Jump to content
 

HS2 under review


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Thanks for posting.

That explains why it looked a bit bare as I went past yesterday afternoon.

Any one any idea as to what is happening to the crane?

Bernard

Watching the video they seemed to be cutting most of it up on the spot.   Certainly the main frame had the four legs cut off in several sections.

 

Jamie

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

Old Oak is quite a size unlike anything ever seen in the UK we were told that just one stop after Euston was detrimental to the running of HS so why is Old Oak being built .Please explain sensibly please I am interested.

Basically because of the extra range of connections it provides, particularly Crossrail and a link to Heathrow.  Euston is not an easy station to get to from west London or Heathrow.

 

To what extent the interchange will attach traffic from further afield on the GWML has been subject to considerable debate on here as you'll know.

  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

All HS2 trains are planned to stop at Old Oak and two platforms are provided in each direction to allow this (train arrives in one platform as the previous one leaves the other platform).  A station in a less populated area without onward transport links would only justify stopping a few trains.  This then uses up more capacity because each train that stops needs a second timetable "slot" a few minutes later for it to drop back into when it re-starts.  So for every stop at such a station one less train can run. 

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

In that case how come trains stop at stations regularily every day even on high speed lines ie wcml ,ecml    and do not cause trains cancelled from timetable a spurious idea from HS2.  Tonight on local news piece about Calvert, builders moving in to strip the countryside even though no actual plans made,this from Bucks County Council  .Just what do these people think they are doing to us  plans not made but still destruction takes place .Don't talk down to me if you have any sensible ideas reply if not don't .

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

In that case how come trains stop at stations regularily every day even on high speed lines ie wcml ,ecml    and do not cause trains cancelled from timetable a spurious idea from HS2.

 

Because the timetable is written with gaps in it to fit, so if a train is due to stop at a station where the following train does not the following train will be timetabled later than it would have needed to be without the stop, so reducing capacity. As there will then only be two trains in a period of time where perhaps three trains with the same stopping pattern could have run.

 

No doubt a great deal of thought goes into the pattern of stops so that the trains maintain separation, so that the 'wasted' path is used as much as possible. Also the fact that freight does a constant 75MPH while the passenger units do 100MPH with stops helps keep them at a similar average speed. So a passenger train may be just about catch a freight at the point where it slows for a station stop, with the freight train then making enough distance during the stop so that the same thing can happen before the passenger trains next stop.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 27/02/2019 at 14:26, lmsforever said:

Old Oak is quite a size unlike anything ever seen in the UK we were told that just one stop after Euston was detrimental to the running of HS so why is Old Oak being built .Please explain sensibly please I am interested.

 

The reasons have already been explained MANY, MANY TIMES up thread. However to save you from having to do the legwork they can be summarised as follows:-

 

(1) Redundancy :- If anything ever shut Euston then trains would have to backtrack all the way to Birmingham! HS1 has Stratford or Ebsfleet to use in this scenario while on the classic network the likes of Watford Junction, East Croydon, Wimbledon, etc can perform the same function

 

(2) Easing the load at Euston:- Connecting with Crossrail at Old Oak hopefully means a substantial number of folk will alight there and thus ease the pressure on the Underground at Euston.

 

(3) providing connections into Heathrow:- Makes it easier to try and capture some of the airline market as there is no need to trek between Paddington and Euston

 

(4) Provides easy access to HS2 for the population of west London without the need for them all having to go via the central area. This does not only include places served by the GWML / Crossrail stopping trains - while it is accepted interchange is not as convenient as it could be the inclusion of stations on the WLL and NLL close by the HS2 / GWML one means that travellers from other places don't have to go via central London too. For example if you lived in Croydon and wished to take HS2, then changing at Clapham Junction for a WLL train to Old Oak may well be preferable than heading across central London to Euston. The other thing to note is the vast amounts of folk who change from Southern  / SWR to get to the employment hubs in the vicinity of Shepherds Bush - a similar situation could occur with HS2 via the Old Oak station as folk seek to avoid venturing into central London only to come back out again

 

(5) Facilitates a Stratford style mass redevelopment of the ex railway lands and other run down areas nearby into a big employment / residential /shopping hub. While its accepted that this is somewhat dependent on moving the Crossrail and Hitachi depots somewhere else, the Mayor and GLA have big plans for a total transformation of the area along the lines of Stratford over the next decade with HS2 obviously being a big marketing advantage - and as with Stratford International, if provision is not made in advance it is very difficult / expensive to add it later on.

