HS2 under review

[Glorious NSE]

£735 is worst case fare, but even the lowest off peak is £192.

Fares start at £38.40 (Direct) and £49.50 (Via London)

 

The challenge is that direct cheap fares are severely limited by lack of capacity on Cross Country at present...

 

Exeter - Newcastle via HS2 is I agree a rather unlikely way to go about things  - so why use it?

 

 

Why is it unlikely?

 

Connecting in Birmingham is going to be sub-optimal (involving leaving the network and taking a walk or tram ride between two stations) if you're coming up from the South West. I suspect doing that is probably still technically *quicker*, but it's a faff.

 

Exeter to Newcastle via London is an entirely conventional routing (it's actually 5mins faster than the direct trains even with the Underground connection!)

 

When HS2 is built, going to London then taking the tube across and picking up the slower route to Newcastle via the ECML would feel an odd choice. I reckon going via OOC will take more than half an hour off if you go via Paddington as I think the timings quoted above are a little out, if the inbound trains also called at OOC then i'd suggest you'll knock at least a whole hour off.

 

 

 

 

 

[adb968008]

I had to look Calvert up on the map.

Why would anyone need a HS2 station here ?

Its Verney Junction all over again.

 

A road- rail interchange is required to HS2, and ive no doubt once HS2 is up, running and sold to private industry at a massive loss, that this station will be almost immediately constructed.

 

Aylesbury wouldnt immediately fulfill this need, but has potential, London desparately needs a western “thames crossing” and some day an A1-M1-M40-M4-M3-A3 motorway diverter will be built to reduce strain on the M25 west, and avoid need for passing the 6 lane each way stretch of M25 at LHR which is already massively over capacity.

 

Though i’d imagine such a route would commence at Welwyn, Berkhamstead, Beaconsfield, Maidenhead, Camberley and Guildford... which would put the ideal place for such an interchange somewhere near the Chalfonts...

 

To give an example, someone in South London, say Drawing box from Orpington to Woking and down to the channel. Everyone in that box has a commute from home to Station, and a 30min -60 min journey to London plus another 30 minutes to cross london to Euston to catch a HS2 service without running, (forget OC no one from south london will ever go there)... a road rail interchange directly off a motorway with improved capacity puts this populace in <60 minutes drive from home with only one modal change..car to train... Ebbsfleet, with its 80% growth in passenger numbers in five years from 1mn to 1.8mn shows road rail interchanges make sense.

Until then this populace will continue doing what it does today..Heathrow, Gatwick, Euston and Kings Cross.

 

If Chiltern end up running to OC, and such an interchange was built, OC will see its HS2 status diminished like Ashford, for the same reasons.. poor connections.

Edited October 14, 2018 by adb968008

[caradoc]

I bet you would get to Glasgow quicker if you could go from Oxford to Calvert, and then catch an HS2 train to Glasgow. You are proof that there is demand for a Home Counties HS2 station!

 

Even if there was to be a Tamworth style station at Calvert serving both HS2 and East West Rail, would trains to Glasgow actually stop there ? Given that most of the current Euston/Glasgow direct trains are non-stop between Euston and Warrington, I doubt it !

[adb968008]

Fares start at £38.40 (Direct) and £49.50 (Via London)

 

The challenge is that direct cheap fares are severely limited by lack of capacity on Cross Country at present...

 

 

 

 

Why is it unlikely?

Connecting in Birmingham is going to be sub-optimal (involving leaving the network and taking a walk or tram ride between two stations) if you're coming up from the South West. I suspect doing that is probably still technically *quicker*, but it's a faff.

 

Exeter to Newcastle via London is an entirely conventional routing (it's actually 5mins faster than the direct trains even with the Underground connection!)

When HS2 is built, going to London then taking the tube across and picking up the slower route to Newcastle via the ECML would feel an odd choice. I reckon going via OOC will take more than half an hour off if you go via Paddington as I think the timings quoted above are a little out, if the inbound trains also called at OOC then i'd suggest you'll knock at least a whole hour off.

 

Paddington to Farringdon will be 8 minutes on the Elizabeth Line.

Farringdon to KX will be 3 minutes...

However tonight i can take the Hammersmith and City from Paddington to KX in 12 minutes as has been possible the last 155 years.

