HS2 under review

[jjb1970]

Something that I never really appreciated until working in London was that the stations which are considered to be major stations in London are not the stations I thought were important when I lived in Cumbria. I always thought Euston, St. Pancras, Kings Cross and Paddington were the major stations of London because they were the main long distance inter-city termini. However Waterloo, Liverpool Street and Victoria are way busier than any of them. And perhaps the one that completely ignored by people in the North is London Bridge which tends to slip below many radars yet is a major station, ditto Charing Cross.

I think this whole question hangs on whether HS2 is being justified on the basis of economics and railway requirements, or as a political project to connect the UK. One answer will probably say HS2 will not got to Scotland (or Newcastle), the other will say it will.

[edcayton]

They seem to be missing the very important fact that building HS2 to Leeds (and connecting it to the ECML) will still speed up trains to Scotland. 

 

Really? I don't see how as it's a long way round, and how do you connect from Leeds to the ecml?

 

Ed

[runs as required]

Really? I don't see how as it's a long way round, and how do you connect from Leeds to the ecml?

How'z aboot via the Leeds Northern alignment to Northallerton?

dhig

Edited May 25, 2015 by runs as required

[Glorious NSE]

That branch of HS2 has a connection in the vicinity of Church Fenton to feed traffic to the ECML North, in the same way there's a connection to the WCML north the other side of the country...

Edited May 25, 2015 by Glorious NSE

[Edwin_m]

Something that I never really appreciated until working in London was that the stations which are considered to be major stations in London are not the stations I thought were important when I lived in Cumbria. I always thought Euston, St. Pancras, Kings Cross and Paddington were the major stations of London because they were the main long distance inter-city termini. However Waterloo, Liverpool Street and Victoria are way busier than any of them. And perhaps the one that completely ignored by people in the North is London Bridge which tends to slip below many radars yet is a major station, ditto Charing Cross.

I think this whole question hangs on whether HS2 is being justified on the basis of economics and railway requirements, or as a political project to connect the UK. One answer will probably say HS2 will not got to Scotland (or Newcastle), the other will say it will.

Thameslink, Crossrail and the proposed Crossrail 2 relieve Waterloo, Liverpool Street, London Bridge and Charing Cross.  Network Rail is still working out what to do with the Brighton Line to relieve Victoria and London Bridge.  So it is likely that most of these stations will be less congested before or soon after HS2 starts operating. 

[Edwin_m]

They seem to be missing the very important fact that building HS2 to Leeds (and connecting it to the ECML) will still speed up trains to Scotland. 

It's actually the WCML connection that will access both Glasgow and Edinburgh, predicted journey time about 3hr 38min from London to either after Phase 2 is finished as far as Golborne. 

[Edwin_m]

It's also worth pointing out that passenger volume between London (and the SE of England) and the NE and Scotland, is relatively minuscule in comparison with the capital's links to other UK regions.

e.g. London & the SE to Scotland represents about 0.3% of all UK rail journeys.

This may be because London to Scotland, and to some extent London to Newcastle, are the only major domestic flows where the air market is significant.  Other domestic air routes support only a handful of smallish planes per day so a couple of hundred pax at most.  Bringing the rail journey down to 3hr would capture most of that traffic.  Not to say it necessarily makes a business case but it does in part account for today's low numbers.

[runs as required]

This may be because London to Scotland, and to some extent London to Newcastle, are the only major domestic flows where the air market is significant. 

In over 40 years of living in the NE and being obliged to travel to London and overseas - using the train to Kings Cross always proved more convenient than flying (even though I live 20 mins from both Ncle airport and Central station).

Its the journeys overseas - changing at one of the London airports where air scores - and even then, I'd say we Geordies mostly prefer Amsterdam (or these days Dubai) as a hub.

 

dhig

[Ron Ron Ron]

This may be because London to Scotland, and to some extent London to Newcastle, are the only major domestic flows where the air market is significant.  Other domestic air routes support only a handful of smallish planes per day so a couple of hundred pax at most. 

 

 

Sorry that's wrong Edwin, in the case of Newcastle, where there have only ever been a relatively few flights to the capital per day.

Compare that with Manchester, where prior to the noughties WCML upgrade and the introduction of Pendolinos and Virgin's HF timetable, there were over 20 flights a day to 4 London airports.

Those WCML service improvements have reduced the number of flights, but there are still many more than to Newcastle.

 

 

.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Ron Ron Ron

[scouser]

Call me cynical but I can't help wondering how many people have made loads'a'money out of HS2 already without a spade hitting the ground!

