HS2

[Phil Parker]

15 hours ago, Flittersnoop said:

As for me showing disrespect, I have been the target of very personal comments in my short time on here. I haven't responded in kind. Are you sure you're not conflating disagreement with disrespect?

 

Virtually all your posts since you joined RMweb have been on the HS2 thread. It's almost as though you signed up JUST to complain about it. You wouldn't be the first to join with the intention of battling on a single issue and when this happens, it rarely ends well. Please prove me wrong. 

[Dunsignalling]

Whatever cash level fares on HS2 are eventually set at is academic given the amount of time and inflation that will pass before they have to be. What will be inevitable is a premium above parallel journeys made over existing conventional routes.

 

The calculations will start from whatever prices are ruling on WCML at the time, though the ECML will also become relevant when the later stages of HS2 come on-stream. However, the advent of a competitive route providing faster journeys might also have the effect of depressing fares on the existing lines a little.

 

The principle of offering reserved seats only and no standing, on at least a proportion of departures, is long overdue in this country. We far too willingly endure "cattle truck commuting" in the UK, though such a change (especially if it costs extra) will undoubtedly generate tabloid flak involving the word elitism. However, I've always considered that  guaranteed seats and not risking copping a standing passenger's elbow in ones ear could be at least as useful in taking travellers out of the peak-hours as is reducing off-peak fares. Not to mention creating the chance of the buffet trolley getting through more than two coaches! It should also attract new customers who don't currently travel by rail because of those unpleasant aspects.

 

When there are five or more services an hour going in a given direction, I see no reason why at least one should not be sold on a 100% reserved basis. Those making unplanned journeys who want/need to "turn-up-and-go" can be offered the next unrestricted train in ten minutes or so, or take pot-luck on a "stand-by" being available - modern IT can easily manage unreserved seats up to a few minutes before departure. 

 

John     

 

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[Ron Ron Ron]

12 hours ago, Zomboid said:

It's not ridiculous to think that it could spread the load from LHR, but how much capacity for expansion is there at Birmingham & Manchester airports?

 

Suggestions (you read them elsewhere) that BHX and MAN can take any significant load of LHR and other SE airports are at best fanciful and at worst deluded.

For example, 83% of LHR's passenger traffic originates or is destined for Greater London, the SE (including Essex, Herts and Suffolk) and is very well served by 6 airports.

A further 8% are travelling to/from the airport from the SW of England (Dorset and Wiltshire and westwards) and Gloucestershire and S. Wales.

 

However BHX and MAN are already mopping up a large proportion of passengers travelling to/from places north of Oxfordshire an Milton Keynes.

There are a lot of air passengers flying to/from the Midlands and north of England.

 

You may not be aware, but Manchester is part way through a £1 billion transformation plan, that will provide a near doubling of terminal capacity.

Further airport developments and expansion will follow on.

MAN airport is currently handling a smidgeon under 30 million passengers per annum.

The airport already has 2 full length runways, that can handle the largest aircraft operating at full weight.

So yes, it already has the capacity and is already expanding.

 

BHX has also seen steady growth and is now handling 12.6 million pax per annum.

There are development plans, but the airport is on a constrained site and any significant expansion, particularly if a new runway was to be built, would probably have to take place outside of the current airport footprint.

Open land to the E and SE of the M42 has been proposed, which puts the new HS2 Birmingham Interchange station right in the middle of an expanded airport complex..

One problem though, is that BHX is sandwiched between the catchment areas of two much larger airports in LHR and MAN, which will continue to abstract air passengers to a much wider range of services.

The Manchester Airport HS2 station will only be 40 mins from Curzon Street and 37 mins from Birmingham Interchange.

Curzon St. and Interchange to OOC is predicted to be 38 and 31 minutes respectively, so less than an hour to Heathrow.

 

This does raise the issue of how useful the HS2 to LHR link via OOC will be.

