HS2 under review

[Edwin_m]

In Roger Fords forthcoming Modern Railways column, he reveals that the specification for the classic compatible trains required for phase 1 say that bidders should assume platform heights as 950mm (nominal) for stations on the current rail network, but 1000mm (1m) on HS2. Now not only does a 1m platform height prevent ordinary freight trains (which is why such platform heights have thus far been restricted to things like the East London Line & Crossrail core sections where no freight traffic is permitted), but high platforms also prevent proper continental style double deck trains as any 'high platform' significantly restricts the width of any passenger accommodation at the lower level. How this circle will be squared is not yet known.... but given the DfTs previous attempts at trying to design detailed rolling stock specifications and the end results, they probably haven't twigged they are in the process of significantly hob-nailing HS2 from the start

This is the situation with a high platform on UK loading gauge, but a high platform on a UIC gauge route would be designed to be clear of the gauge so trains of the standard width wouldn't foul the platforms.  The compatible trains will need some sort of moving step to cope with the platform being further from the track on high speed routes as well as a different height.  It is also possible this would prevent a Euro-standard train, when eventually ordered for Phase 2, giving acceptable stepping distance to these platforms.  Potentially this could indeed be a big design change, especially if they eventually go for double-deck stock, but for a slightly different reason. 

 

Incidentally the platform height in question is 1115mm not 1000mm in Roger Ford's email update.  This is level with a typical unit floor and therefore gives the advantage of level boarding for wheelchairs, pushchairs and wheely suitcases.  As well as making life easier this should help with shortening station dwell times. 

Edited June 20, 2017 by Edwin_m

[locoholic]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hs2-high-speed-railway-most-expensive-world-403-million-mile-michael-byng-a7843481.html

 

Even allowing for media hype, the costs of HS2 seem to be on the up. I wonder what effect the recent fall in the value of the pound has had?

[Kelly]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hs2-high-speed-railway-most-expensive-world-403-million-mile-michael-byng-a7843481.html

 

Even allowing for media hype, the costs of HS2 seem to be on the up. I wonder what effect the recent fall in the value of the pound has had?

 

 

It was always going to cost a large amount. These days there are so many other associated costs due to things such as health and safety and environmental considerations as well as the usual route clearing/building costs etc.

[Joseph_Pestell]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hs2-high-speed-railway-most-expensive-world-403-million-mile-michael-byng-a7843481.html

 

Even allowing for media hype, the costs of HS2 seem to be on the up. I wonder what effect the recent fall in the value of the pound has had?

 

Even in the building industry generally, materials costs have shot up as a consequence of devaluation after the Brexit vote. I know of at least one project that will probably not go forward as a result even though a great deal of public money has already been spent on it.

 

Much made of comparisons between cost of HS2 and recent French high-speed lines. Some higher costs are inevitable in a more densely populated country. But I do believe that our public sector is soft on building companies and does not drive as good a deal as it could and should.

 

I also believe that bringing HS2 into Euston by the proposed route is a mistake given the huge extra costs and disruption that it causes. Most passengers will surely prefer to get off at OOC and transfer to CrossRail 1 making the terminus at Euston a white elephant.

[melmerby]

http://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/winners-named-for-66bn-of-hs2-contracts

 

Keith

[woodenhead]

A few years back I thought that HS2 was something we needed, but sitting here in my home office and thinking how little I need to travel now especially to London makes me think more and more this is a white elephant.

 

Chris Grayling refers to the much needed seats and I ask where are these full trains, I don't see them often out of Manchester other than the first and last off peak services where people cram on to save money, high speed internet is more important to the British economy than high speed trains.

 

By the time we have these trains between Birmingham and London I think we will see even more movement away from face to face business in London unless the congestion charging is so great that even the rich are forced out of their cars.

 

Never thought I would be saying that.

[Pete the Elaner]

Chris Grayling refers to the much needed seats and I ask where are these full trains, I don't see them often out of Manchester other than the first and last off peak services where people cram on to save money.

