existing HS1 and the future HS2.

All over N. England, Scotland, Wales, is a captive audience who might want to travel to France/Belgium without getting tangled up in Euston/St Pancras. Equally I am talking about all who have access to HS1 services in France/Belgium who might wish to travel to any location in UK without getting tangled ip in the Euston/St Pancras disaster. Unlike you, I do not know the size of this audience today, nor what size it might be in the future.

The government in their original plan did have an HS2/HS1 Link line which would cater for just such an audience. I am arguing for this link to be restored. If you actually got to the point of a completed HS2 without such a link then the whole HS concept would look, indeed actually be, stupid.
 

Spartacus

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2009
Messages
2,907
When you're talking about international travel you simply HAVE to consider all sensible means available, land, sea and air to realise the big picture, it's like insisting that rail would still do a good job at pickup goods services a century after roads starting taking increasingly big bites out of that cherry. A captive audience they are not because for most people in the regions, even with HS2 and HS1 linked it will still barely compete with air on speed, and will probably barely do so on price. There'll then always be a good proportion of the market who are tied to using ferries or driving to Cheriton & taking shuttle services because they want to take a vehicle with them, and there's not going to be car trains running on HS1 or HS2, so replacing those is a non-starter. There'll no doubt be a market, probably mostly enthusiasts and people who have a fear of flying but want the speed akin to that of travelling by air, but it won't be a big one.
 

NSEFAN

Established Member
Joined
17 Jun 2007
Messages
3,504
Location
Southampton
When you're talking about international travel you simply HAVE to consider all sensible means available, land, sea and air to realise the big picture, it's like insisting that rail would still do a good job at pickup goods services a century after roads starting taking increasingly big bites out of that cherry. A captive audience they are not because for most people in the regions, even with HS2 and HS1 linked it will still barely compete with air on speed, and will probably barely do so on price. There'll then always be a good proportion of the market who are tied to using ferries or driving to Cheriton & taking shuttle services because they want to take a vehicle with them, and there's not going to be car trains running on HS1 or HS2, so replacing those is a non-starter. There'll no doubt be a market, probably mostly enthusiasts and people who have a fear of flying but want the speed akin to that of travelling by air, but it won't be a big one.
I suppose the UK government could just ban short haul flights to European cities that are served by an international train service, but then we don't live in a command economy and the airlines and airports would certainly have something to say about it!

I also don't think they would want HS2 capacity eaten up by trains that could be better used to serve UK demand.
 
Last edited:

Spartacus

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2009
Messages
2,907
I suppose the UK government could just ban short haul flights to European cities that are served by an international train service, but then we don't live in a command economy and the airlines and airports would certainly have something to say about it.

Shhh! Michael O'Leary'll be compiling a statement as we speak!
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,429
Location
Yorkshire
No ! Like Basle in Switzerland where they have 100 trains every hour arriving from
N, S, W, E, Europe and departing that same hour in the opposite direction. see
Michael Portillo's visit to the Basle Station signal box.
Can you back up this claim with a hyperlink to, and quote from, a reputable source please?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Can you back up this claim with a hyperlink to, and quote from, a reputable source please?

To be fair, when I checked my facts, there were indeed 100+ departures / hour on the Basle Bahnhof SBB live departures board (usually reputable, hope the link works).
http://fahrplan.sbb.ch/bin/stboard.exe/dn?ld=std3.a&

Although 80% of them are trams / buses. Trains-wise it's about 22 in the standard hour.
 
Last edited:

Snapper

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2006
Messages
2,386
Location
All over the place
I'm annoyed that when they dropped it from the Bill (and it was included in the original version of the HS2 Bill), they also removed the spur from the station box at Old Oak Common, which means that retro-fitting a HS2-HS1 link will involve tearing apart OOC station, or adding a new junction - which will need a considerable shutdown of a by-then operating railway line.

Contrast this with the efforts of the Northern Powerhouse Rail project to ensure there are junctions built-in to HS2 around Manchester and Leeds so that their desired lines can be added in later.

It was a pragmatic decision. There's certainly an argument that passive provision should have been left for such a link, but that would need to have been done if a potential route was agreed. The NLL idea was a botch. It satisfied no-one and caused a lot of opposition to Hs2 in Camden. Scrapping it got rid of that opposition & effectively pulled the rug form under the anti Hs2 campaign in Camden. It's about keeping eyes on the big prize (which was getting Hs2 phase 1 through Parliament).

If, in future years there's a business case for a link it can be built. But that's because Hs2 will have been completed, something the link in its existing form could have helped sabotage.
 

jyte

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2016
Messages
670
Location
in me shed
Scrapping it got rid of that opposition & effectively pulled the rug form under the anti Hs2 campaign in Camden.

