HS2

[Northmoor]

22 minutes ago, caradoc said:

I've mentioned before the problems caused for the new 'home-worker's' family, but in addition I, as a customer of various financial institutions, am not at all happy that when phoning them now personal and private details could be overheard by, well, anyone, not to mention concerns about security of their IT systems. This is a factor that must be taken into account by such businesses when making their future working arrangements. 

 

I don't know about the banking sector but in List-X defence companies, if information above Restricted was found to have been leaked via "the new housemate" looking over an employee's shoulder at home, that company could potentially look forward to losing its List-X status (one of the major benefits of which is pre-acceptance of security procedures).  For the larger companies, this could halve their share value overnight (that's £Bns).  A few thousand people's bank details lost through lax home working security procedures and they could lose a lot of customers and a hammering to their reputation (plus GDPR breaches are fined by the number of individuals affected).

 

Commuting into London and other cities will, within a few months of the availability of an effective vaccine, return to levels imperceptibly lower than before.  A huge proportion of the working population doesn't work at a desk.  Of those that do, the one's who don't return to the office too often will quickly find that all the new projects, promotions and contracts have gone to the people who were around the office when the boss first discussed them.  This discussion, like most in an office environment, would have been an unscheduled chat and not a planned Zoom/Skype/Teams call.

 

Ever since the industrial revolution, people have been brought together to work, not spread further apart, because it is more efficient and effective.  It is amazing how many TV and newspaper correspondents are convinced that this time (the one that coincides with their own lives) it will be different.  History tells us it almost never is.  To the idea that we'll all be working at home for ever, remember the old quote:

"The good ideas aren't new and the new ideas aren't good".

 

HS2 will be built and the doubters need to focus on something they stand more chance of preventing, like an asteroid collision.

[298]

On 11/08/2020 at 09:11, melmerby said:

This has occured to me before but:

Do TBMs get re-used? 

They quite often seem to be newly made for the project. e.g. I believe some (all?) of the TBMs for the Channel Tunnel are buried under the channel.

 

One of them ended up under Las Vegas in Oceans 13....

[Edwin_m]

As someone who has worked from home for over ten years, my take on this is that it's much more productive, at least for some jobs and types of people.  I would expect the trend of working from home a few days a week, already showing up as a dent in commuter TOCs' season ticket revenues before Covid, to accelerate as more people realise the benefits to themselves and to the company - and more bosses discover that the work still gets done even when the people aren't present.  My guess is that business travel will return closer to previous levels once social distancing finishes, as the advent of reasonably useable technology and the legacy of travel cost crackdowns after the 2008 recession meant that a lot of less critical meetings were already being done by teleconference.  Visiting friends and relatives will most likely return to previous levels but the train didn't have much of that market anyway.  

 

One possible response could be a more spaced-out commuting experience in an intercity environment with decent-sized tables and probably some sort of guarantee of a seat.  It would cost somewhat more for peak travel but with per-journey pricing to replace the season.  This could be sold as first class or some sort of new product, probably managed by an app allowing regulars to pre-book a seat at a few minutes notice and to have their account deducted with a discount for more frequent use.  The commuter who doesn't have to be in the office every day could then end up paying a bit less to travel say three days a week, or much less if they avoided peak times, and would be able to work on the train.  This would probably co-exist with the current provision for those that had to attend a workplace full-time and would want to spend the minimum necessary to do so.  

 

What does this mean for HS2?  It would already offer the "intercity environment" but my belief is it should be aiming and pricing to encourage business travel and personal mobility rather than commuting.  Some existing travel will probably never return.  But there are plenty of reasons to believe that the underlying trend of increased travel will continue and indeed be accelerated by HS2 creating new opportunities such as visiting a contact in another city at an hour's notice.  If HS2 encourages economic activity to spread out then that in itself will encourage travel.  And we mustn't forget that if environmental or economic factors mean that just 5% of car miles transfer to train, the railway will have to find the capacity for 50% more passengers.  