Will we one day speak of the "HS2 Bubble"?

[Glorious NSE]

I really don't see the problem with the DFT not pushing on for Scotland. With what's north of the border being Transport Scotland's problem and a reasonable chance of Northern Hubs HS3 getting as far north as Newcastle then connecting up the various projects IF Transport Scotland reckons it's a good idea and builds their bit ought not to be that hard!

[Ron Ron Ron]

Call me cynical but I can't help wondering how many people have made loads'a'money out of HS2 already without a spade hitting the ground!

 

HS2 Ltd have been going for a few years now and employ a large number of people, including many highly paid specialists.

As an organisation it appears to have grown like Topsy, with all sorts of Strategist and project management type jobs. 

 

Amongst their currently advertised posts, they are looking for a "Head of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion", a "Select Committee and Witness Manager", a "Parliamentary Intern-Euston, plus many others.

Staff employed is well over 800, with several thousand more job posts to be filled. The wages bill will be costing tens of millions already.

 

HS2's share of costs (not counting any other DfT or parliamentary costs) was £176 million for the year ending 31st March 2013.

Two years on and with a larger organisation, it'll be interesting to see what the latest accounts say.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Ron Ron Ron

[locoholic]

If the SNP feel that outraged and snubbed, why don't they put taxes up a bit in Scotland to raise the cash to build their own line southwards towards civilisation?

[mjkerr]

If the SNP feel that outraged and snubbed, why don't they put taxes up a bit in Scotland to raise the cash to build their own line southwards towards civilisation?

That's the plan

The issue is where to connect it

That plan has ended

So the High Speed Rail Line will go to the borders, then stop; how useless!

You can't plan something like this if you don't know where to connect it to...

 

Never mind that, can't even get EGIP to where it should be

Oh that's right, the SNP cut that in half too!

Edited May 25, 2015 by mjkerr

[Edwin_m]

Sorry that's wrong Edwin, in the case of Newcastle, where there have only ever been a relatively few flights to the capital per day.

Compare that with Manchester, where prior to the noughties WCML upgrade and the introduction of Pendolinos and Virgin's HF timetable, there were over 20 flights a day to 4 London airports.

Those WCML service improvements have reduced the number of flights, but there are still many more than to Newcastle.

 

 

.

According to the respective websites, Manchester has nine flights to Heathrow tomorrow, Newcastle has six BA to Heathrow and two Flybe to Stansted, so the difference isn't great.  Your point on Manchester demonstrates how a relatively small improvement in the train service (an increase in frequency being equivalent to shortening the journey time) can result in a lot of passengers transferring from air. 

[Edwin_m]

In over 40 years of living in the NE and being obliged to travel to London and overseas - using the train to Kings Cross always proved more convenient than flying (even though I live 20 mins from both Ncle airport and Central station).

Its the journeys overseas - changing at one of the London airports where air scores - and even then, I'd say we Geordies mostly prefer Amsterdam (or these days Dubai) as a hub.

 

dhig

My parents lived in Jesmond until 1994 and from what I remember my father would have used the plane and the train about equally but the plane was mainly interlining at Heathrow I think.  Even without a Heathrow link HS2 will improve rail access from Manchester or Newcastle to Heathrow by replacing the tedious journey from Euston or Kings Cross with a single change at Old Oak.  I'm not sure if either would be enough to be quicker than connecting flights though, once check-in and transfer times are allowed for.

[edcayton]

It really is no surprise that the SNP did so well in the general election. This seems to me to be yet another case of their being sh@t upon by Westminster. I hope this is not considered too political

 

Ed

[Kris]

It really is no surprise that the SNP did so well in the general election. This seems to me to be yet another case of their being sh@t upon by Westminster. I hope this is not considered too political

 

Ed

They may feel hard done by, but there has never been a promise made for a direct HS line to Scotland. 

 

Something to also remember is that this is a newspaper report, written by a journalist for a newspaper whose support for the project and the current government is limited. 

 

Edit - spelling correction. 

Edited May 25, 2015 by Kris

[PhilJ W]

It really is no surprise that the SNP did so well in the general election. This seems to me to be yet another case of their being sh@t upon by Westminster. I hope this is not considered too political

 

Ed

Not just the Scots.

[Ron Ron Ron]

It really is no surprise that the SNP did so well in the general election. This seems to me to be yet another case of their being sh@t upon by Westminster. I hope this is not considered too political

 

Ed

 

The SNP are using HS2 to further their own ends. The only interest they have in HS2 is using it as another example to demonstrate to the Scottish people that the nasty Westminster government treats Scotland with a lower priority etc, etc.