Not true, HS2s land take around Euston is huge - I think rehoming hundreds if not nearly a thousand people. There's still significant opposition to that and I still see the occasional 'stop HS2' poster around the station.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
There has been occasional talk of building an additional HS line from Toton to London, should HS2 phase 1 approach capacity. Given this line would probably approach London from the North rather than the West, there would be better opportunities for linking up to HS1.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
It was a pragmatic decision. There's certainly an argument that passive provision should have been left for such a link, but that would need to have been done if a potential route was agreed. The NLL idea was a botch. It satisfied no-one and caused a lot of opposition to Hs2 in Camden. Scrapping it got rid of that opposition & effectively pulled the rug form under the anti Hs2 campaign in Camden. It's about keeping eyes on the big prize (which was getting Hs2 phase 1 through Parliament).

If, in future years there's a business case for a link it can be built. But that's because Hs2 will have been completed, something the link in its existing form could have helped sabotage.

"Pulled the rug" is a bit strong. But helped get Camden a little bit more 'on side' than they previously were. Euston was (and still is) a huge concern for them.
 

Snapper

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2006
Messages
2,386
Location
All over the place
"Pulled the rug" is a bit strong. But helped get Camden a little bit more 'on side' than they previously were. Euston was (and still is) a huge concern for them.

No, the opposition to Hs2 isn't a 'concern' as it's collapsed. Oh, there's still plenty of issues around community engagement but don't mistake that for outright opposition. There's over 143,000 folks living in Camden. How many have turned out to the last few protests at Euston - a handful - and many of them were from outside the borough (as I analyse here https://paulbigland.blog/2018/01/20/hs2-protests-twyford-down-they-aint/). How many from Camden have signed the latest stophs2 petition? Just 422 (0.29% of all Camdenites).

The world's moved on. The protests are derisory. LB of Camden are now working with Hs2 to get the best for the borough, not to try & stop hs2. It's the same with the business groups. The 'concern' now is to get the project right & deliver on the expectations, not about worrying about protesters.
 

nbdm

Member
Joined
5 Oct 2017
Messages
29
No, the opposition to Hs2 isn't a 'concern' as it's collapsed. Oh, there's still plenty of issues around community engagement but don't mistake that for outright opposition. There's over 143,000 folks living in Camden. How many have turned out to the last few protests at Euston - a handful - and many of them were from outside the borough (as I analyse here https://paulbigland.blog/2018/01/20/hs2-protests-twyford-down-they-aint/). How many from Camden have signed the latest stophs2 petition? Just 422 (0.29% of all Camdenites).

The world's moved on. The protests are derisory. LB of Camden are now working with Hs2 to get the best for the borough, not to try & stop hs2. It's the same with the business groups. The 'concern' now is to get the project right & deliver on the expectations, not about worrying about protesters.
It's the same (mostly) to the east of Birmingham where delta junction will be.
Locals are trying to mitigate the impacts of construction, which will be ongoing for several years.
There is a handful of people who still want to stop it but that's the same with any big project, most people just want it to be over and done with.

I for one just want it to be built asap, 8 years of continuous roadworks + construction (just for Phase 1 - not including Phase 2b) is going to be a real pain.
Not to mention the inevitable M42/M6 closures while the viaducts over are put in.
On the plus side when it's done I'll be under an hour from London and Manchester, every cloud?

Back on topic, I think there should at least be passive provision for a future HS1 link, even if there is next to no business case currently - you don't know what will happen in the future.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
Back on topic, I think there should at least be passive provision for a future HS1 link, even if there is next to no business case currently - you don't know what will happen in the future.

What do you passively provide or safeguard for though? There are many possible schemes. Any extra work carried out at Old Oak Common might be wasted if the route of a connection was to branch off further north and go via (say) Heathrow or round the north side of the M25.
 

33Hz

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2010
Messages
513
That no passive provision for this is being made is bonkers. Eurostar and various authorities are currently going to great lengths to start direct services to the Netherlands because apparently people are too lazy / scared / unwilling to change high-speed trains to the next platforms are Brussels, using cheap through tickets that they can buy from eurostar.com, yet it is constantly argued here that people will change stations (perhaps even walking down the street) to do the same with HS1-HS2.

The comparison between Gare du Nord and Gare de l'Est and this is not 100% accurate because there are trains bypassing Paris between LGV Nord and Est. I doubt there are many passengers regularly schlepping down the steps or hill between them with luggage.