LHR will continue to offer a very much wider choice of long haul destinations than other UK airports; so where direct flights from the regional airports are not available, the choice for passengers will be a HS rail journey down to London, connecting onto Crossrail or HEX for the final leg into LHR; .....or catching a flight from the nearest, or most convenient regional airport to a connecting hub, either in Europe, or further afield (Gulf, Asia, N. America).

 

 

.

 

.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Ron Ron Ron

[Clearwater]

20 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

or.....

4) 1000 passengers @ £100/ticket = £100,000 revenue

5) 1000 passengers @ £300/ticket = £300,000 revenue

 

You can play around like that all day.

 

A more interesting question (IMHO) would concern the availability of tickets if for example, train passenger capacity was to be strictly limited to a set maximum capacity, e.g. seated passengers only.

If so, that would mean reservations only, with up to last minute filling of empty seats, when available.

 

.

 

21 hours ago, Pandora said:

My perspective is this:    ticket revenue is part of the business case and ticket revenue vs ridership is open to conflicting aims and ambitions.

 For a particluar service train  the operators  could go for a  hyperthetical ticketing structure of catering for:

 

1) 1000 passengers @ £10/ticket  = £10000 revenue

2) 100 passengers @ £100/ticket = £10000 revenue

3) 50 passengers @ £300/ticket = £15000 revenue

 

 

 

1) is the option was maximising city to city connectivity and transfer from existing,

3) is the option for maximising operator profits, / minimal public benefit

 

i believe the case for HS2 is to enhance connectivity between  North to South for the many and not the few and that objective is high levels of ridership

 

How achievable is 1),   maximum ridership?

 

I’d suggest that we’re several years too soon to work out a revenue maximising vs ridership maximising model.  The ability to maximise revenue will depend on the inelasticity of the demand.   Let’s get it built and then optimise it!

[Ron Ron Ron]

27 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

.....What will be inevitable is a premium above parallel journeys made over existing conventional routes.....

 

......the advent of a competitive route providing faster journeys might also have the effect of depressing fares on the existing lines a little......

 

 

What parallel journeys or competing routes?

The Birmingham to London market is probably the only one where any, or any significant alternative to HS2 will exist.

Almost all the IC services from north of Brum to London will be moving onto HS2, apart from the semi-fast residual services that will call at places like MK, Rugby and Coventry.

 

 

.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Suggestions (you read them elsewhere) that BHX and MAN can take any significant load of LHR and other SE airports are at best fanciful and at worst deluded.

For example, 83% of LHR's passenger traffic originates or is destined for Greater London, the SE (including Essex, Herts and Suffolk) and is very well served by 6 airports.

A further 8% are travelling to/from the airport from the SW of England (Dorset and Wiltshire and westwards) and Gloucestershire and S. Wales.

 

However BHX and MAN are already mopping up a large proportion of passengers travelling to/from places north of Oxfordshire an Milton Keynes.

There are a lot of air passengers flying to/from the Midlands and north of England.

 

You may not be aware, but Manchester is part way through a £1 billion transformation plan, that brings a near doubling of terminal capacity.

Further airport developments and expansion will follow on.

MAN airport is currently handling a smidgeon under 30 million passengers per annum.

The airport already has 2 full length runways, that can handle the largest aircraft operating at full weight.

So yes, it already has the capacity and is already expanding.

 

BHX has also seen steady growth and is now handling 12.6 million pax per annum.

There are development plans, but the airport is on a constrained site and any significant expansion, particularly if a new runway was to be built, would probably have to take place outside of the current airport footprint.

Open land to the E and SE of the M42 has been proposed, which puts the new HS2 Birmingham Interchange station right in the middle of an expanded airport complex..

One problem though, is that BHX is sandwiched between the catchment areas of two much larger airports in LHR and MAN, which will continue to abstract air passengers to a much wider range of services.

The Manchester Airport HS2 station will only be 40 mins from Curzon Street and 37 mins from Birmingham Interchange.

Curzon St. and Interchange to OOC is predicted to be 38 and 31 minutes respectively, so less than an hour to Heathrow.

