What if...HS2 is scrapped?

[PR1Berske]

I have watched from afar as reports build about the increasing budget for HS2 and its decreasing popularity in opinion polls. A new report coming out of the Treasury suggests that Liz Truss MP is considering axing infrastructure projects with out of control budgets.

With that in mind, what medium term consequences would there be if the reports are accurate?

From my perspective, if the WCML truly was congested, it would have ground to a halt by now. It cannot be that vital to build HS2 if the timetable is for the first stage to be completed in so many years from now.

So my speculation for this thread is that axing HS2 would not have much consequence, given that its current absence isn't having any detrimental effect on the network.

As for Euston, in the medium term, the current rebuilding works can continue, with inproved links to the Underground included.

The Liz Truss rumours come from this source; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ss-hints-controversial-HS2-link-scrapped.html


Quote from that article:

She said ministers must be prepared to pull the plug on big projects which are hit by spiralling costs rather than sit back and allow 'mission creep'.

The Treasury Minister's intervention comes amid dismay at the ballooning costs of the major railway projects HS2 and Crossrail.

Officials fear the costs of HS2 - a new rail link joining London to the West Midlands, Leeds and Manchester - could balloon past its £56billion budget to over £100bn.

Sir Terry Morgan last month resigned as chairman of HS2 and Crossrail projects amid reports he was about to be sacked after just four months in the job.

Speaking to the Sunday Telegraph, Ms Truss took what appeared to be a veiled swipe at the big and hugely divisive infrastructure projects.

What does the forum think? Would axing HS2 truly be a bad thing or could the scrapping be a way to focus infrastructure spending more closely?

 

[Mintona]

If HS2 is scrapped, I highly doubt the money will be invested in the rail network, so I’d prefer construction to continue. Better to alleviate congestion on the WCML than do nothing.

 

[PR1Berske]

If HS2 is scrapped, I highly doubt the money will be invested in the rail network, so I’d prefer construction to continue. Better to alleviate congestion on the WCML than do nothing.

This is how I know I've learned from my mistakes on earlier discussions about HS2; I agree that the budget is not a physical pot of money there to be moved onto other parts of the network. It would leave future timetabling plans in the balance, no doubt.

 

[VT 390]

Though the WCML timetable works it is at capacity in terms of use as the current 3tph Birmingham to Euston Virgin service runs most of the day and most services are full (in standard at least) and the local 3tph service from Birmingham to Euston is very busy, even if it were 8 coaches all day it would still be quite full. Also having the frequency every 20 minutes limits the amount of local services that can run Coventry to New Street.
I think as a minimum HS2 phase 1 to Birmingham needs to be built.

 

[PeterC]

With a nice new intersection for construction traffic on the M25 and work started at Euston I suspect that it is getting too difficult pull the plug on phase 1 but I doubt that any of phase 2 will be built.

 

[Meole]

Alternative use for the money might be to repair the 3500 road bridges deemed potentially unsafe for modern 44T trucks at an estmated £1bn, railway needs more support, as a frequent user of the WCML ignoring its failings is crazy.

 

[ainsworth74]

With a nice new intersection for construction traffic on the M25 and work started at Euston I suspect that it is getting too difficult pull the plug on phase 1 but I doubt that any of phase 2 will be built.

And that is, of course, aligned with the warning delivered not so long ago that Phase 2 is not in the bag.

I do personally feel that, having recently been in the Euston area and the Birmingham Moor Street area that it's probably too far gone for Phase 1 to be cancelled. Buildings are being knocked down, construction compounds put together, land compulsory purchased, contracts signed, etc etc. Shovels are well and truly in the ground! Sure it could still be cancelled but it would lead to an awful lot of completely wasted money.

Phase 2 however? Well, that looks an awful lot more vulnerable to cancellation. Particularly since Cameron and Osborne left the scene and their 'Northern Powerhouse' idea barely gets lip service from their replacements let alone any actual weight in decision making!

 

[jon0844]

If we get the hard Brexit and the economy goes tits up then I'm sure the Government will have to cut spending quite drastically. We'll not only maybe not get the second phase of HS2 but lots of other works canned too.

There certainly won't be any money saved or available for anything else.

 

[MarkyT]

Phase 2 however? Well, that looks an awful lot more vulnerable to cancellation. Particularly since Cameron and Osborne left the scene and their 'Northern Powerhouse' idea barely gets lip service from their replacements let alone any actual weight in decision making!

