Where should HS3 go and why?

[Zoe]

3 trains an hour along the B&H (plus 1 on the current service pattern),

So now you are saying three trains per hour from Exeter to London via the Berks and Hants? Is there really still going to be a need to run non-stop Taunton - Reading services via the Berks and Hants to Reading if HS3 is available to cover this route faster?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

1tph - London, Reading, Exeter and then onto Cornwall calling at most stations (including Plymouth)

When you say on into Cornwall, do you mean stopping at stations in Devon other than Plymouth or would this be non-stop Exeter to Plymouth and then into Cornwall?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

However even with an extra 2 or 3 stops on the B&H line the journey time may not be that much slower than at present as by the time of HS3 the B&H should have been electrified meaning that accerlartion is better.

Even if this is the case I'd have still thought you could stop at least one train per hour at Taunton to take advantage of HS3 and not leave Taunton with a slow service compared to the rest of the route. The town is certainly not on the scale of Exeter but I expect high speed services from Taunton to London would be well used. I see you have included this in your latest plan now.

 

[The Ham]

So now you are saying three trains per hour from Exeter to London via the Berks and Hants? Is there really still going to be a need to run non-stop Taunton - Reading services via the Berks and Hants to Reading if HS3 is available to cover this route faster?

I was say prior to HS3 there would be 3tph along the B&H, then after HS3 there would be 2, but with shorter trains and a few stops between Taunton.

When you say on into Cornwall, do you mean stopping at stations in Devon other than Plymouth or would this be non-stop Exeter to Plymouth and then into Cornwall?

Could be either, depends on what the demand is. There could even be some of the B&H service running to Cornwall, such as to Newquay, so there are direct services but also fastish services depending on what people wich to take.

 

[Kneedown]

Obviously, Holyhead to Cardiff, with a tunnel beneath Snowdonia...

I like your thinking, but you'd have no time to digest the greatest scenery in Britain, and i would fear for the Red Kite population along the route. There would be a few less visiting Gigrin Farm for tea!

 

[dalmahoyhill]

I suspect that after HS2 the next stage will be expansions and branches off it.

However, Bristol-South Wales-Wexford-Dublin would be interesting though. Make those tunnels Betuweroute double-stack loading gauge while we're down there.

I don’t think that would ever have a business case, it would be the longest undersea crossing in the world, and it only services a population of 5 mill. The channel tunnel services 60mill and has struggled to pay back its debts. Technically though it is feasible.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If we're in the mood of claiming HSR will bring regional economic benefits, my suggestion would be a "new Cross Country Mainline" (on the German model of incorporating bits of existing lines):

Plymouth-Barnstaple - using the existing alignment as far as Gunnislake and on to Tavistock, with upgrades;
Barnstaple-Cardiff - either going through the top of Exmoor or a longer underwater tunnel if not viable;
Cardiff-Newport - on SWML;
Newport-Coventry-Leicester - connexion with Marches line before Hereford, and connexion with HS2 before Coventry. Coventry would probably have to be tunneled; use existing line from roughly Narborough.
Leicester-Toton - using existing line; connexion with HS2 NE branch at Toton.

Think thats a bit ambitious jumping all over the country, even taking in account the high speeds of HSR thats not a very straight route and misses out the main centres of population.

I don’t think there is any business case to go from Devon to Cardiff as you miss Exeter to Bristol out.

I am a civil engineer and I think you underestimate the costs of getting under the Bristol channel compared to running the line on land. The severn is shallow from Weston in, but out at Barnstable it is much deeper. Look at the Seikan tunnel, its 36miles long yet only 12miles is undersea. Because of the depth of the sea (1500ft deep) the line need to dive underground far inland to keep the gradients gentle. It would the same here and as around ilfracombe is so hilly you would have to tunnel from Barnstable north.
Although say Plymouth to Exeter would be heavily engineered it is easier working as it would be tunnel/viaduct/tunnel/viaduct. It is easier to setting up a working area and getting access to a tunnel and remove the spoil if it is short.

