Jump to content
 

HS2 under review

Andy Y
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ozexpatriate

Ozexpatriate

Posted
Posted (edited)

I just popped PDX to SFO into AA's booking system and the first flight that came up was 2:05.

That route might be mostly operated by Horizon - so slower flights on turboprops. United offers 737s to SFO with slightly faster schedules.

 

The engineering of the route may be a bit challenging (read; expensive) in the northen CA/southern OR area (something about mountains...)

Which is why the SP went through Klamath Falls rather than the Siskiyou pass.

 

I hadn't realized that there was actually any activity on the US HSR plan - I thought it was still a pipe dream.

Pretty much. There was a lot of interest during the Obama administration's first term. Since then I don't think there's any money. Edited by Ozexpatriate
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Joseph_Pestell

Joseph_Pestell

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

The original proposal was indeed to retain Waterloo and - more importantly North Pole Depot (with no intention to create a second depot beyond a possible stabling site, the intention being that all trains would run from St Pancras to North Pole if they required any sort of servicing beyond a turnround interior clean).

 

But LCR decided to change that original proposal for a number of very good reasons (and possibly one or two not so good ones, as follows -

 

Retaining Waterloo was always going to constrain the 'shape of the train service for some very good reasons which I'm not going to explain at this time of night,

Secondly there seems to have been an increasing view that the level of business was insufficient to support two terminals with all their associated costs (not just Eurostar staff but also paying for all the border security in its various forms).

But there was a view that getting out of Waterloo would deter many passengers from a sector stretching south & west of London (I believe that has to some extent turned out to be the case)

Using North Pole for empties to/from St Pancras required a very expensive reversing siding to be built at White City.

Using North Pole required all the 'Three Capitals' sets to be equipped with a BR ICMU for running over lines electrified with BR 25kv electrification which meant modifying the entire fleet.

Coming out of Waterloo would allow all the 3rd rail pick up kit to be removed with its very occasional reliability problems when it came to lifting the shoes (which were out of gauge in France).

Coming out of Waterloo completely would avoid the very hefty rent being paid for office accommodation there but it would involve expensive relocation of the training school and simulator.

 

I don't know any of the numbers but the passenger service impact apart and the lack of platform space at St Pancras ignored there would seem to have been a very good financial case for coming out of Waterloo and consequently North Pole as well.  (incidentally the number of platforms at Waterloo was also inadequate)

 

I have used Eurostar just once since the move to St Pancras. Even with light luggage, the tube is a complete pain.

 

I am thinking about a trip to Paris (Pontoise) next weekend. An easy change at Waterloo would make me keener to do the journey by rail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
chris p bacon

chris p bacon

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

I have used Eurostar just once since the move to St Pancras. Even with light luggage, the tube is a complete pain.

 

I am thinking about a trip to Paris (Pontoise) next weekend. An easy change at Waterloo would make me keener to do the journey by rail.

And yet for us North of King's Cross/St Pancras it's so much better than Waterloo.  :blum:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
jjb1970

jjb1970

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted

When looking at the attractiveness of terminals in and out of London it is important to remember the overall picture. St. Pancrass may be a pain for people from the South and West but it is ideal for people coming in from the North. I use Eurostar and it is almost (but not quite perfect) that I arrive in Euston and have a short walk down the road to the Eurostar. No idea of how the numbers stack up but St. Pancrass makes Eurostar massively more attractive for connections from the West and East Midlands and people from the North who would rather use the train.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike Storey

Mike Storey

Posted
Posted

I have used Eurostar just once since the move to St Pancras. Even with light luggage, the tube is a complete pain.

 

I am thinking about a trip to Paris (Pontoise) next weekend. An easy change at Waterloo would make me keener to do the journey by rail.

 

Not sure how a trip to any of the London airports is any easier from North Dorset, unless you drive. But, have you tried missing out the tube by going Waterloo East - London Bridge then Thameslink to Kings Cross/St Pancras? The new-ish escalators at Waterloo and the improving layout at LB make this a lot easier than it used to be, and it is one hell of a lot more comfortable than the Bakerloo/Northern, plus you arrive right under the Eurostar International Check In desks instead of a half mile walk from them!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
roythebus

roythebus

Posted
Posted

Sorry I've missed out on a few day's of discussion here with working abroad, but found a comparison in terms of expenditure on the "Boris Island2 airport scheme, reportedly costing £47bn and taking 7 years to build. It begs the question if they can find £47bn and build a complete new airport in 7 years, why can't they do the same for HS2?

 

Quit yapping, get digging!