 

The time to change trains at Paddington, and same again at KX or OC is presumably the same, if you said 10 mins at each end, and allow yourself 20 minutes to wait for the next onward train then its an hour tonight or an hour in the future.. its no saving unless you can deboard at OC, in which case youve saved maybe 20 minutes and one connection, it all comes diwn to “premium fare” to see if its worth it... i doubt any profit making entity will sacrifice a premium fare and charge the same as regular rail.

I’m guessing that premium fare will start at the lower end of walk up 1st class fares on regular rail.

Edited October 14, 2018 by adb968008

[locoholic]

Even if there was to be a Tamworth style station at Calvert serving both HS2 and East West Rail, would trains to Glasgow actually stop there ? Given that most of the current Euston/Glasgow direct trains are non-stop between Euston and Warrington, I doubt it !

God forbid that trains actually stop to allow passengers to use them!

 

When compared to all the through coaches that used to run, today's trains seem to run for the convenience of the operating companies and Network Rail, rather than to make the passengers' journeys easier by removing the need to change. A lucky few inner city dwellers get to hurtle from A to B in next to no time, whilst everyone else has to make do with the residual semi-fast services left on the "classic" network, or waste hours fighting their way into the congested inner cities to catch one of the swanky new trains.

[Glorious NSE]

Paddington to Farringdon will be 8 minutes on the Elizabeth Line.

Farringdon to KX will be 3 minutes...

However tonight i can take the Hammersmith and City from Paddington to KX in 12 minutes as has been possible the last 155 years.

 

The time to change trains at Paddington, and same again at KX or OC is presumably the same, if you said 10 mins at each end, and allow yourself 20 minutes to wait for the next onward train then its an hour tonight or an hour in the future.. its no saving unless you can deboard at OC, in which case youve saved maybe 20 minutes and one connection, it all comes diwn to “premium fare” to see if its worth it... i doubt any profit making entity will sacrifice a premium fare and charge the same as regular rail.

I’m guessing that premium fare will start at the lower end of walk up 1st class fares on regular rail.

Sorry bud, your maths is still suspect.

 

Euston-Newcastle will be at least 35 mins faster travelling time than Kings Cross-Newcastle with essentially a similar tube connection - saving 35 mins.

So Old Oak-Newcastle ought to be about 40 mins faster than Kings Cross-Newcastle travelling time, plus Pad to OOC will only be about 4 mins versus 12 on the tube, so that's 48 mins faster than Pad-Kings Cross-Newcastle.

A direct Old Oak connection saving one physical change plus travel time ought to be a minimum of an hour faster.

 

Whichever route you have the possibility of a wait for the next main line connection.

 

Whichever way you cut it, none of those are 'it's no saving'.

 

I disagree with your take on the pricing, but we'll see.

 

 

 

 

[lmsforever]

What are all you supporters of HS2 going to say now that the costs are set to rise over £100 billion pounds  and the government admit that the wcml is not full ,where do these facts come from HS2 Ltd.The environmental costs and damage are far above what were considered and also damage to companies and property are also rising way ahead of what was predicted.The wage costs are rising  above sensible figures and you wonder what all these employees are doing?  Please don't accuse me of being not sure of these figures they are in the public domain and with a budget coming up and the NHS promised a great deal of money plus many demands from other government funded projects etc HS2 should be stopped now as it is an obscene project that will stop people from receiving help they need.  Don't vilify me as I have provided figures if you can justify this project come up with real reasons and saving thirty minutes and a clogged up wcml don't count.Over to you !!!!!!

[Glorious NSE]

At present, the costs are not "set to rise over 100bn", those figures are NOT from HS2 ltd as you state, and they have been officially denied by the government.

Lying about things does not help your cause.
 

you wonder what all these employees are doing?

Maybe they are building a railway?
 

 if you can justify this project come up with real reasons

There's 109 pages of real reasons up-thread, we understand you are capable of either ignoring or rejecting all of them, but nevertheless they are real reasons.


 

[adb968008]

Sorry bud, your maths is still suspect.

Euston-Newcastle will be at least 35 mins faster travelling time than Kings Cross-Newcastle with essentially a similar tube connection - saving 35 mins.

So Old Oak-Newcastle ought to be about 40 mins faster than Kings Cross-Newcastle travelling time, plus Pad to OOC will only be about 4 mins versus 12 on the tube, so that's 48 mins faster than Pad-Kings Cross-Newcastle.

A direct Old Oak connection saving one physical change plus travel time ought to be a minimum of an hour faster.

Whichever route you have the possibility of a wait for the next main line connection.

Whichever way you cut it, none of those are 'it's no saving'.

