Jump to content
 

HS2 under review


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, rockershovel said:

Depends what you are trying to achieve. The M25 appears to have created at least as many problems as it has solved, and is currently being extended yet again. The M6 and M62 appear to defy all attempts to complete whatever is being done to it. The A14/A45 area seems to be under permanent repair. 

 

I don’t doubt that any rail link between main cities would be full to overcapacity within quite a short period, wherever it went; but whether that would be a benefit in the wider sense, isn’t quite the same thing. 

 

Theres also the not-so-small matter that the railway didn’t create the industries it served; THEY arose from the unfolding of various issues involving resources and demand. 

 

From what what I can see in my travels, the road network is collapsing under the huge demands of freight haulage placed upon it. There are numerous controversies raging about the nature and profitability of much of the much-bruited “full employment” and there is a parallel, and contradictory controversy about the so-called “productivity gap”. 

 

Frankly, the HS scheme seems to be part of a wider issue in which there seems to be little, if any clarity or agreement. Its final cost appears to be incapable of definition. If Boris Johnson does cancel it, or some part of it, that would seem to be little more than recognition of the inevitable.

 

 

 

Much of what you say is patently true, but I do not get any impression of what you believe that "wider issue" is?

 

I have read many critiques of both HS2 and wider transport, even wider overall planning strategy and of even wider industrial, employment, social, land-use, etc etc policy issues. There are very few suggestions as to what would constitute a comprehensive, acceptable "policy" let alone a strategy or a plan. We simply do not have one, although the NIC would like us to.

 

In a vacuum, either nothing happens, or things get done despite everything.

 

On the railways, there is extant and forecast demand between North and South, which exceeds any current ability to fulfill it, even through incremental enhancements. HS2 is the only game in town which gives significant relief to that over a reasonable period. Boris may well cancel it, but that will not be for any logical reason.
 

Your logic also defeats me, except in Utopia.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Much of what you say is patently true, but I do not get any impression of what you believe that "wider issue" is?

 

I have read many critiques of both HS2 and wider transport, even wider overall planning strategy and of even wider industrial, employment, social, land-use, etc etc policy issues. There are very few suggestions as to what would constitute a comprehensive, acceptable "policy" let alone a strategy or a plan. We simply do not have one, although the NIC would like us to.

 

In a vacuum, either nothing happens, or things get done despite everything.

 

On the railways, there is extant and forecast demand between North and South, which exceeds any current ability to fulfill it, even through incremental enhancements. HS2 is the only game in town which gives significant relief to that over a reasonable period. Boris may well cancel it, but that will not be for any logical reason.
 

Your logic also defeats me, except in Utopia.

 

 

I’m not really offering logic, rather the observation that (as you correctly identify) there simply is no coherent plan at all. 

 

 The reason isn’t hard to find. Take a walk along our East Coast; you will see Dutch contractors, with Dutch crews, busy making profits building wind farms and their associated infrastructure, reinforcing coastal defences and the like. They are doing this on behalf of mostly German and Danish companies. Our power utilities are, in large part, owned by the French, who also have a fairly obvious ambition in the automotive industry. Italy’s chaotic political structure bobs along because the country is pretty much run by Fiat, ENI and MV Agusta in any case. 

 

None of this is accidental, it derives from the clear perception amongst those governments of their role. Our government, whatever it’s supposed political hue, appears to completely lack this, relying instead upon “magical thinking” (wonderful term, by the way) and the blind belief that in some way, if the conditions are right, money will fall from the sky by the efforts of “others”. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
54 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

Our government, whatever it’s supposed political hue, appears to completely lack this, relying instead upon “magical thinking” (wonderful term, by the way) and the blind belief that in some way, if the conditions are right, money will fall from the sky by the efforts of “others”. 

 

 

Well if you mix the colours of all the political parties you'll end up with something akin to turd brown.

So it's no wonder much of what comes out of Westminster is bull@*!!

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, rockershovel said:

Regarding increased traffic on any given line, isn’t that what they call “the M25 effect”? Provide any random transport link and it immediately fills to capacity, without actually solving the original problem? 

 

Would this have happened if it had been built on time and as originally planned though?

 

 

http://pathetic.org.uk/features/ringways/

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re “London’s unfinished motorways”, see my previous comments about the Metropolitan Railway. Once the decision is taken to concentrate on a particular plan, the rest follows. 

