HS2

[Northmoor]

3 hours ago, Grovenor said:

And given the global security situation, should we be relying on offshore wind. Just how long would it take a Russian submarine to cripple an offshore windfarm?

Wow this thread is going OT.........

 

The answer to the question is, a Russian submarine would not dare operate so far within UK waters and shallow enough for our offshore windfarms to be attacked this way.  You'd be able to see the sub from the air, you wouldn't need to use sonar to find it.  Interference with the Norwegian gas connector is much more likely (as is a cyber attack on our infrastructure, which is much more "plausibly deniable").

Edited January 28, 2023 by Northmoor

[lmsforever]

Politicians are well known for talking big but delivering virtually nothing  we are lucky that we have what we have but dont hold your breath they could still cut back HS2 .

[ess1uk]

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

Easy, everybody goes back to horses.

Then the same protesters would be bleating about all the horse poo everywhere.

Got one of them

slow and not cheap to run

[APOLLO]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

So spreading the existing stock thinner over the network. Reducing services on non-HS2 lines to cascade stock to HS2. That's going to go down well with those crammed onto existing rolling stock isn't it? Or maybe that doesn't matter. With a lot of trains already running at well over 100% of pre-Covid levels, that makes a bad situation worse.

 

And when will we be able to afford new rolling stock? My guess is never. Might as well raid the NRM. The whole country, at the behest of many people, is going backwards.

 

Blame the government for the spending cuts  (and the Chinese for Covid ) ? - Not that simple though. The shortage of money for UK capital projects of all kinds is not the only worry, don't forget the rapidly rising cost of both replacement and operational expenditure on our railways (and everything else). There is only one pot of money.

 

I'm only suggesting a way of affording HS2, given we are now too deep into it to cancel, Euston included. - OK my suggestions are may not be valid, please suggest viable alternatives.

 

With the cost of living crisis, post covid etc are we running at well over 100% of pre-Covid levels ? Asking as I don't know. Certainly some London Glasgow trains are busy, but now post Christmas most are not too busy, daughter always finds a seat (Wigan - Lancaster). Quite a few people commute between Warrington, Wigan, Preston & Lancaster on these long distance services these days. Pre covid levels ? - I don't know.

 

As we approach 2030 when new  ICE cars are banned, and given the demonisation / rising costs of motoring, cost of EV's (unaffordable for many ICE car owners today) we will need our railways more and more, and especially for local commutes in the more populated areas of the country. (i.e. here up north).

 

Brit15

 

 

 

 

[TravisM]

50 minutes ago, Grovenor said:

And given the global security situation, should we be relying on offshore wind. Just how long would it take a Russian submarine to cripple an offshore windfarm?

 

Oh get real

[APOLLO]

30 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

  Interference with the Norwegian gas connector is much more likely (as is a cyber attack on our infrastructure, which is much more "plausibly deniable").

 

Which IS a worry given our dependence on one pipeline -  can supply up to 50% of  the UK's gas.

 

Real time, scroll down to bar graph, Easington Langeled is this pipeline. About 30% at the moment, as is imported LNG at Milford Haven.

 

https://mip-prd-web.azurewebsites.net/InstantaneousView/Index

 

TBH it's not a Russian attack that worries me, more the fact that Norway has a finite supply, 15 years or so.

 

Brit15

[Phil Parker]

10 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Blame the government for the spending cuts  (and the Chinese for Covid ) ? - Not that simple though. The shortage of money for UK capital projects of all kinds is not the only worry, don't forget the rapidly rising cost of both replacement and operational expenditure on our railways (and everything else). There is only one pot of money.

 

The problem is that there is NEVER enough money to pay for capital projects. But if you don't invest in infrastructure, then the country as a whole suffers. Roads and rail grind to a halt - and all the savings not keeping up with the required capacity are then thrown away because even if anyone can make anything, they can't move it. You also don't train up all the engineers currently being developed by HS2, who in the long run will earn good money here and abroad, moving the country forward.

 

In theory, you could close all the schools, that would save a LOT of money, but long term, an uneducated workforce isn't ideal. However, in the short term, it saves you a lot of cash.

