HS2

[Ron Ron Ron]

4 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

The reasoning for a station at OOC most likely goes back to the original idea of connecting to Heathrow, and I think was entwined with the decision to turn down the third runway and provide better rail connections instead of more domestic flights. ..........

 

A slight correction Edwin.

The 3rd runway was not turned down, but was approved.

That project has been "paused" due to a number of factors, but is still on the agenda.

 

 

 

.

[phil-b259]

18 hours ago, KingEdwardII said:

I can just see a stream of folk trotting along Old Oak Common Lane to get from their HS2 from Birmingham to a train from Willesden Junction, their luggage rolling along behind them... (It's over a mile for folk unfamiliar with the area)

 

It's this kind of lack of joined-up thinking that condemns OOC HS2 station for me. There are lines running close to OOC that could provide great connectivity across London, but there are no plans to provide any kind of usable access to trains on those lines. 

 

Yours, Mike.

 

Not so - TfL have long stated their desire to get the NLL and WLL to serve Old Oak and did in fact draw up a number of possibilities to enable this to happen.

 

The problems are:-

 

The DfT will NOT PROVIDE ANY FUNDING towards it - TfL have to sort that out themselves

 

The costs of re-routing said railways over new infrastructure to get best connectivity with the Old Oak HS2 + GWML station complex were huge and TfL and even before the pandemic TfL lacked the sort of funds needed to do it.

 

With the two depots (North Pole and Crossrail) sterilising huge amounts of land there was minimal scope for TfL to use S106 Developer Contributions towards new rail infrastructure making many of the options even more unaffordable for TfL.

 

Many of the options involved taking land from Wormwood Scrubs (either for the new links directly or to compensate Hitachi for steeling part of their depot. However Wormwood Scrubs is heavily protected by various laws - even Br had enormous struggles to acquire a tiny patch of it back in the 1990s for the North Pole depot which had to go right up to the SoS for transport who only approved it because providing a depot for Eurostar was 'of National importance'. In these even more litigious times and with green spaces / environmental concerns much higher on the agenda any further attempts to encroach on Wormwood Scrubs for what is just rail links for the London area would create huge protests / legal bills and ultimately stood a very good chance of being blocked by the courts unless the SOS could make a 'in the national interest' decision.

 

As a result TfL were forced to settle on plans for two stations on existing lines, both some distance from the Old Oak HS2 + GWML station and improved walking routes to link them. Yes a people mover type setup would have been nice - but as the cost of the new one at Luton airport shows these don't come cheap - and given circumstances meant TfL would be funding everything themselves provision of such a link is clearly not something they can afford to do.

 

Yes in an ideal world (or maybe just one where the Westminster Government stopped this 'Its the mayors responsibility' nonsense when talking about funding transport within London) we would have better connectivity at Old Oak - but as things stand TfL have recognised the need for connectivity and have tried their best to find solutions they feel able to fund towards that end.

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2023 by phil-b259

[melmerby]

12 hours ago, Mark Saunders said:

I was always intrigued by the concept of a hung parliament!

A useful purpose for a piece of rope.👍🏻

[Bernard Lamb]

1 hour ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

A slight correction Edwin.

The 3rd runway was not turned down, but was approved.

That project has been "paused" due to a number of factors, but is still on the agenda.

 

 

 

.

But vey unlikely to go ahead Ron.

The latest blow seems to be the authorities blocking the full requested increase in passenger handling costs, which makes development less likely.

Bernard

[Ron Ron Ron]

7 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

.......TfL have long stated their desire to get the NLL and WLL to serve Old Oak and did in fact draw up a number of possibilities to enable this to happen.......

 

.......The DfT will NOT PROVIDE ANY FUNDING towards it - TfL have to sort that out themselves

 

The costs of re-routing said railways over new infrastructure to get best connectivity with the Old Oak HS2 + GWML station complex were huge and TfL and even before the pandemic TfL lacked the sort of funds needed to do it........

 

Many of the options involved taking land from Wormwood Scrubs (either for the new links directly or to compensate Hitachi for steeling part of their depot. However Wormwood Scrubs is heavily protected by various laws.....

......In these even more litigious times and with green spaces / environmental concerns much higher on the agenda any further attempts to encroach on Wormwood Scrubs for what is just rail links for the London area would create huge protests / legal bills and ultimately stood a very good chance of being blocked by the courts unless the SOS could make a 'in the national interest' decision.

 

As a result TfL were forced to settle on plans for two stations on existing lines, both some distance from the Old Oak HS2 + GWML station and improved walking routes to link them.........

 

 

Indeed Phil.

Suggestions of diverting the WLL to the west, to cross the GWML to the east of the Hitachi depot on a viaduct, with a new OOC station alongside and above the HS2/GWML station, were immediately shot down by Hammersmith & Fulham because such a route would cross the protected open space of Wormwood Scrubs. 

