HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general discussion

[whole diary]

[ellendune]

The comment about the trains on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) being more overcrowded than on the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line). My trains from Birmingham to Coventry and back today were both 11 car trains.  The Waterloo to Exeter train I met on Saturday looked like 12 cars. 

Even the longest trains on the GWML are only 8 at the moment.

There is therefore a lot of scope to grow capacity on the GWML by increasing train length.  SWT^▸ (South West Trains) is trying to increase capacity on other lines by lengthening trains to 12 cars.  There is less scope to do so on the WCML.  So the WCML is going to hit the need for a new line sooner assuming the same rate of growth.

[grahame]

There is therefore a lot of scope to grow capacity on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) by increasing train length.

As I recall, that's not going to be easy at Paddington

[ellendune]

There is therefore a lot of scope to grow capacity on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) by increasing train length.

As I recall, that's not going to be easy at Paddington

Good point the extension of the concourse area over the years has taken a lot of capacity there.

However, Crossrail will get over this problems from the inner suburban trains. 

It would probably be possible to make a few platforms available for longer trains. P1 is the obvious, but perhaps a few others?

[TonyK]

The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)'s version of the Electric Spine in the 2012 HLOS^▸ (High Level Output Specification) has no mention of Avonmouth at all, just the routes north from Southampton.  Where are you getting that description from?
Paul

Probably I should have said connecting Avonmouth to the electric spine, rather than suggesting it is part of the Electric Spine. More like an Electric Hip?

My source is West of England Partnership Joint Transport Executive's minutes of meeting on 12 September 2012, item 5:

15. Looking beyond 2019 to Control Period 6 the HLOS requests the rail industry to identify the most efficient electrification schemes including the freight linkages Derby ^ Birmingham ^ Bristol along with the Government^s longer term aim to provide high capacity electrified routes from all major ports to the long distance electric rail network is set out. It is assumed this will include lines to Portbury (Portishead) and Avonmouth.

Electric Spine is a CP5^▸ (Control Period 5 - the five year period between 2014 and 2019) aspiration. After 2019, in CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024), other major ports are joined into it, meaning electrification from Avonmouth and Portbury to join the spine at Derby. So far, the call is to identify the schemes with the highest benefit to cost ratio. Avonmouth intends to have a new Deep Sea Container Port, which will involve a huge increase in rail traffic to and from there. The timing according to their website said "By 2015" when I first looked in 2010, but now says:

D. When will this happen?

We are currently waiting for global economic conditions to improve. Once construction start the terminal will be ready in about 3 years.

If it has to wait for CP6 before work starts, it could not start running before 2022. Let's hope not.

How do you define 'white elephant'. If it means an expensive scheme that is hardly used, then HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is not one. If it means an expensive scheme with some fairly major flaws, but still gets heavy usage, then HS2 might be.

The term comes from a fabled gift by a king to another visiting king. It is a very special elephant, being white, and being a king's gift, it must be cared for. So when it gets home, it cannot be put to work, but still eats a great deal. It is thus useless, and a very expensive gift. HS2 is certainly not useless, and I believe strongly that it should be built. The white elephant that I would show to Margaret Hodge is Bristol Metrobust.

In other news, the government fight-back to sell HS2 to a sceptical public has begun. Patrick McLoughlin, with timing so serendipitous that it makes me wonder if the brouhaha of recent days has been choreographed, delivered his speech at the Institute of Civil Engineers, as reported by the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Hardly likely to be a hostile audience, but he produced a report by KPMG, like a larger Paul Daniels producing a rabbit in book form from a hat. This report tells us that all is well, and HS2 will produce massive benefits for everybody, albeit not for 15 years after the first train runs. The nay-sayers at the Institute for Economic Affairs like it - not a lot. Even though the report was clearly commissioned some time ago, they accuse the government of changing the statistical methods for measuring benefits - as if!

Daniel Finkelstein, in the Times, argues for HS2 because it will bring about chance meetings of minds. I value his opinion as a rule, but find his argument this time a little tenuous and unconvincing. Which is a shame.

As for expanding the existing routes, don't forget that the extension of platforms at Waterloo alone is, IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly), to cost northwards of ^250 million. HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) can't be made longer, other than by coupling, and rolling stock is at a premium. Then there's the 10 to 15 years of chaos and delay whilst the work is done. No thanks.

