Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
53 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

Also remember that a large amount of the land currently disturbed at the portal is the construction compound and is temporary.

 

from here they have to Store and manage logistics for the TBMs, staff offices & welfare, Spoil handing & onward disposal And possibly also the logistics for the Colne viaduct.

 

as with the huge construction compounds and marshalling yards on HS1, these will be returned to nature upon completion.

And if left to nature would very soon be full of silver birch and rose bay willow herb.

 

Jamie

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

As ever, people see a Heathrow branch as just being about the airport. But it would also serve huge tracts of west and south-west London and the Thames Valley - population catchments that can not all easily reach OOC or Euston. Diverting more trains to Heathrow would relieve pressure on the rather limited platform capacity at Euston.

 

The Thames Valley will have easy- ish access to HS2 via Crossrail and Old Oak common while places further west will proabaly still find it better to use current Cross Country services to Birmingham.

 

As Heathrow lacks any form of rail link to South West London, anyone from there using Heathrow as a railhead is going to end up driving, piling yet more traffic (and pollution) on the M25 and the road network, something that needs to be avoided if at all possible.

 

Granted its not going to be the best interchange, but with new Overground stations to be built in the Old Oak area, if people from south West London want to avoid Euston then there will be the option of using the WLL from Clapham or NLL from Richmond to get to Old Oak.

 

Ultimately the only way the Heathrow spur makes sense is if it isn't a spur! If you have a look at the TGV line that serves Paris CDG airport, that line is a complete avoiding line and used by through trains from one region to another by-passing Paris completely. The only way a HS line past Heathrow makes any sense is if it forms part of a link to HS1(and other classic lines so as to relieve the WLL & NLL) - but with the UK leaving the EU and the current passport / security requirements, the demand for such a link simply does not exist!

 

(People often forget that unlike Paris, London is very close to the sea on its eastern side plus the bulk of the UK population, industry, etc live to the north and West of London. Paris is a far more central location within France and thus the demand for north south / east west transport across Paris is consummately grater).

 

 

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

34 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

Ultimately the only way the Heathrow spur makes sense is if it isn't a spur! If you have a look at the TGV line that serves Paris CDG airport, that line is a complete avoiding line and used by through trains from one region to another by-passing Paris completely. The only way a HS line past Heathrow makes any sense is if it forms part of a link to HS1(and other classic lines so as to relieve the WLL & NLL) - but with the UK leaving the EU and the current passport / security requirements, the demand for such a link simply does not exist!

 

 

 

If a spur from HS2 underneath Heathow and round to say Ashford was built, it might as well go under Gatwick as well, creating the often-mooted Heathrow-Gatwick rail link.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

As ever, people see a Heathrow branch as just being about the airport. But it would also serve huge tracts of west and south-west London and the Thames Valley - population catchments that can not all easily reach OOC or Euston.

 

Surely large parts of the Thames Valley (and beyond) will be able to access HS2 via one simple change at OOC ? That is certainly what I will be doing, should I still require and be able to travel between Oxford and Glasgow when HS2 opens ! And given that, currently, the only rail links to Heathrow Airport are the Piccadilly Line, and Heathrow Express/Connect (which of course will serve OOC anyway), I'm not convinced that HS2 to Heathrow would serve much more than airline passengers. Which might of course be worthwhile in itself, depending how air travel recovers from the present and adapts in the future. 

 

Edited by caradoc
Spelling mistake
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 minute ago, caradoc said:

 

Surely large parts of the Thames Valley (and beyond) will be able to access HS2 via one simple change at OOC ? That is certainly what I will be doing, should I still require and be able to travel between Oxford and Glasgow when HS2 opens ! And given that, currently, the only rail links to Heathrow Airport are the Piccadilly Line, and Heathrow Express/Connect (which of course will serve OOC anyway), I'm not convinced that HS2 to Heathrow would serve much more than airline passengers. Which might of course be worthwhile in itself, depending how air travel recovers from the present and adapts in the future. 

 

 

It has been a long term ambition, with several plans produced, to improve rail access to Heathrow from South West London, Surrey and Hampshire. A connection to HS2 "Heathrow" would improve the viability of that.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

It has been a long term ambition, with several plans produced, to improve rail access to Heathrow from South West London, Surrey and Hampshire. A connection to HS2 "Heathrow" would improve the viability of that.