Their stance was to not allow an inch of the Scrubs to be encroached upon.

There would have also been a long line of other legal challenges, on environmental grounds, if this proposal had got off the ground..

 

Such a diversion of the NLL would also have faced difficulties in cutting through the industrial area, between the canal and Willesden Jct, despite this whole area already being earmarked to be completely demolished and redeveloped as part of a new mini-city quarter.

No doubt the land being much more valuable being sold for such a scheme, rather than its value under CPO's.

 

As such, there's a proposal for a new WLL station on the current alignment, with a long walkway to the main OOC station.

Far from ideal.

 

In contrast, the proposed NLL station on Old Oak Common Lane (just some 400 metres from the front door of the HS2 station), would appear to be a "no brainer", but as you described, the DfT and Treasury won't put up the money and TfL are broke.

 

.

Edited March 20, 2023 by Ron Ron Ron

[Ron Ron Ron]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[jamie92208]

At long last there is something to report on the TBM's progress.   4 of the 5 have been updated recently and after 6 weeks we have some news of the progress of Sushila and Caroline.  Sushila has passed the first kilometre mark with 1,107m out of 7685, Caroline is a bit behind with 867m.  They awe both averaging over 10m per day.  I suspect that they will really seem to speed up when we next see a report.   Florence and Cecilia are both over the 9km mark out of 16 and are both doing well over 20m per day.   I felt that it was worth doing another graph.

Jamie

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

.....and meanwhile, ate Long Itchington, "Dorothy" had only 154 metres to go, as reported 11 days ago, on 9th March.

 

Assuming the TBM will slow down as it approaches the southern portal, it will only be a matter of days, or a week or two at most, before it completes the drive and emerges from the tunnel.

 

 

 

.

[woodenhead]

Small problem in Ruislip

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-65013542

Edited March 20, 2023 by woodenhead

[Ron Ron Ron]

55 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Small problem in Ruislip

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-65013542

 

It appears to be at the same location as the previous escape of slurry through an old, uncapped borehole.

 

 

.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Information on the leakage of air and fluid at Ruislip rugby Club.....

 

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/hs2-confirms-ground-bubbling-in-videos-taken-in-ruislip-is-not-a-sinkhole-22-03-2023/

 

 

QUOTE:

 

HS2 confirms ground bubbling in videos taken in Ruislip is not a sinkhole

22 MAR, 2023 BY THOMAS JOHNSON

 

A High Speed 2 (HS2) spokesperson has said that fears stemming from videos circulating on social media of ground bubbling near tunnelling for the project are not the result of a sinkhole.

 

The videos show a large muddy, bubbling puddle at Ruislip Rugby Club which caused a number of witnesses to fear it was a sinkhole caused by tunnel boring machines working on HS2.

The sinkhole claims follow on from a similar incident at the rugby club in February when tunnelling stopped for two hour as bubbling foam escaped at ground level through a pre-existing borehole at the same location.

 

Speaking about the current incident, an HS2 spokesperson said: “Air appears to have been forced to the surface through waterlogged ground via a pre-existing borehole during tunnelling operations.

The area has been temporarily fenced off and remains safe.”

 

The issue was first reported on 19 March as Skanska Costain Strabag joint venture's (SCS JV) tunnelling work progressed in the area.

SCS JV is currently constructing more than 20km of twin-bore tunnels on the HS2 route to its southern terminus at Euston with two Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs). 

The TBMs for the 8km long tunnels from West Ruislip to Greenford were launched in October last year.

 

During the tunnelling operations, SCS JV is backfilling small gaps behind the segmental reinforced concrete lining of the tunnel with grout which sometimes pushes air up to the surface.

HS2 believes that small volumes of air have migrated through a sealed borehole and as air has got close to the top of the borehole it has found natural gaps in the topsoil and grass of the field. 

It is likely to continue for a period of time while tunnelling operations continue, HS2 confirmed.

HS2 Ltd further stated there is no sign of subsidence and it is not a sinkhole.

 

At the time of the February incident, tunnelling specialist Bill Grose told NCE: "Boreholes are usually positioned some distance horizontally from the tunnel alignment and are grouted on completion to prevent this type of occurrence and of course would be recorded on a GIS or BIM model for the tunnellers to be aware of.

"The TBM will be injecting drilling fluid, ie the foam, at the tunnel face to keep the face stable and to help remove spoil. 

The drilling fluid will be under pressure and will therefore exploit any flow route, such as a fissure or other void at a lower pressure. 

The borehole, if not fully sealed would provide a route to ground level for the pressurised drilling fluid."