 

(6) Being so close to Euston means that stopping at Old Oak doesn't add much by way of a time penalty in end to end journey times.

Edited by phil-b259
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

In that case how come trains stop at stations regularily every day even on high speed lines ie wcml ,ecml    and do not cause trains cancelled from timetable a spurious idea from HS2.  Tonight on local news piece about Calvert, builders moving in to strip the countryside even though no actual plans made,this from Bucks County Council  .Just what do these people think they are doing to us  plans not made but still destruction takes place .Don't talk down to me if you have any sensible ideas reply if not don't .

No, not quite, that false allegation was made by various old age pompous landed gents who think they know more than they do.

 

the HS2 contracts are design & build. There are designs in place, they would not get planning permission without them. Any allegation those landed gents made that it has no permission - utter poppycock. 

 

Full detailed construction drawings are a work in progress and not needed until full construction starts next year. Current works are preparatory works and were let as an earlier contract by HS2 to prepare & secure the land, clear obstructions, move utilities and complete archeology digs etc BEFORE the main works start thus removing risk and cost.

 

sadly the residents of Calvert have shown themselves up as massively uninformed.

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

6 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

All HS2 trains are planned to stop at Old Oak and two platforms are provided in each direction to allow this (train arrives in one platform as the previous one leaves the other platform).  ........

 

Not quite Edwin.

There will be 3 platforms provided in each direction.

From what I can glean, it needs 3 platforms for an 18 tph all stopping service, otherwise it doesn't work.

It also provides the required capacity for terminating and reversing trains, when Euston, or the tunnels to the east of OOC are unavailable.

 

 

.

 

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

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

Why then have no plans been shown to the public  then and only then will people not be worried about what is going on ,thanks Phil B for saving my legwork !

Here's a whole page  of things going on around Calvert.

https://hs2inbucksandoxfordshire.commonplace.is/schemes/proposals/calvert-steeple-claydon-charndon-edgcott-grendon-underwood-and-twyford/details

Here are the plans for this area from the Hybrid Bill.  I'm not up on Parliamentary procedures but as I understand it they will be developing more detailed designs within these limits but if they go outside what is here they will need new permissions. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-plan-and-profile-maps-post-house-of-commons-select-committee-2016-country-south

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The reasons have already been explained MANY, MANY TIMES up thread. However to save you from having to do the legwork they can be summarised as follows:-

 

(1) Redundancy :- If anything ever shut Euston then trains would have to backtrack all the way to Birmingham! HS2 has Stratford or Ebsfleet to use in this scenario while on the classic network the likes of Watford Junction, East Croydon, Wimbledon, etc can perform the same function

 

(2) Easing the load at Euston:- Connecting with Crossrail at Old Oak hopefully means a substantial number of folk will alight there and thus ease the pressure on the Underground at Euston.

 

(3) providing connections into Heathrow:- Makes it easier to try and capture some of the airline market as there is no need to trek between Paddington and Euston

 

(4) Provides easy access to HS2 for the population of west London without the need for them all having to go via the central area. This does not only include places served by the GWML / Crossrail stopping trains - while it is accepted interchange is not as convenient as it could be the inclusion of stations on the WLL and NLL close by the HS2 / GWML one means that travellers from other places don't have to go via central London too. For example if you lived in Croydon and wished to take HS2, then changing at Clapham Junction for a WLL train to Old Oak may well be preferable than heading across central London to Euston. The other thing to note is the vast amounts of folk who change from Southern  / SWR to get to the employment hubs in the vicinity of Shepherds Bush - a similar situation could occur with HS2 via the Old Oak station as folk seek to avoid venturing into central London only to come back out again

 

(5) Facilitates a Stratford style mass redevelopment of the ex railway lands and other run down areas nearby into a big employment / residential /shopping hub. While its accepted that this is somewhat dependent on moving the Crossrail and Hitachi depots somewhere else, the Mayor and GLA have big plans for a total transformation of the area along the lines of Stratford over the next decade with HS2 obviously being a big marketing advantage - and as with Stratford International, if provision is not made in advance it is very difficult / expensive to add it later on.