 

[Rhydgaled]

There should be a general plan on how the High Speed Network will develop over time so that potential interchanges or connections where HS lines meet can be allowed for in the HS2 design/build to save having to rebuild later at much greater expense.

And this is why my answer to the topic's question is: there won't be a HS3 (or, if there is, it will be isolated). The current HS2 design boxes itself into a terminal station at Euston for example, it isn't designed as part of a network. The only way there can be a HS3 linked to HS2 is if Scotish extensions to HS2 are known as HS3 rather than HS2 phase 3.

I think we need to think of more cross City services (not just for London but also for Manchester/Birmingham) etc to allow the existing lines to take more local services

Indeed, I think the proposed central Birmingham HS2 station should lead into a tunnel through which the line continues to Manchester, rather than Birmingham being a terminus on a spur. Similarly the Manchester station could be in a trench where Mayfield is with tunnels at both ends, making a through station on route to Scotland (although phase 1 would stop where it reaches the WCML).

(one of my criticisms of HS2 is that its trying to solve too much - and that the eastern "arm" will make it a lot harder to justify a proper High Speed line up the eastern side of the UK - I think it'll be hard to find enough of a niche for any further High Speed lines in the UK - e.g. not enough population live west of Reading for a whole separate line there)

I agree with the Leeds spur of HS2. Trying to relieve the ECML with a line to Euston via (pretty close to) Birmingham doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

My proposal would be for one parallel to the South Coast linking into HS1 at Folkestone, following the planned route of the M27 from Folkestone, through Dover, Eastbourne, Brighton, Pompey, So'ton, Bournemouth, Weymouth, Exeter, Plymouth, Truro and Penzance.

That sounds like an interesting one, didn't think of that. Quite a good plan I think.

Interesting number of stations being more than on the whole Y network of HS2, and 5 stations within 100 miles at the southern end of the route, something that has been soundly dismissed as part of HS2.

I think the raw speed approach taken in the design of HS2 isn't necessarily the right one. In some cases, when a new line gets further out from London and some HS services have diverged onto classic lines there should be scope for allowing trains with a slightly busier calling pattern to join the 'HS' line to serve additional intermediate stations constructed to put towns on the rail network.

Since this is a blue-sky thinking thread that requires no operational knowledge, I'll throw in my tuppence.

Looking purely from an economic growth point of view (and this is hardly a ground-breaking suggestion), it seems a no brainer for a fast cross-Pennines route linking Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Hull.

I agree, largely. When the government go on about HS2 giving ecconomic benifits to the north I think "if that's why you want to build HS2, rather than capacity releif, just build an Intercity main line linking Liverpool - Manchester - Leeds - York" though I suppose you could do Hull instead or as well as York. It would probably be cheaper than HS2 and do more for the north's ecconomy.

As for my blue-sky thinking:

• The Leeds and Heathrow spurs of HS2 should be abandoned.
• The Euston Cross proposal should be adopted, with 4-track between Old Oak Common and Stratford International
• A link from Old Oak Common to Heathrow should be constructed
• Either HS3 or HS4 would be an extension of the Heathrow link, running to the M4 junction south-east of Reading where a chord would allow trains to join the SWT line into Reading to serve Reading station, the HS line would run south of Reading, north of Newbury (with chords linking to and from the Reading - Newbury line) onto Marlborough (a chord west of Hungerford would allow services to join to call at Marlborough). From there it could head either to Bath, Chippenham or Bristol Parkway (the latter extending to Severn Tunnel Junction via a second Severn tunnel)
• Either HS3 or HS4 (the other) would take the Eurostar depot chord at Stratford international, and then diverge to head towards Stansted (which would not be on the HS line, but chords could be provided to allow a few services to come off the HS line to call there) then Cambridge and Peterborough. From there, it would run to Leeds, either via Nottingham or via Doncaster.
• Trains from HS2 and Heathrow would converge to run through the 4-track central London central, then fan out again taking either HS1 to Ashford (with a few services continuing overseas) or the new HS3/4 (ECML relief route)
• A later addition would be a line from Bath via Wells and Glastonbury to join the line between Bridgewater and Taunton just north of where the Westbury to Taunton line joins. From there the line would basicly be an upgrade of the existing one, with the tighter curves eased significantly by cutting the corners, to Exeter. A new route out of Exeter would then join the A380 and get rather twisty towards Newton Abbot, and thence to Plymouth/Truo.

