Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

[quantinghome]

If fast line platforms are built, they’ll have to. It will be all stopping or nothing stopping.
Note the first word though.

Is that still being debated? I'd have thought it would be a no-brainer.

Edit. I forgot where I was. Delete ‘fast’, insert ‘main’.

The GWR accepts your correction.

 

[thaitransit]

I would have thought everyone would jump on board this High speed railway. I get the preference for upgrading existing lines as something as simple as a full double tracking and curve easing project could knock 30 % off travel times. Ie removes capacity issues due to main line single track sections thus avoiding the frustrating waiting in the loop for the other late running train. That alone can add 20 % to journey times on a long distance route especially if its busy with freight.

Queensland Rail sunshine coast line is the worst for this kind of delay as its common to wait for a cross at every single loop turning a 50 km trip into a 90 minute slog. Made worse by so many stations with only one platform requiring what is known as a setback cross just to have access to the platform!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I would have thought everyone would jump on board this High speed railway. I get the preference for upgrading existing lines as something as simple as a full double tracking and curve easing project could knock 30 % off travel times. Ie removes capacity issues due to main line single track sections thus avoiding the frustrating waiting in the loop for the other late running train. That alone can add 20 % to journey times on a long distance route especially if its busy with freight.

Queensland Rail sunshine coast line is the worst for this kind of delay as its common to wait for a cross at every single loop turning a 50 km trip into a 90 minute slog. Made worse by so many stations with only one platform requiring what is known as a setback cross just to have access to the platform!

I understand your logic, but the lines that most opponents of HS2 are saying we should upgrade instead are not really comparable to the Sunshine Coast line. The WCML, MML and ECML are all already double-track or quadruple track, and generally have line speeds of up to 125mph, with very little scope for increased speeds by remodelling curves.

 

[tomuk]

Is that still being debated? I'd have thought it would be a no-brainer.

There will be eight platforms on the existing GWML. Two for each existing line, Up Main, Down Main, Up Relief, Down Relief.

 

[Aictos]

There will be eight platforms on the existing GWML. Two for each existing line, Up Main, Down Main, Up Relief, Down Relief.

That layout seems confusing to me, are they going to have a platform either side of a train and have doors open both sides?

Surely it would be better to have either have two wide island platforms serving the Down on one side and the Up on the other side or have a platform to serve the slow/relief lines separately and a island platform to serve the fast/mains lines in much the same way St Albans for example is done.

You can then leave 4 other platforms for terminating services.

 

[Peter Kelford]

That layout seems confusing to me, are they going to have a platform either side of a train and have doors open both sides?

Surely it would be better to have either have two wide island platforms serving the Down on one side and the Up on the other side or have a platform to serve the slow/relief lines separately and a island platform to serve the fast/mains lines in much the same way St Albans for example is done.

You can then leave 4 other platforms for terminating services.

I doubt that any trains will terminate there. They'll run into a headshunt that a small brown Peruvian bear is named after.

 

[Bald Rick]

There will be eight platforms on the existing GWML. Two for each existing line, Up Main, Down Main, Up Relief, Down Relief.

I wouldn’t bet your mortgage on that. Putting 5 minutes into every GW fast service is a pretty big price to pay for, basically, HS2 connectivity to Birmingham and the north for some stations stations west of Reading.

That layout seems confusing to me, are they going to have a platform either side of a train and have doors open both sides?

Surely it would be better to have either have two wide island platforms serving the Down on one side and the Up on the other side or have a platform to serve the slow/relief lines separately and a island platform to serve the fast/mains lines in much the same way St Albans for example is done.

You can then leave 4 other platforms for terminating services.

Firstly, St Albans isn’t like that. Or at least it wasn’t yesterday

Secondly, the principle of two platforms per line for the mains is the same as at platforms 6-9 at London Bridge for the Charing Cross lines, or HS2 at OOC - it is because of the expected throughput on each line. With trains leaving Paddington on 3 minute headways, anything that stops on a ‘normal’ platform, ie one platform for one line, with high linespeeds will automatically block the line and thus delay the next service. So each line splits into two tracks, each with a platform, typically either side of an is.and. Train ‘1’ runs into (say) the left hand platform in direction of travel, whilst the following train ‘2’ runs into the adjacent right hand platform, just as train 1 is leaving, and vice versa. This enables 3 minute headways to be maintained, and station calls to be made.