[ellendune]

As for expanding the existing routes, don't forget that the extension of platforms at Waterloo alone is, IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly), to cost northwards of ^250 million. HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) can't be made longer, other than by coupling, and rolling stock is at a premium. Then there's the 10 to 15 years of chaos and delay whilst the work is done. No thanks.

As I see it the stations West of Paddington to Maidenhead are being made 10 car (?) for Crossrail and Reading is being made with long platforms albeit to allow use of a and b ends, The main stations seem to have retained long platforms from an earlier age.  So on the main line at least it does seem to be only Paddington that is the problem. 

As for HSTs - It would be IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) that would be made longer and some of thema re going to be 10 car. So is Paddington long enough already for them?

[stuving]

As for HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) - It would be IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) that would be made longer and some of thema re going to be 10 car. So is Paddington long enough already for them?

As far as I can see - yes, or very nearly, for P1-P10. The current layout at Paddington is quite generous with both the concourse and the space between the gateline and the platforms, especially given that the Lawn is there as well. As a result, the trains do not reach much past the first (from the concourse end) aisletransept.

Since the platforms don't show up too well on Google Earth, what you can measure is from aisletransept 1 to the end of the canopies at 220 m on P4, and to the near edge of Bishops Bridge Road it's 247 m. So it only needs a little bit more inside the station or under the bridge to reach the 260 m that a 10-car IEP needs. Some platforms are, I think, a bit narrow by modern standards at the far end, but a small amount of modification ought to be enough - and P1-3 are officially longer than this anyway.

[Red Squirrel]

It struck me when reading the last few posts that we could almost rename the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) as 'HS0'; at least the core Bristol - London route. It is an object lesson in the benefits of vision, and not cutting corners, when investing in infrastructure.

[Rhydgaled]

How do you define 'white elephant'. If it means an expensive scheme that is hardly used, then HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is not one. If it means an expensive scheme with some fairly major flaws, but still gets heavy usage, then HS2 might be.

The term comes from a fabled gift by a king to another visiting king. It is a very special elephant, being white, and being a king's gift, it must be cared for. So when it gets home, it cannot be put to work, but still eats a great deal. It is thus useless, and a very expensive gift.

Thank you. I can now agree with you that HS2 is not a white elephant, since I do not believe it will be useless. However, it could be a heck of alot more useful than it would be as currently planned.

However, if the argument the government is using to support HS2 is ecconomic rather than capacity then I do not support the scheme. I suspect, if transport links help the ecconomy anyway, that greater ecconomic benifits for northern England would come from building new Intercity lines like Liverpool - Manchester - Leeds - York than HS2, probably at less cost.

It is on capacity grounds that HS2 is useful and on that basis I support it in principal. However, as I have said it could be far more useful. My main gripes are:
1. Having Euston as a London terminus rather locks it in as a stand-alone line, not part of a national network that could grow to relieve capacity on other main lines
2. Having the central Birmingham station as a terminus preventing through trains from Liverpool/Manchester/Glasgow calling at Birmingham on the way to London. This means Birmingham needs it's own seperate trains to London, wasting capacity and wasting electricity/energy/CO2 (a distance that short only needs 125mph trains to beat the competition (road), especially given the lack of intermediate stops, so why give it a 250mph rail link?)
3. I cannot see the Leeds spur being particularly useful in capacity relief terms, or (given the lack of town/city centre stations on route and, I guess, lack of Leeds - Birmingham links) actually that useful at all. Actually, I may have found a white elephant there. Not HS2 as a whole, but the Leeds spur.

Given the main case for a HSR network is capacity, I would suggest that future lines have slightly more intermediate stops (and less full-speed running where this allows a cheaper route).

As for HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) - It would be IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) that would be made longer and some of thema re going to be 10 car. So is Paddington long enough already for them?

They are not really 10-car IEP trains though are they. They are 2x 5-car IEP trains, with a total seating capacity similar to a 9-car IEP train. DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about). Now that 'extra coach' really is a white elephant, as are the proposed 5-car IEP trains themselves. Give us a uniform 9-car fleet please (perhaps with a few real 10-car sets on East Coast).

[Lee]

Ah, the dawn of a brand new media day...