 

Fair point, but AFAIK the prospect of a link from the Waterloo/Reading route to Heathrow is as far away today as ever; Are there not major objections to an increase in rail traffic over several level crossings ? There seems a bigger chance of a westward link from the GWML to Heathrow, which would not of course involve HS2. 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

Fair point, but AFAIK the prospect of a link from the Waterloo/Reading route to Heathrow is as far away today as ever; Are there not major objections to an increase in rail traffic over several level crossings ? There seems a bigger chance of a westward link from the GWML to Heathrow, which would not of course involve HS2. 

 

Yes IIRC most of the route already exists from Webridge to Staines and there is some sort of provision for it under Terminal 5. The inhabitants of Egham, in particular scupperred it.

 

Jamie

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

5 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

As ever, people see a Heathrow branch as just being about the airport. But it would also serve huge tracts of west and south-west London and the Thames Valley - population catchments that can not all easily reach OOC or Euston. Diverting more trains to Heathrow would relieve pressure on the rather limited platform capacity at Euston.

...but only if HS2 continued southwards beyond Heathrow, or some other service provided the southern rail links into Heathrow that are sadly lacking at present.  But the latter option could (and was indeed proposed to, but is in abeyance at present) operate as an extension of some of the paths from Paddington, so would make the same connections at Old Oak instead.  

 

Even if the Heathrow western link was built, the access from the Thames Valley via GWML to Old Oak would be better than to Heathrow.  

Edited by Edwin_m
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

...

Granted its not going to be the best interchange, but with new Overground stations to be built in the Old Oak area, if people from south West London want to avoid Euston then there will be the option of using the WLL from Clapham or NLL from Richmond to get to Old Oak.

...

 

I largely agree with your comments about the LHR spur (which made no sense when Mawhinney reported against it, and makes no sense today), but your assessment of the interchange with the WLL is too kind. It is not that it will not be the best interchange -- it is that it will be an utterly dreadful interchange, involving long walks (was it 300m?) between the WLL LO platforms and the other platforms that will serve LHR. Intended mainly for air passengers many of whom will presumably be travelling with luggage...

 

The last scheme I saw involved a high-level footbridge snaking across the area. It was only an "interchange" in the same sense that, say, King's Cross and St Pancras are currently a single interchange. Ie, they are not.

 

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 minutes ago, Fenman said:

it is that it will be an utterly dreadful interchange, involving long walks (was it 300m?) between the WLL LO platforms and the other platforms that will serve LHR. Intended mainly for air passengers many of whom will presumably be travelling with luggage...

 

Sounds much like walking to your gate at Heathrow or Gatwick then, except presumably at OOC, you won't be routed through a duty free shop first.

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

14 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Sounds much like walking to your gate at Heathrow or Gatwick then, except presumably at OOC, you won't be routed through a duty free shop first.

 

Except you'll be doing it on a high-level walkway through a not very salubrious part of London, exposed to the elements -- driving rain, snow? Tough.

 

It was decided the option where the platforms would all be in the same station was either too expensive or would lead to the loss of a bit of Wormwood Scrubs (which is anyway not a brilliant green open space though, admittedly, this part of London needs all the green it can get).

 

Paul 

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

2 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

...but only if HS2 continued southwards beyond Heathrow, or some other service provided the southern rail links into Heathrow that are sadly lacking at present.  But the latter option could (and was indeed proposed to, but is in abeyance at present) operate as an extension of some of the paths from Paddington, so would make the same connections at Old Oak instead.  

 

Even if the Heathrow western link was built, the access from the Thames Valley via GWML to Old Oak would be better than to Heathrow.  

 

However the Thames Valley isn't just the GWR corrridor. Remember the Thames runs south of Heathrow through or close to places like Staines, Chertsey, Walton, Surbiton, Hampton, Kingston, Twickenham.

 

Then there are the various tributaries such as the Wey, heading to places like Guildford and beyond.

 

None of these have an easy link to OOC, unless the Overground was to be extended beyond Richmond.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

If a spur from HS2 underneath Heathrow and round to say Ashford was built, it might as well go under Gatwick as well, creating the often-mooted Heathrow-Gatwick rail link.

 

Indeed - but that would be a project in its own right and even then the numbers transferring between airports are way too small to justify the cost.