On the reliefs it is different. I would expect the middle pair to be terminating platforms for EL services, with the through services to be routed outside them.

 

[Aictos]

I wouldn’t bet your mortgage on that. Putting 5 minutes into every GW fast service is a pretty big price to pay for, basically, HS2 connectivity to Birmingham and the north for some stations stations west of Reading.



Firstly, St Albans isn’t like that. Or at least it wasn’t yesterday

Secondly, the principle of two platforms per line for the mains is the same as at platforms 6-9 at London Bridge for the Charing Cross lines, or HS2 at OOC - it is because of the expected throughput on each line. With trains leaving Paddington on 3 minute headways, anything that stops on a ‘normal’ platform, ie one platform for one line, with high linespeeds will automatically block the line and thus delay the next service. So each line splits into two tracks, each with a platform, typically either side of an is.and. Train ‘1’ runs into (say) the left hand platform in direction of travel, whilst the following train ‘2’ runs into the adjacent right hand platform, just as train 1 is leaving, and vice versa. This enables 3 minute headways to be maintained, and station calls to be made.

On the reliefs it is different. I would expect the middle pair to be terminating platforms for EL services, with the through services to be routed outside them.

You didn’t read my post fully then... I did say with all due respect as you do use St Albans and you have my deepest sympathy but my second point was have a single face platform serve Up Relief (Plat 1 at SAC), a island platform serving both Down Relief (Plat 2 at SAC) as well as the Up Main (Plat 3 at SAC) and finally a single face platform serve Down Main (Plat 4 at SAC).

As to the explanation above you have gave, I guess it’s like Plat 1 to 3 being used in the London bound direction in the morning peak and being used in the Kent bound direction in the evening peak or have I confused myself?

 

[Bald Rick]

You didn’t read my post fully then... I did say with all due respect as you do use St Albans and you have my deepest sympathy but my second point was have a single face platform serve Up Relief (Plat 1 at SAC), a island platform serving both Down Relief (Plat 2 at SAC) as well as the Up Main (Plat 3 at SAC) and finally a single face platform serve Down Main (Plat 4 at SAC).

As to the explanation above you have gave, I guess it’s like Plat 1 to 3 being used in the London bound direction in the morning peak and being used in the Kent bound direction in the evening peak or have I confused myself?

You might have confused yourself.

Firstly that St Albans is not on the Western - we have fast/slow rather than main/relief

Secondly, if you are referring to London Bridge, then for Charing Cross services it is always 8/9 towards Charing Cross and 6/7 country bound, and for Cannon St it’s 2/3 towards Cannon St in the morning peak, and 1/2 towards country evening peak.

At St Albans it is always P1 (up slow) for all stations and semi fast services towards London, plus a proportion of fast services, and P3 (up fast) for a proportion of fast services. In the down direction P2 (down slow) is for all stations and semi fast services from London, and the occasional fast, and P4 (down fast) for almost all the fast services to Bedford. There is no reversible working at the platforms under normal operation.

 

[Peter Kelford]

You didn’t read my post fully then... I did say with all due respect as you do use St Albans and you have my deepest sympathy but my second point was have a single face platform serve Up Relief (Plat 1 at SAC), a island platform serving both Down Relief (Plat 2 at SAC) as well as the Up Main (Plat 3 at SAC) and finally a single face platform serve Down Main (Plat 4 at SAC).

As to the explanation above you have gave, I guess it’s like Plat 1 to 3 being used in the London bound direction in the morning peak and being used in the Kent bound direction in the evening peak or have I confused myself?

Firstly that St Albans is not on the Western - we have fast/slow rather than main/relief

The MML uses the same sort of arrangement (slows/reliefs/goods grouped together). You've lost me a bit as to what the problem is...

 

[hwl]

I doubt that any trains will terminate there. They'll run into a headshunt that a small brown Peruvian bear is named after.

All the future crossrail services that are due to turnback at Paddington / Westbourne would be extended westward to OOC as enabled by the relief line platforms and reversing facilities provided by the new OOC station.