From the Department for Transport and HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) Ltd

Property owners protected by HS2 compensation scheme

Proposed measures to compensate residents affected by HS2 are announced.

New proposals setting out compensation for residents affected by the first phase of HS2 have been published today (12 September 2013) by Transport Minister Simon Burns.

The measures go significantly beyond what is required under statute.

The government agreed to re-consult on compensation following a High Court ruling in March. The proposals aim to assist property owners who are affected by HS2, as well as supporting the local housing markets along and around the line of route between London and the West Midlands.

Simon Burns said:

^
HS2 is a vital scheme that will help rebalance our economy and generate economic growth. It will free up vital space on our railways for passengers and freight, generate hundreds of thousands of jobs and deliver better connections between our towns and cities.
^
However, we will do everything possible to minimise the effect on those living on the route. We are committed to fairly compensating those who are affected and I want to hear views on the generous and comprehensive measures we have set out.
^
This is a complex area which we are determined to get right. That is why we pledged to look again at how to help property owners - including consulting on a property bond - and that is exactly what we have done.^

The proposals include:

^express purchase - a streamlined system of purchasing properties that are within the safeguarded area - giving greater certainty to owner-occupiers closest to the line that the government will buy their homes at the full un-blighted value, along with additional compensation of 10% up to a value of ^47,000 and reasonable moving costs

^a long-term hardship scheme - for owner-occupiers who have strong personal reasons to move but cannot do so, other than at a significant loss because of HS2 - like the exceptional hardship scheme the government introduced in 2010, which is still operational, this would have no defined geographical boundary

^two possible approaches to renting homes to their former owners following government purchase

The government is also consulting on 2 potential options which would provide further assistance in rural areas, these are:

^property bonds - a transferable guarantee that the government would act as the buyer of last resort for those living close to the route

^a voluntary purchase scheme - for owner-occupied properties within 120 metres of the route.

To support the consultation a series of information events for local communities will be held along the line of the HS2 Phase One route from London to Birmingham.

The previous consultation on measures to assist and compensate property owners took place from October 2012 to January 2013.

The government is now re-consulting on most elements of that consultation as well as additional measures. However, to avoid unnecessary delay there is no re-consultation on proposals for:

^restoring confidence in the value of properties above tunnels

^how we should seek to ensure the replacement of any social rented housing that is lost as result of HS2

Separate announcements will be made about these shortly. Meanwhile, the government has published a non-technical summary of the Impacts of tunnels in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom).

The consultation launched today (12 September 2013) will run for 12 weeks, closing on 4 December. Final schemes should come into operation by next summer.

I'll duck now...

[IndustryInsider]

As for HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) - It would be IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) that would be made longer and some of thema re going to be 10 car. So is Paddington long enough already for them?

As far as I can see - yes, or very nearly, for P1-P10. The current layout at Paddington is quite generous with both the concourse and the space between the gateline and the platforms, especially given that the Lawn is there as well. As a result, the trains do not reach much past the first (from the concourse end) aisletransept.

Since the platforms don't show up too well on Google Earth, what you can measure is from aisletransept 1 to the end of the canopies at 220 m on P4, and to the near edge of Bishops Bridge Road it's 247 m. So it only needs a little bit more inside the station or under the bridge to reach the 260 m that a 10-car IEP needs. Some platforms are, I think, a bit narrow by modern standards at the far end, but a small amount of modification ought to be enough - and P1-3 are officially longer than this anyway.

Official platform lengths are as follows:

1:  307m
2:  277m
3:  273m
4:  249m
5:  252m
6:  253m (HEx)
7:  251m (HEx)
8:  237m
9:  245m
10:  255m
11:  165m (or 291m if blocking platform 12)
12:  171m
13:  150m
14:  144m

So, without modifications, and allowing a suitable amount of extra length for stopping short of the buffers, then there's only really 2 platforms that could accommodate 10-car 260m IEP's at present.  That figure rises to 6 platforms currently able to accommodate 9-Car IEP's at present.  When I say 'at present' I'm not 100% sure whether a couple of signals might need to be moved as they're not currently right at the end of the platform in all cases.

