HS2

[woodenhead]

@APOLLO You're looking at it through the wrong eyes, as reasons not to.

 

That level crossing to the houses, it's not the only route, a lot of the industry is now gone or going - it's a viable route, it doesn't have to be TGV straight.

 

It is also the least impacting whilst giving benefit to Warrington and Liverpool.

 

I'm quite pleased to see some plans coming forward that look at the topology and don't simply want to run a bulldozer through a city.

[Steamport Southport]

19 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Useful, they will be electrifying the Warrington Central route then

 

I heard that rumour ages ago.

 

There's not really much in the way of infrastructure such as bridges and tunnels to get in the way. Already electrified up to Hunts Cross which is currently being rebuilt. New station recently built at Warrington West .

 

 

There are also plans for a station on the WCML at Halewood South (near where Ford/Jaguar Land Rover is and near to Hattons).

 

 

Jason

[corneliuslundie]

A post further up says electrification of the MML to Sheffield. How will HS2 trains then get to Leeds? I assumed that would get wiring as well. I hope they are not thinking of more hybrids.

And another aspect, will the fleet of HS2 trains now need more compatible with the existing system and fewer of those dedicated to HS2? Is that why the promised summer announcement on fleet procurement didn't happen? And one reason why those tendering may be upset? 

Jonathan

[phil-b259]

8 hours ago, KingEdwardII said:

One simple approach is to have a T5 station and then a T2/T3 station as at present - various other airports around the world have a pair of stations like this. T4 would have to be via some kind of shuttle, but T4 is relatively small.

 

With the arrangement on a loop, the extra time is fairly small. It is also possible to choose which trains go via Heathrow and which do not - they don't all have to go there. The presence of the major interchange at Reading just to the west offers flexibility since people can change trains there if necessary.

 

As with many of these reports, it is often a case of drawing out a desired conclusion*. I treat any report prepared by a politician with a high degree of skepticism.

 

The real question is whether you want an integrated transport system and whether you are committed to getting more people to travel by train rather than by car. I am sure that a lot of people travel to Heathrow by car because the alternatives are simply slow and inconvenient - I certainly did. 

 

Yours, Mike.

 

* A certain "Beeching Report" comes to mind - remember that one?

 

Ok lets look at Paris shall we? one of the pioneers of HS rail travel and who know a thing or two about what works.

 

Does the LGV nord pass through CDG airport? NO

Does the LGV est pass through CDG airport? NO

Does the LGV sud-est pass through CDG airport? NO

 

In all cases diverting the line to pass through the airport was never considered to be viable due to the amount of deviation from the optimal route.

 

What the French did do of course was ensure the Paris avoiding LGV did pass through the airport - in a similar vein to if a HS1 to HS2 link hugged the Southern and Western M25.

 

Unfortunately with HS1 entering London from the east and the geographical position of London in the UK (i.e. fairly close to the channel coast compared to the likes of Paris, there simply isn't the potential to have HS rail routes radiating southwards out of the capital which means the ability to repeat what the French did doesn't exist.

 

However that HS link in itself was not simply because of the airport! It just happened to lie on the best route between the LGV Nord and LGV sud-est (in the same way Birmingham happens to lie slap bang in the middle of the route between London and Manchester).

 

Also it should be noted that as with HS2 and Birmingham, the primary driver of the LGV link line round Paris was long distance rail traffic - in that case services from northern France / Belgium / the Netherlands to the south of France and although airport passengers formed part of the business case the real drivers of the scheme lay elsewhere.

 

If Heathrow is to be served by HS rail then the best business case is likely to be as part of a HS line heading west to Bristol / South Wales / the south west.

 

Of course had more enlightened folk been listened to in the 1970s we would have seen a new airport developed to the NW of London - a position which would have put it directly in the path of HS2 and made a station there a no-brainer.

 

[melmerby]

2 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

 

Of course had more enlightened folk been listened to in the 1970s we would have seen a new airport developed to the NW of London - a position which would have put it directly in the path of HS2 and made a station there a no-brainer.

 

Assuming you mean the Wing/Cubbington area.

We had the same protesters then (more likely their parents) that are objecting to HS2 now

If you drove around the area you would have seen countless "no airport here" banners

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, corneliuslundie said:

A post further up says electrification of the MML to Sheffield. How will HS2 trains then get to Leeds? I assumed that would get wiring as well. I hope they are not thinking of more hybrids.

And another aspect, will the fleet of HS2 trains now need more compatible with the existing system and fewer of those dedicated to HS2? Is that why the promised summer announcement on fleet procurement didn't happen? And one reason why those tendering may be upset? 

Jonathan

 

The 'HS2 Captive fleet' plan got ditched a couple of years ago (about the time the decided to serve Sheffield by spurs onto the MML through the City rather than a dedicated HS2 facility) as the volume of trains to be ordered was going to be too small to make it viable.