 

(6) Being so close to Euston means that stopping at Old Oak doesn't add much by way of a time penalty in end to end journey times.

 

All of that is completely right, except that it misses one of the major reasons.

 

Many/most of the business users of HS2 (if not heading for Heathrow) will be going to London to get deals done (for which no amount of video-conferencing has ever been sufficient) - for which they need lawyers, bankers, insurers, software developers, go-betweens/agents and investors/buyers. These are dominantly located either in the City of London or at Canary Wharf. The much easier access to Crossrail, to get to either of those, at Old Oak (compared to a convoluted journey from Euston), will be an essential factor to gain that business from air or road, or indeed to make those journeys to be made at all, when they really should be.  If such journeys can be made in a few hours, instead of taking up most of a day, or overnight, then they become less of an issue. 

 

 

 

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

An important point about Crossrail, there. Crossrail was always intended to change the pattern of travelling across London from East to West, and vice versa. It very much affects the attractiveness of HS2 for business users, along with addressing the chronic problem of Heathrow - ie, getting there and away from the place. 

 

This isn't to say that I believe the principal purpose of HS2 is business users, I can’t envisage a sufficient traffic of that sort at all to justify the cost. HS2 has always been firmly rooted in the EU plan for high-speed mass transit between capitals. 

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

5 hours ago, rockershovel said:

An important point about Crossrail, there. Crossrail was always intended to change the pattern of travelling across London from East to West, and vice versa. It very much affects the attractiveness of HS2 for business users, along with addressing the chronic problem of Heathrow - ie, getting there and away from the place. 

 

This isn't to say that I believe the principal purpose of HS2 is business users, I can’t envisage a sufficient traffic of that sort at all to justify the cost. HS2 has always been firmly rooted in the EU plan for high-speed mass transit between capitals. 

 

It is a principal purpose, one which attracts high premium fares in the main, but it is not of course the only purpose. Leisure and family/friends journeys dominate rail travel for most hours, with long distance commuting at peak hours. Old Oak will allow much easier, wider access to/from large swaithes of areas East and South East of London, via Crossrail, as well as the catchments Phil has already described.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Not quite Edwin.

There will be 3 platforms provided in each direction.

From what I can glean, it needs 3 platforms for an 18 tph all stopping service, otherwise it doesn't work.

It also provides the required capacity for terminating and reversing trains, when Euston, or the tunnels to the east of OOC are unavailable.

 

 

.

 

That makes far more sense of course.  18tph evenly spread comes down to a headway of slightly over 3 minutes and Old Oak dwell time is inevitably going to have to be at least 1 minute (and probably more if the passenger numbers are correctly estimated).  I don't know the line speeds or braking and acceleration rates but it's reasonable to assume that they will cost at least 1 minute compared with a non-stopping train.  

 

So in theoretical reality a stop at Old Oak would effectively consume the best part of an average headway and in practice it probably would consume all of it and potentially more if passengers take their time joining and alighting.   What then happens - assuming for the moment a platform on the through running line is that further deceleration of successive trains approaching the station stop will occur as the headway is eroded.  If the platform is on a loop that effect is mitigated to some extent but it then depends on the length of the loop because the train still has to decelerate and accelerate and doing that usually consumes part of a path although you can get round it by using a skip stop - but you still neutralise a path.  