[Ron Ron Ron]

A view of the Curzon St. site, taken  from Moor St. station....

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

The Chilterns South Portal site.....

 

 

 

 

 

Chalfont St Peter Vent Shaft:

 

 

 

 

 

 

A412 where the Colne Valley Viaduct will cross the road.....

 

 

 

.

 

 

Edited August 22, 2020 by Ron Ron Ron

[Ron Ron Ron]

Amersham - Whielden Road in July 2020...

 

 

 

The same place in August......

 

 

 

.

[Mike Storey]

On 21/08/2020 at 23:03, Edwin_m said:

As someone who has worked from home for over ten years, my take on this is that it's much more productive, at least for some jobs and types of people.  I would expect the trend of working from home a few days a week, already showing up as a dent in commuter TOCs' season ticket revenues before Covid, to accelerate as more people realise the benefits to themselves and to the company - and more bosses discover that the work still gets done even when the people aren't present.  My guess is that business travel will return closer to previous levels once social distancing finishes, as the advent of reasonably useable technology and the legacy of travel cost crackdowns after the 2008 recession meant that a lot of less critical meetings were already being done by teleconference.  Visiting friends and relatives will most likely return to previous levels but the train didn't have much of that market anyway.  

 

One possible response could be a more spaced-out commuting experience in an intercity environment with decent-sized tables and probably some sort of guarantee of a seat.  It would cost somewhat more for peak travel but with per-journey pricing to replace the season.  This could be sold as first class or some sort of new product, probably managed by an app allowing regulars to pre-book a seat at a few minutes notice and to have their account deducted with a discount for more frequent use.  The commuter who doesn't have to be in the office every day could then end up paying a bit less to travel say three days a week, or much less if they avoided peak times, and would be able to work on the train.  This would probably co-exist with the current provision for those that had to attend a workplace full-time and would want to spend the minimum necessary to do so.  

 

What does this mean for HS2?  It would already offer the "intercity environment" but my belief is it should be aiming and pricing to encourage business travel and personal mobility rather than commuting.  Some existing travel will probably never return.  But there are plenty of reasons to believe that the underlying trend of increased travel will continue and indeed be accelerated by HS2 creating new opportunities such as visiting a contact in another city at an hour's notice.  If HS2 encourages economic activity to spread out then that in itself will encourage travel.  And we mustn't forget that if environmental or economic factors mean that just 5% of car miles transfer to train, the railway will have to find the capacity for 50% more passengers.  

 

All of that pre-supposes that city centre jobs in London were not decreasing anyway, which was the primary cause of the loss of season ticket revenue, pre-Covid, for journeys into London. The impact of Brexit should not be underestimated, as there would appear to be no planned safety net for financial services after 1 January. But inner-city commuting was increasing, outside London, and I would expect that to continue once a vaccine is found.

 

But, as you say, travel demand was increasing overall anyway, and your comment about visiting friends and family is incorrect. That segment accounted for around 45% of all rail journeys, and has been climbing for 20 years. It reflects the decreased ownership of cars by younger people, due to insurance costs primarily. That cost is not likely to reduce significantly with electric vehicles, and self-driving vehicles are likely to be expensive to own, even if they prove resilient. No doubt, an Uber type of operation may challenge that in future, but it is hard to see how the numbers stack up right now.

 

The HS2 market is reasonably assured, as you say, as modelling has taken a number of societal changes into account. It is the nature of the utilisation of capacity released that is likely to prove problematic - I doubt anyone can reliably predict demand in ten years from now, let alone the 50 years over which the decision must be judged.

[Fenman]

On 21/08/2020 at 19:38, Northmoor said:

... within a few months of the availability of an effective vaccine, return to levels imperceptibly lower than before. ...

 

13 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

... But inner-city commuting was increasing, outside London, and I would expect that to continue once a vaccine is found. ...