 

[yorkie]

Just a reminder this thread is to discuss Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

If anyone wants to discuss something unrelated to railways, please create a thread in the General Discussion section.

Please post any suggestions for how you think HS2 could or should be built, or any other ideas/suggestions, in the Speculative Ideas section. Feel free to create a new thread if any of the existing ones are not suitable.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In case anyone else was interested in it, the discussion about whether GWR trains should call at OOC has been moved here

 

[Dr_Paul]

I've not seen every post so apologies if this Viz handy hint has been posted previously.

 

[The Ham]

I've not seen every post so apologies if this Viz handy hint has been posted previously.
View attachment 74881

There's two problems with that:

Firstly the journey time saving between London and Birmingham is 35 minutes. The reason that 20 minutes is used by those opposed by HS2 is that they say it takes 15 minutes to walk between the two. However whilst there'll be some will need to walk to New Street to the go where they're going there's probably quite a few for whom they won't and the journey time saving will therefore be more than that.

Secondly, and now importantly HS2 is about capacity and had been from the beginning as the following extract from February 2009 starting the objectives of HS2 demonstrates:


If you recall the Rail Package 2 works were aiming to achieve a doubling of capacity (200 passengers for every 100 in 2009), well by 2018 between London and the West Midlands/North West/Scotland growth had reached 170 for every 100.

View media item 3340
Since then Virgin had seen a 3% increase in passengers, which is likely to mean that when the 2019 figures are available that it's likely that is likely to be around the 175 mark.

If that's the case then we're not far off the 200 passengers for every 100 in 2009 and would very much likely to achieve this by the opening of Phase 1. That under the model this wasn't expected until the full opening of HS2 (with the increase in attractiveness of rail from Phase 1).

As such once Phase 1 does open I'd expect that rail growth would jump (new trains, extra capacity, faster journey times, etc.). If so within a few years of our being open I'd expect calls for more High Speed Lines to be built (possibly even due to HS2 being fairly busy) and people wondering why we ever thought that we could do without it.

 

[yorkie]

Sorry to be a pain but can I ask that posts which contain images also have a text alternative (either a quote, description or summary as appropriate) provided please.

This will ensure the forum is accessible for anyone unable to access the images (such as blind people).

Thanks!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There's two problems with that:

Firstly the journey time saving between London and Birmingham is 35 minutes. The reason that 20 minutes is used by those opposed by HS2 is that they say it takes 15 minutes to walk between the two.

I think you may possibly have missed a humorous intent. Viz is not a magazine that is designed to be read seriously!

 

[quantinghome]

I have just finished reading Gerry Fiennes' book "I tried to run a railway". Highly recommended, and there's an interesting aside on the last pages. Commenting on his (enforced) retirement, he looks to the future of the railways and expresses his lack of desire to be involved in projects which he will never be able to see through to completion:

I do not want - for five years is too short - to get involved in the 125 m.p.h. or, more rightly, the 250 m.p.h. railway...

Nice to see his predictions finally coming to fruition.

 

[Peter Kelford]

I have just finished reading Gerry Fiennes' book "I tried to run a railway". Highly recommended, and there's an interesting aside on the last pages. Commenting on his (enforced) retirement, he looks to the future of the railways and expresses his lack of desire to be involved in projects which he will never be able to see through to completion:

Nice to see his predictions finally coming to fruition.

Agreed

 

[bastien]

I think you may possibly have missed a humorous intent. Viz is not a magazine that is designed to be read seriously!

As though a London businessman would be having a meeting in Birmingham in the first place!

 

[miami]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51722251

HS2: Chris Packham launches legal challenge to rail link

TV naturalist Chris Packham has launched a legal challenge to HS2 high-speed rail link.

The Springwatch presenter said the government's approval of the controversial project fails to take carbon emissions targets into account.

Mr Packham said: "In regard to the HS2 rail project I believe our government has failed."

The Department for Transport (DfT) said it was considering the challenge and would respond "in due course".

And on it goes.

 

[class26]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51722251

HS2: Chris Packham launches legal challenge to rail link



And on it goes.

..........and so does the work preparation thankfully.

 

[Grumpy Git]

..........and so does the work preparation thankfully.

Let's hope they have done more homework than those who planned LHR Runway 3?

