HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general discussion

[whole diary]

[Phil Farmer]

     I tend to think that the argument that a new high speed line, misses too many major towns or cities, misses the point.
     
     Surely the existing network will allow passengers from places like Milton Keynes or Rugby to feed into the High Speed line at Birmingham.   After all - when you catch a flight from Heathrow to Athens for example - you would't expect it to pick up at Brussels, Berlin, Zurich or Rome on the way.

     The whole point, surely, is reduce the travelling time over long distances.

     Even a journey combining a feeder service, together with the High Speed link, would still offer a good reduction on current journey times.

[brompton rail]

It seems that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is more likely to have new stations in London, Birmingham and perhaps Manchester.  It certainly would be very difficult to accommodate High Speed Trains in New Street for example. Probably take as long to travel from London to Proof House junction as it will getting through the tunnel from Proof House into a platform. 

I am inclined to the view that building cut-off high speed lines might result in less fast journeys but benefit more places. A HS^▸ (High Speed (short for HSS^▸ (High Speed Services) High Speed Services)) line parallel to the East Coast line which had short spurs to, say, Nottingham, Sheffield, but passed through, say, Doncaster before going to Leeds would enable faster services to many East Midland, South and West Yorkshire destinations as well as speeding up journeys between London and Newcastle and Edinburgh.  A similar line parallel with WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) and spurs towards Brum, Manchester, Liverpool, Preston (not forgetting towards North Wales) would free up space on the existing lines, speed up long distance trains, serve existing main line stations thus allowing good connections with other services to be maintained.

Has anyone stated how many passengers are carried by air between London and Manchester and Leeds compared with the current number of rail passengers. There are no flights from Yorkshire to Heathrow for example (according to press reports). High Speed lines ought to be to increase the attractiveness of rail compared with all other modes, not just air, which is likely to become even more expensive than rail!

[Btline]

     I tend to think that the argument that a new high speed line, misses too many major towns or cities, misses the point.
     
     Surely the existing network will allow passengers from places like Milton Keynes or Rugby to feed into the High Speed line at Birmingham.   After all - when you catch a flight from Heathrow to Athens for example - you would't expect it to pick up at Brussels, Berlin, Zurich or Rome on the way.

     The whole point, surely, is reduce the travelling time over long distances.

     Even a journey combining a feeder service, together with the High Speed link, would still offer a good reduction on current journey times.

Yes, but many direct services will be lost, such as Wolverhampton/Sandwell and Dudley to Euston. Milton Keynes to Manchester may survive, but as a much slower and infrequent service, as it will need to call more often to compensate for the loss of the London - Manchester passengers.

And I think the plan is for Birmingham to be severed by a London facing branch, giving Britain's second city NO direct high speed link North.

My suggestion would speed everyone up.

[TerminalJunkie]

And I think the plan is for Birmingham to be severed by a London facing branch, giving Britain's second city NO direct high speed link North.

That just proves you haven't read it...

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/images/5896_NewLines_routePlan.jpg

[Btline]

Thanks TJ, that's the first "plan/map I've seen with the Birmingham branch facing both North and South.

Is this NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s preferred route?

I haven't read it because I am bored of countless "reports" and "plans".

[IndustryInsider]

I haven't read it because I am bored of countless "reports" and "plans".

It's been in all the serious documents I've read. The latest RAIL for example quotes half-length trains (5 coaches) running four trains per-hour starting at Birmingham running north, two calling at Manchester, Preston and Glasgow, and two calling at Preston and Edinburgh. Those are in addition to 12-14 trains per hour running north from London.

It's very early days and so scant regard can be given to the length of trains and frequencies and stopping patterns, but what it does demonstrate is that Birmingham northwards is very much on the agenda.

[John R]

I haven't read it because I am bored of countless "reports" and "plans".

Puts you at a bit of a disadvantage when putting forward your views on the subject then?

[Chris from Nailsea]

Is this NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s preferred route?

Well, the fact that Network Rail chose to publish it does rather suggest that it is their preferred route? 

[Btline]

All maps I've seen over the last few years show a single London facing branch; if this has changed, so much for the better.

Puts you at a bit of a disadvantage when putting forward your views on the subject then?

Whether or they run services North from Birmingham, my original post still stands. So the fact that I didn't drool over the latest proposal is irrelevant.

Anyway, I've stopped reading these documents. Partly as I can't be asked to spend time wafting through 100s of pages of hot air!