 

I know everyone wants to believe there will swiftly be an effective vaccine, but it is by no means certain. After more than 30 years research there is still no prospect of a vaccine against HIV, for example. 

 

There are lots of possible scenarios: the virus could change in ways that would make it less fatal (it is not in the interests of any disease to kill its host); our ability to manage people who have become infected could dramatically improve (there is some evidence of this already); we could develop treatments which minimise the impact (HIV is a good example of what can be done); we might even develop an effective vaccine. Past pandemics show that a disease can sometimes blow itself out: English sweating sickness was a very serious killer in late medieval Britain, but today it doesn't seem to exist; Spanish flu, eventually, subsided, perhaps significantly as herd immunity also increased. 

 

But no-one can predict with certainty which outcome we'll get for Covid19. Which makes predicting the consequences of any change a risky business. I wouldn't want to bet my pension on it.

 

Paul

 

 

[Phil Parker]

On 21/08/2020 at 22:03, Edwin_m said:

As someone who has worked from home for over ten years, my take on this is that it's much more productive, at least for some jobs and types of people.  I would expect the trend of working from home a few days a week, already showing up as a dent in commuter TOCs' season ticket revenues before Covid, to accelerate as more people realise the benefits to themselves and to the company - and more bosses discover that the work still gets done even when the people aren't present. 

 

For most firms, persuading people to work from home has the advantage that all the costs of setting up and running an office are shifted to the employee. Ask yourself, "who provides the chair you sit in?" and "who heats the room?" and the answer is probably the employee without any commensurate increase in pay to cover the extra expense. OK, you can argue but in the current climate, that means you are likely to be unemployed from home.

 

Longer term, the issue is that there are plenty of people who can't afford to give over a room to become an office for their firm. Does this mean the WFH boom will slow? Don't know.

 

More flexible season tickets seem a good move in the short to medium term. I know plenty of parents who see WFH being an important part of their package as the savings in childcare outweigh any other costs.

 

13 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

The HS2 market is reasonably assured, as you say, as modelling has taken a number of societal changes into account. It is the nature of the utilisation of capacity released that is likely to prove problematic - I doubt anyone can reliably predict demand in ten years from now, let alone the 50 years over which the decision must be judged.

 

For me this is the crucial thing. We are talking a very long term project here and it's very difficult to model perfectly. If anyone can make those sort of predictions with 75% or above accuracy then there are plenty of governments waiting with a big pile of cash, and investors with a bigger one. HS2 wasn't drawn up in a coffee break and so should be a reasonably sensible solution to lack of capacity for years to come.

 

Final point - why do people keep focussing on passenger travel? We need capacity to allow more freight to move by rail too!

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Fenman said:

 

There are lots of possible scenarios: the virus could change in ways that would make it less fatal (it is not in the interests of any disease to kill its host);

 

Paul

 

Covid 19 is a mutation of SARS which was more deadly but less contagious making it easier to control.

There is some anecdotal evidence that the current strain is is also mutating again, becoming more contagious but less deadly.

It's possible it could mutate even more until it is no more deadly than just another type of cold, both are Coranaviruses (unlike flu which is a different type of virus with a known number of possible permutations), to enable maximum spread amongst the population.

Cold viruses are constantly mutating, hence the difficulty in vaccinating against them.

[Zomboid]

2 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

For most firms, persuading people to work from home has the advantage that all the costs of setting up and running an office are shifted to the employee. Ask yourself, "who provides the chair you sit in?" and "who heats the room?" and the answer is probably the employee without any commensurate increase in pay to cover the extra expense.

For me personally, that's well worth it to not have a 1h30+ commute (very significant with an 11 month old baby). But I'm fortunate enough to have a room to pretty much dedicate to an office (not allowed to have a train set in there though...).

[Phil Parker]

59 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Covid 19 is a mutation of SARS which was more deadly but less contagious making it easier to control.