 

[HSTEd]

Whilst I agree a Heathrow HS2 spur is pointless, it really should be on the route of any future HSGW proposal.

And then there is the London-Cambridge-Peterborough route which would give buckets of increased capacity and reduced journey times on Norwich, King's Lynn and the remaining East Coast destinations.

Would run into a reconstructed King's Cross that has 400m platforms constructed by demolishing the PSB and slewing everything away from the Arts College in the approach.
(Probably put the canal onto an aqueduct to make more room).

HSGW would have to terminate at Paddington but otherwise we want as many of the High Speed termini on Euston Road as possible for the maximum possible connectivity.

Euston Cross is unfortunately impractical since HS1 has no turnback facilities and nowhere reasonable to put them, especially when you consider the route's capacity is drastically less than HS2.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Just as an aside to all the fanciful "blue sky" thinking that has been generated upon this thread, whilst noting the pre-existing hoped-for completion date for the HS2 project, what time period are we then looking at for the HS3 project that appears to be the basis of this thread ?

 

[HSTEd]

Myself I would hope that 'HS3' construction commences immediately upon completion of HS2-2 construction.

 

[Squaddie]

Just as an aside to all the fanciful "blue sky" thinking that has been generated upon this thread, whilst noting the pre-existing hoped-for completion date for the HS2 project, what time period are we then looking at for the HS3 project that appears to be the basis of this thread ?

I think we can safely say that the majority of us will be dead or, at least, very very old.

 

[Zoe]

A new route out of Exeter would then join the A380 and get rather twisty towards Newton Abbot, and thence to Plymouth/Truo.

I doubt having a new high speed line getting twisty at any point is going to be a good idea.

 

[HSTEd]

The best way is frankly just to run directly to Plymouth, a straight line from near Bristol takes you across the Exeter approach.

You can then run a train first stop Exeter which picks up the intermediate stations while another runs fast to Plymouth.

 

[Zoe]

The best way is frankly just to run directly to Plymouth, a straight line from near Bristol takes you across the Exeter approach.

You can then run a train first stop Exeter which picks up the intermediate stations while another runs fast to Plymouth.

I'm not convinced there would be demand for high speed rail west of Exeter though. Plymouth would still benefit from a high speed line as far as Exeter. Also not stopping at Exeter isn't really going to be a good option as Exeter seems by far to be the most important location in England west of Bristol. Trains can still be quite busy west of Exeter but a lot of people do get on and off there. I also wouldn't want to remove fast services from Taunton to London.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think we can safely say that the majority of us will be dead or, at least, very very old.

Since I am currently 68 years of age now, I doubt that I will see the end of the completion of HS2, let alone the completion of HS3..

 

[PR1Berske]

I think we can safely say that the majority of us will be dead or, at least, very very old.

At around 30 years for the completion of HS2, I take that 40 or so years for anything else. That puts me at 73 years old......

 

[HSTEd]

I'm not convinced there would be demand for high speed rail west of Exeter though.

The demand is the fact that you can easily get ~1hr15 journey times as far west as Plymouth, which means you add a significant fraction of Devon and potentially Eastern cornwall to the extended commuter belt.
In an area being strangled by second homes/holiday homes this is a good thing since why would you live up north (commuting to London) and holiday in Cornwall in a holiday home when you can just commute straight from Cornwall?

Additionally there is the fact that it is only 55km from Plymouth to Exeter but the railway journey still takes an hour.

That is utterally ridciulous, that 50-60km of railway track can pick you up another 35-40 minutes on the Cornwall journey times is frankly just plain embarrassing.

Plymouth would still benefit from a high speed line as far as Exeter.

Yes, but the extra benefit from the 60km of railway line is enormous for the areas west of Plymouth.

Also not stopping at Exeter isn't really going to be a good option as Exeter seems by far to be the most important location in England west of Bristol.