 

A simple example of this is how Eurostar stops at Ashford can be worked.  In the past there was requirement to flight Eurostars in pairs on the classic route to the Chunnel and also a requirement to path them in pairs through the tunnel - in both cases in order to achieve optimum line capacity use where train speeds varied considerably.  So the simple method of inserting an Ashford stop worked like this (using a 3 minute headway in all cases).  The first train from London will call at Ashford and run in path A, the second train will leave 3 minutes later and run non-stop in path B - we have used two flighted paths.  At Ashford the non-stop train will pass the other one - remaining in Path B, the stopping train emerges and the occupies Path C,  3 minutes behind Path B and running as a flight of two into the Tunnel.   Effectively what this does - which doesn't really matter on a mixed traffic (in terms of  train speeds) railway is that Path A is not used beyond Ashford and Path C is only used beyond Ashford.

 

It will of course have a different effect on a railway where all trains will - at least in theory - run at similar speeds (Which, incidentally, is not what happens on some SNCF LGVs because trains, even of similar performance characteristics, are timed at different speeds for various reasons - normally for reliability but also pathing.)

 

Adding a second platform - as we now see at Reading - allows a 3 minute headway to be maintained provided everything works as it should, that doesn't always happen but fortuitously in the Down direction Reading also happens to have a third platform albeit with lower entry and exit speeds.   That works well at GWML line speeds in the Reading area.  But if you have higher line speeds the time cost of stopping a train also increases so you either have to add a platform to avoid any added time in the approach or you simply add time into successive trains during their approach, and that usually snowballs into even more time lost.

 

The balance is thus a matter of acceleration and deceleration time cost, plus the dwell time cost against non=stop times  and it is a simple matter to reproduce graphically (so simple it can even be done manually if you have the right data to use on your graph).  Thus it is easy to calculate and prove how many platforms you need to enable maximum utilisation to be achieved at a specified headway and line speed depending also on how many trains out of the total will be calling at the station.  There might even be a UIC fiche explaining all the calculations as there is definitely one for line capacity calculation. 

  • Informative/Useful 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

On BBC TV Midlands Today they've just said that two-thirds of the land required for HS2 is under Schedule 16 possession: that is, HS2 has sole access to the land even though they haven't paid for it! And the landowners are legally trespassing by walking on the land that they still own. The rationale being that HS2 are avoiding paying for the land to keep their costs down, whilst still being able to progress the project. This doesn't seem like something that should be going on in a civilised country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, locoholic said:

On BBC TV Midlands Today they've just said that two-thirds of the land required for HS2 is under Schedule 16 possession: that is, HS2 has sole access to the land even though they haven't paid for it! And the landowners are legally trespassing by walking on the land that they still own. The rationale being that HS2 are avoiding paying for the land to keep their costs down, whilst still being able to progress the project. This doesn't seem like something that should be going on in a civilised country.

 

I think they, or you, are confusing temporary site access and compound requirements, with the actual line of route once completed. HS Rail Act (Phase 1) Section 16 just covers temporary access, requires advance notification, demands that compensation is paid by HS2 to landowners and occupiers, and allows for disputes to be referred to third parties. It is true that owners/occupiers lose rights of access etc unless agreed in advance with HS2. All this is much the same as was done for HS1 (although the law has changed since then). See attached for detail.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/7/schedule/16/enacted

 

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

That is definitely not what was stated in the news item: the farmer being interviewed had lost access to one third of his whole farm without receiving any payment, and they clearly stated that two-thirds of HS2 land requirements are now subject to this procedure. That can't all be land for compounds, etc.

 

If the report is true it would appear that HS2 is seriously abusing the Schedule 16 process.

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

25 minutes ago, locoholic said:

That is definitely not what was stated in the news item: the farmer being interviewed had lost access to one third of his whole farm without receiving any payment, and they clearly stated that two-thirds of HS2 land requirements are now subject to this procedure. That can't all be land for compounds, etc.

 

If the report is true it would appear that HS2 is seriously abusing the Schedule 16 process.

 

If it is the same as when the power lines from Wilton over the Vale of Pickering were opposed to by farmers it was all over money and it would be nice to see what the other side of the story is! 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the TV news channels are being quite one sided and just going with the biased rants of the landowning Gentry from the ones I’ve seen. No balance or right of reply aired.

 

one the other day was being most vocal that he was only in line to get £3m from HS2 for his fields and wouldn’t be able to hand the working farm down to his son.