 

I await events with considerable interest, if not much optimism. I believe that we are experiencing a general failure of our system of governance, which has built up over a long period of time; I’m quite certain that many of our problems vis-a-vis the EU, result from a chronic failure to respond appropriately to its direction of development. 

 

I’m wholly certain that the increasingly frantic efforts to define the problem in particular terms, which fill the press, are quite futile. If our existing leaders could solve these problems, by their intended means, they would surely have long since done so. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hesperus said:

 

Would this have happened if it had been built on time and as originally planned though?

 

 

http://pathetic.org.uk/features/ringways/

 

Far enough in the past and roads like motorways were built and took years to reach capacity, but that isn't true anymore and is pretty much consistent worldwide.

 

The only way today to build a road and prevent it from being clogged with traffic would be through using tolls to discourage use.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 22/07/2019 at 08:41, rockershovel said:

Regarding increased traffic on any given line, isn’t that what they call “the M25 effect”? Provide any random transport link and it immediately fills to capacity, without actually solving the original problem? 

When the M42 was built east of Birmingham for some time it was like a ghost road - I used it frequently and it was lightly trafficked.

HGVs were noticeable by their absence.

Then over a period of maybe months it was if it had suddenly been discovered as a useful shortcut around the east of Brum and wham! Solid slow moving traffic most of the day and jams during rush hour.

  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, melmerby said:

HGVs were noticeable by their absence.

Then over a period of maybe months it was if it had suddenly been discovered as a useful shortcut around the east of Brum and wham! Solid slow moving traffic most of the day and jams during rush hour.

 

Wonder if maybe a reflection in the time lag for GPS / satnav systems to be updated to reflect it being open?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, mdvle said:

 

Wonder if maybe a reflection in the time lag for GPS / satnav systems to be updated to reflect it being open?

30+ years ago!  It was quiet for some time after completion in the late 80s until the 90's

 

Sat navs would be a bit scarce, waiting to be invented 10 years later.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

Hardly anyone seems to have discovered the M69 between Leicester and Coventry. Long may it stay like this. 

 

Plenty of people KNOW about it, it’s just that it is like the Humber Bridge - obsolete as built! 

 

The M42 was like that for a long while. I suspect that the ongoing catastrophe at Oldbury Viaduct is a major contribution to its current popularity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/07/2019 at 19:12, melmerby said:

Check the number of voters against chamber attendees and you will often find far more vote than appear to be in the chamber as they are elsewhere in parliament and turn up to vote when the division bell sounds.

So where do you find who voted and which way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 20/07/2019 at 10:31, ess1uk said:

 

MPs backed the High Speed Rail (West Midlands to Crewe) Bill in the House of Commons by 263 votes in favour to 17 against.

who voted against?

Here's the link to Hansard: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-07-15/division/6A3441EA-EAFA-4DF5-8E96-70D52903AE3A/HighSpeedRail(WestMidlands-Crewe)Bill?outputType=Names

 

Dennis Skinner voted against it. But you probably guessed that. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dennis Skinner would vote against opening his anal sphincter to evacuate his bowel, if he thought it might in some way obstruct anyone else, in any possible way at all.  This gives him a conflict of interests, as he uses the same vent to express his thoughts opinions.  That may, in some small way, explain the disconnected, logic lacking, aggressive effluent which exudes from an otherwise charming candidate for the Queen's Royal Reception presenter.

 

Regards

 

Julian

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

Here's the link to Hansard: https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-07-15/division/6A3441EA-EAFA-4DF5-8E96-70D52903AE3A/HighSpeedRail(WestMidlands-Crewe)Bill?outputType=Names

 

Dennis Skinner voted against it. But you probably guessed that. 

As did several other "usual suspects"

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, jcredfer said:

Dennis Skinner would vote against opening his anal sphincter to evacuate his bowel, if he thought it might in some way obstruct anyone else, in any possible way at all.  This gives him a conflict of interests, as he uses the same vent to express his thoughts opinions.  That may, in some small way, explain the disconnected, logic lacking, aggressive effluent which exudes from an otherwise charming candidate for the Queen's Royal Reception presenter.