I disagree with your take on the pricing, but we'll see.

 

Sorry i thought you were referring to just the london connection not end to end.but i agree 48 minutes is nothing, especially when a train runs late or a connection is missed.

 

But ask yourself, who in their right mind will take a slower train, for the same fare as a faster one, from the same or next doors station ?

 

If HS2 doesnt do premium, there will be a lot of empty seats at KX and on VT from Euston.

The government is dodging the question on fares, but nodding towards a yes..

 

 

But if HS2 accepts normal fares, then surely all tose premiums paid by HS1 passengers become unfair ?, indeed they might even argue the rail contract for fares is invalid and seek refunds back dated to when it commenced... PPI again.

HS2 will carry a premium, no polticitcian can resist it, but they wont call it, until its too late to stop construction.

Edited October 15, 2018 by adb968008

[lmsforever]

Glorious NE    I  object strongly to the tone of your post how do you know it will not cost over £100 billion  and the figures come from HS2  and don't accuse me of lying its something I do not do .

[pete_mcfarlane]

At present, the costs are not "set to rise over 100bn", those figures are NOT from HS2 ltd as you state, and they have been officially denied by the government.

 

It wouldn't be the first time that campaigners have plucked a hugely inflated figure out of thin air for the thing they oppose (HS2, Trident etc etc), and then make a big fuss about it. For bonus points accuse the Government of hiding the true cost. 

Edited October 15, 2018 by pete_mcfarlane

[lmsforever]

Can you categoracly deny that it will be over £100billion if can can all use your crystal ball?

[jamie92208]

Can you categoracly deny that it will be over £100billion if can can all use your crystal ball?

I think that what most of us would like you to post is some sort of weblink to the source of your figures so that we can assess their provenance.

 

Jamie

[Glorious NSE]

Can you categoracly deny that it will be over £100billion if can can all use your crystal ball?

You are categorically stating that it will be.

 

You claim to have actual info from HS2 to show this.

 

Please provide the actual info from HS2 showing this.

 

 

 

 

 

[pete_mcfarlane]

Can you categoracly deny that it will be over £100billion if can can all use your crystal ball?

 

That's not how it works. You don't pick random figures out of thin air and then expect people to 'prove' that they aren't true. The onus is on the people claiming £100bn to prove their figures. 

 

Here the current figures, via a FOI request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/513400/response/1239168/attach/3/foi18%202090%20Annex%20A.xlsx?cookie_passthrough=1

 

I'm pretty certain this will come in at less than the current headline figure of £56bn, given how much of this is contingency. Something would have to go spectacularly wrong for that to happen. . 

Edited October 15, 2018 by pete_mcfarlane

[Glorious NSE]

Glorious NE    I  object strongly to the tone of your post how do you know it will not cost over £100 billion  and the figures come from HS2  and don't accuse me of lying its something I do not do .

If you can prove that you are not lying, by finding us the announcement by HS2 or the DfT that the costs will definitely be over 100bn, as you state, then I'll be happy to apologise.

 

Otherwise, you are making up a number - lying, or repeating somebody else's lie.

 

 

[lmsforever]

The figures came from the cabinet office  and I repeat I DO NOT LIE AND I FIND IT OFFENSSIVE TO BE ACCUSSED OF IT ESPECIALLY ON A PUBLIC SITE SUCH AS THIS please apologise now!

[jamie92208]

The figures came from the cabinet office  and I repeat I DO NOT LIE AND I FIND IT OFFENSSIVE TO BE ACCUSSED OF IT ESPECIALLY ON A PUBLIC SITE SUCH AS THIS please apologise now!

Can you please point us to a publicly available reference and source of these figures rather than just mentioning an office. Eg Cabinet office report No/date/reference etc.

 

Jamie

[Glorious NSE]

The figures came from the cabinet office  and I repeat I DO NOT LIE AND I FIND IT OFFENSSIVE TO BE ACCUSSED OF IT ESPECIALLY ON A PUBLIC SITE SUCH AS THIS please apologise now!

Official government press release?

Statement from HS2 Ltd?

News item covering the official announcement?

 

 

[lmsforever]

Ester McVey   Work and Pensions minister have a look at her speeches just recently.  good enough?  Last Nov in apublicc meeting also said that the gov has written a blank checque  its there to see.She must  have a pretty good idea of the figures ?