I used to read these reports; I used to lick my lips at the proposed improvements. But every year when the new report came out, the "completion dates" would be pushed back a year. (or more!) No progress. No action. Probably because they'd wasted the year writing another bloody report instead of actually building X line/station/signal/track!

[IndustryInsider]

It's also worth pointing out that Network Rail's proposals are separate from the Governments own HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) study - though of course both might refine their plans based on each others findings.

[caliwag]

mmm...here's what "an important think tank" is proposing for Central Scotland...have to say it seems a grim idea taking a high speed train from London (or even all points European) to a hub in the middle of nowhere, only to be crammed onto a 158, or it's latest incarnation to the Centre of Glasgow or Edinburgh...forget about Stirling...that's always going to be a 158!
Sorry it's not the South West, but you can see how some people are thinking!

Almost certainly more on this in the next issue of Rail

[caliwag]

of course forgot to attach the relevent article...bah

http://www.nce.co.uk/5204225.article

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Birmingham could get two new multi-million pound railway stations if proposals for a high-speed rail network get the go-ahead.

The first line is expected to be built between London and the West Midlands with trains running at more than 200mph, cutting journey times to less than 45 minutes from the Midlands to London.

The BBC has learned that as part of plans to accommodate the new line, Birmingham will probably need two new stations.

The first would be close to the city centre, probably in the under-developed Eastside area.

A second station is likely to be built close to Birmingham International Airport and the National Exhibition Centre (NEC^» (National Exhibition Centre - about)), with easy access to the motorway network.

Those involved in planning high-speed lines agree New Street station, which is due for a major redevelopment, will not be suitable, although it would continue to serve the non-high speed services.

It is understood potential sites for the stations will be included in a report, due to be handed to transport ministers at the end of this month.

The report has been compiled by High Speed Two (HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s))), a special company set up by the government earlier this year. Its sole aim is to plan the first line to the West Midlands, but it has also been advising ministers on options to go further north in the future.
 
High-speed rail campaigners have maintained that having two stations in Birmingham would make "perfect sense".

Jim Steer, director of campaign group Greengauge 21, said: "We will have to see the report, but my guess is that it is pretty likely. There is a very strong case for a city centre station and equally I think they will find, as our work has found, there is a very good case for a station at perhaps Birmingham International Airport."

In recent months there has been a long and drawn out debate about exactly where a high-speed station for the West Midlands should be.

Some have argued high-speed rail systems work best when lines go directly into city centres.

Others, like officials from the airport and NEC, have backed plans for an "interchange" station there.

Paul Kehoe, chief executive of the airport, said: "We truly believe in an integrated transport solution and a station here with the NEC, the airport and the M42 is a fantastic location. So let's get on with it."

Although the report will be completed by the end of December, it is not clear when it will be officially published.

The government has said it is committed to launching a public consultation in 2010, however those plans will almost certainly be delayed by the general election.

It is hoped that despite the impending election, ministers will publish the report either in February or March.
 
High-speed rail plans have achieved cross-party support and it is expected that whichever party forms the next government, planning work will continue.

But there are already concerns about the impact a high-speed line could have on the communities through which it might pass.

The report is likely to put forward several potential routes. And while the speculation about the routes continues, each of the areas which could be potentially disrupted could suffer lengthy periods of blight, where property values fall and houses become more difficult to sell.

Chartered surveyor Steven Hinton said: "It's likely to be sometime before we have a definitive route and particularly in an election year, the more delay there is, the more blight there will be and the more hardship there will be for families."

Building a high-speed network will cost tens of billions of pounds, which is expected to come from a mixture of public and private sector sources.

Planning the network is also expected to take several years to complete.

Early estimates suggest construction of the first line to the West Midlands could start in 2015 with the line opening in the early-2020s.

[paul7575]

The report is likely to put forward several potential routes.

I thought they'd explicitly said the report will put forward only one fully engineered route (albeit with some local options), because of the huge issues with property blight in Kent when they proposed a number of different routes for the CTRL^▸ (Channel Tunnel Rail Link). 

So if it proposes for instance a route based on the existing Chiltern route , that will be the route, to all intents and purposes...

Paul

[Btline]

Only problem is the bad connexions from regional and commuters services to the HSS^▸ (High Speed Services).

And B'ham will have 4 different city centre stations on 3 different routes!