 

Ruislip Rugby Football Club originally reported the incident as the puddle is located on its property but HS2 has stated the club was not impacted as the puddle sits far away from the pitch and close to the land boundary.

HS2 has stated the ground in the area is a challenging mix of clay, chalk and sand and recent rainfall has increased the water level in the ground.

 

 

.

[woodenhead]

A report of 15 missing Ruislip players feared lost down a sinkhole on the pitch after a late night practice has been cleared up, they were on a stag weekend for the scrumhalf.

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, woodenhead said:

A report of 15 missing Ruislip players feared lost down a sinkhole on the pitch after a late night practice has been cleared up, they were on a stag weekend for the scrumhalf.

Knowing rugby players on stag dos, they probably had disappeared down a hole (or two)😄

[icn]

On 16/03/2023 at 05:21, david.hill64 said:

Alstom has developed the AGV - a distributed power TGV - complete with articulated bogies, but as far as I know the only customer has been in Italy. They are reported to be working on a double deck variant. SNCF of course partly own the design rights to the TGV having paid for its development prior to the EU banning such nonsense and there might still be commercial advantages to SNCF in maintaining the procurement of traditional TGV designs.

 

Or of course it is entirely possible that SNCF will understand, as BR did, that if you want an intercity train longer than about 5 coaches, you are much better off with power car(s) and trailers..........

 

And Stadler have the Giruno with articulated powered bogies, albeit not true high speed at only 250km/h.

 

The claim that you are better off with power cars above 5 coaches is conditional on various factors. The choice of EMU for the latest Swiss double-decker intercity trains was driven both by capacity factors (claimed 10% increase in capacity over an equivalent 400m train which ends up needing 2 locos), and acceleration. The latter factor is less important for long intercity routes such as what the TGV operates on, but for other locations it is important. The former would need to be weighed against various other costs and it might not even be necessary for many routes. Just because locomotives might be purportedly better for the UK doesn't mean that they are better everywhere else in the world. Finally, if the evaluation was based on arbitrary locos and arbitrary coaches then it doesn't translate to a dedicated loco paired with dedicated coaches that are never mixed and matched with other trains.

 

Nay I suspect one important factor instead is pantographs. The TGV - like Swiss IC double-deckers - has a continuous upper floor, as opposed to an intermediate deck at the coach ends as is seen on most double-deck trains. In the case of an EMU that leaves you with a single location for your pantograph - right above the cabs. Good luck fitting two pantographs there. If my memory serves me correctly two pantograph widths are needed for France alone. Next, I'm not sure what pantograph arrangement is used when two units are coupled together, but if they want to use the foremost and rearmost pantograph then there's the question of whether a pantograph at the very front of the train - as opposed to 20m further back at the rear of the power car - is even safe or reliable at 320km/h.

 

You could perhaps fix the pantograph issue by making the end-cars single-deck, but you'll lose the continuous upper deck and therefore trolley access for these cars. You'll also lose some more capacity (beyond the space taken up by distributed traction equipment), at this point you might not have much of an advantage over locos. Or perhaps you can use a variable width pantograph, but it's not clear whether they're suitable for 320km/h - the version that was designed for the Swiss ICs was only designed for 200km/h and isn't even being used yet because these trains are staying domestic for the time being.

 

Combine these factors with the potential noise and comfort downsides of distributed traction, and it's not clear why the SNCF would want to risk investing in a double-deck EMU.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Mr B0tt0m and the Copthall Tunnel.

Soundtrack by Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[DavidLong]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/27/revised-plans-hs2-london-euston-terminus-cost-5bn

 

David

[jamie92208]

I found this on the BBC website.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-65035770

 

Jamie

[Ron Ron Ron]

2 hours ago, DavidLong said:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/27/revised-plans-hs2-london-euston-terminus-cost-5bn

 

David

Thanks David.

I had just read the article myself, only a couple of minutes before seeing your post.

 

In addition to these extra costs, TfL are saying that they’ll need extra Elizabeth Line trains to cope with OOC being the London terminus for what may end up being 15 years.

Madness!!!

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/tfl-needs-more-elizabeth-line-trains-to-manage-the-hs2-delay-at-euston-61458/
 

 

 

 

.

Edited March 27, 2023 by Ron Ron Ron

[corneliuslundie]

So the NAO says delay and changing things are making it less affordable so the DafT says they will delay and change it again. Joined up thinking? Stupidity? Or just a wish to scupper the project (after billions have been spent of course)?

I despair of governments (and not just in the UK or any particular party).

Jonathan 

[jjb1970]

Nothing about DfT would surprise, but in fairness if their political masters and the treasury have told them to try and fit a quart into a pint pot something will give. I do have some sympathy for those who are told they have a budget and that they have to make their commitments fit the funding available. That does promote stupid short term decision making, but the people who should be blamed are not usually the ones who face the heat. I have known a lot of people in the MoD who understood the stupidity of their decisions full well but who had been given instruction which made such decisions all but unavoidable.