The full trains are south of Rugby.

Trains are continuing to get progressively more crowded.

It was not so long ago that the Crewe 110mph Desiros started running & a 4 car unit had loads of spare seats. Now an 8 car train on the same service has standing passengers with few spare seats.

The same is true of Pendolinos. They were 8 car when new, then strengthened to 9. The 11 car expansion programme came just at the right time, but now if a 9 car set replaces the usual 11, it is pretty full.

I also remember Virgin proudly promoting the fact that they run 3 trains per hour to Manchester during the week, so I assume this was an increase over BR days?

Roads are continuing to get progressively busier too. With the motorway building programme now stopped, people & goods have to go somewhere. (once the M6 Toll was completed in 2003, there were no major new M-way projects in progress for the first time since the 1950s).

 

I can't explain where the demand is coming from but from what I see when travelling, trains & roads are continuing to get busier. Assuming this continues, HS2 will be desperately needed when it arrives.

BR also found that when they introduced the HST, the improved service made it popular.

[phil-b259]

Even in the building industry generally, materials costs have shot up as a consequence of devaluation after the Brexit vote. I know of at least one project that will probably not go forward as a result even though a great deal of public money has already been spent on it.

 

Much made of comparisons between cost of HS2 and recent French high-speed lines. Some higher costs are inevitable in a more densely populated country. But I do believe that our public sector is soft on building companies and does not drive as good a deal as it could and should.

 

I also believe that bringing HS2 into Euston by the proposed route is a mistake given the huge extra costs and disruption that it causes. Most passengers will surely prefer to get off at OOC and transfer to CrossRail 1 making the terminus at Euston a white elephant.

 

Even if large numbers do get off at Old Oak, Euston will still have value. Yes Old Oak may have Crossrail but (i) That is expected to be very busy anyway by the time HS2 opens and (ii) its unwise to rely on a single onward transport mode in case service disruption / engineering work shuts it down.

 

Old Oak will only have Crossrail and a couple of NLL / WLL stations near it, while Euston gives interchange with 3 tube lines, the Met / Circle / H&C at Euston Square, maybe Crossrail 2 and it is also a short walk from the St Pancras / Kings Cross hub with all the onward connections available there (a covered walkway has been talked about in conjunction with a double ended CR2 station which has an exit at one end for Euston and another at the other end for St Pancras - much in the same way the Crossrail 'Liverpool Street" station actually lies between Liverpool St and Moorgate, with a direct connection to each).

 

Besides in your call to terminate at Old Oak you rather overlook the fact that wherever HS2 terminates, it needs a large number of platforms to turn trains round. IIRC this is something that 'The stationmaster' has talked about before on threads here, but basically if you assume a 30minute turn round (which gives time to top up the water tanks, empty the bins etc) and the line can cope with 18tph then you need a 9 platform terminus at a minimum. While constructing such a station at Old Oak is of course doable (and potentially slightly cheaper) its not as if you are going to escape large scale demolition to build it - and if the line did ever get extended all that extra construction effort is wasted.

Edited July 17, 2017 by phil-b259

[locoholic]

There must be a better plan for the London end. £8 billion and 20 years of disruption just seems ridiculous. Access to Euston is not essential, as few journeys will end there. What is required is access to CrossRail and the underground system.

[locoholic]

And of course for £8 billion you could have the most amazing station at OOC!

[Kelly]

Joining with hs1 would have seemed to be a logical thing and linking channel tunnel with the North in a high speed line at EU loading gauge, allowing freight and passenger traffic to use it as a core trunk.

 

Obviously thinking hasn't gone down that route, with it going to Euston instead.

[woodenhead]

Joining with hs1 would have seemed to be a logical thing and linking channel tunnel with the North in a high speed line at EU loading gauge, allowing freight and passenger traffic to use it as a core trunk.