 

10 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

With the cost of living crisis, post covid etc are we running at well over 100% of pre-Covid levels ? Asking as I don't know.

 

Google is your friend.

Generally, commuting is down, leisure is up a lot. Things will change over time, that's why projects like HS2 have to be planned for the long term. You can't run away because on Wednesday things looked a bit grim. Well, you can, but that means no one can build anything bigger than a garden shed.

 

[GoingUnderground]

1 hour ago, Grovenor said:

And given the global security situation, should we be relying on offshore wind. Just how long would it take a Russian submarine to cripple an offshore windfarm?

Probably about as long as it would take a Russian (other megalomaniac regimes/fanatics/terrorists with sufficiently powerful weapons and delivery systems are available) attack to take out a conventional fossil fuel power station, or key parts of the gas or electric grid, or the North Sea gas pipelines, which would have the same knock-on effect as crippling a wind farm. Or have you already forgotten that they've tried that trick with the Nordstream gas pipeline? 

Edited January 28, 2023 by GoingUnderground
To correct spelling of megalomaniac

[class26]

2 hours ago, griffgriff said:

You don’t need more trains but you can have more of them. Besides, high speed rail is power thirsty …. Maybe we need to consider that as a factor. Slower trains may be more economical and cheaper? 

It is commonly known (Ian Warmsley in M. Railways says so and his opinion is pretty sound)  that you DO need more trains if you go slower otherwise you need to operate less services. Less services means less income and the business case falls down. The issue being that downgrading to 140 mph is not worth it   

Edited January 28, 2023 by class26

[billbedford]

3 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Is it time to do-it-yourself? The water turbine in this garden generates 14.4kW for local residents:

 

 

Martin.

 

Until there's a drought...

[martin_wynne]

2 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Until there's a drought...

 

Emergency pumped storage in winter up on the hill?

 

[Mark Saunders]

1 hour ago, Phil Parker said:

 

The problem is that there is NEVER enough money to pay for capital projects. But if you don't invest in infrastructure, then the country as a whole suffers. Roads and rail grind to a halt - and all the savings not keeping up with the required capacity are then thrown away because even if anyone can make anything, they can't move it. You also don't train up all the engineers currently being developed by HS2, who in the long run will earn good money here and abroad, moving the country forward.

 

In theory, you could close all the schools, that would save a LOT of money, but long term, an uneducated workforce isn't ideal. However, in the short term, it saves you a lot of cash.

 

 

Google is your friend.

Generally, commuting is down, leisure is up a lot. Things will change over time, that's why projects like HS2 have to be planned for the long term. You can't run away because on Wednesday things looked a bit grim. Well, you can, but that means no one can build anything bigger than a garden shed.

 

 

Using economic modelling based on the past you could drive your car based on the view in the rear view mirror.

[martin_wynne]

Q1. How much energy can we extract from the total winds blowing across the UK, before the reduced downstream wind energy affects the climate?

 

Q2. Would the effect be anywhere commensurate with the expected climate change?

 

Q3. Are these sensible questions?

 

Martin.

[billbedford]

6 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

The wind might stop blowing, the sun might stop shining -- but the tide still goes in and out. At known and predictable times. Why aren't we doing more tidal?

 

Entropy 

The more dilute the energy source that's being harvested, the bigger and more expensive the machines that do the harvesting have to be. 

 

 

 

 

[PhilH]

6 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

The wind might stop blowing, 

I did read that part of the reason for a couple of coal fired power stations being put on standby recently was that there wasn’t enough wind across the UK to maximise the output from the turbines.

 

I think it was on the BBC so it must be right……🤷🏼

[martin_wynne]

5 minutes ago, billbedford said:

The more dilute the energy source that's being harvested, the bigger and more expensive the machines that do the harvesting have to be

 

Canute didn't find it very dilute.

 

[billbedford]

9 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Canute didn't find it very dilute.

 

 

Cnut wasn't trying to run an electric railway.

[APOLLO]

22 minutes ago, billbedford said:

 

Entropy 

The more dilute the energy source that's being harvested, the bigger and more expensive the machines that do the harvesting have to be. 