 

Re HS1, I've used it a few times from Ashford to Brux and back, the main complaint is lack of trains from AFK to Brux!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
pete_mcfarlane

pete_mcfarlane

Posted
Posted (edited)

Boris Island isn't an official scheme - it's a speculative punt which may or (more likely) may not happen. The 7 year build time would presumably be from when the very lengthy series of public enquiries ends, so you'd be looking at the thing actually opening in 12-15 years time.

 

Because that floppy haired buffoon Boris Johnson is involved on the periphery, it's being presented in some parts of the media as an official scheme that is going to happen. 

Edited by pete_mcfarlane
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike Storey

Mike Storey

Posted
Posted

Boris Island isn't an official scheme - it's a speculative punt which may or (more likely) may not happen. The 7 year build time would presumably be from when the very lengthy series of public enquiries ends, so you'd be looking at the thing actually opening in 12-15 years time.

 

Because that floppy haired buffoon Boris Johnson is involved on the periphery, it's being presented in some parts of the media as an official scheme that is going to happen. 

 

The airlines don't want it - they want a bigger Heathrow!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Joseph_Pestell

Joseph_Pestell

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Not sure how a trip to any of the London airports is any easier from North Dorset, unless you drive. But, have you tried missing out the tube by going Waterloo East - London Bridge then Thameslink to Kings Cross/St Pancras? The new-ish escalators at Waterloo and the improving layout at LB make this a lot easier than it used to be, and it is one hell of a lot more comfortable than the Bakerloo/Northern, plus you arrive right under the Eurostar International Check In desks instead of a half mile walk from them!!

 

Simples: I don't use a London airport. Bournemouth and Southampton are favourites with Bristol as a "last resort" option (why they chose Lulsgate over Filton remains a mystery to me).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vanders

Vanders

Posted
Posted

Boris Island isn't an official scheme - it's a speculative punt which may or (more likely) may not happen.

It's not even a new scheme; similar ideas about building an island in the Thames Estuary have been floated since the 50's. There was even a motorway proposed that would be routed south of Southend!

 

Simples: I don't use a London airport. Bournemouth and Southampton are favourites with Bristol as a "last resort" option (why they chose Lulsgate over Filton remains a mystery to me).

Oh God, don't get me started. Why have an airport with a runway that can take even an A380, with excellent motorway and railway links to every point on the compass, when you can have one on a foggy hill in the middle of nowhere with a long drive along the single rubbish road to anywhere of any interest?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Joseph_Pestell

Joseph_Pestell

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Going a bit OT, but we don't need a new airport hub in London. Schiphol does the job admirably.

 

Especially when we will be able to get there with Eurostar.

 

Is the £47B cost of Boris Island just for the airport itself or for the extra infrastructure e.g. diverted HS2.?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Ron Ron

Ron Ron Ron

Posted
Posted (edited)

Boris Island isn't an official scheme - it's a speculative punt which may or (more likely) may not happen. 

 

There are at least 3 speculative schemes going by this title, plus Norman Foster's Isle of Grain scheme which the newspapers and BBC erroneously use images of when mentioning Boris Island.

None are official and are just private venture proposals.

 

 

.

Edited by Ron Ron Ron
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
byron

byron

Posted
Posted

Papers this morning say that the Chinese are to finance/build HS2.

 

Might at least happen then. But really a sad comment on the state that UK has got to that we can't/won't do it ourselves.

Just like our models! Once again real life follows where we lead.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
EddieB

EddieB

Posted
Posted

Front page headline on the London Evening Standard yesterday: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/china-well-invest-billions-and-help-britain-build-hs2-8977508.html?origin=internalSearch

 

Another instance of China wanting a stake in a struggling third-world economy?  Might have been worth studying the story of the Tazara railway before committing, but those who fail to learn from history, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike Storey

Mike Storey

Posted
Posted

Front page headline on the London Evening Standard yesterday: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/china-well-invest-billions-and-help-britain-build-hs2-8977508.html?origin=internalSearch

 

Another instance of China wanting a stake in a struggling third-world economy?  Might have been worth studying the story of the Tazara railway before committing, but those who fail to learn from history, etc.

 

There appears to be no commitment - it was just a proposal from the Chinese, to follow on from Hinkley Point. Chinese funding, whole or in part, is almost inevitable, whether directly or via others. The issue would be construction (and operation) as the Chinese have no experience in Europe on rail construction, and such a track record together with knowledge, would be a vital factor in any bid. They would have to partner with one or more of the usual suspects. I would imagine they really want to flog their trains and get a toe-hold in European high speed train procurement, which is (currently) a separate funding package. I think they will have a battle on their hands from the likes of Alstom, Siemens and Hitachi. Let's see what they propose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...