 

Obviously thinking hasn't gone down that route, with it going to Euston instead.

Maybe they have a plan to reinvent the Kings Cross Hotel curve in a Euston environment with freight from HS1 rising up from a tunnel into the middle of Euston HS2 

[Kris]

I wonder if the people who purchased the homes being knocked down to make way for HS2 will be pleased with their investment? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40635299

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Made me smile listening to Chris Grayling on the radio this morning saying they were good at getting transport projects completed on-time and on-budget.....  

 

He cited Crossrail as a shining example (though many of the station rebuildings in West London are well behind schedule).

 

For some reason, no mention was made of the GWML electrification scheme.............  

[D854_Tiger]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hs2-high-speed-railway-most-expensive-world-403-million-mile-michael-byng-a7843481.html

 

Even allowing for media hype, the costs of HS2 seem to be on the up. I wonder what effect the recent fall in the value of the pound has had?

 

The cost of HS2 will actually be spread over many years, decades actually.

 

The cost should come in at around 2bn a year, depending upon how serious they are about accelerating the construction of phase 2, though availability of key engineering skills rather than money will no doubt determine that.

 

To put that 2bn level of spending into some kind of perspective we are currently spending 110bn a year on the NHS and their costs are escalating far more quickly than those at HS2.

 

It should also always be argued that spending on transport infrastructure is actually investing in the economy, not spending upon it, in a way that should eventually allow us to afford things like more of the NHS.

 

The trouble with politicians, on all sides, is that they tend to prefer public spending to public investment because it inevitably suits their short term political interests far better. 

 

I reckon convincing them to agree to build HS2 must have involved the political equivalent of pointing a loaded gun at their heads, not so hard when you consider the capacity constraints on both the WCML and ECML, so i'm pretty well convinced it must be needed, if only because they agreed to it.

 

Having said all of that, HS2 has always struck me as being somewhat over the top, both the French and the Germans managed these things without resorting to new build all the way into the city centres.

 

That's supposed to be the advantage of high speed rail in being backward compatible, unlike in Japan or Spain because of the gauge difference.

[D854_Tiger]

Made me smile listening to Chris Grayling on the radio this morning saying they were good at getting transport projects completed on-time and on-budget.....

 

He cited Crossrail as a shining example (though many of the station rebuildings in West London are well behind schedule).

 

For some reason, no mention was made of the GWML electrification scheme.............

 

 

To be fair, HS1 was both ahead of schedule and within budget.

 

Mind you, there does seem to be a hint of think of a number and then quadruple it as the preferred way of achieving that nowadays.

 

Out of interest, it's no better with road schemes nowadays millions of pounds per mile seems to be the norm for even a piece of bog standard dual carriageway.

[phil-b259]

 

Having said all of that, HS2 has always struck me as being somewhat over the top, both the French and the Germans managed these things without resorting to new build all the way into the city centres.

 

That's supposed to be the advantage of high speed rail in being backward compatible, unlike in Japan or Spain because of the gauge difference.

 

Thats because their existing city centre stations and approaches don't need massive rebuilding to accommodate their high speed trains. For example they can already accommodate double deck trains - British infrastructure cannot (they are also fundamentally incompatible with traditional UK platform heights), plus they usually have very long platforms / space to extend them - British ones are quite short (compare the likes of the Gare du Lyon or Gare du Nord to Kings Cross or Euston on Google maps to see the difference).

 

Unless the plan is to forever restrict HS2 to UK loading gauge (and all the issues that brings), new approaches and platforms are essential for the busiest termini, thus allowing for the likes of double deck + very long trains to be obtained for the busiest flows. Away from the core destinations of Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds, then yes, the fact that the conventional rail network does share the same gauge as HS2 will facilitate through running - however as such trains will be restricted in length, height and width by the traditional UK loading gauge then HS2 will not fundamentally increase capacity in to the destinations served by said trains.

