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

[Puffing Devil]

And that's what we'll get, with the addition of a HS spine to London.

That's not in the plan - all that's mapped is the Y to Leeds and Manchester.

 

[Sceptre]

Also, if I'm being frightfully honest, a "high-speed TransPennine line" is probably overkill, given the distances between Leeds, Manchester, and Liverpool mean that you won't be spending that much time at "high speed". An express line capable of 125mph would probably satisfy TfN's aspirations of a sub-30 minute journey between Leeds and Manchester.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Certainly not Liverpool, that gets HS2 trains in Phase 1.

Leeds/Newcastle pretty integral to Phase 2B.

Liverpool may get the trains, it's not getting the line.

 

[EM2]

Do you foresee any negative consequences of HS2?

Some disruption while construction takes place. Apart from that, no I don't.

 

[PR1Berske]

Some disruption while construction takes place. Apart from that, no I don't.

Thank you.

Interesting how I can see nothing but failure and mistakes, you only success and achievements.

 

[EM2]

Thank you.

Interesting how I can see nothing but failure and mistakes, you only success and achievements.

Maybe because I work in the industry, and have experience with HS1.

 

[Carlisle]

Leeds/Newcastle pretty integral to Phase 2B.

Completely irrelevant to most people’s considetions given its at least 15 years away assuming it opens on time .

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Interesting how I can see nothing but failure and mistakes, you only success and achievements.

If you read the lessons learned from the West Coast Route Modernisation (which took 10 years from remodelling Euston to opening the TV4 section), it was that "never again" would we attempt to rebuild a classic line while trying to run commercial services over it.
It took another 5 years to finish the resignalling at Bletchley and Watford (some would say it isn't really finished yet), and build the Norton Bridge flyover - more disruption..
The disruption was deeply damaging to the railway's reputation, and so were the project delays and overspend.
This happened roughly at the same time HS1 was built (in two sections), which was painless by comparison.
It also stayed pretty close to time and budget, and transformed services in Kent and to Paris/Brussels.

You seem to be advocating another bout of endless WCML upgrades (also possibly MML and ECML) to address your "pinch points" (which are 110 miles long: Euston-Rugby-Birmingham).
After all that, the benefits would be significantly less than with a new route, because of the basic constraints of the Stephenson corridor.
If we want a major uplift of capacity, we should do it properly.

 

[Ianno87]

Liverpool may get the trains, it's not getting the line.

So the best deal then - the benefit of improved services without the local construction disruption.

Completely irrelevant to most people’s considetions given its at least 15 years away assuming it opens on time .

In perspective, only 7 years after the first bit opens, the same time duration as between now and Phase 1.

 

[The Ham]

Unless there is a huge cut in pricing the growth in passenger numbers will not happen. The broadband speed that you talk about in your post has cut business travel, commuters would not be able to afford it and leisure travellers can easily spare the time for a much cheaper fare. See again the number of people that take the LNWR train to London from Crewe to save a few £££

View media item 3337
Given the Growth figures (70% between London and the North West) either there's been significant growth on all TOC's or LNWR can fit a lot of people on their trains or Virgin have been carrying very few people.

Given that 11 million people is 2,000 people per hour, each and every hour, over a 15 hour day every day of the year (with no allowance for Christmas and Boxing Days) I doubt it's the latter two options.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just had a thought.

What were First group proposing as a timetable for Horizon Trains? Seem to remember some press coverage was saying more stops at more stations and possibly mini Pendolinos?

Now surely they'd have had to have worked this around the existing Very High Frequency timetable? But were they proposing a way of getting more out of it?

Mini Pendolinos were for the Brum to Scotland services. What VT actually did was much, much better.

 

[jfowkes]

Do you foresee any negative consequences of HS2?

I can think of some:

• Any major infrastructure project causes immediate localised environmental damage and HS2 is no exception. Regardless of any mitigation measures, there will be a negative environmental effect.
• Any major infrastructure project causes immediate localised disruption to the people living on/near the site. Regardless of any compensation, people's lives will be affected negatively.
• Local services on the MML, WCML, ECML, Chiltern Main Line and probably other lines will change. I doubt that all those changes will be good for everyone. Some journeys will be "worse", for a given and subjective definition of "worse".
• A potential negative: HS2 will be under a lot of pressure to succeed. If it fails to live up to expectations, it could have severe repercussions for the rail industry as a whole.