 

All this does raise the issue of how useful the HS2 to LHR link via OOC will be.

LHR will continue to offer a very much wider choice of long haul destinations than other UK airports; so where direct flights from the regional airports are not available, the choice for passengers will be a HS rail journey down to London, connecting onto Crossrail or HEX for the final leg into LHR; .....or catching a flight from the nearest, or most convenient regional airport to a connecting hub, either in Europe, or further afield (Gulf, Asia, N. America).

 

 

.

 

.

I live in East Devon, and whilst I rarely fly, for a number of friends who regularly go to Australia, the airport of choice is Birmingham. LHR comes no higher than third on their list of preferences.

 

Rail connection is at least as easy as going via LHR (one change, at BNS or BSK according to route) and by road it is much less hassle. Excellent airlines, too, I'm told.

 

John

[Ron Ron Ron]

16 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

I live in East Devon, and whilst I rarely fly, for a number of friends who regularly go to Australia, the airport of choice is Birmingham. LHR comes no higher than third on their list of preferences.

 

Rail connection is at least as easy as going via LHR (one change, at BNS or BSK according to route) and by road it is much less hassle. Excellent airlines, too, I'm told.

 

 

The Western Rail link to Heathrow should improve the options from your neck of the woods, providing a quick change at Reading onto a direct train to Heathrow.

The link is running 4 years behind plan (constantly being pushed back for more rounds of consultation  and public briefings) and unless the full planning application is refused, or funding is denied for whatever reason, it should be up and running within 5 years from now.

Note: Heathrow R3 has no bearing on the requirement or business case.

 

Another option: You can currently get a £64 return flight ticket between Exeter Airport and Manchester and connect to a much wider range of long haul flights from there.

 

.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Ron Ron Ron

[Dunsignalling]

20 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

The Western Rail link to Heathrow should improve the options from your neck of the woods, providing a quick change at Reading onto a direct train to Heathrow.

The link is running 4 years behind plan (constantly being pushed back for more rounds of consultation  and public briefings) and unless the full planning application is refused, or funding is denied for whatever reason, it should be up and running within 5 years from now.

Note: Heathrow R3 has no bearing on the requirement or business case.

 

Another option: You can currently get a £64 return flight ticket between Exeter Airport and Manchester and connect to a much wider range of long haul flights from there.

 

.

The general consensus appears to be that Birmingham works just fine, neither I or any of my pals would use Heathrow (however many runways it has) if there was a practical alternative.  The place is a hell-hole to navigate once you get there. By comparison, Brum is a delight!

 

John

[Ron Ron Ron]

22 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

.....neither I or any of my pals would use Heathrow (however many runways it has) if there was a practical alternative.  The place is a hell-hole to navigate once you get there. By comparison, Brum is a delight!

 

YMMV and all that.

The relatively new T2 and T5 are a delight to use, if somewhat very busy at peak times.

A marked contrast from the labyrinth like and confusing old T3 (it's had more extensions and facelifts than Joan Collins), or the past its sell-by-date T4.

The railway and LU station serving T5 (and the next new terminal if R3 goes ahead) is located right underneath T5. It couldn't be any easier.

 

There's a lot to be said for smaller airports though.

I like using our local airport, Southampton. Easily accessible by road and rail, small and compact.

No shopping mall retail experience ()  and limited but adequate food and drink facilities compared with the big airports, but only a bare minimum of 20 to 30 minutes needed before flying out and it takes only 10 or 15 minutes to get out after landing.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Ron Ron Ron

[pete_mcfarlane]

5 hours ago, Zomboid said:

HS2 addresses Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield to London & Birmingham journey times, but I'm not sure what will happen as far as Leicester goes.

 

HS2 doesn't directly serve Nottingham and Derby, so it won't improve city centre to city centre journey times. I live in the centre of Nottingham, and by the time I've driven or got the tram to the East Midlands HS2 station, I've wiped out any savings in journey time compared to the existing MML route. 