Edited July 17, 2017 by phil-b259

[Kris]

Out of interest, it's no better with road schemes nowadays millions of pounds per mile seems to be the norm for even a piece of bog standard dual carriageway.

 

 £250 million is the current quote for duelling the A30 between Carland Cross and Chiverton Cross in Cornwall. A distance of 14km, nearly £18m per km! 

[chrisf]

Joining with hs1 would have seemed to be a logical thing and linking channel tunnel with the North in a high speed line at EU loading gauge, allowing freight and passenger traffic to use it as a core trunk.

 

Obviously thinking hasn't gone down that route, with it going to Euston instead.

 

The Border Agency will put paid to that idea.  Look at the nonsense to which Eurostar passengers from the South of France are subjected.

 

Chris

[Kelly]

The Border Agency will put paid to that idea. Look at the nonsense to which Eurostar passengers from the South of France are subjected.

 

Chris

Indeed, I said logical, rather than realistic however.

 

Being able to travel on one train from Manchester to Berlin would probably appeal to a number of people. With freedom of movement that isn't so much of an issue, but it isn't sadly feasible in the current climate.

[jamie92208]

Indeed, I said logical, rather than realistic however.

 

Being able to travel on one train from Manchester to Berlin would probably appeal to a number of people. With freedom of movement that isn't so much of an issue, but it isn't sadly feasible in the current climate.

Some years ago I travelled from Cannes to Leeds by Eurostar, admittedly 3 of them, Cannes to Lille, Lille to London and London to Leeds I thought it would have been brilliant to do it on one train.

 

However Lord Berkeley and others proposed a scheme called Euston Cross that was an underground station at Easton aligned East/West with onwards connections to HS1 and a depot in I think East London so that they platforms became through ones and occupancy was cut dramatically. It got kicked into the Long Grass by the politicians though.

 

Jamie

[lmsforever]

Could not resist   knocking down new houses,construction work given to a failing company (Corrillion)  overbudget not wanted what a waste of money nuff said

[phil-b259]

Could not resist   knocking down new houses,construction work given to a failing company (Corrillion)  overbudget not wanted what a waste of money nuff said

 

• Get real, 16 out of 200 IIRC new houses to be demolished is hardly that noteworthy - just how many were demolished to bring the MML into St Pancras, or several decades later, the M1 into London? far more than 16 certainly, and If you go far enough back you will find even the Romans were quite happy to demolish new stuff if it got in the way of later plans. Human civilisation was not built on sitting around doing nothing - it was a willingness to be bold and continuously alter the natural and built environment as time goes on.

• As has been pointed out by Carillion themselves, they are undertaking the work as part of a consortium of 3 - and whats more the other two partners have signed legally binding undertakings that they will ensure the contract the consortium has won will be delivered on time and on budget (i.e. they stump up the cash if Corillion goes bust and argue about it later)

• Its not over budget - the main reasons costs have gone up is the UK deciding to walk out of the EU and the resultant massive devaluation of Stirling on the money markets. Road building, house building and indeed pretty much anything that requires the purchase of construction materials has gone up significantly since June last year (as was predicted at the time but not listened to / not thought important enough by the electorate when casting their ballots)

• Finally only an idiot with their head in the sand fails to appreciate that our main lines linking London to the north have run out of capacity. While not wishing to resurrect the debates that have been had before on here, it is a fact that with passenger numbers continuing to grow and the desire not to squeeze rail freight off the tracks, extra capacity is essential. HS2 (in its current form) has been developed by experts in the field as the most efficient, least disruptive and most future proof way of providing that extra capacity the UK rail network needs.

Edited July 17, 2017 by phil-b259

[lmsforever]

Service as usual on here . Bye all have fun on this rather unpleasant thread.

[Geoff Endacott]

 £250 million is the current quote for duelling the A30 between Carland Cross and Chiverton Cross in Cornwall. A distance of 14km, nearly £18m per km! 

 

...and that's an awfully long fight.

 

Geoff Endacott