 

Where it gets more problematic is that it is also true that government departments and government departments don't have a very good reputation for efficiency or spending what money is available to good effect. Which leads to a lot of (in my opinion, justified) questioning to what degree cuts are down to silly cost cutting or off a reasonable reaction to cost increases. And in this case, it's no secret that government finances are already a mess and could get massively worse very quickly if the nascent banking crisis is anything like as bad as some suspect.

[DavidLong]

What seems to be lacking in the view of DfT/Treasury in this whole discussion about HST is a sense of proportion. Being in part of government is exactly what they should have before making these highly dubious and expensive decisions.

Here is a slide that has been used by Gareth Dennis which gives an assessment of the sense of proportion required:

 

The £4bn spent on High Speed Rail represents 0.36% of total government expenditure in one year. Not exactly enough to break the bank, is it? This seems like a small price to pay for a significant addition to national infrastructure in one of the richest counties in the world and which will be in place for decades to come.

UK Government - it's called investment.

Drives me to despair.

 

David

Edited March 27, 2023 by DavidLong

[jjb1970]

TME is a bit of a meaningless metric in this case, as it includes both current and capital spending. 

 

Attempts to cut current spending are notoriously difficult (toxic even). Politically it is much easier to focus on capital spending, even if many economists would argue that capital spending is the part that should be protected given that it is building infrastructure, providing employment etc.

 

So the real indicator is the percentage of government capital spending. And saying it is £4bn pa may be true but slightly misleading given it is a commitment over many years (it will be several decades from inception to delivery).

 

Then the question is what capital projects does the government have to support? Politically, health and education are almost always the big vote winners and political safe bets. Then we have a slight problem with defence (we've given a lot of our already limited equipment and consumable supplies away and need to replace it all in a hurry if we don't want to have a gaping hole in defence). HS2 is not the only part of rail capital spending and rail not the only part of DfT. Then consider things like energy (the path to zero emissions isn't cheap), law and order etc.

 

And every one of those departments and all the others have essential capital projects, most of which will cost a lot less than HS2. 

 

So the question is, what does the government do? Control costs to deliver commitments more efficiently to the agreed specification? That would be ideal but previous history indicates it to be a case of 'good luck with that'. Do they raise revenue collection? That is always easy politically just so long as someone else faces the bill (at the risk of sounding cynical, the definition of rich and being able to afford to pay higher taxes seems to be a step above whatever most people are earning). Or does it just demand budget cuts? In which case we see all sorts of stupid decision making.

 

Fundamentally, the UK (as with much of Europe) is a country living beyond its means and hoping the next generation can figure out what to do with increasing debt.

 

None of which is to say I am against HS2, but the financial issues with HS2 are a symptom of a much deeper issue.

Edited March 27, 2023 by jjb1970

[woodenhead]

DFT regretting demolishing this:

 

DFT now looking at this for the new revised 'cost effective' design

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by woodenhead

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

None of which is to say I am against HS2, but the financial issues with HS2 are a symptom of a much deeper issue.

My question in this debacle would be how much the companies and shareholders of those companies have made so far from this project and if they are really concerned about the cancellation because they can just move resources to the next big project.

 

Then I would ask how many MPs have significant investments in these big engineering companies and how much they profit from the profits made so far on HS2.

 

Then I ask myself so who really loses out and who wins when a Government doesn't deliver what was promised and have to make do with a cut down version that isn't quite the blistering shining solution envisioned 10 years ago.

[jjb1970]

12 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

My question in this debacle would be how much the companies and shareholders of those companies have made so far from this project and if they are really concerned about the cancellation because they can just move resources to the next big project.

 

Then I would ask how many MPs have significant investments in these big engineering companies and how much they profit from the profits made so far on HS2.

 

Then I ask myself so who really loses out and who wins when a Government doesn't deliver what was promised and have to make do with a cut down version that isn't quite the blistering shining solution envisioned 10 years ago.

 

Those companies have also made significant investments to deliver their work packages. It will be a lucrative project over several years for many of them but it's also true that they have had to provide bids in a competitive process. 

 

All the same, they're not charities and need to make an adequate return on investment and an acceptable margin. Some may be quite exposed as normal practice is to bid low and wait for variation orders when working for the government. That relies on things going ahead.

 

Government work can be lucrative but against that they are often the client from hell. If parts are cancelled the affected contractors will expect any cancellation clauses to be honoured (if not it'll go to court) and move on. The construction workers will either be redeployed or they will have to find new jobs. Ditto contractors. The staff project teams will likely just move onto something else.