 

Entropy will end everything, HS2 included !!

 

 

Brit15

[RJS1977]

10 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Thats what you get when your dedicated airport services are way more expensive than 'ordinary' ones.

 

I get the sense that for Heathrow, they think of their 'express' service as an extension of business / first class on the planes where only those on expense accounts can afford the best accommodation - the riff raff that travel economy (despite being garter in number) are not welcome...

 

The same situation occurs on the BML where airline passengers cram themselves into Southern services to Victoria rather than use the much more expensive Gatwick Express trains.

 

If you want to solve the problem then airports (and the Government) need to stop treating rail links like cash cows - particularly when other operators also run along the same route. If anything dedicated airport services should be cheaper than regular services to promote their use by ALL airport passengers. Until then airline passengers (plus their suitcases) will vote with their feet and cram on to what should be commuter services.

 

The reason the Heathrow Express service costs so much more is because the Heathrow branch (including electrification from Paddington) was completely funded by BAA with no Government support, and BAA have needed to charge a premium fare in order to recoup their investment. There was also a premium fare on the Hayes-Heathrow part of the old Heathrow Connect service (for non-Heathrow employees) as BAA were charging HC for use of the line. I'm not quite sure how the change has come about that there is no premium fare for Crossrail services to Heathrow (to the point that Travelcards are accepted), unless TfL is subsidising fares on that section

[RJS1977]

48 minutes ago, PhilH said:

I did read that part of the reason for a couple of coal fired power stations being put on standby recently was that there wasn’t enough wind across the UK to maximise the output from the turbines.

 

I think it was on the BBC so it must be right……🤷🏼

 

Indeed, that's what kicked off the energy crisis in the first place, long before Putin invaded Ukraine (in summer 2021 we had to use much of the gas we had in storage for winter 2021/22 because of a lack of wind, requiring us to buy in more gas in autumn/winter when it was more expensive).

 

I've also heard it said that as the poles are expected to warm faster than the equator, average wind speeds are likely to drop and days without wind likely to increase over the coming decades.

 

(None of which has anything to do with HS2 of course).

[frobisher]

7 hours ago, Grovenor said:

And given the global security situation, should we be relying on offshore wind. Just how long would it take a Russian submarine to cripple an offshore windfarm?

 

Probably a bit longer than it would take to hunt it down and sink it... Nothing quite like an attack to expose a submarine.

[The Stationmaster]

16 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

The wind might stop blowing, the sun might stop shining -- but the tide still goes in and out. At known and predictable times. Why aren't we doing more tidal? How many Swanseas would it take to not need nuclear?

 

 https://www.tidallagoonpower.com/projects/swansea-bay/

 

Martin.

And this is the height of disinterest in tidal power -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-57156482

 

So in reality the way all this has been handled we can only run trains when the wind blows so maybe we should f fir them with sails?

 

13 hours ago, class26 said:

Way, way, way too late to pair it back to 140 mph and in any  case it wouldn`t save much . the desing for the part 1 and 2A is all done, shovels in the ground so pair it back means redesiging it and therefore MORE cost. Also 140 mph would possibly cost more as if journeys are longer you need more trains (greater purchase cost) and larger depots  to house this greater number of trains - again more cost.   

No need to redesign it with possible exception of the signalling and power distribution (neither yet built of course).  But yes operational cost are likely to increase as I've already recently posted.

[Ron Ron Ron]

9 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

……..There was also a premium fare on the Hayes-Heathrow part of the old Heathrow Connect service (for non-Heathrow employees) as BAA were charging HC for use of the line. I'm not quite sure how the change has come about that there is no premium fare for Crossrail services to Heathrow (to the point that Travelcards are accepted), unless TfL is subsidising fares on that section

Heathrow Connect was jointly owned by HAL Ltd  (formally known as BAA Plc until 2012) and GWR.

They indeed imposed a supplement on the section of the fare between Hayes & Harlington and Heathrow.

 

When TfL took over the running of the service, in preparation for the start of the Crossrail service ( Elizabeth Line), the access charge for the Heathrow branch came under review.