There is some anecdotal evidence that the current strain is is also mutating again, becoming more contagious but less deadly.

It's possible it could mutate even more until it is no more deadly than just another type of cold, both are Coranaviruses (unlike flu which is a different type of virus with a known number of possible permutations), to enable maximum spread amongst the population.

Cold viruses are constantly mutating, hence the difficulty in vaccinating against them.

 

That pretty much sums it up. Can we now avoid endless discussion on Covid and keep this thread to HS2 - several other threads have unravelled because the topic has mutated to virus theories.

[Mike Storey]

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Final point - why do people keep focussing on passenger travel? We need capacity to allow more freight to move by rail too!

 

Good point, but perhaps also moot. There was plenty of extra capacity for freight for several months this year, but little sign of an increase in the rail share.

 

[Zomboid]

Demand for everything during lockdown was sufficiently different to normal that I'm not sure it'll have much useful information to offer.

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Good point, but perhaps also moot. There was plenty of extra capacity for freight for several months this year, but little sign of an increase in the rail share.

 

 

But similarly there was plenty of extra capacity on many of the roads, making road transport easier and faster as well without the long term commitment rail requires due do the need to readjust the logistics around where rail access is.

[Fenman]

6 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

For most firms, persuading people to work from home has the advantage that all the costs of setting up and running an office are shifted to the employee. Ask yourself, "who provides the chair you sit in?" and "who heats the room?" and the answer is probably the employee without any commensurate increase in pay to cover the extra expense. OK, you can argue but in the current climate, that means you are likely to be unemployed from home.

...

Find yourself a better employer? Mine offered free delivery of a proper ergonomic chair and desk to anyone who wanted one, and will look at any other expenses people want to claim on a case-by-case basis. 
 

It’s actually in the employer’s interests to do this, so they don’t end up with claims for RSI or back injuries caused by rubbish working conditions. But I recognise it’s very hard if you don’t have the physical (and tranquil) space for a home office. 
 

I guess as WFH becomes more familiar, these things will sort themselves out. Which does potentially create a new balance between population size, work patterns, and transport infrastructure. 
 

Paul

Edited August 24, 2020 by Fenman
Hit post too soon...

[Ron Ron Ron]

3 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

.....Can we now avoid endless discussion on Covid and keep this thread to HS2 .........

 

Absolutely, Phil.

Returning to the topic......

 

What's left of one of the Euston office block towers  (as of last week)........

 

 

 

Worksite project offices (possibly at the Chiltern South portal)......

 

 

 

Building the slab platform/plinth (or whatever it's called), on which the tunnel boring machines will be reassembled and launched from........

 

 

 

 

.

Edited August 24, 2020 by Ron Ron Ron

[lmsforever]

3 hours ago, Zomboid said:

For me personally, that's well worth it to not have a 1h30+ commute (very significant with an 11 month old baby). But I'm fortunate enough to have a room to pretty much dedicate to an office (not allowed to have a train set in there though...).

Why not build a layout in closed box then SWMOB  wont see it plenty of plans about ,go for it!

[Edwin_m]

3 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Good point, but perhaps also moot. There was plenty of extra capacity for freight for several months this year, but little sign of an increase in the rail share.

 

 

3 hours ago, Zomboid said:

Demand for everything during lockdown was sufficiently different to normal that I'm not sure it'll have much useful information to offer.

 

2 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

But similarly there was plenty of extra capacity on many of the roads, making road transport easier and faster as well without the long term commitment rail requires due do the need to readjust the logistics around where rail access is.

A sudden increase in freight by rail would have needed extra locos and wagons, which probably aren't available and nobody would want to buy new ones for such a short-term demand.  More drivers would be needed too, or at least passenger ones re-deploying without actually training anyone as two in a cab breaks social distancing.  There would also be all the planning and bidding processes to negotiate, all made more difficult by various people being off work social isolating.  

