Campaign for better transport have produced the following blog:
https://bettertransport.org.uk/blog/rail/west-coast-mainline-improvements-deliver-huge-benefits
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)
- Thread starter ABB125
- Start date
- Status
Campaign for better transport have produced the following blog:
https://bettertransport.org.uk/blog/rail/west-coast-mainline-improvements-deliver-huge-benefits
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Andrew1395
Member
So it's probable that better rail services releases latent demand. Privatisation has increased frequencies, created new journey opportunities, promoted cheaper rail travel and created new channels to purchase. All of which has released demand. In the same way better roads do to, (the criticism of predict and provide Road plans). So HS2 has few green credentials in the sense that it will release demand for travel that would not have occurred without it, rather than seeing a switch of demand from cars to trains. So the justification is going to be the improved national GDP that releasing that latent demand will deliver. Sounds like an economics PhD in there somewhere!
Of the WCML capacity released how much will go to semi fast services and how much to open access? Quite rightly we talk about better services linking places such as Milton Keynes and Rugby with the major conurbations but I would imagine that OA operators will be looking at a niche of faster than coach and cheaper than HS2 on the traditional city centre to city centre flows.
Nobody knows, it's up to future franchises.
quantinghome
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 2,410
'Privatisation' has coincided with those things, although I'd question whether rail travel is cheaper overall now than prior to privatisation (yes, there are cheaper off peak advance options). Given the same thing was happening before privatisation, and has taken place in countries with nationalised railways, it's unlikely to be the cause. The massive increase in government investment in the railways is a rather more likely candidate.
Andrew1395
Member
Well all those things have happened. Would the Treasury have allowed BR to do all that I am not sure. In the early nineties as a junior manager in BR I spent a lot of time cutting activities to save money. BR Inter City Sector and NSE made operating profits partly because of its ability to ratchet up prices. Anyway 20 years on, the justification for investment in railways must be either making the economy more productive or reducing the environmental impact of mobility. I think if HS2 could demonstrate it will achieve one or the other or preferably both it would garner more support from those interested in the industry and the wider community.
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 958
There are a lot of conservative supporters who live near the new line and feel the line does not benefit them. The people who want to be the next conservative leader are trying hard to get their support. This doesn't look good for HS2.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/88369...llion-hs2-rail-link-to-boost-local-transport/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/88369...llion-hs2-rail-link-to-boost-local-transport/
Geezertronic
Established Member
I see it as unaffected to be honest. What politicians say and what they actually do are often two completely separate things.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/88369...llion-hs2-rail-link-to-boost-local-transport/
Seems HS2 will struggle to survive after Liz Truss's axe?
Seems HS2 will struggle to survive after Liz Truss's axe?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The irony being that HS2 is actually about local transport - providing more south WCML capacity for commuters.
I'd fully support axing it north of Birmingham, though.
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 958
That's one way to annoy the Northern Powerhouse.
I think it is likely that Phase 2b will be axed but likey the phase 1 and 2a might survive?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Decisions should be made on practical benefit and not emotionally. It would be better to spend the phase 2 money on electrification, rolling stock and Metrolinking.
But consider Liz Truss's hateful sentiment towards HS2...
What about p2a to Crewe?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Still has a very weak case in my mind given that the Trent Valley is not anywhere near as full as south of Hanslope Junction. There are overcrowded trains, but that is because they are too short. If you put the LNR service to 12-car that would solve that problem for many years.
I think 2a really must be built to get the enhanced benefits of Stafford bypass, elimination of flat junctions, segregation from freight etc, and NPR really needs the new 2b(west) access into Manchester due to congestion from the airport direction. If they didn't build 2b(east) what could be done with the unused capacity on the trunk south of Birmingham?
Get it, may be anyone can predict the possible outcome of Liz Truss's unfriendly spending review?
Cancelling construction to buy Tory votes is also appealing to emotion though. Thing is a lot of people on the phase 1 route have now got over market value sales agreed on their properties so might not be happy for the deals to be undone.
But if p1 built, it will be more service though Crewe-Birmingham section right?
I don't think they dare to cancel p1 right? Given the enabling work started, and thousands of workers employed?
IIRC, many of the short (4 coach trains) are due to be longer (I don't recall if it's 8 or 10) in due course.