HAL wanted to charge TfL a surcharge for the use of the branch for Elizabeth Line services.

TfL objected and it went to the ORR for review.

The ORR deemed that TfL should not be liable to pay towards historic liabilities incurred in building the airport branch and its infrastructure.

 

HAL appealed the decision and it went to the High court.

The court upheld the ORR decision.

So TfL are not paying a supplement and adding that to the ticket price.

 

However, there is a different premium now attached to EL services serving Heathrow.

This also applies to TfL Piccadilly underground services as well.

In order to address its financial deficit and its funding problems, the government required TfL to increase certain fares.

From September just gone (2022), fares between the Heathrow terminal stations (T 2, 3, 4 & 5) and Zone 1 are charged at Peak fare, all times of the day.

Again, this applies to both the Piccadilly Line and Elizabeth Line. 

The all day fare between Zone 1 and Heathrow terminals was  £12.80 on the EL and £5.50 on the Piccadilly Line, up to the end of 2022.

I don’t know if it’s gone up since.

 

This does not affect journeys between Heathrow and TfL & NR stations outside of Zone 1 (presumably on the west side of Zone 1 ?)….thus safeguarding airport workers living in west and outer London, outside of Zone 1.
It also helps promote local travel to and from the airport by public transport, for passengers.

 

Journeys between Zone 1 and Hayes & Harlington, or Hatton Cross, are not affected by this all-day peak fare.

 

 

Note:

Heathrow Express tickets can be as low as £5.50 one-way, if bought 90 days in advance, which makes it cheaper than using the Elizabeth Line .  Within 90 days, the next advance single is priced at £10.00.  After that it gets more expensive as you get nearer to the date of travel.

 

 

 

.

 

 

[The Stationmaster]

11 hours ago, class26 said:

It is commonly known (Ian Warmsley in M. Railways says so and his opinion is pretty sound)  that you DO need more trains if you go slower otherwise you need to operate less services. Less services means less income and the business case falls down. The issue being that downgrading to 140 mph is not worth it   

It is very simple maths - not beyond the ability of any reasonably intelligent person who understand numbers.  

 

The more difficult bit is finding the balancing point between optimum speed (actually journey time and, far more critically resource cycle time) and fleet size.  That is why those of us who were able to work out  such things seem to have been (at least in later BR days and some of us in privatised times)  reasonably well rewarded for our abilities in that area.

[APOLLO]

10 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Indeed, that's what kicked off the energy crisis in the first place, long before Putin invaded Ukraine (in summer 2021 we had to use much of the gas we had in storage for winter 2021/22 because of a lack of wind, requiring us to buy in more gas in autumn/winter when it was more expensive).

 

 

Not really, as the UK has very little LNG storage since the main sites at Partington, Avonmouth, Dyvenor Arms (Wales) and Glenmavis (Scotland) were decommissioned as life expired, and not replaced a few years ago.

 

Real time UK gas storage here. Scroll down for graphs

 

https://mip-prd-web.azurewebsites.net/

 

We now have a couple of weeks storage at best.

 

We are buying over half of our gas off Norway / Imported LNG. Europe have been importing LNG from around the world to Milford Haven, regassifying it and sending it through the UK gas transmission system and interconnector pipeline to Europe, where they re liquified and stored it. Very busy activity last summer. Meanwhile the Germans have built at great cost and speed an LNG import facility at Wilhemshaven, first shipment received earlier this month. 

 

https://www.uniper.energy/news/first-lng-cargo-arrives-at-germanys-lng-terminal-in-wilhelmshaven#:~:text=The Uniper LNG terminal in,landed in Germany per year.

 

World gas prices are expected to decline, as they would as summer approaches in the Northern Hemisphere. Next winter & what happens in Ukraine will be a real test - fingers crossed.

 

And what has the above to do with HS2 ? - Everything, as everything is energy cost related these days.

 

Quite a number of container trains pass my house (side of WCML Wigan) diesel hauled. I have read that currently (!!) this is more cost effective than using electric traction. So save money on HS2 by running diesels ?? Roll out the preserved Deltics !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15