I'd hope at least Phase 2A would proceed as planned after Phase 1, as that provides significant further valuable time savings for north western English destinations and Scotland. I wonder if a similar approach for the eastern arm might work, diverting along the M18 corridor into Doncaster from the south then using existing routes north therefrom to get to Leeds and Newcastle.

 

[Andy25]

From my perspective, if the WCML truly was congested, it would have ground to a halt by now. It cannot be that vital to build HS2 if the timetable is for the first stage to be completed in so many years from now.

We're talking long term here, WCML has seen almost double didget passenger growth year on year, add that to current services over even 10 years and you'll see the strain. And if you wait until that happens to do anything it's too late, you end up with 15 years of passenger misery while they build HS2 after all.

So my speculation for this thread is that axing HS2 would not have much consequence, given that its current absence isn't having any detrimental effect on the network.

This just isn't true,

-Lack of seats is the obvious one.

-continued stress on London housing due to lack of commutable towns outside london

-Often overlooked one is lack of redundancy, one signal failure on the WCML just outside London at peak time and the whole network crumbles. And the knock on effects last for hours afterwards to clear the backlog. Put in a secondary route (HS2) and the problem can be alleviated to a greater degree.

 

[6Gman]

From my perspective, if the WCML truly was congested, it would have ground to a halt by now. It cannot be that vital to build HS2 if the timetable is for the first stage to be completed in so many years from now.

The issue is not how the WCML looks today, but how it's likely to look in ten years time. None of us knows what things will be like in 2029, but based on past experience one might reasonably expect growth of 20-30% over that decade - perhaps less, perhaps more. And then what would the WCML look like?

 

[Bald Rick]

The issue is not how the WCML looks today, but how it's likely to look in ten years time. None of us knows what things will be like in 2029, but based on past experience one might reasonably expect growth of 20-30% over that decade - perhaps less, perhaps more. And then what would the WCML look like?

Almost exactly as it does now, but with much busier trains, and much higher advance fares to manage that demand.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Almost exactly as it does now, but with much busier trains, and much higher advance fares to manage that demand.

There is scope to eke out a bit more capacity if that was necessary in addition to fare increases to manage the demand:
- All Pendolinos to 11-car, or if that's not possible split some 9-cars up to make some more 11s and order some additional new stock;
- All local services 240m long (probably 10 x 24m fixed formation) and 3+2 seated, either SDO or platform extensions north of Northampton. Euston rebuild to go ahead despite no HS2 to create a set of uniform 240m platforms. Maybe even consider longitudinal seated stock for Tring stoppers, again 240m fixed formation;
- Abolish First Class or reseat it to 2+2 as SWR are doing with the differential being posher seats and service rather than 2+1 seating.

I reckon with those three plus a bit of yield management you'd cover a 20-30% increase in patronage without making trains much busier than they are now.

 

[PR1Berske]

The issue is not how the WCML looks today, but how it's likely to look in ten years time. None of us knows what things will be like in 2029, but based on past experience one might reasonably expect growth of 20-30% over that decade - perhaps less, perhaps more. And then what would the WCML look like?

Again I do accept the point. We don't know how things will own out over the next ten years. But by the same token ten years ago the arguments for building the thing were based on projections which haven't come to pass.

I'm interested by this 30% claim. We see ups and downs in rail use when we focus on year on year usage statistics. Such an increase would be quite remarkable given existing WCML usage, particularly "whole route" passengers.

 

[Bald Rick]

There is scope to eke out a bit more capacity if that was necessary in addition to fare increases to manage the demand:
- All Pendolinos to 11-car, or if that's not possible split some 9-cars up to make some more 11s and order some additional new stock;
- All local services 240m long (probably 10 x 24m fixed formation) and 3+2 seated, either SDO or platform extensions north of Northampton. Euston rebuild to go ahead despite no HS2 to create a set of uniform 240m platforms. Maybe even consider longitudinal seated stock for Tring stoppers, again 240m fixed formation;
- Abolish First Class or reseat it to 2+2 as SWR are doing with the differential being posher seats and service rather than 2+1 seating.

I reckon with those three plus a bit of yield management you'd cover a 20-30% increase in patronage without making trains much busier than they are now.