Sneaky tactics, just like NS offering Ed Miliband the hand of friendship (offering the possibility of an alliance or coalition), which was solely aimed at damaging the labour vote south of the border.

 

Yes we are getting too political.

Best leave that side of the discussion.

 

 

. 

[pete_mcfarlane]

So the SNP's position is best summarised as 'we want faster rail links to the rest of the country we want to leave'. 

[Ron Ron Ron]

According to the respective websites, Manchester has nine flights to Heathrow tomorrow....

.....Your point on Manchester demonstrates how a relatively small improvement in the train service (an increase in frequency being equivalent to shortening the journey time) can result in a lot of passengers transferring from air. 

 

The improvement has been more than minor, but that is not the sole reason for the reduction in flights in that specific market. There are many other reasons.

 

BA have been losing money at Gatwick for many years and have been scaling down some of their services from there to UK domestic destinations.

For years they ran 7 flights a day to Manchester from LGW, but after gradually reducing them over recent years, have now stopped them completely. Purely to save money and nothing at all to do with rail competition.

 

The London City - Manchester flights (5 a day, up to 7 a day during the WCML upgrade disruption) were directly affected by the WCML improvements.

The operator VLM was taken over by CityJet who stopped the flights in the face of the improved rail services and rising costs.

 

BMI (formerly British Midland) ran 7 or 8 flights a day from LHR to MAN. Load factors were fairly high.

They were taken over by BA in late 2012 and the flights stopped.

Virgin Little Red replaced them with 4 flights a day, purely to serve interconnecting passengers feeding into Virgin Atlantic and Delta (Virgin's owners) flights through LHR.

The costs of operation were too high, average load factors too low and they pulled the plug after 2 years.

Nothing at all to do with rail competition.

 

BA Regional (sold off to Flybe many years ago), ran 2 flights a day between Stansted and MAN.

They didn't really attract much custom and were stopped after a year or two.

 

BA LHR - MAN. 

As you say, now down to 9 flights a day, from 12 a day only a couple of years ago.

At the peak there were 14 a day.

The reasons for the decline are manyfold.....

 

LHR has lost a lot of connecting traffic from Manchester, due to better alternatives. Most notably the Emirates services from MAN via Dubai, providing a wide range of connections to the Far East, SE Asia, the Indian sub-continent, Australasia and the Indian Ocean islands.

Emirates run 3 flights a day from MAN, one of which is an A380 and one of the others is also an A380 on some days now. The others are all big B777-300's.

A hugely popular service.

Etihad also compete in this market with 2 flights a day by large wide-bodied a/c, as do Qatar airways.

 

These services, along with Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific (both providing onward connections through their hubs) have taken most of the market that formerly routed via LHR.

Similarly, the traditional European hubs like AMS, FRA and CDG, providing an alternative to LHR, have all increased their traffic from MAN.

Westbound, there has been a steady growth in direct flights from MAN to N. America and the Caribbean, cutting out the London airports.

 

There has also been the recession, reducing some business travel, but for BA, one of the big factors has been that they've been losing money on purely domestic tickets and have been reducing domestic flights at LHR and transferring the slots to more lucrative long haul flights.

Hence the recent reduction to 9 flights a day.

 

In summary. Improved rail competition has had some impact on London to Manchester domestic flights, but a far bigger factor has been changes in the airline marketplace and LHR's role as a connecting hub from MAN.

 

 

 

.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Ron Ron Ron

[locoholic]

The SNP claim that the business case for a high speed line from Scotland to London is very strong. Is there anything to stop the Scottish Govt from funding the construction of such a route on English soil, southwards to the point where the English bit of HS2 fizzles out?

[Ron Ron Ron]

.... Is there anything to stop the Scottish Govt from funding the construction of such a route on English soil.....

 

What, with the money they are given from Westminster to subsidise their spending?

[Glorious NSE]

That's the plan

The issue is where to connect it

That plan has ended

So the High Speed Rail Line will go to the borders, then stop; how useless!

You can't plan something like this if you don't know where to connect it to...

You can, you just build it to plug into an existing line in the vicinity of the border, and it wouldn't be useless, as you'd start getting journey time (and capacity) benefits for the existing services - and that would give further impetus to develop the network on the English side to support it. 

 

So come on Scotland, if it's so obvious, go for it.