However the advice comment falls into the trap that you are looking at what it looks like now, not 10-15 years time, it even further into the future.
What happens if in 12 years time all the trains are 12 coaches long, how do we then cater for more growth?
Even if they aren't 12 coaches, but are due to be, what happens to provide capacity for the 390's?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Ah yes, fair point.
2A is also relatively 'easy' in engineering terms - no big cost stuff like major tunnels or long viaducts.
So would I.
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/16366/inflation/why-is-cost-of-living-in-uk-so-expensive/ (2. Transport)
From a purely personal perspective, rail fares have increased substantially. I used to be able to get from Horsham to Manchester and back for less than £40. Then, gradually, the £17 advance tickets disappeared, and were replaced by advance tickets between £20 and £30. Now those have pretty-much gone (or at least i can't find any), and I now have to pay over £80 minimum to do that return journey (advance each way), or over £100 if I buy a walk-up ticket, and it makes no difference whether or not I avoid peak times or bank holidays. Unfortunately this has now motivated me to use the car more frequently for that journey, where a £50 fill-up will get me there and back with fuel to spare for a couple of journeys to work, with the added advantage of being able to drive to the Lakes or Snowdonia for a day and do some hill walking whilst I am up in Salford.
So will p2a survived under Truss's axe?
LOL The Irony
On Moderation
You do realise NPHR requires HS2's track between Manchester Interchange and Piccadilly, right?
Also that by removing 2/5 long distance services from Piccadilly in the morning peak hour, there's scope to lengthen 12 local services.
2 long distances services provide platform space for 4 longer local services, by switching those to platform used by the former long distance service there's other platform space which can be used to lengthen 4 further services.
Finally, add long distance services use platform space for 30-40 minutes, whist local services is more often 15-20 minutes. As such there's 50% more time available, releasing a further 4 services to be lengthened.
That's before NPR happens, which will free up even more space.
I'd argue both 2A and 2B(west) need to go ahead to make the best of what has been provided at 1. What should be done with some of the excess capacity freed by 2B(east) ? Perhaps more west coast services, more Liverpools, perhaps Chester, Blackpool added. Full 400m capabilty would not be required at new destinations, as trains can split and combine at major hubs such as Crewe and Preston. The Golborne connection is needed as any alternative junction near Warrington on some additional NPR/HS2(x) new Liverpool access would entail difficult junctions in built up areas on rather twisty routes anyway so would significantly slow down Scottish bound HS2 trains. The double track north of Crewe, although avoided in Ph1/2A by trains turning right to Manchester, and beautifully aligned for high speed, really needs to be avoided by Scottish HS Expresses as it's shared with some local traffic and, importantly, lots of freight. That element of 2B(west), and the fast tunnel under Crewe, is essential to remove express conflict with other traffic, again releasing capacity that could be used by other local services, and providing flexibility and resilience for all traffic groups; complete grade separation, so no need to ensure everything is stationary every half hour(?) to let a pair of expresses thunder through, then hold on pause for another five minutes because one passes through late.
So here's my political compromise:
---------------------------------------
Phase 1 - Complete as planned, but make provision to use some of the new Birmingham Curzon Street terminus capacity for Long distance Cross Country trains reversing with new connections to Gloucester and and Coventry lines an eventual aim. This could effectively use the Birmingham spur additionally as an extra pair of fast tracks for the Cross Country Derby access.
Phase 2A - Complete as planned.
Phase 2B(W) - Complete trunk route through Crewe to Golborne (The Scottish Connection), Make suitable provisions for new NPR junctions, but do not build Manchester spur.
Continued support and encouragement for development of NPR proposals by Northern planning bodies, with possibility and desire that some HS2 services might be diverted via some of that infrastructure once it is completed.
Phase 2B(E) - Cancel (some elements might be resurrected by NPR).
Extra West Coast services to use some of the capacity released on the south section of the Trunk.
quantinghome
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 2,410
These arguments assume there are significant votes in cancelling HS2 (or phases of it). There isn't. Most of the opposition is coming from the Chiltern area, and even that proved itself completely ineffective at changing anything in the GE. Further North the opposition is less in number and organisation. Phase 2b provides the most benefit in the scheme for the least cost. And let's not forget the outrage from northern cities if they don't get a connection to HS2.
- Status