 

The reason the TGV line via Paris CDG was cost effective was NOT simply because it served the main Paris airport - it was because it allowed high speed trains from Lille, Belgium, the Netherlands to access destinations in the South of France.

 

Kent (or Sussex) simply doesn't have large cities capable of demanding frequent through services to Manchester etc , while the prospect of international through trains has been killed off by the UK leaving the EU / not entertaining joining the Schengen free movement area plus Channel Tunnel security rules.

 

HS2 has been under considerable pressure to cut costs - and as such they are in no position to 'waste' money in building an uneconomic spur for someone else to use at a later date. This is why all such provision for such a spur has been expressly delated from the plans to keep HM Treasury happy.

 

 

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

  • RMweb Premium
58 minutes ago, RJS1977 said:

 

However the Thames Valley isn't just the GWR corrridor. Remember the Thames runs south of Heathrow through or close to places like Staines, Chertsey, Walton, Surbiton, Hampton, Kingston, Twickenham.

 

Then there are the various tributaries such as the Wey, heading to places like Guildford and beyond.

 

None of these have an easy link to OOC, unless the Overground was to be extended beyond Richmond.

 

But Guildford, Woking, etc have lousy access to Heathrow anyway!

 

As has been explained before there will be no rail access to Heathrow from the south until enough level crossings are removed to keep local residents and MPs happy.

 

In that context the residents of Guildford etc would have to drive to Heathrow and clog up the M25 even more to make use of a Heathrow HS2 railhead.

 

IF Heathrow had a link to the SWR network, then yes interchanging to HS2 there might well be attractive - but as we have been waiting over half a century for said rail link to appear and there is no commitment to provide one in future that argument is null and void!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Fenman said:

 

I largely agree with your comments about the LHR spur (which made no sense when Mawhinney reported against it, and makes no sense today), but your assessment of the interchange with the WLL is too kind. It is not that it will not be the best interchange -- it is that it will be an utterly dreadful interchange, involving long walks (was it 300m?) between the WLL LO platforms and the other platforms that will serve LHR. Intended mainly for air passengers many of whom will presumably be travelling with luggage...

 

The last scheme I saw involved a high-level footbridge snaking across the area. It was only an "interchange" in the same sense that, say, King's Cross and St Pancras are currently a single interchange. Ie, they are not.

 

Paul

 

The problem is that any new stations for the WLL and NLL need to be funded by TfL - and they were broke even before Covid hit!

 

The ONLY thing HS2 are committed to fund is the GWML station - and with campaigners against HS2 being given plenty of airtime by the media over the past few years, the Government has been very clear to those in charge that HS2 MUST avoid 'mission creep' and start funding other things. Hence the initial idea for HS2 to fund a mass rebuild of Euston got shelved, HS2 will now effectively only do the minimum to accommodate the trains and have passed over responsibility for the station overall to Network Rail.

 

TfL themselves were fairly open during the consultations over station sites that the ones eventually chose were not ideal - but effectively they were the only ones TfL could guarantee to fund and have ready for the HS2 opening.  Anything involving re-routing the railways to achieve better interchange would need strong financial backing from the Westminster Government - and given the Westminster Government has been far more interested in taking money away from TfL than dolling it out , I think we can all guess what the outcome would have been for such a request.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

HS2 has been under considerable pressure to cut costs - and as such they are in no position to 'waste' money in building an uneconomic spur for someone else to use at a later date. 

 

 

 

And I wasn't advocating that they should - I was only saying that in the unlikely hypothetical situation that such a southern link to HS1 were  to be built, it would make sense to connect it to Gatwick as well, in which case it would serve the dual purpose of acting as a link between the two airports. 

 

And with regards to the definition of "Thames Valley", I was again just pointing out that "Can't they all get the GWML to OOC" wouldn't be possible for a significant number of people.

 

In neither case was I advocating either for or against building a Heathrow link.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RJS1977 said:

 

However the Thames Valley isn't just the GWR corrridor. Remember the Thames runs south of Heathrow through or close to places like Staines, Chertsey, Walton, Surbiton, Hampton, Kingston, Twickenham.

 

Then there are the various tributaries such as the Wey, heading to places like Guildford and beyond.

 

None of these have an easy link to OOC, unless the Overground was to be extended beyond Richmond.

The solution to this one is the Heathrow Southern Link … which I mentioned in the very post of mine that you quoted!  