 

ALL train procured by HS2 will therefore be fully compatible with the existing UK rail network - though HS2 itself is still being built to larger European standards meaning that should the amount of HS infrastructure be expanded in subsequent decades the ability to have a 'HS2 captive' fleet of double decked trains (i.e. two TGV duplex units) will be possible.

Edited November 18, 2021 by phil-b259

[scottystitch]

2 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

 

ALL train procured by HS2 will therefore be fully compatible with the existing UK rail network...

Thanks for that, I didn't know that.  I thought there was still going to be a dedicated sub-fleet for Euston to Curzon Street.

 

Best

Scott.

[phil-b259]

Just now, melmerby said:

Assuming you mean the Wing/Cubbington area.

We had the same protesters then (more likely their parents) that are objecting to HS2 now

If you drove around the area you would have seen countless "no airport here" banners

 

Quite so - and I know we have discussed this before over the years on RMweb.

 

However if the majority of the population live to the North and West of London, its the most logical place to put our National Airport as it were, because it reduces then numbers needing to orbit London to get to it.

 

Its obviously a non starter these days but had we had the guts to push through with it (like the French did with the creation of CDG) then air pollution and traffic congestion around Heathrow would be nowhere near as bad, plus it would then be in a suitible place to be intercepted by HS2 on its way north.

[lmsforever]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

Assuming you mean the Wing/Cubbington area.

We had the same protesters then (more likely their parents) that are objecting to HS2 now

If you drove around the area you would have seen countless "no airport here" banners

Living in the area we did not want an area fom Aylesbury luton Bedford destroyed for an airport because that is what would have happenned .The main buildings would have spread plus new housing would have taken land for miles and we would have had miles of roads and the traffic levels would have been horrendous.There are perfectly adequate airports at Luton and E Midlands  plus Heathrow .Thankfully sense prevailed and we got on with our lives .This airport would have blighted so many lives at least HS2 when its built will not blight our countryside.So thats the story behind our protests which reached a higher level than HS2 has reached I bet if you lived around here you would have joined us.

[RJS1977]

On 17/11/2021 at 13:17, KingEdwardII said:

 

Even that journey involves crossing London - and I can tell you that Waterloo to Kings Cross is miserable if you have luggage, having done it numerous times.

 

 

Of course the real solution there would be the construction of through N-S cross-London rail links. But quite apart from the enormous expense and upheaval, there would be the usual cries of "Why are they spending all that money on London?" again. 

[lmsforever]

Reading the new report on our railways I wonder just how much of it will be carried out plus with HS2 only going to Birmingham there are going to be a great many agrieved people. Trains to the north and Scotland  will not be the fast time cutting services touted in the past .Non tilting units will not match Pendo times north of Crewe but passengers from the home counties who benefit from the existing reliable well timetabled trains will find only slow connecting trains on offer.HS2 is in danger of becoming a fast couldesac to Birmingham and may not recoup money spent on it plus as I said before many passengers will be alanaited by the services on offer on existing lineoing fors.overall I wonder what the people who produced this document have been doing to produce such a poor document. I fully expect to be vilified but you can bet that there will be a good few million people who feel the same as me  face the facts rail has been stuffed again.

[Ron Ron Ron]

22 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Reading the new report on our railways I wonder just how much of it will be carried out plus with HS2 only going to Birmingham there are going to be a great many agrieved people. ........

 

HS2 isn't "only going to Birmingham".

It's being built all the way to Manchester and will provide connections at Crewe and further north, into the WCML, to serve Liverpool, the NW and Scotland.

 

.

[Flittersnoop]

24 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Reading the new report on our railways I wonder just how much of it will be carried out plus with HS2 only going to Birmingham there are going to be a great many agrieved people. Trains to the north and Scotland  will not be the fast time cutting services touted in the past .Non tilting units will not match Pendo times north of Crewe but passengers from the home counties who benefit from the existing reliable well timetabled trains will find only slow connecting trains on offer.HS2 is in danger of becoming a fast couldesac to Birmingham and may not recoup money spent on it plus as I said before many passengers will be alanaited by the services on offer on existing lineoing fors.overall I wonder what the people who produced this document have been doing to produce such a poor document. I fully expect to be vilified but you can bet that there will be a good few million people who feel the same as me  face the facts rail has been stuffed again.

HS2 won't be a cul de sac - trains will reach Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow, and eventually Nottingham and Sheffield.

 

Today's announcement is nowhere as bad as I thought it might be - bits of it are actually an improvement on the old plan. But, as you say, there's no guarantee whether any of it will be finished. If inflation really takes off and the country is bankrupt, at least we can convert the Chiltern tunnels into nuclear bunkers in case any of our friends in the East decide to start a war!