But these negatives have to be balanced against the positive gains. On that basis, I support the construction of HS2.

 

[PR1Berske]

Thank you @jfowkes . Again, interesting.

 

[The Ham]

I can think of some:

• Any major infrastructure project causes immediate localised environmental damage and HS2 is no exception. Regardless of any mitigation measures, there will be a negative environmental effect.
• Any major infrastructure project causes immediate localised disruption to the people living on/near the site. Regardless of any compensation, people's lives will be affected negatively.
• Local services on the MML, WCML, ECML, Chiltern Main Line and probably other lines will change. I doubt that all those changes will be good for everyone. Some journeys will be "worse", for a given and subjective definition of "worse".
• A potential negative: HS2 will be under a lot of pressure to succeed. If it fails to live up to expectations, it could have severe repercussions for the rail industry as a whole.

But these negatives have to be balanced against the positive gains. On that basis, I support the construction of HS2.

Indeed, there's plenty which could reasonably be leveled at HS2 as being negative, however you need to consider what happens without it or what the alternitve is to cope with the pressures which it is trying to solve.

For instance the environmental impact:
- if we do nothing would likely mean more traffic congestion adding more pollutants into the atmosphere. Quite possibly with more traffic looking to use local road rather than Motorways, which could lead to more traffic driving through Chiltern villages (probably not from further afield, but probably more local traffic which would find the hop one junction trips that they make aren't quicker anymore)

- the alternative may include a new motorway (it would probably need to be 2 lanes in each direction) which would at least require a corridor of 25.7m (edge of hard shoulder to edge of hard shoulder, Vs 22m for HS2), however chances are it would need to be upgraded to 3 lanes which would widen the corridor to 33m.

 

[mmh]

Look at why specific trains are crowded, and either retime them or add extra carriages. Reroute services to underused destinations. Reexamine ticket prices to see if a fairer pricing regime could spread passengers over a wider set of services.

Invest where it matters. Expand the WCML at its pinch points, rather than build a new railway with no intermediate stations. Use money to focus on regional hotspots.

Consider taking people *away* from the railway where appropriate. Invest in high speed BroadBand, rebalance the economy to reduce strain on commuter railways.

Think differently.

I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.

WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant

How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?

 

[pt_mad]

I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.

WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant

How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?

Are any stopping LNR trains booked on the fasts? Other than the semi fast Crewe services of course?

 

[mmh]

You are getting investment:

Liverpool - Manchester Chat Moss Electrification
Liverpool - Wigan Electrification
Lime Street Station Rebuild/Re-signalling
Ordsall Chord
Manchester - Bolton Electrification
Blackpool Electrification
Srapping of Pacers by Cascaded Stock - 150s, 156s, 158s, 170s, 319s
Northern New 195 DMUs
Northern New 331 EMUs
TPE New 802 BiModes
TPE New Mk5 stock
TPE New 397 EMUs
LNER New 800 Bimodes

Proposed/Future Enhancements
Trans Pennine Improvement/Electrification
Piccadilly Extra Platforms
HS3/Northern Powerhouse Rail

Plus you will benefit from HS2, journey times from Preston to London will improve by at least 30 mins when phase 1 to Birmingham opens increasing to at least an hour when phase 2 opens. Plus you get new stock to replace/complement the Pendolinos.

But if I live in Preston I don't really care about getting to London 30 minutes quicker. I'm far more likely to be going to Manchester or Liverpool, or anywhere not the other side of the country.

 

[Bald Rick]

I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.

WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant

How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?

Fair point - the D.C. lines between Harrow and Watford could take more trains, with a fair bit of cash spent on it.

Doesn’t help anybody who wants to travel to/from anywhere north of Watford of course...

 

[Bald Rick]

But if I live in Preston I don't really care about getting to London 30 minutes quicker. I'm far more likely to be going to Manchester or Liverpool, or anywhere not the other side of the country.

But, actually, some people in Preston do care about getting to London quicker. And some people in London care about getting to Preston quicker. Hence the West Coast electrification in the 60s and 70s, and the IC110 project in the early 90s, and the WCRM project in the 00s, all of which reduced the London - Preston (and other places) journey time.