In population terms Plymouth is larger (although I don't have "metro" figures) and I have to wonder if Importance is not simply a result of Plymouth being 3hr20 from London.
That extra 50-60km of track is the difference between a 2hr journey time and a 1hr15 journey time.

Trains can still be quite busy west of Exeter but a lot of people do get on and off there.

Remember that if we have a high speed line as far as Bristol we have 18 paths per hour to play with.
Having a second path per hour for the south west is not going to cause the scheme to collapse.

 

[Zoe]

That is utterally ridciulous, that 50-60km of railway track can pick you up another 35-40 minutes on the Cornwall journey times is frankly just plain embarrassing.

You can speed up the journey times as much as you want but people are not going to travel unless they have a reason to. Outside of the season where is the demand going to come from to justify the expense unless you are suggesting that people should start commuting daily from places like Truro to London?

Also considering your plans for West of England trains to be first stop Exeter (assuming this would be after Reading), are you going to force anyone for Taunton onto a stopper via the Berks & Hants?

 

[dalmahoyhill]

I think Greenguages proposals for a HSR network are quite well thought out a mixture of existing line upgrades and new tracks across the country. Once HS2 is up and running there will be a business case to extend it further I am sure and fill in gaps. I am a civil engineer and I have been briefly involved in looking at HSR in Australia so I will give you my thoughts on the options for HS3 and constraints.

I think the three main opportunities on the network are the GWML, Transpennine and extend HS2 further north.

Transpennine.
The problem with transpennine is that from Liverpool to leeds it is nearly entirely built up except for tunnelling under the pennines, and the route is a mixture of short and long distance commuting that entirely governs the thinking behind proposing a HSL. I think you would have to design the line for 150mph max due to this type of traffic and geography. I think the line would have to be a mixture of new and upgraded lines and would still be sized for UK gauging. You might have to pass back onto existing lines into Manchester and leeds or build lower speed lines parallel to the existing.

• From edge hill you could have a new line to outskirts of Manchester following m62 with a warrington parkway.
• Upgrade Victoria as a new interchange.
• From Victoria to leeds you try and go to stanedge, I don’t know the feasibility of reopening the old stanedge tunnels and what the gauge clearance is like for electrification? Otherwise a new tunnel is required. Otherwise follow the M62 over the pennines. Either way there is a lot of tunnelling. Bypass Huddersfield with a spur at either end.
• Follow M62 to leeds using existing lines to city.
• Extend HS2 from west of leeds to Newcastle bypassing York with spurs either end following M1/A1. Or if there is capacity, upgrade existing ECML York/ Darlington for faster running then build a new line from darlington to newcastle. Use new line for both HS2 and transpennine services.

Great Western
The great western line has effectively turned into a long distance commuting line I think there are grounds for a new line to take the pressure of the existing line by moving intercity off it. By building a spur at old oak common you could have west country/wales to Europe services. Trying to adapt a line to serve both Bristol, west country and wales is difficult because if you take a line to Bristol you are taking a longer route to the west country and have to turn the line 90 deg to head to taunton, the alternative is building a route that follows the berks and hants line but I don’t think that’s economical or would have a business case. However if you build it to Bristol and then build a new line or upgrade the line to taunton the benefit is you can move cross country onto this line thereby improving those journeys as well.

• Parallel the GWML all the way to Swindon, pass Swindon with spur to Gloucester line.
• Run to Bristol parkway with spur onto existing lines at filton
• I don’t know what the capacity is like of the severn tunnel but parallel it if need be. Increased 125mph line speed to Newport.
• Upgrade Bristol to exeter or build new parallel line.
• Electrify Exeter to Penzance and fit tilt. I don’t think there will ever be a business case to extend HSR beyond plymouth

HS 3 (or 2.5) onwards to Scotland.
In my spare time I actually sketched up a route on CAD using 1:45 gradients and 7000m curve radii. I think the west coast route has a better case as its easier to serve both Glasgow and Edinburgh without major construction. If the line came up from the east, how would you get across Edinburgh, through the central belt and into Glasgow? It’s a much bigger proposition.