[Andy Hayter]

The reasoning for HS2 as a new line was that the other option of upgrading the existing line would have been too disruptive.  I wonder therefore just how disruptive to lines from Birmingham to Leeds and from Manchester to Leeds and Hull will be.  

 

I sense a jam-tomorrow project and today will be not only no jam but probably no butter or even bread (unless you own a replacement bus company in which case the bread and honey will flow).

[montyburns56]

2 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Googling the area just found this

 

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/18797772.unilevers-warrington-factory-closes-today-130-years/

 

 

So perhaps if all the industrial clutter is demolished it would help tremendously. BUT there are other industries around also. 

 

Any Warringtonians here who could shed more light ? - Not been there for years.

 

Brit15

 

 

 

 

I don't think that there's any major industrial businesses on the route though. From what I can gather it's mostly just small businesses in metal sheds, which I'm sure could be relocated relatively easily. And the eastern level crossing on Quay Fold could be eliminated as the road can also be accessed via the other level crossing and even that could be eliminated with a new road connection via Barnard St.

[woodenhead]

4 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

A post further up says electrification of the MML to Sheffield. How will HS2 trains then get to Leeds? I assumed that would get wiring as well. I hope they are not thinking of more hybrids.

And another aspect, will the fleet of HS2 trains now need more compatible with the existing system and fewer of those dedicated to HS2? Is that why the promised summer announcement on fleet procurement didn't happen? And one reason why those tendering may be upset? 

Jonathan

Via Manchester I imagine in the first instance using the Manchester Leeds route or they wire from Sheffield to Wakefield

[woodenhead]

2 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Reading the new report on our railways I wonder just how much of it will be carried out plus with HS2 only going to Birmingham there are going to be a great many agrieved people. Trains to the north and Scotland  will not be the fast time cutting services touted in the past .Non tilting units will not match Pendo times north of Crewe but passengers from the home counties who benefit from the existing reliable well timetabled trains will find only slow connecting trains on offer.HS2 is in danger of becoming a fast couldesac to Birmingham and may not recoup money spent on it plus as I said before many passengers will be alanaited by the services on offer on existing lineoing fors.overall I wonder what the people who produced this document have been doing to produce such a poor document. I fully expect to be vilified but you can bet that there will be a good few million people who feel the same as me  face the facts rail has been stuffed again.

Massive savings made from London to Golborne, the route north can be eased and cant altered to improve line speed without tilt being required, trains are generally faster now so they don't need to use tilt further up to cope with slow freights and fast passengers, the intermodals are probably the slowest trains on the route and they shift.  The Pendolino will be due for retirement by the time HS2 trains are heading to Scotland

[lmsforever]

The route to manchester and crewe could go the way of Leeds as the costs will doubtless spiral like all long term jobs do and if we have different political masters who will undo everything their predessors have done.The Pendos will offer a good service beyond thirty years with refurbishment carried out.I still think that many passengers will be offered poor alternative services as they are in France ,if you cant get to TGV hard luck there might be a railcar occasionaly.The rail review is a badly thought out project and HS2 will complicate inter city travel in the UK.People want a no change journey and many many will find no alternative have to to put up with changes.The WCML  is going to be sidelined south of Crewe great but now you can leave Glasgow at 4.30pm and be in MK by 8.45pm change at crewe to a stopper and allow longer .Not a good replacement for an extremely well patronised services plus the fares on HS2 will have to be high to give a return on the investment and will the rolling stock be comfortable ,and last a reasonable time ? Euston is only to have ten platforms for HS  is this enough for sixteen trains per hour and will these trains make a profit? These questions do not have answers now or even long term plus who knows what the countries situation will be in ten plus years there could be a decline as often happens but that is conjecture. I hope that HS2 is a success as the engineering is to a level never seen in the UK and the people building the line are dedicated.As usual they and everyone else is let down by polaticians. I feel better getting this off my chest !

[96701]

The land in South Yorkshire is littered with old mines which cause subsidence on the railway, hence the slow journey times between Sheffield and Wakefield. I wonder how capacity there is going to be increased for those trains that travel between Sheffield and Leeds and how long services will be disrupted while upgrade works are carried out? Shades of Railtrack and WCML upgrade springs to my mind.

[96701]

3 hours ago, lmsforever said:

 and will these trains make a profit? 

I'm not sure that any trains make a profit. During BR Sectorisation, I worked for Inter City East Coast. That bit of Inter City made a profit, as did Gatwick Express. All other Inter City routes made a loss, but Inter City as a whole was profitable. Come privatisation, the keys to the ECML franchise have been handed back on more than one occasion, making me think that the whole network requires taxpayer support which might be achieved now by reducing the track access fees for the TOCs and FOCs and simply increasing the payment to Network Rail.