Between the Greater Manchester built up area and the West Midlands built up area there are 5 million people. A through connection would put them under 3 hours from the administrative capital of Europe or close to 3 hours for Paris. That this decision was made prior to the Brexit vote shows it was more about keeping London preeminent than actually designing a useful service.
 

nbdm

Member
Joined
5 Oct 2017
Messages
29
That no passive provision for this is being made is bonkers. Eurostar and various authorities are currently going to great lengths to start direct services to the Netherlands because apparently people are too lazy / scared / unwilling to change high-speed trains to the next platforms are Brussels, using cheap through tickets that they can buy from eurostar.com, yet it is constantly argued here that people will change stations (perhaps even walking down the street) to do the same with HS1-HS2.

The comparison between Gare du Nord and Gare de l'Est and this is not 100% accurate because there are trains bypassing Paris between LGV Nord and Est. I doubt there are many passengers regularly schlepping down the steps or hill between them with luggage.

Between the Greater Manchester built up area and the West Midlands built up area there are 5 million people. A through connection would put them under 3 hours from the administrative capital of Europe or close to 3 hours for Paris. That this decision was made prior to the Brexit vote shows it was more about keeping London preeminent than actually designing a useful service.
I wish there was a way to like posts on this forum - I agree.

It's often stated there is a threshold after which air travel becomes preferable to high speed rail travel, I partly agree with this.
But these claims often discount some very important points:
- With rail travel you don't (usually) have to get there hours before like flying
- In the same time you could be waiting at an airport, you are already making progress by train
- You don't have a luggage restriction (weight or contents) it's how much you can carry
- There is free wi-fi (most of the time)
- You arrive in the centre of your destination rather than on the outskirts then having to find transport into the centre.
- Some people just don't like flying
- High speed rail is emission free at the point of use, if it's electric

Of course I am not suggesting you go via train to everywhere, but sometimes the convenience of not having to change makes a difference for people deciding to fly vs train.
For example, as much as I love Eurostar, I find it quite expensive and coming from outside London I have to change stations (albeit only from Euston to St. Pancras)
So I have to decide: do I want to take an hour and a bit train to Euston then walk to St. Pancras then 2 hours to Paris or do I want to fly for about an hour to CDG then catch a train into Paris.
I don't mind about the time it takes, for me it's price that makes the decision unfortunately. If I am with others or have luggage most of the time the plane wins due to convenience.

Not putting any provision in for a future HS1-HS2 link is very short sighted in my opinion. We don't know what the future holds, demand forecasts are often wrong and travel patterns change.
A North of London - OOC (Connections) - Stratford (as a second London stop) - Ebbsfleet/Ashford (for Kent) - The Continent train sounds great.
Is it worth giving up valuable paths on HS2 for? Not sure, but it shouldn't be discounted.
If the french build the shortcut route LGV Picardie it would reduce the journey time to Paris even further.
Although Brexit will change things, we don't yet know to what extent. It might do the opposite and increase tourism to the UK.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
In a different world, with open borders, a two hourly Manchester - Birmingham - Stratford - Paris would probably be justified if the infrastructure was there. Bear in mind the entire current daily air market from Mancheter, Liverpool and Birmingham to Paris could fit on 3 Eurostars each way. However it is very unlikely we will get open borders, and therefore such a frequency can not be justified.

However providing a very expensive bit of infrastructure for a train every two hours each way doesn't really cut it.

Bear in mind the 'passive provision' would only be at the HS 2 end, and all it would be is a tunnel cavern somewhere around South Hampstead. But bigger tunnel caverns can be built around existing tunnels (see the northern line). Yes it costs more, but with no realistic prospect of such a service any time soon the additional cost is sufficiently far away that it is cheaper not to build it now.

What do at the other end is even more problematic, as there is close to zero chance of finding paths across the NLL as originally proposed
 
Last edited:

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Although Brexit will change things, we don't yet know to what extent. It might do the opposite and increase tourism to the UK.

Quite, we don't know. If we spend the money on passive provision now, we may well waste it. Given that the extra cost of waiting is relatively small (and in effect negative once the time value of money is counted), it is better to wait.
 

nbdm

Member
Joined
5 Oct 2017
Messages
29
Quite, we don't know. If we spend the money on passive provision now, we may well waste it. Given that the extra cost of waiting is relatively small (and in effect negative once the time value of money is counted), it is better to wait.
The same could be said in reverse, if we wait the price to implement could go up. Inflation, labour cost, land cost, material cost, etc.
Just look at some projects being done nowadays at much higher the cost or disruption of being done years ago or at least passive provision.

Too late now either way, Phase 1 has royal assent.
 

Wychwood93

Member
Joined
25 Jan 2018
Messages
634
Location
Burton. Dorset.
In a different world, with open borders, a two hourly Manchester - Birmingham - Stratford - Paris would probably be justified if the infrastructure was there. Bear in mind the entire current daily air market from Mancheter, Liverpool and Birmingham to Paris could fit on 3 Eurostars each way. However it is very unlikely we will get open borders, and therefore such a frequency can not be justified.