Quote

...or some other service provided the southern rail links into Heathrow that are sadly lacking at present.  But the latter option could … operate as an extension of some of the paths from Paddington, so would make the same connections at Old Oak instead.   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Fenman said:

 

Except you'll be doing it on a high-level walkway through a not very salubrious part of London, exposed to the elements -- driving rain, snow? Tough.

 

It was decided the option where the platforms would all be in the same station was either too expensive or would lead to the loss of a bit of Wormwood Scrubs (which is anyway not a brilliant green open space though, admittedly, this part of London needs all the green it can get).

 

Paul 

 

It should be noted however that the Mayor / GLA have a long term plan to regenerate the whole area. Granted that means finding somewhere else to put the Crossrail depot (or effectively putting it underground beneath a development as per the Central Lines White City depot now subsumed beneath Westfield Shepherds Bush), but IF it comes off then the walk between stations will be similar to transiting between Stratford international and Stratford Regional (mostly under cover via the Westfield shopping centre which has a 24 / 7 walkway through it even when the shops are shut)

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

  • RMweb Premium
5 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

The solution to this one is the Heathrow Southern Link … which I mentioned in the very post of mine that you quoted!  

 

 

Not going to happen unless you get rid of / bypass the level crossings on the SWR network (Egham in particular)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
27 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

The problem is that any new stations for the WLL and NLL need to be funded by TfL - and they were broke even before Covid hit!

Can I just put that one to bed right now....?  The PM lied to the Commons when he said that this week; he and the Mayor are as bad as each other.

 

TfL was NOT broke before the pandemic, it survived for months by spending its significant reserves.  A Broke company has run out of cash and TfL was in no way close to that in March, despite the Mayor persisting with offering free travel to every "worthy" group he could thing of.  

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Can I just put that one to bed right now....?  The PM lied to the Commons when he said that this week; he and the Mayor are as bad as each other.

 

TfL was NOT broke before the pandemic, it survived for months by spending its significant reserves.  A Broke company has run out of cash and TfL was in no way close to that in March, despite the Mayor persisting with offering free travel to every "worthy" group he could thing of.  

We now have a Mayor who takes note of air quality standards and because of this has been forced into such measures to get people out of their cars and onto public transport. We now have a Prime Minister who never took any notice of air quality standards and now wants to charge me £15 to visit my daughter by car and god knows how much to go by train or bus. As bad as each other? That is not how I see it.

Bernard

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

But Guildford, Woking, etc have lousy access to Heathrow anyway!

 

Woking has very good access to Heathrow... just not by train. There's a National Express bus that leaves from the station hourly. If I'm going to Heathrow, it's how I get there. Train to Woking (I live on the Alton line) and then bus to the airport.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Not going to happen unless you get rid of / bypass the level crossings on the SWR network (Egham in particular)

The idea was a new line from Heathrow to somewhere around Virginia Water, which would bypass the level crossings.  

 

Far from cheap or easy, and most unlikely in the current situation I agree, but looks relatively sensible compared with the alternative of a high speed line, which is where we came in on this discussion.  

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
36 minutes ago, bimble said:

 

Woking has very good access to Heathrow... just not by train. There's a National Express bus that leaves from the station hourly. If I'm going to Heathrow, it's how I get there. Train to Woking (I live on the Alton line) and then bus to the airport.

My wife used that. Coach got stuck on the M25 and she missed her flight.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

The idea was a new line from Heathrow to somewhere around Virginia Water, which would bypass the level crossings.  

 

Far from cheap or easy, and most unlikely in the current situation I agree, but looks relatively sensible compared with the alternative of a high speed line, which is where we came in on this discussion.  

 

Yes I have seen that suggestion - but it remains only a suggestion at this stage and is going to be incredibly expensive to build compared with a surface option that ties into the current Windsor line. Given the way Covid has ravaged the airline industry I think its clear that unlike previous schemes* Heathrow are going to be in no position to fund anything for a decade or so at least and I don't see HM Treasury being willing to step into the breach.

 

*Around a decade ago Heathrow were all set to go and apply for a TWA to allow them to build a southwards link from T5 to the Windsor line (including reinstating the north to west curve plus a new Staines north station only to be told that the then Secretary of State for Transport would personally veto / reject the scheme due to the increased downtime at level crossings within his Runnymede constituency.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...