 

Regards

 

Julian

 

He speaks very highly of you too...can't quite see the relevance of this to the thread, surprised it hasn't been jumped on by the great and the good.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 21/07/2019 at 10:30, Mike Storey said:

On Stratford, you are both wrong, if you take the starting point back a while. There was only one tube line (Central) and a reduced layout for main line and local trains, in the 1980's. It was hardly an interchange "hub". What changed it was vision, availability (of new space from demolitions and preserved old routes) and money - lots of it - from developers and taxpayers. Once DLR was added from one direction, and then from another, and once the Jubilee arrived, plus Stratford International, and then all the other upgrades, expansions and improvements, plus a huge new shopping centre and a very expensive, under-used sports ground, it only then became what it is today.

 

The GLA appear to have the same vision for Old Oak, although availability for new links/re-established old ones is definitely more limited, but not impossible. It will come down to money and planning powers. The same planning powers that demanded HS2 call there and provide over-provision for future aspirations. Whether it will all ever happen, is a different debate.

 

The vision of a stratford hub had nothing to do with Crossrail, it was all about the Olympics, since 2000 little has changed in terms of rail connections apart from 2012 related refurbishments.

 

 Stratford Intl has failed in its purpose of enabling long distance commuting, as Eurostar doesn't stop there... remember that idea of commuting to work from Calais and Lille, instead it feeds off the short distance commuters paying premium fares off South Eastern who can avoid London Bridge.

 

Stratfords growth in numbers is much down to its role in Canary Wharf’s growth, commuters to / from Essex. The big miss was not having the Elizabeth line go direct from Stratford to Canary Wharf... it would empty stratford and reduce many many commutes.

 

If the govt transforms the OC area from industrial to residential, thats all good, but its not going to do much for HS2.

 

As OC is what we've got, it may be better to skew the Central line under OC with an interchange, (though that requires a tunnel under a prison). Diverting the NLL above OC to Willesdon, and maybe divert the A40 to an interchange terminal on the park at Wormwood scrubs.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

 

The vision of a stratford hub had nothing to do with Crossrail, it was all about the Olympics, since 2000 little has changed in terms of rail connections apart from 2012 related refurbishments.

 

 Stratford Intl has failed in its purpose of enabling long distance commuting, as Eurostar doesn't stop there... remember that idea of commuting to work from Calais and Lille, instead it feeds off the short distance commuters paying premium fares off South Eastern who can avoid London Bridge.

 

Stratfords growth in numbers is much down to its role in Canary Wharf’s growth, commuters to / from Essex. The big miss was not having the Elizabeth line go direct from Stratford to Canary Wharf... it would empty stratford and reduce many many commutes.

 

 

 

Sorry, but almost entirely untrue. I know, because I was a key part of the planning and then delivery team, both when in NR, working alongside TfL, and then in the ODA, with both of them then as clients.

 

A very major part of London's bid, and its acceptability to the IOC and UK HMG overall, was its legacy (something that Paris, the main competitor could not match). That legacy had to include improved links that had been planned years before, for progressive employment opportunities for depressed areas of London. Hence the NLL upgrades, which had a primarily social business case, not much for commuters from Essex and Suffolk (many Essex commuters to CW used the route via West Ham anyway). The NLL has been further upgraded since the Olympics, as has the DLR, and as has the NR link to Tottenham (Lea Valley). Stratford Hub was as much social engineering for North and East London, as it was a transport business case for increased business.. It had the advantage of Canary Wharf (and others latterly) private contributions, and then of course 2012 funding. But, at all times, although we knew Crossrail would not be a part of the 2012 transport plan, we had to provide passive, or indeed active, provision for it. That included re-routing a large chunk of the DLR serving Stratford from the West, around Pudding Mill Lane especially, and ensuring provision within short term changes to track layouts between Liverpool Street and Maryland. CrossRail will actively generate improved links with Canary Wharf, but that's nothing to do with Stratford.

 

Old Oak will similarly be a piece of social engineering, with as much private developer contributions as can be obtained. But it will take much longer than Stratford, that is certain.

 

Crossrail was a very key part of the planning assumptions for Stratford (and indeed many other things we did in East London, years before it became a construction project). Canary Wharf was a key driver, and a key funder in several respects, you are right about that. But i certainly do not get your point about running Crossrail to Canary Wharf via Stratford (if that is what is you meant?). According to projections, it will already be full at Whitechapel, on either route. A branch from either route, from or to Canary Wharf, would have a far lower capacity than the train-every-minute Jubilee extension, upgraded as now, on which many millions have already been spent.

