HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general discussion

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

The map is below....

[mjones]

According to the Sunday Telegraph, the transport select committee is going to recommend that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) should start in the north, leaving the southern section until later. I hope this isn't true, as if so it would demonstrate a worrying failure by the committee to grasp that the whole point of HS2 is to provide increased capacity, and that capacity is most urgently needed on the southern section. Building a northern HS2 in isolation wouldn't have any business case at all.

[Electric train]

According to the Sunday Telegraph, the transport select committee is going to recommend that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) should start in the north, leaving the southern section until later. I hope this isn't true, as if so it would demonstrate a worrying failure by the committee to grasp that the whole point of HS2 is to provide increased capacity, and that capacity is most urgently needed on the southern section. Building a northern HS2 in isolation wouldn't have any business case at all.

May be the Select Committee are interested in the politics of perhaps protecting their own seat in Parliament those in the proposed route because of loss of votes due to the NIMBY's those in the north because building it there would generate jobs show investment hence possibly earn them votes.  We have to remember the MP^▸ (Member of Parliament)'s start looking to the next election in 2012 so will be unwilling to do anything that might upset the voters and will do anything to please the voters.

Besides since when have MPs grasped anything that is common sense

[JayMac]

From The Telegraph:

HS2 rail link should start in north of England say MPs

A report by the all-party transport select committee is understood to propose that the government abandons plans to make London to Birmingham the first section of the ^34 billion scheme to be built.

Instead, MPs say Justine Greening, the Transport Secretary, should consider starting construction of the HS2 link in Leeds and Manchester, with a Y-shaped line going south to Birmingham.

The Sunday Telegraph understands that the committee was hit by internal rows over its final report, out on Tuesday, which is understood to give the project broad support, but to include some specific criticisms.

Under current plans, construction of the southern section linking London and Birmingham, is likely to start in 2017 with the first trains using the route in 2026.

The Y-shaped section north of Birmingham, to Leeds and Manchester, is likely to begin to be built in 2016 and is scheduled to open around 2032.

Turning the project on its head and starting in the north would put off for years major battles with Conservative MPs through whose constituencies the southern section is expected to pass as it cuts through the Chiltern Hills to the north west of London.

Such a move would also boost regeneration in the north of England.

Ms Greening is expected to give the government's response to the national consultation on HS2 ^ including a "final" route map between London and Birmingham ^ next month.

[northwesterntrains]

If they want to boost regeneration in the north then new stock for local services, regeneration of stations and extra track at congested sections of line will be far more useful and cheaper than HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)).

All major towns and cities in England outside the South East have 125mph trains to and from London.  On the other hand XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) services are slow, so how about a new high speed link between somewhere like Blackpool and somewhere like Newquay via Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol?

[JayMac]

All major towns and cities in England outside the South East have 125mph trains to and from London. 

Norwich? Northampton? Shrewsbury? And if were talking outside the South East rather than outside the (former NSE^▸ (Network South East)) Network area then there are numerous places in the south that do not have 125mph trains to and from London. Portsmouth, Southampton, Salisbury.

And whilst the rest may have 125mph capable trains, on many lines or for large parts of the journey that speed is never achieved.

[Btline]

What's going to happen to all these extra HS^▸ (High Speed (short for HSS^▸ (High Speed Services) High Speed Services)) trains from Manchester and Leeds once they slam into Birmingham?

No capacity. In fact, congestion will get WORSE, as they'll still need to be trains from Liverpool, Stoke, Wimslow travelling on the Classic WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line).

[mjones]

Indeed, such a  proposal would be absurd, for this and lots of other reasons. I hope that the select committee aren't in fact about to produce such a recommendation and suspect that this is the Telegraph furthering its anti HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) agenda by leaking a minority view in the committee. If however this is what the committee recommend in their final report then it is a rather damning indictment upon their understanding of the issues, and will seriously damage their credibility.

[RailCornwall]

Outsource the whole lot, construction, operation, maintenance to RFF / SNCF^▸ (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais - French National Railways) and get the Assembl^e Nationale and Senate to legislate accordingly. We might actually get it constructed then.

[eightf48544]

Interesting idea RailCornwall. the trouble is you'd get a junction station for Glasgow and Edinburgh somewhere near Meridan and if you are  lucky intermediate stations somewhere between Warrington and Manchester on the Glasgow branch and on the Edinburgh branch somewhere between Leeds and York although both are not far in LGV^▸ (Large Goods Vehicle) terms from Meridan, and maybe somewhere near Newcastle.

the trouble is our major population centres are too close together in LGV terms.