Valid points - I meant busier in terms of more people per train, which is how you have described it.

Re growth. Taking Euston as a example, it has had passenger growth of 56% in the last 10 years. Whilst past performance is not necessarily a guide to future growth, it certainly shows what can happen on the premier route.

 

[Andy25]

Again I do accept the point. We don't know how things will own out over the next ten years. But by the same token ten years ago the arguments for building the thing were based on projections which haven't come to pass.

I'm interested by this 30% claim. We see ups and downs in rail use when we focus on year on year usage statistics. Such an increase would be quite remarkable given existing WCML usage, particularly "whole route" passengers.

Historical passenger number increases have consistently been over 5% year on year, I even think it topped 10% at some point. So 30% is totally reasonable if the network could even accept that.

 

[Andy25]

There is scope to eke out a bit more capacity if that was necessary in addition to fare increases to manage the demand:
- All Pendolinos to 11-car, or if that's not possible split some 9-cars up to make some more 11s and order some additional new stock;
- All local services 240m long (probably 10 x 24m fixed formation) and 3+2 seated, either SDO or platform extensions north of Northampton. Euston rebuild to go ahead despite no HS2 to create a set of uniform 240m platforms. Maybe even consider longitudinal seated stock for Tring stoppers, again 240m fixed formation;
- Abolish First Class or reseat it to 2+2 as SWR are doing with the differential being posher seats and service rather than 2+1 seating.

I reckon with those three plus a bit of yield management you'd cover a 20-30% increase in patronage without making trains much busier than they are now.

New pendos or any major mod isn't possible. They no longer meet current group standards so new vehicles wouldn't be permitted.

And adding in new cars would be considered a major enough upgrade to require the same approvals and therefore wouldn't be compliant either.

That's assuming Alstom would even produce them since all the tooling is likely gone.

 

[Bletchleyite]

New pendos or any major mod isn't possible. They no longer meet current group standards so new vehicles wouldn't be permitted.

And adding in new cars would be considered a major enough upgrade to require the same approvals and therefore wouldn't be compliant either.

That's assuming Alstom would even produce them since all the tooling is likely gone.

Hacking them about to make 11s out of some 9s is probably doable, though; that sort of reforming with mods has been done to 22x.

 

[6Gman]

There is scope to eke out a bit more capacity if that was necessary in addition to fare increases to manage the demand:
- All Pendolinos to 11-car, or if that's not possible split some 9-cars up to make some more 11s and order some additional new stock;
- All local services 240m long (probably 10 x 24m fixed formation) and 3+2 seated, either SDO or platform extensions north of Northampton. Euston rebuild to go ahead despite no HS2 to create a set of uniform 240m platforms. Maybe even consider longitudinal seated stock for Tring stoppers, again 240m fixed formation;
- Abolish First Class or reseat it to 2+2 as SWR are doing with the differential being posher seats and service rather than 2+1 seating.

I reckon with those three plus a bit of yield management you'd cover a 20-30% increase in patronage without making trains much busier than they are now.

Well, I suppose one way to suppress demand is to make travel more unpleasant ...

 

[Andy25]

Hacking them about to make 11s out of some 9s is probably doable, though; that sort of reforming with mods has been done to 22x.

The extended Pendolinos needed a third traction pack in the added vehicles so wouldnt be a simple swap in from a 9 car.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The extended Pendolinos needed a third traction pack in the added vehicles so wouldnt be a simple swap in from a 9 car.

9 cars have two pantograph/transformer vehicles, so that's two sets that could be extended from each one. Quite a lot of spare vehicles, though.

 

[adrock1976]

I have watched from afar as reports build about the increasing budget for HS2 and its decreasing popularity in opinion polls. A new report coming out of the Treasury suggests that Liz Truss MP is considering axing infrastructure projects with out of control budgets.

With that in mind, what medium term consequences would there be if the reports are accurate?

From my perspective, if the WCML truly was congested, it would have ground to a halt by now. It cannot be that vital to build HS2 if the timetable is for the first stage to be completed in so many years from now.

So my speculation for this thread is that axing HS2 would not have much consequence, given that its current absence isn't having any detrimental effect on the network.

As for Euston, in the medium term, the current rebuilding works can continue, with inproved links to the Underground included.