 

[pt_mad]

But, actually, some people in Preston do care about getting to London quicker. And some people in London care about getting to Preston quicker. Hence the West Coast electrification in the 60s and 70s, and the IC110 project in the early 90s, and the WCRM project in the 00s, all of which reduced the London - Preston (and other places) journey time.

Out of interest what did the IC110 project involve?

 

[Bald Rick]

Out of interest what did the IC110 project involve?

Raising the speed of the fast lines to a ruling 110mph. Mostly track /OLE realignment, staff safety (new walkways, positions of safety etc) and some level crossing changes. It was all done by about 1992. The higher linespeed could only be used by Class 90s and MkIII stock.

Knocked a few minutes off the London - Manchester / Liverpool / NW / Scotland times.

 

[pt_mad]

Raising the speed of the fast lines to a ruling 110mph. Mostly track /OLE realignment, staff safety (new walkways, positions of safety etc) and some level crossing changes. It was all done by about 1992. The higher linespeed could only be used by Class 90s and MkIII stock.

Knocked a few minutes off the London - Manchester / Liverpool / NW / Scotland times.

Not the 87s?

 

[KeithP]

I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.

WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant

How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?

No mention of freight in there.

 

[mmh]

No mention of freight in there.

It's quite rare these days to pass freight too. If freight is the issue, build a line for freight at a fraction of the cost of HS2. It isn't.

 

[Sceptre]

Fair point - the D.C. lines between Harrow and Watford could take more trains, with a fair bit of cash spent on it.

Doesn’t help anybody who wants to travel to/from anywhere north of Watford of course...

As far as I'm aware, the DC lines don't interact with the WCML at all save for the Euston throat and a connection to the Down Fast at Watford Junction.

 

[mmh]

But, actually, some people in Preston do care about getting to London quicker. And some people in London care about getting to Preston quicker.

They really don't. Not a single person will have ever not gone from Preston to London or vice versa because it takes 30 minutes too long.

Hence the West Coast electrification in the 60s and 70s, and the IC110 project in the early 90s, and the WCRM project in the 00s, all of which reduced the London - Preston (and other places) journey time.

Which as you say benefited places other than London. HS2 will do nothing for anywhere north of Birmingham.

 

[Aictos]

They really don't. Not a single person will have ever not gone from Preston to London or vice versa because it takes 30 minutes too long.



Which as you say benefited places other than London. HS2 will do nothing for anywhere north of Birmingham.

I agree, it will do nothing for Leeds, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Manchester etc apart from reducing journey times for all services and increasing capacity for more trains to run on the classic lines.....

 

[The Ham]

They really don't. Not a single person will have ever not gone from Preston to London or vice versa because it takes 30 minutes too long.



Which as you say benefited places other than London. HS2 will do nothing for anywhere north of Birmingham.

Firstly, there will be people who wouldn't be inclined to go to London because they can't get their early enough without getting up earlier, or wouldn't go because their train gets them home too late for when they need to get up the next day.

Secondly either HS2 is saving 30 minutes or there's no benefit North of Birmingham, the two statements can't both be true.

 

[The Ham]

It's quite rare these days to pass freight too. If freight is the issue, build a line for freight at a fraction of the cost of HS2. It isn't.

Given we've established that a 120mph railway is 9% cheaper than a High Speed railway, and I would guess that it is unlikely that a 80mph railway would be much cheaper (if at all) than that, the cost savings aren't that great.

Then add in that the benefits for passengers are likely to be bigger (not least as there's more passenger trains) and you can perhaps understand why a new passenger line was chosen.

However, other than pathing limits, there's little stopping freight trains from using HS2 like HS1 has done. Obviously those path limits are going to be quite significant of the trains are running at 60mph and 200+mph.

 

[The Ham]

I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.

WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant

How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?

What will the WCML look like in 5 years time, 10 years time, 50 years time? To an extent nobody knows for sure, however with more people wanting to reduce their car usage, population growth and the ease of working whist on a train a fairly reasonable guess is that train usage is likely to grow.

As such it is reasonable to do something to increase capacity.

If South of MK is a major problem then it could be that there could have been a new line built from there, however you would need to find a way of accommodating them at each end and trying to ensure that people used them rather the Virgin trains.

Just because over one section of the DC route there's 3tph it doesn't mean that there's lots of capacity elsewhere for extra services. For instance between Woking and Guildford there's 4tph, yet there's little scope for more trains at Guildford and less at Woking.