Don't know how many juctions you'd get with traditional lines as LGV junctions tend to cover vast acres of land to minimise the curvature not sure we'ed have room .

Look at Amiens fought hard to get LGV Nord, misses it by miles.

Which is why I'm not sure HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is the answer, or if so to what is it the answer?

[northwesterntrains]

All major towns and cities in England outside the South East have 125mph trains to and from London. 

Norwich? Northampton? Shrewsbury? And if were talking outside the South East rather than outside the (former NSE^▸ (Network South East)) Network area then there are numerous places in the south that do not have 125mph trains to and from London. Portsmouth, Southampton, Salisbury.

And whilst the rest may have 125mph capable trains, on many lines or for large parts of the journey that speed is never achieved.

OK all major towns may be an exaggeration but the point about faster trains/routes being needed for XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) type journeys is still valid.

[Tim]

If this new line is all about capacity, I would have thought that a new frieght line would be the way to go.  It would be cheaper (cos lower speed), less environmentally damaging (cos doesn;t need to be so straight or plough into city centers) and could be built to a continental loading guage.  Passenger capacity (and perhaps speed to an extent) could be increased on the existing lines with their already-built city centre stations.

[mjones]

No, a freight line wouldn't release anything like the same capacity, for two reasons: first, there aren't as many freight trains on the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) as fast trains that will divert to HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), secondly, the mix of speeds between fast and semi-fast services uses far more capacity than is used when trains are all travelling at similar speeds with similar stopping patterns. 

I don't dispute that there are valid concerns about HS2, but none of the alternatives proposed offer anything like as much additional capacity for both long distance and regional services.

[mjones]

Not surprisingly, the Telegraph's prediction about the Transport Committee report was largely wide of the mark:

"There is a good case for a high speed rail network, linking London and the major cities of the Midlands, the North and Scotland says the Commons Transport Committee. "

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/transport-committee/news/hsr---substantive/

However, the report still includes the bizarre recommendation "A full assessment of the case for building from north to south should be carried out as a priority". When the chair of the committee was interviewed on the Today programme she agreed fully that all the capacit benefits are on the London to Birmingham section, so I suspect it only represents a minority opinion. There really isn't much to do a full assessment on: the capacity is needed in the south, so that's where you start building!

They also say "Claims that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) would deliver substantial carbon-reduction benefits do not stand up to scrutiny", which is a bit of a straw man, as the HS2 scheme documents are very clear that carbon savings are small, and largely dependent upon the extent to which the electricity supply is decarbonised.

They also question cost benefit analysis based on value of time, which has certainly become controversial, however it is still the standard method used in transport appraisal and it would not be reasonable for high speed rail to be treated differently from other transport schemes in that respect, simply because it suits the HS2 opponents.
Nonetheless, the campaigners have seized on it to conclude that the report destroys the business case, so it appears the report has something for everyone in it. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15619461

[onthecushions]

The HoC Select Committee proceedings have shaken my support for HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)). The promoters seemed just lobbies for the consultants, contractors, interest groups and regional chambers of trade with a lot to gain. Only NR^» (Network Rail - home page) came near to convincing me but the reasonable alternatives weren't given and  some answers were just wrong, such as no intermediate stations being possible (never heard of platform loops or high speed turnouts).

If long distance capacity is the issue (i.e to Rugby, in stage 1) then the old Great Central route is the answer. Well engineered, older main lines (such as the GW^▸ (Great Western) and LNW/WC^▸ (Wiltshire Council (Unitary Authority))) were mostly laid out for speed and with a small fraction of the ?32Bn quoted could have long stretches raised to LGV^▸ (Large Goods Vehicle) speeds. What they can't have is mixed traffic operation so HSx in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) really requires new slow/relief lines to allow full segregation. The argument against this majored on tunnelling (the fast lines) under existing towns, really to allow all the platform roads to be used by non-TGV^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse) and stopping trains, unnecessary if this traffic were to be diverted.

I suspect that in the end the big scheme capital costs will be too much for a weakish economy like the UK and after years of dreaming (and borrowing), we'll have to live within our means again.

Thoughts?

OTC