 

The myth continues that Stratford is primarily for Essex dwellers to avoid Liverpool Street on their way to Canary Wharf. The survey numbers (in 2011 anyway) simply do not support that - most interchangers at Stratford for Canary Wharf (or in that direction anyway) were off the Central Line and the North London Line (post frequency improvements), whilst passengers off Anglia trains (suburban, InterCity and from Tottenham) were fewer in number, although still significant, and undoubtedly increased once more Anglia trains could call at Stratford and Jubilee capacity increased. Indeed, there was evidence that, whilst it is true that Stratford "International" did not meet its original aspirations, it was used by increasing numbers of passengers off the Midland and the ECML / Thameslink / GN to avoid central London, to access Canary Wharf too. I was one of them for several years. But numbers were still relatively low by 2011.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 21/07/2019 at 10:30, Mike Storey said:

On Stratford, you are both wrong, if you take the starting point back a while. There was only one tube line (Central) and a reduced layout for main line and local trains, in the 1980's. It was hardly an interchange "hub". What changed it was vision, availability (of new space from demolitions and preserved old routes) and money - lots of it - from developers and taxpayers. Once DLR was added from one direction, and then from another, and once the Jubilee arrived, plus Stratford International, and then all the other upgrades, expansions and improvements, plus a huge new shopping centre and a very expensive, under-used sports ground, it only then became what it is today.

 

The GLA appear to have the same vision for Old Oak, although availability for new links/re-established old ones is definitely more limited, but not impossible. It will come down to money and planning powers. The same planning powers that demanded HS2 call there and provide over-provision for future aspirations. Whether it will all ever happen, is a different debate.

 

Thanks for the insight, into the social engineering aspect of Stratford, but you've not mapped its relevance in any way to HS1, indeed you admitted the that it failed.

 

It failed for the same reasons as OC at HS2 will fail....

 

People living in Stratford have no need for HS1

 

Social engineering new suburbs of a city is great its needed, but tieing blocks of flats and shopping centres to High Speed Rail is a nonsense mix.

 

How many people take HS1, even by South Eastern, to visit Westfield ? 

How many people will travel from Birmingham to a shopping centre in Old Oak or vice versa ?

 

We agree Stratford is a station that exists for connections, even though I disagree with regards Canary Wharf.. its absolutely rammed in Rush hour, to dangerous proportions... Crossrail should have linked the two, and could reduce the need for passengers to change at Stratford at all.

 

As an ex-Canary Wharfer myself Ive not seen any increase in transport options at Stratford since year 2000... yes 313’s have turned into DLR, 378’s northbound, and their might be new rails, resurfaced platforms, signage and shiny glass and increased frequency, but actual new build rail routes to new destinations.. the only one Ive seen is Stratford to Stratford Intl... which is a shorter distance than this proposed overground to OC connection HS2 passengers are expected to gleefully drag their suitcases down some industrial street towards.

 

back to Old Oak..

 

it doesnt have the connections Stratford has, it has GWR, Crossrail and thats it. No tube, No feed south, No feed North, I dont see a road transport feed. An add on station 1/4-1/2mile away to a low speed connection that itself is an outer london ring is not a connection.

 

Similarly, if I were inbound to Tottenham Court road, I’d be interested to see the time from HS1 to Euston and 2 stops on the Northern compares to HS1 to OC and 3 stops on Crossrail.

When it comes to Farringdon, HS1 to Euston and 2 on the Met, compares to HS1 to OC and 4 stops on Crossrail.

 

if these are faster via Euston, the only purpose of any passenger connection at OC is For Paddington, or Bond Street, unless they are using OC to go GWR back west?

 

if i’m wrong tell me the big picture i’m missing ?

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Quite interesting talking to a GWR rep yesterday evening at our BUG (Branch User Gfroup) where GWR's current strategy - which they seem very sure of and they've obviously done a lot of talking to commuter groups (and possibly wider) is that they see Paddington as the key interchange for Crossrail.

 

Noew the interesting things about that is as far as Thames Valley commuters are concerned the most obvious interchange between GWR and Crossrail is not Paddington but Ealing Broadway which is not only 100% level access but in fact only involves getting off one trains, stepping no more than a few feet away from it then stepping back the same distance to join the other one.  so on the face if it it sounds illogical to interchange at Paddington where a change of levels is obviously needed.