 

id suggest his son would do fine with the £3m myself. Many of these farmers are the ones eager to sell one or two of their fields for housing every 10 years or so.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

Yes, the TV news channels are being quite one sided and just going with the biased rants of the landowning Gentry from the ones I’ve seen. No balance or right of reply aired.

 

Nothing new the same was happening when the original network was being built in Victorian times !

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously someone does not like the people who are being affected by this project, are you not aware that many many ordinary people are losing their homes and are not receiving a good price.Not far from here a farm is being split in half and no reasonable acsess points offered ,they are still waiting for an answer and houses at the rear of an estate  will be passed extremely close and no real solving of noise.I would suggest comrade you have a look at the whole economy farming is an important sections.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Obviously someone does not like the people who are being affected by this project, are you not aware that many many ordinary people are losing their homes and are not receiving a good price.Not far from here a farm is being split in half and no reasonable acsess points offered ,they are still waiting for an answer and houses at the rear of an estate  will be passed extremely close and no real solving of noise.I would suggest comrade you have a look at the whole economy farming is an important sections.

 

Please can we have facts not hearsay and a real location so others can look in to it!

 

Most people want investment in Roads and Railways but not where they live, given the way many people think then  Dere Street would have still been the main road to Scotland and the A6 would never have been replaced by the M6.

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

3 hours ago, locoholic said:

That is definitely not what was stated in the news item: the farmer being interviewed had lost access to one third of his whole farm without receiving any payment, and they clearly stated that two-thirds of HS2 land requirements are now subject to this procedure. That can't all be land for compounds, etc.

 

If the report is true it would appear that HS2 is seriously abusing the Schedule 16 process.

 

If you read the Act, Section 16, you will readily see why that is neither true nor even feasible. Under this process, the land MUST be handed back within one year following completion of the works, with only two exceptions -

 

1. The land later becomes subject to a Compulsory Purchase Order, only necessary if HS2 subsequently decide the land is needed permanently. The relevant Act for that process is the same as for any entity using its provisions, and values are arbitrated.

 

2. If access is further required within five years following completion of the works, for any activity pursuant to the maintenance or rectification of the works. Such additional access also requires further payment to the landowner and any occupiers disturbed. For any access beyond that period, such provision is normally included in the neighbouring, compulsory purchase, or if the land concerned did not fall under that procedure, then a normal, commercial access arrangement must be entered into, which the land owner cannot reasonably refuse unless demonstrating extreme hardship.

 

Whatever the reporter "clearly stated", it is entirely possible that two thirds of current, property-related, HS2 activity concerns these arrangements, but it is a physical and legal impossibility for two thirds of HS2 long term land requirements to be obtained under this part of the Act.

 

Quite what you choose to believe of a Farmer, who will have almost certainly rejected the initial financial offer, and will be negotiating a larger figure via the process dictated by the Act (and cannot be paid until that figure is settled), is entirely up to you.

 

I thought I had seen everything in the build up to HS1, with the constant slagging off by people looking for big payouts (many of whom got them), by people stating their livestock or granny would die of shock, by people who suggested the noise would be so much worse than a Jumbo jet and certainly much worse than the constant roar of traffic from the M20, A2(M) and/or M2 (none of which almost none of them had objected to) and a pervading view that Britain didn't need a train that ran faster than walking pace and the overbearing smell of pee was not that bad. Most of those people are now either users of HS1 Javelins, or have made many sovs from flogging their once-priceless and irreplaceable mock tudor farmhouse/Persimmon special executive box to some Londoner who thought it was a great bargain for the journey time to Lunnon. (I know that because I lived there for some time and continue to have family and friends there.)

 

But HS2 has clearly aroused a much greater Trumpism in so many - I guess they will be accused of anti-semitism or next?

 

It's all about money. Anyone who thinks that the protests are about a "greater good" or "the rights of the countryside" etc etc, will have a bit of a shock when it all goes very quiet. That's if bloke down the pub decides the money would be better used elsewhere (because obviously no-one uses trains these days, innit?), without actually voting for anyone that would use it elsewhere.

 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...