SkyscraperCity banner

23181 - 23200 of 23512 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,009 Posts
Although I do want HS2 axed, i know that all graphics, prototypes, diagrams and proposed stations are designed for traditional single deck trains. If HS2 trains are supposed to also go on existing railways, no bridges are low enough for double decker units.
There will be two fleets of trains, Classic Compatible which can travel the whole network, and Captive, which will be restricted to the new tracks. It's the Captive trains that are yet to be detailed and could easily be double decked
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,009 Posts
The implication in the UK context I think is that each unit needs one single deck car configured First Class - shop - standard class. This way the wheelchair space(s) aren't an isolated island, but can travel in the same compartment and at the same level with companions, and have access to the full range of onboard services.
Which would also neatly solve the "where do the motors go?" question.
Currently Alstom seem to be offering something like two short power cars with 7 or 8 intermediate double deck passenger cars, potentially seating about 640-650 per unit. This format is because it is difficult to incorporate distributed traction under double deck passenger cars due to a lack of space.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,125 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,230 Posts
Surely the biggest hint yet from Government that the Eastern Leg is in serious danger of being chopped (despite references to Oakervee's conclusion that a Y-shaped network is the "right solution"):
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-speed-north-an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands-terms-of-reference/terms-of-reference-for-an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands#an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-midlands-and-the-north-high-speed-north
If DfT's Terms of Reference to the Phase 2B integration with NPR and NR Review states specifically that legislation for "the Western leg should (still) proceed" (provided that doesn't compromise the review....surely a Burnham-Bechtel Mcr spur realignment would do just that though?), then what does the silence on the Eastern Leg say about their commitment to that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
934 Posts
Surely the biggest hint yet from Government that the Eastern Leg is in serious danger of being chopped (despite references to Oakervee's conclusion that a Y-shaped network is the "right solution"):
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-speed-north-an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands-terms-of-reference/terms-of-reference-for-an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands#an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-midlands-and-the-north-high-speed-north
If DfT's Terms of Reference to the Phase 2B integration with NPR and NR Review states specifically that legislation for "the Western leg should (still) proceed" (provided that doesn't compromise the review....surely a Burnham-Bechtel Mcr spur realignment would do just that though?), then what does the silence on the Eastern Leg say about their commitment to that?
I’ve sometimes wondered about what sort of benefit that could be gained for Newcastle, York and Edinburgh from the eastern arm. One day there will likely be a second high speed line in to London built, but would that be more likely to be on a Cambridge/Stansted alignment, with services on the current ECML plugging in to that? Perhaps such a new line would continue hue further north than just Cambridge though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
578 Posts
It'll be a real waste of the complex grade separated junctions east of Birmingham being built as part of phase 1 if they then cancel the eastern phase 2b lobe entirely. One wonders how it would effect BCR also as it will mean one tranche of passenger demand removed on routes to Birmingham and London.

One wonders what challenges a second HSR into London would face in finding somewhere to locate another station - it was tough enough finding somewhere for the existing scheme. If Phase 2B East (in whatever guise it is realised) still connects to HS2 at Brum, the infrastructure to get the rest of the way to Birmingham and London city centres is already there and no new stations/tunnels etc. are required. It will literally cost nothing.

Interesting to note they are looking to report "at the end of the year" - at one time they were planning to only take 6 months.

I can't help sensing some "politics" in this also - is there the whiff of "getting spades in the ground up north" before the next general election..?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
934 Posts
Well spaces in the ground in the north before the next GE would be a helpful story to spin for Johnson. It would be physical evidence of the scheme going ahead and move the conversation on from ‘us up here and them down there’. But there would also need to be tangible evidence of NPR taking place, given the noise Johnson has made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
Surely the biggest hint yet from Government that the Eastern Leg is in serious danger of being chopped (despite references to Oakervee's conclusion that a Y-shaped network is the "right solution"):
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-speed-north-an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands-terms-of-reference/terms-of-reference-for-an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-midlands#an-integrated-rail-plan-for-the-midlands-and-the-north-high-speed-north
If DfT's Terms of Reference to the Phase 2B integration with NPR and NR Review states specifically that legislation for "the Western leg should (still) proceed" (provided that doesn't compromise the review....surely a Burnham-Bechtel Mcr spur realignment would do just that though?), then what does the silence on the Eastern Leg say about their commitment to that?

I read legislation for Western leg proceeding as phase 2a.
The rethink is 2b, so on the west side from Crewe to Manchester and Golborne, I suspect the major talking point is Piccadilly station and adding in a Liverpool spur beyond just designing the future junctions for one as is currently the case. On the Eastern leg then it is of course the whole leg, including junctions for example at Toton as per Midlands hub desires and link from Sheffield to Leeds for NPR. Maybe much wider still.
Then on top NPR from Leeds to Manchester, if not in so much detail as HS2. Also probably some sort of prioritisation and phasing. I don't see that eastern leg is at all out, just rethought to a lesser or greater degree
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,230 Posts
^^I don't read it like that.

Ph2a has already been given the go ahead (two weeks ago), so why mention it in the ToR for a Ph2b review?
The whole ToR only ever references 2b, so why would the phrase "proceed with the legislation for the Western Leg" refer to the Ph2a element thereof?
The ToR also says that 2b can be split into two hybrid bills - surely that infers Ph2b West and Ph2b East separately, so that ultimately only one need get as far as Royal Assent, or at very least they could be legislated for at different times - i.e. East could be significantly delayed.