 

It will be good for those living on the west of Nottingham (and east of Derby) who will find the new HS2 station a lot easier to get to. They're probably currently getting their London trains from East Midlands Parkway, Long Eaton or Beeston (or possibly Alfreton) rather than the city centre stations. 

 

 

[Zomboid]

I believe other works are planned to bring Derby and Nottingham city centre stations to within 10 minutes of the East Mids HS2 station. Not the same as having HS2 trains actually going into the city centre of course, but close enough to say that the station serves them I'd say.

[Pandora]

2 hours ago, Clearwater said:

 

 

I’d suggest that we’re several years too soon to work out a revenue maximising vs ridership maximising model.  The ability to maximise revenue will depend on the inelasticity of the demand.   Let’s get it built and then optimise it!

In which case when HS2 operation is to commence, and the franchise  to operate trains is tendered,  the  terms should incorporate measures to prioritise    fair and reasonable access for the many to their state funded  asset, and  the franchisee  will  run a public service and not a service for an elite

[Clearwater]

1 minute ago, Pandora said:

In which case when HS2 operation is to commence, and the franchise  to operate trains is tendered,  the  terms should incorporate measures to prioritise    fair and reasonable access for the many to their state funded  asset, and  the franchisee  will  run a public service and not a service for an elite

How the franchise is tendered, if that’s the policy at the time, is also a decision for the future DfT.  of course, your statement begs the question what is ‘fair and reasonable’ access.  If first class tickets, to those who can afford or whose businesses are prepared to pay, indirectly subside others, is that a problem? 

 

Personally, I think you’re unlikely to get value for money from a traditional franchise from the start .  Irrespective of the definition of ‘fair and reasonable’, the ability of any bidder to accurately forecast patronage is too great.  For a bidder to take that risk, they’d build in a large buffer. In the short term, I’d have thought they’d let a managed service type contract where DFT specifies both the services and the fare structure.

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, Pandora said:

In which case when HS2 operation is to commence, and the franchise  to operate trains is tendered,  the  terms should incorporate measures to prioritise    fair and reasonable access for the many to their state funded  asset, and  the franchisee  will  run a public service and not a service for an elite

 

But will it be a "state funded asset"? If money to build HS2 is borrowed on the international money markets (at low current rates) and repaid from operating profit over x years, the state is only involved as a guarantor. No public/taxpayers' money gets used at all.

[Ron Ron Ron]

1 hour ago, Pandora said:

In which case when HS2 operation is to commence, and the franchise  to operate trains is tendered......

 

1 hour ago, Clearwater said:

How the franchise is tendered, if that’s the policy at the time, is also a decision for the future DfT......

 

The franchise has already been awarded, ............but it's a bit more complicated than that.

As it stands at the present time, the TOC due to operate trains at the commencement of services, will be First and Trenitalia's "Avanti West Coast".

 

The current ICWC franchise, which commenced in December 2019, consists of two parts; an initial 6 year franchise period and then from March 2026 to March 2031, a management contract type arrangement to operated both HS2 passenger services and a recast ICWC service pattern.

The ever so slight issue here, is that the initial HS2 passenger services are almost certainly not going to be starting in 2026 !

 

 

.

[Zomboid]

6 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

What parallel journeys or competing routes?

The Birmingham to London market is probably the only one where any, or any significant alternative to HS2 will exist.

Almost all the IC services from north of Brum to London will be moving onto HS2, apart from the semi-fast residual services that will call at places like MK, Rugby and Coventry.

 

 

.

It will still be possible to make journeys on the parallel routes. For example Leeds to KX trains will still run, but they'll call at more intermediate stations along the way, and will presumably be more for people who want to go from Leeds to Peterborough and Doncaster to London.

 

Chiltern seem to be doing ok offering an alternative to the WCML to Birmingham, but their business on those trips is probably just as much people going to/from Leamington, Banbury etc as it is people doing London - Birmingham. The same will continue to apply after HS2.