 

But the problem with Ealing Broadway is that even with its present level of usage and interchange it is extremely busy during the peaks (and not exactly quiet off-peak).  Plus yet again other people might well to choose what we do when we return from our friend at Northfields which is to go through to Paddington (two changes on the Underground) rather than go via Ealing Broadway (one change on the Underground or even a not too onerous walk from our friend's home).  Which goes back to my point about getting on a train at its originating point and therefore a great chance of getting a seat during the peak periods.  However it should be noted that apart from Northfields itself the journey to Paddington involves no other stairs and a short escalator which is nice and friendly for arthritic knees.

 

Old Oak Common interchange between GWR trains and Crossrail will I suspect have little impact on those who are familiar with their journey on a regular basis.  Local commuter changes will probably be less stressful than changing at Ealing Broadway because Old Oak Common lacks all the other local routes (two UndergrounD lines and numerous 'bus routes) which are on the doorstep at Ealing Broadway but the westbound pattern could well be very different.  In reality Old Oak Common as an interchange. except to HS2, involves many more contrary factors to mitigate against it than the far wider range of interchange possibilities at Stratford.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The proposed North London Line station for OOC is located only 300 metres from the HS2 station. 0.175 of a mile.

 

It’s the WLL that’s too far away, unless the line is significantly diverted and. There are no plans for that......as yet.

 

 

 

Ron

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

H

Heres my fag packet workings (i’m sure experts will tell me how bad it is, but then i’m not an expert nor claiming to be one)...

 

If HS2 had gone via LHR, with an below ground station at Ealing Broadway.

This still gives HS2 a XR connection.

 

the GWR unused Fastline platforms give the West connections at no cost.

 

It gives HS2 a Central line connection at no cost.

 

Additionally by switching Uxbridge Piccadilly line fast services to an all stations to Earls Court, this giving the District fast line services from Ealing Broadway to Earls Court... this gives a fast south central zone 1 connection to HS2 at no cost.

 

With it upgrade the access to the A406 North Circular and access to A40/M40/M25, which is just beyond Ealing Broadway, this has a traffic improvement cost.

 

Forget Euston, HS2 itself could be using Crossrails tunnel, and a after London provide through service to Anglia. A clever spur at Stratford could give HS1 access to South Easterns routes in Kent... this is low cost, you've saved the need for a Palace at Euston.

 

Finally as HEX is now subsumed to HS2, use those paths for a HEX via the existing route to Ealing Broadway and peel off to the NLL at West Ealing to Clapham Junction giving the entire South East / South West and North UK a HS2 / GWR access point in 1 connection, avoiding central london entirely.. Additionally most of the south east (including Gatwick Airport) could have a direct route to LHR... all for virtually no cost (just electrify a 300m stretch of track from West Ealing to the NLL.. it gives added benefit of continuous 25kv access from GWML, to WCML, ECML, MML and GEML).

 

What does this cost... 

stations at LHR, Ealing Broadway for HS2.. a bit of extra tunnel to go via LHR rather than direct under Greenford, a short spur at Stratford.

 

Savings Euston megaoplis and an entire OC construction site..

 

You can now go Norwich direct to Heathrow, Dover to Manchester on 1 train using 2 HS lines, and hundreds more direct, 1 change and avoiding zone 1 connections options.

 

indeed a few extra terminating platforms at LHR could see it a terminus in its own right, and allow for through ticketing / baggage check in to flights from anywhere HS2 services originate.

 

Would  the costs of this end up that much different to the current proposals ?

 I can imagine GA, SE, HEX, GATEX & BA would be concerned that it impacts their profits, over passenger comfort.

 

How to mitigate this... give GA and SE access to HS1 as competitors, HEX should become a building management company with a levy on tickets per passenger at LHR. Gatex runs the Airport connecting service. BA could goto alliances with all LHR ticketing with code shares.

 

As is, the whole HS2 scheme feels like its built to a compromise, ensuring it fits without affecting anyone else's place in the trough, in doing so the animals still get fed but the fleas have more jumps to make to get from end to end.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by adb968008
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the deepest respect, I suggest you put your crayons away.

HS2 is already underway, with early stages of construction taking place right now.

Hypothesising about might have been, is a bit pointless IMHO.

 

As for the idea of running HS2 services through the Crossrail tunnels....we’ll that just totally destroys the whole Crossrail service and the justification for it being built in the first place.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...