• Anyway from current end of HS2 track near wigan run to the east of preston following M6 with a spur onto Blackburn line. Preston parkway station.
• At Lancaster divert east up the lune valley through Hornby and passing Kirkby Lonsdale. Spur onto WCML S of Lancaster with Lancaster parkway station.
• At the Lune gorge the valley is too tight so you would need to tunnel under the west side and the run parallel to the WCML over shap summit.
• Descend to penrith following the lowther valley. Pass penrith running parallel to M6. Penrith HS station.
• Run parallel to m6 to Carlisle.
• Tunnel under south of Carlisle with a station parallel to existing citadel station on the old yards. Follow existing line out across the eden and run west of kingmoor yard, spur to yard for European night freight.
• Gretna is a pinch point as all WCML and M74 turn west just north of it. Cut and cover tunnel threading under m74 where is crosses the Dumfries line and under edge of Gretna, coming out just west of the M74 by the services.
• Follow up the west side of Kirtle water. Pass to west of ecclefechan and west of castlemilk house.
• Parallel m74 through Lockerby and as far as beattock yard.
• Follow the valley up to beattock summit with a mixture of viaducts and tunnel (the valley is to windy to run in it along the floor)
• Pass to west of elvanfoot with a long 5km tunnel under the southern uplands coming out near crawfordjohn.
• Follow m74 down to douglas with a junction for Edinburgh services just before junct 12 on the motorway.

HS2.5 glasgow section

• To Glasgow follow m74 running to the east all the way to Hamilton.
• At Hamilton reduce speed to 125mph follow m74 to m74/m73 junction at uddingston.
• Turn north and tunnel under mount Vernon in 2km long tunnel
• Turn west and parallel the Bathgate-glasgow QS low level line all the way into Glasgow.
• New terminus over Glasgow high street station on old yard site.
• Build Glasgow cross rail using the old line over the clyde using the new HS station as an interchange.

HS2.5 to Edinburgh.

• From junction by douglas follow the east bank of the douglas water alongside the A70.
• Viaduct over the clyde and WCML to east of carstairs. Spur onto WCML.
• Parallel carstairs Edinburgh line to the west until midcalder junction.
• From midcalder junction take a direct route to Glasgow QS Edinburgh mainline at gogarburn. Spur on the forth bridge line for Aberdeen services.
• Parallel route into haymarket (now trams have been built on the adjacent corridor this makes it a much harder proposition) probably through tunnel or demolition of adjacent properties.
• From murryfield tunnel to Waverley.
• Upgrade Waverley as per Network rails original £800mill proposal to include more through lines to accommodate 400m long trains.

Existing track upgrades that would help are as follows to make a joined up network:

• Better connection between HS1 and HS2 than currently proposed.
• Electrification of cross country route.
• Some Cross country trains use HS2 between leeds and Birmingham and HS3 between Bristol and Exeter.
• Diversion round morpeth curve.
• Straighten ECML over granthouse summit.
• Electrification of devon/cornwall mainline line with tilt.
• Diversion around Cheltenham spar for non stoppers.
• Connection onto HS3 at stoke Gifford and improve the line speed on the existing junction.
• Electrification to Aberdeen
• Electrification of scarborough, middlesborough and sunderland lines.

 

[HSTEd]

You can speed up the journey times as much as you want but people are not going to travel unless they have a reason to. Outside of the season where is the demand going to come from to justify the expense unless you are suggesting that people should start commuting daily from places like Truro to London?

Truro would be a bit far west, but you could certainly expect people to commute from Plymouth, Saltash and even Liskeard.
They would be similar journey times from London as Grantham and Newark are today and they have significant commuter flows.

Considering the appeal of living so far south (for milder winters and better summer weather) I think that you would pick up a significant traffic.
"Live in Kent and be content" sort of thing.

Also considering your plans for West of England trains to be first stop Exeter (assuming this would be after Reading), are you going to force anyone for Taunton onto a stopper via the Berks & Hants?

If we have a continuous high speed line from London to Plymouth via Bristol I would expect no stops at all between Heathrow Airport Parkway and Plymouth/Exeter on the "West of England" trains.