[Clearwater]

12 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

It will still be possible to make journeys on the parallel routes. For example Leeds to KX trains will still run, but they'll call at more intermediate stations along the way, and will presumably be more for people who want to go from Leeds to Peterborough and Doncaster to London.

 

Chiltern seem to be doing ok offering an alternative to the WCML to Birmingham, but their business on those trips is probably just as much people going to/from Leamington, Banbury etc as it is people doing London - Birmingham. The same will continue to apply after HS2.

 

I think it depends on where you are going to and why.  Last Saturday, I took Chiltern up to Birmingham and WCML back.  We were going to the Hawthorns so I wanted the simplicity of a cross platform transfer in Birmingham.  Coming back, we’d stopped in central Birmingham for food (and to dry out, it had been rather wet) but being at New Street and wanting to head east once we’d got back to London, it made more sense to get the faster WCML back to Euston and also shave off the distance of Marylebone to Euston on our journey.  Great to have the choice.

 

Of course,  as an enthusiast, I enjoyed the journey on the former GW northern line.... It’s also a prettier route than the WCML which I find rather dull.

[Mike Storey]

17 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

 

Somewhere in the voluminous paperwork of the HS2 business case (but don't ask me where!) is a statement that fare levels are assumed to be broadly similar to the existing ones.  

 

 

Yes, That has been an assumption throughout the iterations of the BC. The PDFH (which is the primary basis on which the demand aspect of HS2 has been calculated) can usefully predict demand based on journey time, comfort, ease of use etc, but is very poor at the effect of demand by various pricing permutations (other than the obvious extremes). The more usual trajectory is to calculate demand, at fares neutral, based on what PDFH is rather good at, and then use computing models to arrive at potential income, in different scenarios, but still largely based on what happens to GDP (still a big factor in rail demand, but less so over the past 20 years). But that is a hugely inexact science.

 

That, and the unknown aspect of to whom revenue will flow (as opposed to the track access charges), prevents the BC from using fares as a variable.

 

The intention of the two part franchise was obviously, when HS2 starts running, to convert to a management contract, in which revenue would flow to HMG. But that mechanism was surely to mitigate risk in its early days, and would not be a permanent feature (unless the railways are nationalised, or there is some future plan of which we are unaware).

[Ron Ron Ron]

It's a waste of time and a pointless exercise speculating what the fares will be.

Apart from being far off in the future, as said a few times already, there's a prospect that the whole issue of rail fares will eventually be tackled between now and HS2 opening for business.

Who knows what will come out of any major shake up of the system?

 

Meanwhile, the notion that fares will be astronomically high, falls into the same bracket as the silly claims that....

HS2 will only be used by rich businessmen and elites,

that ordinary people won't be able to afford the fares,

that nobody will want to use it,

and that it'll be a White Elephant.

 

All hysterical clap trap.

 

Note a popular definition of a White Elephant:    Something that has cost a lot of money but has no useful purpose.

Only half of that will be true as far as HS2 goes, the other half is total tosh.

 

 

.

[lmsforever]

Indeed fares are a long time away as is completion of the first phase  knowing how works are carried out in the UK it will probabally overrun by quite a few years.Also judging by new rolling stock It will not be ready either that will have many teething problems and if it cant run there is no back up so even more delays ,glad I probably wont need to travel then.Why is it that we cant complete projects on or near time in the UK GWR wires ,Crossrail,even a new road in Wales all projects promised but not on time, The northern route will be subject to change due to cost will there more use of standard rail routes and its going to be very difficult constructing northern termini.A priority should be completing the cross pennines route with wires all the way no gaps no bimodes .Boy what a dismal future thank god I can watch Gold and have a laugh and no I don't look like Smiler in LOTSW !!!!!!