Should the platforms for the Heathrow Express be changed from 6/7 to 8/9, and platforms 12 and 13 combined to create one long platform (at the same time releasing the full length of platform 11 to all trains), then you have 4 platforms capable of holding 10-car IEP's and 9 capable of holding 9-car IEP's without major surgery to the quite small concourse area at Paddington or the complex trackwork at the station throat.  It already gets mighty busy there on most evenings, so reducing concourse capacity by moving the buffer stops is asking for trouble in the future if you ask me - even with many passengers down in the new Crossrail station!

So, that's my guess as to what will happen as a minimum so there's enough capacity for the new trains.

As for HSTs - It would be IEPs that would be made longer and some of thema re going to be 10 car. So is Paddington long enough already for them?

They are not really 10-car IEP trains though are they. They are 2x 5-car IEP trains, with a total seating capacity similar to a 9-car IEP train. DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about). Now that 'extra coach' really is a white elephant, as are the proposed 5-car IEP trains themselves. Give us a uniform 9-car fleet please (perhaps with a few real 10-car sets on East Coast).

That is certainly very true.  From the draft specification a 10-car IEP has just 14 more extra standard class seats that a 9-car and 11 less first class ones, so an extra carriage for just 3 more seats!

[eightf48544]

That is certainly very true.  From the draft specification a 10-car IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) has just 14 more extra standard class seats that a 9-car and 11 less first class ones, so an extra carriage for just 3 more seats!

 

[paul7575]

To be precise I think the comparison above is only about 5 car IEPs^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) running in a pair, which is not actually a 10 car IEP... 

A proper 10 car unit would only need the same First class and catering facilities as a 9 car, with the extra vehicle probably being an extra standard class coach with about 80 seats?

Paul

[IndustryInsider]

Yes, sorry if I wasn't clear - the 10 car IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) would be two 5-cars working in multiple compared to a single 9-car unit as that is the current spec.  Whether in time the 9-car electric's are extended to 10-cars in the same style as the recent Pendolino lengthening is quite possible, so perhaps more major surgery to clear most platforms for 10-car 260m long trains will be more prudent?

[TonyK]

We, as a forum, have slipped into the error of criticising the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) project's rolling stock because even if the platforms at Euston and Birmingham were lengthened, it could not provide a cheaper alternative to HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)). The two projects are massive, both in terms of delivery and of cost. They are intended to achieve different outcomes.

IEP and the conjoined twins of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) and ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) electrification are primarily to allow the replacement of the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) with an electric option. Doing nothing would mean either commissioning yet another high-speed diesel series - the HSTs were meant to fill the gap between steam and electricity, remember. Or we could refurbish 30-year-plus-old trains yet again, or give up on high speed rail for those routes entirely. The secondary objectives are to increase capacity, speed up journeys, and reduce the environmental impact of rail travel. A tertiary effect will be the cascading of stock of reasonable standard, for use on services such as the proposed Greater Bristol Metro.

HS2, despite the misnomer, is primarily to add capacity to passenger and goods services between north and south by means of a brand new railway, capable of high speed. The secondary objectives are faster journey times, the reduction of emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants per tonne of payload, a reduction in internal air travel, and a whole lot of jobs in construction, engineering, and property law.

HS2 is not really a big bang, but it is more than a mere wet fart - probably best described as a medium sized bang. It draws a number of lines. No new railway, other than the odd short chord to connect two bits, will use anything other than electricity as the source of motive power. The days of locomotive power for passenger transport are over, as surely as steam will serve only the fantastic and brilliand heritage sector, and the EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) will rule the roost henceforth. They have no fixed length, other than the platforms they serve. The cost of extending those in a working station is huge.

[Rhydgaled]

No new railway, other than the odd short chord to connect two bits, will use anything other than electricity as the source of motive power. The days of locomotive power for passenger transport are over, as surely as steam will serve only the fantastic and brilliand heritage sector, and the EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) will rule the roost henceforth.

Not strictly true. Scotland are building a new diesel railway and locomotive haulage isn't completely obsolete. LHCS^▸ (Locomotive Hauled Coaching Stock) and Multiple Units both have their advantages and disadvantages. MUs^▸ (Multiple Unit) win hands down in the vast majority of cases, but there is the odd spot where LHCS would do as well as an MU for a similar cost. That spot is long distance, limited stop, services (ie. Intercity). Isn't the Railjet in Europe rather new? That's LHCS.