Edited November 19, 2021 by 96701
spealling is carp

[jamie92208]

5 hours ago, 96701 said:

The land in South Yorkshire is littered with old mines which cause subsidence on the railway, hence the slow journey times between Sheffield and Wakefield. I wonder how capacity there is going to be increased for those trains that travel between Sheffield and Leeds and how long services will be disrupted while upgrade works are carried out? Shades of Railtrack and WCML upgrade springs to my mind.

30 plus years after most of the mines closed I suspect that any subsidence has now happened. There may be some historical slows where repairs haven't been carried out but I doubt that there are any new areas. There may be some construction problems caused by old and badly filled shallow old workings though.

 

Jamie

 

 

[Kris]

45 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

30 plus years after most of the mines closed I suspect that any subsidence has now happened. There may be some historical slows where repairs haven't been carried out but I doubt that there are any new areas. There may be some construction problems caused by old and badly filled shallow old workings though.

 

Jamie

 

 

30 years is nothing for subsidence from mines. The land around the house my wife used to live in suffered from subsidence at time caused by mines that had closed hundreds of years ago (so long that there were no official records of mining on the site).

[KingEdwardII]

15 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

If Heathrow is to be served by HS rail then the best business case is likely to be as part of a HS line heading west to Bristol / South Wales / the south west

I can agree with that. France points out another thing - having a HS line that bypasses the city centre of Paris altogether. At least they have a comprehensive plan - something sadly absent in the UK.

[KingEdwardII]

17 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

76% of terminal passengers were travelling to/from The SE region ... Of those, 70% were travelling to/from Greater London.

Yes, but the damning statistic in there is that >60% of passengers travel by car/taxi and only 10.6% travel by rail and 18.8% by tube (2019). Gatwick had 44.2% arrive by rail. Birmingham 18.4% by rail. So rail could be doing a much better job at Heathrow than it does currently - and this is despite the well known "car park" characteristics of the M4 and M25 routes to Heathrow. Interestingly, coach/bus accounts for almost as many passengers as rail at Heathrow.

 

If the thinking is that passengers are happy to travel into a London terminus and then out again from Paddington, this is truly wrong-headed. Myself and my colleagues refused to do this for the best part of 40 years - we were part of the 60% in cars. It's too slow and too much hassle.

 

One of the other interesting numbers buried in the stats for Heathrow is just how few passengers arrive/depart by plane from other UK airports - only 6%. This includes both folk travelling to the London area itself and also those making international connections.

 

Yours, Mike.

[Ron Ron Ron]

23 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

Yes, but the damning statistic in there is that >60% of passengers travel by car/taxi and only 10.6% travel by rail and 18.8% by tube (2019). Gatwick had 44.2% arrive by rail. Birmingham 18.4% by rail. So rail could be doing a much better job at Heathrow than it does currently .......

 

......If the thinking is that passengers are happy to travel into a London terminus and then out again from Paddington, this is truly wrong-headed. .........

 

...err, are you not aware of the Elizebeth Line (Crossrail) ?

(Finally)  opening in less than 6 months time, this is aimed at substantially increasing the number of passengers travelling to/from Heathrow by rail.

 

There's also the Western Rail Link project, which has unfortunately been delayed and put on ice, yet again (IIRC it's the third delay?) .

Unlike the paper proposal, Southern Access to Heathrow" (Heathrow Southern Railway) and the previous, defunct "Heathrow Airtrack" from the early 00's, the Western Rail Link to Heathrow- WRLtH  (formerly known as WRAtH) is an actual, live Network Rail programme that has gone through several stages of consultation and pre-planning processes.

 

This link has been designed and is close to being ready for submission to the Secretary of State for full approval, which would be followed by a formal planning application.

Construction of the western link should have started in 2017 and would be close to opening in a few months from now, had it gone ahead on the original schedule.

However, the GWML electrification cost overrun and parlous state of NR finances saw it put back, under the guise of requiring another round of consultation. Then another round of consultations was ordered as a delaying tactic, followed by further delay hidden under the cover of awaiting the 3rd runway decision.

Now it has gone off the back burner and been put in the fridge, due to the economic aftermath of Covid and the uncertainty of Heathrow's development plans following the effective ending of the 3rd runway project.

 

If over the next decade, Heathrow is to return to anywhere near the 80 million passengers a year it was handling, then the Western Rail Link and hopefully the Southern Rail Link, should be worthwhile projects to progress. So I agree with you that this should have been done years ago.

However, you are never going to have the capacity to put through trains or intercity connections through the existing Heathrow rail tunnel system.

 

 

This is the HS2 thread by the way.....

 

 

 

.