Taunton would see its journey time collapse since the fastest route would be a train that travels to Bristol on the high speed line and then on the Classic Bristol-Plymouth line.

Or just comes off the high speed line at Taunton pathing (and chord) permitting.

You could easily get 15 minutes saved off the current journey time even stopping all stations from Bristol.
The Berks and Hants is reduced to a commuter railway serving the people on it.

Reading calls would be handled either by slower trains on the classic lines or simply by having people change at Heathrow or Bristol (unless more through trains could be provided to wherever it is people want to go).
Proper chords could permit a train to run fast from Plymouth to Bristol and then on the classic line to Reading since I doubt we will have a capacity overload on the western section.

 

[Zoe]

Considering the appeal of living so far south (for milder winters and better summer weather) I think that you would pick up a significant traffic.
"Live in Kent and be content" sort of thing.

s it wise to encourage long distance commuting though? While CO2 emissions will be much lower that the private car they are still going to be more than if less people travelled.

 

[HSTEd]

Is it wise to encourage long distance commuting though? While CO2 emissions will be much lower that the private car they are still going to be more than if less people travelled.

Decarbonisation of the energy supply should amke the carbon footprint of a 300km high speed commute rather small.
('Renewables' and Nuclear Power plants).

This has to be weighed against the social problems caused by thousands of empty houses in the South West that would have people in them if they could reach London in a time that made commuting possible.
Or indeed the social benefits of enabling a bunch of people too poor to afford to stay in Cornwall to take day trips using bargain basement fares.

Although gauge clearance of the CML would be preferable I think platform extensions to 400m would be easily good enough and probably relatively cheap.

 

[Zoe]

Or indeed the social benefits of enabling a bunch of people too poor to afford to stay in Cornwall to take day trips using bargain basement fares.

That may well be the theory but I wouldn't rule out it attracting richer people from the South East to move to Cornwall since it would then be within commuting distance of London and this would likely force house prices/rents up as the market would command a higher price. This would make living in Cornwall even less affordable for the locals. Also the "bargain basement" fares would likely have to be booked a long time in advance and so would certainly not have the convenience of living in the South East. You can run as many trains per hour as you want but if you have an advance ticket, you only have one train per day you can travel on. The richer people would likely be able to afford very expensive walk-up fares and so have the convenience they are used to in the South East.

 

[TheKnightWho]

That may well be the theory but I wouldn't rule out it attracting richer people from the South East to move to Cornwall since it would then be within commuting distance of London and this would likely force house prices/rents up as the market would command a higher price. This would make living in Cornwall even less affordable for the locals. Also the "bargain basement" fares would likely have to be booked a long time in advance and so would certainly not have the convenience of living in the South East. You can run as many trains per hour as you want but if you have an advance ticket, you only have one train per day you can travel on. The richer people would likely be able to afford very expensive walk-up fares and so have the convenience they are used to in the South East.

Yes, but this would be countered by the fact that better paying jobs would be in their reach, too. There are only so many people that can work in London; spreading them out over a wider area would arguably be better for the country in terms of geographically spreading wealth.

 

[edwin_m]

Transpennine.
The problem with transpennine is that from Liverpool to leeds it is nearly entirely built up except for tunnelling under the pennines, and the route is a mixture of short and long distance commuting that entirely governs the thinking behind proposing a HSL. I think you would have to design the line for 150mph max due to this type of traffic and geography. I think the line would have to be a mixture of new and upgraded lines and would still be sized for UK gauging. You might have to pass back onto existing lines into Manchester and leeds or build lower speed lines parallel to the existing.

• From edge hill you could have a new line to outskirts of Manchester following m62 with a warrington parkway.
• Upgrade Victoria as a new interchange.
• From Victoria to leeds you try and go to stanedge, I don’t know the feasibility of reopening the old stanedge tunnels and what the gauge clearance is like for electrification? Otherwise a new tunnel is required. Otherwise follow the M62 over the pennines. Either way there is a lot of tunnelling. Bypass Huddersfield with a spur at either end.
• Follow M62 to leeds using existing lines to city.
• Extend HS2 from west of leeds to Newcastle bypassing York with spurs either end following M1/A1. Or if there is capacity, upgrade existing ECML York/ Darlington for faster running then build a new line from darlington to newcastle. Use new line for both HS2 and transpennine services.