[jamie92208]

I presume that this is the source of your figures.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6275525/Pensions-Secretary-Esther-McVey-warns-cost-building-HS2-DOUBLE-100billion.html

Not one single piece of evidence in the whole article. Comments made in a meeting to her constituents last November that have somehow just surfaced do not for me make a well proven case.

 

Jamie

Edited October 15, 2018 by jamie92208

[Glorious NSE]

Ester McVey   Work and Pensions minister have a look at her speeches just recently.  good enough?  Last Nov in apublicc meeting also said that the gov has written a blank checque  its there to see.She must  have a pretty good idea of the figures ?

"Work and Pensions" is fairly obviously not transport, and it seems she was just repeating a figure by an "expert" not involved in this project.

 

The 100m claim being made was specifically denied by the minister actually responsible for transport, so, i'm sorry, it is still a lie if you claim that these are official figures from HS2, which is what you did.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40629219/grayling-hs2-100bn-price-tag-nonsense

 

 

[Glorious NSE]

But ask yourself, who in their right mind will take a slower train, for the same fare as a faster one, from the same or next doors station ?

As I said, I disagree with your take on fares, if it was substantially more expensive then folk would use the cheaper legacy routes and there would be no capacity advantages - therefore to achieve the capacity advantages intended it cannot be substantially more expensive.

[Mike Riley]

This 100 billion figure for HS2 comes from the National Infrastructure Commission who estimated that an additional 43 billion would be needed for people to make the best use of HS2.  This additional money was for connectivity to HS2 stations, not directly for HS2 itself.

[The Stationmaster]

Presumably there is a speed limit at the points? With a 3-minute headway, merging the Birmingham and North trains is not going to leave any margin of error. If they can do this, why can't they separate out trains to stop at an intermediate station?

 

They are unlikely to be high speed points in the station throat especially as the throat at euston appears to include two double slips (=maintenance and operational nightmare particularly if meant for higher speeds.  Now 'higher speeds' raises a question in itself because correctly designed all the pointwork should be on the correct speed for the acceleration/deceleration curves of trains leaving and approaching the station platforms (or putting it another way the performance of the trains should match the capability of the pointwork).  and don't forget the rear of a departing train will going through those double slips at a higher speed than the front end of the train.

 

If the pointwork design speeds and train performance are not matched then either train performance and running times would have to be constrained or energy accelerating/decelerating trains would be wasted.  hopefully the designers will have got this lesson from the 1970s  right although NR's layout designers definitely don't seem to have understood it at some places where new layouts have gone in.

 

Euston won't work at all without grade separated arrivals and departures as the 3 minute headways simply won't allow it without grade separation.  Don't forget too that the platforms at Euston will be fed through two necks - according to drawings shown on the net thus far - with a resultant very constrained ability to permit parallel moves.  This in turn means that there will be a need for departing trains in particular to clear those two necks in the shortest possible time which makes it essential that the two double slips can take the highest achievable speeds for departing trains, and we are talking about some quite long trains.

 

I'm also interested in whether or not the number of platforms and station layout is consistent with achieving the necessary turnround times to make use of 3 minute headways bearing in mind the length of trains being talked about for the route.  Station design and the number of passenger access points to/from the platforms is critical to keeping down turnround times when long trains are involved.  This has already come home to roost at St Pancras where, apart from the number of platforms being totally inadequate to handle the capacity (including headways) created on HS1,  Eurostar turnround times have had to be considerably increased from the 35 minutes which applied at Waterloo and basically because of the rate at which passengers can be cleared from and admitted to the platform which has eaten into the time available for turnround servicing (which is also not quite as simple as it was at Waterloo.   Thus detail platform access design at Euston (and probably Curzon Street as well) becomes critical to creating a situation in which the potential 3 minute headway can be exploited.

 

the effect of an Old oak Common stop on 4 3 minute headways also needs to be considered but at least there appear to be two platform faces in each direction which will allow a second train to arrive as the first leaves.  But again if this interchange station is to live up to its intended purpose there will need to be multiple platform access points to enable arriving passengers to clear platforms at a sufficient pace and equally give entraining passengers room to spread along platforms in readiness to quickly board their train in the relevant vehicle.  An interesting exercise in passenger handling and if it isn't designed properly it would undermine that 3 minute headway aspiration - and all done in probably a 1 minute dwell time (90 seconds at most = half a headway) and watching LHR passengers detraining at Reading or joining at Paddington and LHR I doubt if some of them will manage to shift their cabin trunk size suitcases off a train in under 1 minute, but they'll have to, unless trains have a longer de well and drop back one path.