57 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

.

Anyone else notice a passing resemblance to a Doric arch?  

[caradoc]

7 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

Ask yourself, "who provides the chair you sit in?" and "who heats the room?" and the answer is probably the employee without any commensurate increase in pay to cover the extra expense.

 

Or in some cases, the employee's father, ie me ! Just about acceptable on a temporary short term (albeit dragging on now) basis but in no way acceptable permanently. There will come a point where my son will either have to return to the office or give up his job. Also, as I mentioned before, I am not prepared as a customer to have my personal and financial details being discussed, verbally and electronically, in a totally insecure environment. Get back to the office and resuscitate both city centres and public transport !

 

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

......Anyone else notice a passing resemblance to a Doric arch?  

 

 

Looks like something straight out of Bedrock.

 

 

.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

 

 

 

Anyone else notice a passing resemblance to a Doric arch?  

I wonder whether that will end up dumped in the river?

 

As an aside. What's happening with the rescue of the arch from the river bed?

There was a plan to rebuild it.

[Mike Storey]

1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

 

 

A sudden increase in freight by rail would have needed extra locos and wagons, which probably aren't available and nobody would want to buy new ones for such a short-term demand.  More drivers would be needed too, or at least passenger ones re-deploying without actually training anyone as two in a cab breaks social distancing.  There would also be all the planning and bidding processes to negotiate, all made more difficult by various people being off work social isolating.  

 

 

Wrong on almost all counts. For starters, you assume additional trains would be needed, when many current multi-modals are under-loaded, so spare capacity is already extant.

 

Plenty of spare freight drivers available. Plenty of spare containers available. Both due to general downturn in demand. Also a significant number of spare freight paths available, as well as "Q" paths (Control Specials), across key routes, but whether these would have proven adequate for any additional demand remains unknown. Only the need to route learn (for changes in demand) may be a valid problem during Covid.

 

The need to transfer freight from road to rail will have to be driven by govt policy, probably in taxation mostly but also in planning, but future capacity could become an issue without HS2. 

[corneliuslundie]

The Euston towers. I thought they were modern!

Shows that I am getting old.

But no great loss from what I remember of my only visit.

Back on HS2 itself, I hope any new buildings will not repeat the mistakes of the past - flat roofs which leak, large areas of glazing which lead to overheating - likely to get worse, and buildings requiring air conditioning year round instead of having passive ventilation systems. What has prompted this thought is two new station buildings shown on the Crossrail thread which look like throwbacks, having all those characteristics.

Jonathan

[Edwin_m]

11 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Wrong on almost all counts. For starters, you assume additional trains would be needed, when many current multi-modals are under-loaded, so spare capacity is already extant.

 

Plenty of spare freight drivers available. Plenty of spare containers available. Both due to general downturn in demand. Also a significant number of spare freight paths available, as well as "Q" paths (Control Specials), across key routes, but whether these would have proven adequate for any additional demand remains unknown. Only the need to route learn (for changes in demand) may be a valid problem during Covid.

 

The need to transfer freight from road to rail will have to be driven by govt policy, probably in taxation mostly but also in planning, but future capacity could become an issue without HS2. 

I wasn't really referring to the sort of bump that would be possible within marginal capacity, more the sort of serious long-term increase that HS2 might facilitate.  Looking at the link below, intermodal traffic has been reasonably constant in recent years.  If there's been a dip since those figures then it will be down to covid reducing either demand or the ability to handle it, and by definition either means there's no scope to carry extra traffic.   If you're referring to the longer-term loss of coal traffic, yes that means locos may be available, and drivers may be available if they haven't been made redundant and lost their route knowledge.  But the network capacity released will mostly be from bulk ports to power stations in the northern half of the country, not on the main lines and container port routes where the intermodal demand is. 

 

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/usage/freight-rail-usage-and-performance/

Edited August 25, 2020 by Edwin_m