The Liz Truss rumours come from this source; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ss-hints-controversial-HS2-link-scrapped.html


Quote from that article:



What does the forum think? Would axing HS2 truly be a bad thing or could the scrapping be a way to focus infrastructure spending more closely?

My suggestion would be for the Government (including the governments of the devolved parts of Great Britain) to work with local councils so as to spread out inward investment in places that have suffered from industrial decline (and also the effects of Thatcherism and Blairism) such as Thornaby, Middlesbrough, Redcar, Colne, Nelson, Scunthorpe, Merthyr Tydfil, etc, rather than concentrating everything in London.

Eventually, it would reduce the pressures in London and the South East if there were task forces set up to work out what skills local people have and encourage businesses to set up in places that have suffered from industrial decline.

 

[6Gman]

My suggestion would be for the Government (including the governments of the devolved parts of Great Britain) to work with local councils so as to spread out inward investment in places that have suffered from industrial decline (and also the effects of Thatcherism and Blairism) such as Thornaby, Middlesbrough, Redcar, Colne, Nelson, Scunthorpe, Merthyr Tydfil, etc, rather than concentrating everything in London.

Eventually, it would reduce the pressures in London and the South East if there were task forces set up to work out what skills local people have and encourage businesses to set up in places that have suffered from industrial decline.

That may well be a good policy, but it doesn't really relate to HS2.

 

[The_Train]

Can we read too much into opinion polls though? You'll get certain groups of people who will say 'we don't want HS2 because it is purely to help those living in the South' (not taking into account that indirectly it will improve local services). Then there is those who will say 'we don't want HS2 because it will ruin the countryside' even though they may never go out into the UK countryside and not forgetting those who will say no to it now but probably won't be around when services on HS2 start.

If HS2 doesn't happen it will just show how little foresight this country has and how much it just wants to stand still. The world is changing very quickly and I feel the negativity of people in this country is holding us back.

 

[AndrewE]

9 cars have two pantograph/transformer vehicles, so that's two sets that could be extended from each one. Quite a lot of spare vehicles, though.

and I'm afraid that 11-cars have a 3rd transformer vehicle, even if it doesn't have a pantograph.

 

[gordonthemoron]

If we get the hard Brexit and the economy goes tits up then I'm sure the Government will have to cut spending quite drastically. We'll not only maybe not get the second phase of HS2 but lots of other works canned too.

There certainly won't be any money saved or available for anything else.

in the event of a hard Brexit, infrastructure projects are one way to keep the economy ticking over, which I suspect is why HS2 is still progressing (& Crossrail 2)

 

[Bletchleyite]

and I'm afraid that 11-cars have a 3rd transformer vehicle, even if it doesn't have a pantograph.

Yes, I know. I meant that you could extend two 9 cars to 11 by splitting a 9, though that would leave 5 spare vehicles.

 

[AndrewE]

Yes, I know. I meant that you could extend two 9 cars to 11 by splitting a 9, though that would leave 5 spare vehicles.

Sorry, I'm a bit slow on the uptake at the moment. Could some of the 9-car sets be made up to slightly slower 10-cars a) technically and b) still be fitted within the existing timetable?
The name of the game is to get the absolute maximum capacity that we can out of existing assets. Anyway, this is mitigating our current problem rather than thinking about post-HS2.
My biggest concern is that salvaging the pride of the London end will trump all other considerations, like maintaining (let alone improving) what we currently have north of Crewe. People are already proposing (and apparently accepting without complaint) speed reductions on the WCML to Scotland, no service improvements "because extra demand from HS2 will take up the capacity" when all sorts of improvements would already pay for themselves in short order.
Trivial (or basic) things like a second Crewe to Scotland hourly service, grade-separating rather than single-lead at key junctions (Golborne)...

 

[duffield]

There is scope to eke out a bit more capacity if that was necessary in addition to fare increases to manage the demand:
...
- All local services 240m long (probably 10 x 24m fixed formation) and 3+2 seated, either SDO or platform extensions north of Northampton.
...

I thought 3+2 seating was out of favour because in a fully loaded service people would rather stand than sit in the middle seat of the three?

 

[PeterC]

I thought 3+2 seating was out of favour because in a fully loaded service people would rather stand than sit in the middle seat of the three?

That is certainly what I have observed in the past even to the extend of passengers being unable to board as the coach is full of standing passengers despite seats being available.