I think you'd struggle to get through both easterly and westerly approaches to Standedge as the valleys are quite densely populated and a straight enough alignment would be very difficult. It would probably have to dodge into tunnel in the valley sides to avoid several of the towns.

As an alternative, how about going from an enlarged Piccadilly HS2 station via Guide Bridge and Woodhead then a new section north of Barnsley to join HS2 to Leeds? Liverpool trains could reverse in Piccadilly and use a future Liverpool branch off the HS2 Golborne line or a new connection onto one of the existing routes.

 

[dalmahoyhill]

As an alternative, how about going from an enlarged Piccadilly HS2 station via Guide Bridge and Woodhead then a new section north of Barnsley to join HS2 to Leeds? Liverpool trains could reverse in Piccadilly and use a future Liverpool branch off the HS2 Golborne line or a new connection onto one of the existing routes.

I like that, it makes a lot of sense, utilising some of HS2 to reduce the amount of construction. Also trying to join with HS2 in manchester makes sense.

I just had a look at a OS map and i would agree, on the approached to Stanedge it is built up and the north entrance faces straight into a hillside, you would go direct into it. From Stalybridge to huddersfield i think you would be in tunnel most of the way.

 

[Rapidash]

It would be lovely if people could remember us down in Torbay The majority of services out of Paignton headed to London/Manchester tend to be pretty busy year round.....

 

[Bonemaster]

Decarbonisation of the energy supply should amke the carbon footprint of a 300km high speed commute rather small.
('Renewables' and Nuclear Power plants).

This argument forgets that much of the carbon footprint is capital based rather than operational based, and some of the benefits will be offset by people travelling further by car to connect into the HS network, rather than connecting in at local stations, for example people from Taunton driving to any potential parkway station.

 

[Zoe]

This argument forgets that much of the carbon footprint is capital based rather than operational based, and some of the benefits will be offset by people travelling further by car to connect into the HS network, rather than connecting in at local stations, for example people from Taunton driving to any potential parkway station.

How many people are going to be able to afford to have a car by the time all this is built though? If it turns out that only a handful of rich people can afford a car then very few people are going to be driving to the station and if people want to travel a long distance to a station they will have use public transport.

 

[Bonemaster]

Yes, but this would be countered by the fact that better paying jobs would be in their reach, too. There are only so many people that can work in London; spreading them out over a wider area would arguably be better for the country in terms of geographically spreading wealth.

Or spreading house price inflation so that young people in the provinces are even further away from being able to afford property than they are now
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How many people are going to be able to afford to have a car by the time all this is built though? If it turns out that only a handful of rich people can afford a car then very few people are going to be driving to the station and if people want to travel to the station they will have use public transport.

Current projections are that car numbers will increase by around 20% by 2021, cars become ever more fuel efficient, and the fixed costs of motoring continue to come down (mainly due to the price of cars coming down), and with the advent of electric car technology. One thing that is for certain, cars are not going to go away. When I passed my test petrol was considered expensive at less than 60p a litre, now people still fill cars at 140p a litre.

The facts are that station car parks in many many places are consistently full, because people do not go to the local station by public transport, they go to the best place to catch a train by car in a very significant number of cases.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Or spreading house price inflation so that young people in the provinces are even further away from being able to afford property than they are now

Which is again countered by the increased wealth generated by having London being far more accessible.

 

[Zoe]

Current projections are that car numbers will increase by around 20% by 2021, cars become ever more fuel efficient, and the fixed costs of motoring continue to come down (mainly due to the price of cars coming down), and with the advent of electric car technology. One thing that is for certain, cars are not going to go away. When I passed my test petrol was considered expensive at less than 60p a litre, now people still fill cars at 140p a litre.

If the government were to make car use a lot more expensive it could become unaffordable for quite a few people in the long term. Alternatively the government could decide to privatize the roads and leave it to the free market to raise the price of car use.