 

[jfowkes]

Let's hope they have done more homework than those who planned LHR Runway 3?

The environmental and (specifically) carbon credentials of HS2 are a lot better than those of a third runway at Heathrow, so even with the precedent set by the recent court case, it's doubtful that this legal action will stop anything.

 

[Carlisle]

The environmental and (specifically) carbon credentials of HS2 are a lot better than those of a third runway at Heathrow,.

I’m not sure they’re significantly better, but the governments determination to build the line as opposed to its longstanding disagreements & dithering over Heathrow will likely be enough to ultimately see it through

 

[The Ham]

The environmental and (specifically) carbon credentials of HS2 are a lot better than those of a third runway at Heathrow, so even with the precedent set by the recent court case, it's doubtful that this legal action will stop anything.

Indeed, argument by Mr Packham "HS2 won't be carbon neutral for 120 years"

Argument by the defence "Government policy is to be carbon neutral post 2050, which HS2 will be".

Follow up point by the defence "HS2 will reduce by about 1 million passengers a year the number of people flying, assuming passenger numbers are accurate, unless Mr Packham can provide evidence to contrary going by electric train (regardless of speed) produces less emissions than flying. Therefore building HS2 is very much in line with government policy in having net zero emissions from 2050."

 

[Skymonster]

Follow up point by the defence "HS2 will reduce by about 1 million passengers a year the number of people flying, assuming passenger numbers are accurate, unless Mr Packham can provide evidence to contrary going by electric train (regardless of speed) produces less emissions than flying. Therefore building HS2 is very much in line with government policy in having net zero emissions from 2050."

HS2 phase one to Birmingham will have no impact on air travel as there are no flights between the two cities. HS2 to Manchester will have minimal impact on air travel because (a) the vast majority of the point to point market has already moved to rail when the Virgin high-frequency timetable was introduced and (b) the connecting flights market will not shift to rail because of the farcical decision to force rail passengers to transfer trains at OOC. Its only when HS2 goes to Leeds, Newcastle, Glasgow and Edinburgh that it might reduce domestic air travel to a degree. Anyone betting when that will be, or even if it will happen. The way things are going, HS2 to Scotland by 2050 might be a tad optimistic.

 

[jfowkes]

HS2 phase one to Birmingham will have no impact on air travel as there are no flights between the two cities. HS2 to Manchester will have minimal impact on air travel because (a) the vast majority of the point to point market has already moved to rail when the Virgin high-frequency timetable was introduced and (b) the connecting flights market will not shift to rail because of the farcical decision to force rail passengers to transfer trains at OOC. Its only when HS2 goes to Leeds, Newcastle, Glasgow and Edinburgh that it might reduce domestic air travel to a degree. Anyone betting when that will be, or even if it will happen. The way things are going, HS2 to Scotland by 2050 might be a tad optimistic.

HS2 will serve Scotland from day 1.

 

[The Ham]

HS2 phase one to Birmingham will have no impact on air travel as there are no flights between the two cities. HS2 to Manchester will have minimal impact on air travel because (a) the vast majority of the point to point market has already moved to rail when the Virgin high-frequency timetable was introduced and (b) the connecting flights market will not shift to rail because of the farcical decision to force rail passengers to transfer trains at OOC. Its only when HS2 goes to Leeds, Newcastle, Glasgow and Edinburgh that it might reduce domestic air travel to a degree. Anyone betting when that will be, or even if it will happen. The way things are going, HS2 to Scotland by 2050 might be a tad optimistic.

I agree that getting HS rail lines to Scotland by 2050 would be optimistic. Likewise there's no flights between London and Birmingham.

However after phase 1 HS2 train services to Scotland will see journey times will reduce, as an example London Glasgow:
4:30 - current
4:00 - after Phase 1 opening
3:40 - full opening of HS2

Those time savings and the fact that many more people are looking to do the right thing by the environment having 1 million fewer passengers flying on domestic flights isn't that unreasonable. Especially given there's about 6 million passengers between London and the Central Belt.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Also note that a transatlantic flight from Manchester via Heathrow is often no more expensive than one from Heathrow direct, so airlines are giving the passenger the journey to Heathrow for virtually free.