[Butler Henderson]

The idea quite clearly is that long distance traffic will use it allowing more capacity on the existing network for more local/regional  and freight services and its difficult to see how that could occur if the fares where to be abnormally high. Then again of course the Channel Tunnel was meant to have long distance services on the British mainland.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Butler Henderson

[Fat Controller]

24 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Indeed fares are a long time away as is completion of the first phase  knowing how works are carried out in the UK it will probabally overrun by quite a few years.Also judging by new rolling stock It will not be ready either that will have many teething problems and if it cant run there is no back up so even more delays ,glad I probably wont need to travel then.Why is it that we cant complete projects on or near time in the UK GWR wires ,Crossrail,even a new road in Wales all projects promised but not on time, The northern route will be subject to change due to cost will there more use of standard rail routes and its going to be very difficult constructing northern termini.A priority should be completing the cross pennines route with wires all the way no gaps no bimodes .Boy what a dismal future thank god I can watch Gold and have a laugh and no I don't look like Smiler in LOTSW !!!!!!

There are plenty of projects that are completed early and/or under budget; however, they aren't considered newsworthy.

[Fenman]

20 hours ago, Dava said:

 

...

The East Midlands cities are the only major ones in England without an electric route to London. Even Norwich has that.

...

That’s a bit rude. For centuries Norwich was the 2nd richest city in the country and it was a pioneer of modern financial services (Gurneys, Barclays, Norwich Union-as-was...). It’s still a pretty wealthy place. 

 

10 hours ago, Zomboid said:

...

Leicester is only at milepost 99 though, so a non-stop time of 75-80 minutes ought to be achievable if line capacity allows. Which is probably good enough, really.

King’s Lynn is at 100 miles from London and its service has been downgraded from InterCity in BR days, and from just over 90 minutes for an electrified route to, now, about 110 minutes. A 20% reduction in speed over a few short years. Apparently it will get even slower soon, with a new Cambridge South Station and additional stops in north London. 

 

7 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

...

There's a lot to be said for smaller airports though.

I like using our local airport, Southampton. Easily accessible by road and rail, small and compact.

No shopping mall retail experience ()  and limited but adequate food and drink facilities compared with the big airports, but only a bare minimum of 20 to 30 minutes needed before flying out and it takes only 10 or 15 minutes to get out after landing.

 

Me too! 
 

When the Wessex Electrics were introduced — with a 59 minute non-stop train every hour from Waterloo to Southampton Airport — BR used to advertise that it was faster flying central London-Paris via Southampton instead of Heathrow. (That route is now also much slower.)
 

Southampton is about the perfect size for an airport. 
 

Paul

[Joseph_Pestell]

2 minutes ago, Fenman said:

That’s a bit rude. For centuries Norwich was the 2nd richest city in the country and it was a pioneer of modern financial services (Gurneys, Barclays, Norwich Union-as-was...). It’s still a pretty wealthy place. 

 

King’s Lynn is at 100 miles from London and its service has been downgraded from InterCity in BR days, and from just over 90 minutes for an electrified route to, now, about 110 minutes. A 20% reduction in speed over a few short years. Apparently it will get even slower soon, with a new Cambridge South Station and additional stops in north London. 

 

Me too! 
 

When the Wessex Electrics were introduced — with a 59 minute non-stop train every hour from Waterloo to Southampton Airport — BR used to advertise that it was faster flying central London-Paris via Southampton instead of Heathrow. (That route is now also much slower.)
 

Southampton is about the perfect size for an airport. 
 

Paul

 

I agree with you about Norwich. Lovely city. It may have an electrified railway but it has the short straw when it comes to roads.

 

As to the claim that East Midlands cities are the only ones without electrified railway to London: Gloucester, Worcester, Swansea, Exeter, Plymouth come to mind

[melmerby]

15 minutes ago, Fenman said:

That’s a bit rude. For centuries Norwich was the 2nd richest city in the country and it was a pioneer of modern financial services (Gurneys, Barclays, Norwich Union-as-was...). It’s still a pretty wealthy place.

 

Paul

Barclays was founded in London. Gurney's was founded in 1770 and formed part of Barclays Bank from 1896.

Incidentally Lloyds was founded in Birmingham in 1765, Midland was founded in Birmingham in 1836.