However providing a very expensive bit of infrastructure for a train every two hours each way doesn't really cut it.

Bear in mind the 'passive provision' would only be at the HS 2 end, and all it would be is a tunnel cavern somewhere around South Hampstead. But bigger tunnel caverns can be built around existing tunnels (see the northern line). Yes it costs more, but with no realistic prospect of such a service any time soon the additional cost is sufficiently far away that it is cheaper not to build it now.

What do at the other end is even more problematic, as there is close to zero chance of finding paths across the NLL as originally proposed
We are not in open borders as it is now - you have GB and French customs at St.Pancras on an outward journey and v.v inwards - the summer Eurostar service entails getting off for a check at Lille Europe and back on again. I do agree with you that with HS2 a two hourly MAN etc. service to Paris/Brussels(? the latter) would be worth at least trying. The HS2/HS1 link should really be on the cards anyway, passive provision is second best, but should certainly be there. A 395 from where it goes now in Kent could run up through without a problem - PAX demand perhaps thin? Who knows?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
We are not in open borders as it is now - you have GB and French customs at St.Pancras on an outward journey and v.v inwards - the summer Eurostar service entails getting off for a check at Lille Europe and back on again. I do agree with you that with HS2 a two hourly MAN etc. service to Paris/Brussels(? the latter) would be worth at least trying. The HS2/HS1 link should really be on the cards anyway, passive provision is second best, but should certainly be there. A 395 from where it goes now in Kent could run up through without a problem - PAX demand perhaps thin? Who knows?

But that's the point. We do know. We know that the passenger numbers from the North west and West Midlands to Paris would not justify a frequent service, or anything like it. We also know that there are simply not enough people going from Kent to the WCML to justify a frequent service (you'll have to trust me). We also know that border controls are very unlikely to change to be easier in the near future; indeed they are more likely to become more stringent.

So why would you spend any money now on something that you know is not required now, and unlikely to be required in the medium term, when you could provide the same facility in future? Or put another way, why spend money now on something on something you don't need when you can spend only a little bit more money on the same thing in 20-30 years time if, and only if, circumstances have changed sufficientLy that you do need it?
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,598
We know that the passenger numbers from the North west and West Midlands to Paris would not justify a frequent service, or anything like it.

Is this based purely on current no. of passengers on direct flights from those places to Paris? Or does it take into account people that travel from those places by air via a change at another airport, and people who currently take the train to London and then the Eurostar? And what about passenger numbers to other destinations like Brussels, Amsterdam, Ruhrgebiet, Frankfurt? If avoiding a change in London could potentially knock an hour off overall journey times, then the spread of destinations that could be moved within that air/rail time calculation threshold is greater than just Paris.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Is this based purely on current no. of passengers on direct flights from those places to Paris? Or does it take into account people that travel from those places by air via a change at another airport, and people who currently take the train to London and then the Eurostar? And what about passenger numbers to other destinations like Brussels, Amsterdam, Ruhrgebiet, Frankfurt? If avoiding a change in London could potentially knock an hour off overall journey times, then the spread of destinations that could be moved within that air/rail time calculation threshold is greater than just Paris.
Alll those other groups are likely to have pretty negligible numbers compared with those using direct flights.

I can't see more than a tiny handful choosing to make a short-haul jounrney involving a change of flights, especially as with "low-cost" airlines they would be deeply out of pocket if it missed. Those travelling to London to get a Eurostar are obviously not time-sensitive and the more time-sensitive passengers who might be attracted by a quicker train journey are those who are already on the direct flights. Passengers to/from other destinations in Europe would need to change trains somewhere anyway, so avoiding the change in London wouldn't deliver the benefit of a direct train, which seems to be the main reason to consider a through service in the first place.
 

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,223
A slightly big problem for the business case for HS2 NoL services will be the shift to hybrid and electric short-haul aircraft. These won't kill off HSR, since they'll still be unable to provide as quick and high-quality a service into dense urban environments. However, there won't be any significant environmental case against general short-haul aviation. That's the only thing the government could really use to justify subsidising any NoL HS services and not advancing short-haul aviation.
 

adamedwards

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2016
Messages
796
You might care to note the British Library has a seven story basement, with the Victoria Line through the middle!
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,598
A slightly big problem for the business case for HS2 NoL services will be the shift to hybrid and electric short-haul aircraft. These won't kill off HSR, since they'll still be unable to provide as quick and high-quality a service into dense urban environments. However, there won't be any significant environmental case against general short-haul aviation. That's the only thing the government could really use to justify subsidising any NoL HS services and not advancing short-haul aviation.
Are hybrid/electric aircraft expected to be more energy efficient than electric trains?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top