Great Western Coffee Shop

HS2 trains are too high for existing station platforms, i can reveal, in a new farce for the project that leaves taxpayers with another huge bill.

As the Chancellor Rachel Reeves mulls tax rises and spending cuts to balance the UK’s books, taxpayers will have to find another £200m to refit HS2 train carriages because their doors are too high for ordinary station platforms.

Industry sources told i that Network Rail and the Office for Rail and Road were unwilling to allow the 225mph trains to run on the existing network because of fears that the gap between the train and the platform will be too great, making them unsafe for use.

“There are grave concerns regarding the rolling stock,” a source told i, claiming that Network Rail was unlikely to allow the trains to run on their network due to safety concerns.
Insiders say that the decision by former prime minister Rishi Sunak to scrap the scheme north of Birmingham, means the trains have a greater exposure to the existing network, heightening concerns that they are unfit for use on Network Rail platforms.

HS2 Ltd, created to deliver the £57bn project, said the trains were still in the design phase, and would now be fitted with a “two-step” solution to manage concerns around the gap on conventional platforms.

The news comes just days after it emerged that the trains will require a separate redesign to have extra doors added on each carriage to shorten the time the trains are sitting on the platforms – known as “dwell times” – to allow passengers to alight.

Stations with platforms of concern


Oxenholme

Penrith

Motherwell

Runcorn

Crewe

Warrington

Wigan

Lancaster

Macclesfield

Stockport

Glasgow Central

Documents seen by i show that cost estimates for the redesigns were £188m in 2022, with HS2 Ltd assessments showing that there are issues with around 12 platforms scattered across the rail network where the high speed trains will run.

According to minutes from a meeting between HS2 Ltd executives and Network Rail executives, concerns were also raised about “diversity and inclusion” by pursuing a train design “which might not work for wheelchair users”.

Raising concerns, Network Rail’s chief engineer Amanda Hall is recorded as stating that “it is surprising that a manufacturer with a non-compliant train should win” the contract for manufacturing HS2 trains.

Ben Rule, a director of infrastructure at HS2 Ltd, responded that the high speed train design is “complying with the contract, but whether the contract looked at this [issue with the trains] in the most compliant way is a question”.

HS2 Ltd has already submitted its request to redesign the trains, which are not due to be completed until 2027 and no pricing has been attached to the proposals.

Mind the gap
Concerns around accidents involving passengers embarking or alighting trains at the platform edge has increased across the rail industry in recent years.

The particular issue with HS2 trains stems from its original plan to use two high speed trains, one known as “captive” trains and the other “classic compatible” trains.

Captive trains were due to operate solely on high speed tracks, and were to be built to European dimensions, making them taller and wider and required bigger platforms.

These trains would have their own platforms which are higher than those on Network Rail stations. The doors of the trains were designed to offer ‘step free’ access, meaning they align with the platform and are thus higher.

Classic compatible trains were to be used to run on both HS2 and existing rail infrastructure. These are not as tall or wide as captive trains, but they must still serve HS2 platforms, which are higher than conventional platforms.

These trains included a step to allow passengers to alight level with the platform, but a redesign is now necessary to include a two-step system, one which will be used on HS2 platforms and a second that will ensure passengers can get on and off the high speed trains safely on existing National Rail platforms.

But early estimations for the design changes from 2022 show that the redesigns could add a further £188,600,000 to the existing £2bn contract HS2 Ltd has secured with the joint venture manufacturers Hitachi and Alstom.

The initial HS2 project planned to use two different HS2 trains. One, larger high speed train, which served only HS2 platforms, and another that would run on both high speed and existing tracks. As the rail project began to be cut back, beginning with the scrapping of the eastern leg of the rail line in 2021, the decision was taken to use just one train design.

The issue of passenger safety between trains and the platform has increased in recent years, with official figures showing that more than half of all passenger accidents occur between the train and platform, according to the Rail and Safety Standards Board.

A spokesman for HS2 Ltd said: “HS2’s new trains and stations are designed to work seamlessly together, providing the best possible street-to-seat service that will enable everyone, including those with limited mobility, to more easily use the high-speed railway.

“However, maintaining our trains’ improved accessibility standards along the West Coast Mainline is complicated by platform heights varying at different stations. Therefore, we’ve engineered a separate step to minimise the gap between train and platform.”

The Office for Rail and Road said it has no “current” concerns with the HS2 rolling stock.

“ORR has been making routine enquiries and continues to engage with HS2 regarding its approach to managing risks at the train and platform interface as we would with any company introducing new trains,” a spokesman said.

It follows reports that Sir Keir Starmer will consider reviving the scrapped routes north of Birmingham after receiving a Labour-commissioned infrastructure report.

The report on rail by former Siemens UK boss Juergen Maier was commissioned by Labour when in opposition, The Telegraph reported. Although an unofficial document, its suggestions that much of the HS2 project scrapped by Rishi Sunak in October should be revived would inform the government when making decisions about rail projects.

HS2: Off the rails
Originally conceived in 2009, High Speed 2 was to be built in phases and run from London to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds, significantly adding capacity to the rail network and cutting journey times.

The first phase would run from London to Birmingham, phase 2a would run from Birmingham to Crewe and phase 2b would build new lines from Birmingham to Leeds and Crewe to Manchester.

But the scheme, which was at one stage the biggest infrastructure project in Europe, has been beset by delays and cost overruns as the dream of improved rail travel hit the reality of the planning system, political opposition, soaring construction costs and the pandemic.

The first major signs of trouble came early on when the £20bn project in 2009, increased to £32.7bn in 2012, only to be revised upwards again by the Government in 2013 to £50bn.

By 2019, a report by the then HS2 Ltd chair Allan Cook, revealed that the costs had ballooned to £88bn and would not be completed until 2040, seven years later than previously expected.

Cost estimates were then pushed up once again in 2020, when it was judged that all three phases would come in at around £98bn in 2019 prices.

By 2021, the Government scrapped the eastern leg of the scheme running from Birmingham to Leeds.

Another fatal blow was delivered by Rishi Sunak last year, when he cancelled plans for the high speed line to run north of Birmingham to Crewe and then to Manchester, despite already spending £2bn on phase 2 of the line.

A National Audit Office report last month revealed that nearly £600m was spent on buying land for phase 2, while the Curzon Street Station in Birmingham will be built in full, despite less than half of the station platforms being used.

Doubts also remain as to whether phase 1 of the project will continue into Euston in central London, which risks leaving the UK’s major high speed rail upgrade running a shuttle service from outside Birmingham to outside the capital.