This tweet from TfN suggests my reading is the correct one:
"It (the ToR) reveals plans to split #HS2 Phase 2b into two hybrid bills, progressing the western leg"
Link: https://mobile.twitter.com/Transport4North/status/1230898474742403073
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,221 Posts
Well spaces in the ground in the north before the next GE would be a helpful story to spin for Johnson. It would be physical evidence of the scheme going ahead and move the conversation on from ‘us up here and them down there’. But there would also need to be tangible evidence of NPR taking place, given the noise Johnson has made.
Spades in the ground in time for the election campaign in November 2024? No chance I suggest for any NPR new build that requires Parliamentary approval.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,221 Posts
I’ve sometimes wondered about what sort of benefit that could be gained for Newcastle, York and Edinburgh from the eastern arm. One day there will likely be a second high speed line in to London built, but would that be more likely to be on a Cambridge/Stansted alignment, with services on the current ECML plugging in to that? Perhaps such a new line would continue hue further north than just Cambridge though.
I can see the need for a new HSR in the 2050s, but sending it via Cambridge will mean an even bigger dog-leg. Not exactly the best use of HSR potential to stop 50 miles north of London, whereas a more direct line could cut the London - Toton timing from 52 minutes down to 39 minutes.
 

·
E = MC²
Joined
·
5,451 Posts
I can see the need for a new HSR in the 2050s, but sending it via Cambridge will mean an even bigger dog-leg. Not exactly the best use of HSR potential to stop 50 miles north of London, ..
I can't see any benefit from connecting Cambridge to London via a High Speed Railway, surely High Speed Railways only become viable when connecting cities that are a more like 100 miles from London.
Someplace as Close as Cambridge would be just as well served with a standard 20th Century Express line which would be far cheaper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
934 Posts
I can see the need for a new HSR in the 2050s, but sending it via Cambridge will mean an even bigger dog-leg. Not exactly the best use of HSR potential to stop 50 miles north of London, whereas a more direct line could cut the London - Toton timing from 52 minutes down to 39 minutes.
My point is less about connecting Cambridge to London, but using a high speed line to free up capacity on the ECML to Kings Cross and in to Liverpool Street, while providing for far better connections to Cambridge (economically one f the most successful areas of the UK) from the rest of country. If Birmingham is not considered to be much of a dog leg for Leeds & Newcastle, I don’t also don’t see why Cambridge should be considered too much of a dog leg. Furthermore I don’t think a high speed line should necessarily stop at Cambridge, but at least go via there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Probable branding come 2021

HS2 Phase 1: London to Birmingham
HS2 Phase 1b: Birmingham to Crewe

These will be entirely merged into “HS2” once legislated for.

NPR a: Crewe to Manchester
NPR b: Manchester to Leeds
NPR c: Liverpool to Manchester

Get to reannounce Crewe to Piccadilly, while making the Pennines tunnel (and possibly a Liverpool extension) seem like a logical and likely to happen part of the scheme, even though it will just be a concept still at the 2024 election.

Dunno where Birmingham to Leeds via Toton fits into the politics now. Depends also what they decide to do with Scotland (and Northern Ireland). No room for ECML relief if they decide to build a Grand Union Railway link north of Golborne.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,230 Posts
^^I don't read it like that.

Ph2a has already been given the go ahead (two weeks ago), so why mention it in the ToR for a Ph2b review?
The whole ToR only ever references 2b, so why would the phrase "proceed with the legislation for the Western Leg" refer to the Ph2a element thereof?
The ToR also says that 2b can be split into two hybrid bills - surely that infers Ph2b West and Ph2b East separately, so that ultimately only one need get as far as Royal Assent, or at very least they could be legislated for at different times - i.e. East could be significantly delayed.

This tweet from TfN suggests my reading is the correct one:
"It (the ToR) reveals plans to split #HS2 Phase 2b into two hybrid bills, progressing the western leg"
Link: https://mobile.twitter.com/Transport4North/status/1230898474742403073
This article from the Guardian pretty much confirms what I thought when they mentioned spitting Ph2B into two phases (west and east):
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/27/manchester-may-get-high-speed-rail-before-leeds-hs2-minister-suggests

I imagine this is going to irk some HS2 supporters in Yorks and North East, as at best the eastern leg will open long after the west.
I recall Councils in Yorks arguing years ago that the two legs had to be delivered simultaneously not to give the NW cities an early huge connectivity advantage which could draw their trade away and be difficult for them to ever catch up that trade again even after the eastern leg is delivered; they pointed out that the NW benefits from Ph1 (and now also Ph2A) many years before Yorks / NE sees any benefit at all from HS2 (i.e. from Ph2B). Clearly building Ph2B West before Ph2B East is going to increase the relative delay in those benefits years further.

That said, I do wonder if the rather subdued championing of the project of late from the Eastern side promotors, and outright hostility to it from a growing number of MPs and Local Authorities in those areas blighted along the Eastern Leg but without their own station (e.g. Rotherham Council motion of opposition "unless route moves back to Meadowhall" - unanimously passed, Doncaster - same, Wakefield Council - long opposed to scheme, etc), means that the 'Integration Review' taking place until December might consider a complete scrapping of the Eastern Leg, or a complete rework and re-consultation of its route with more of it being part of a Yorks NPR network?
 

·
B*tch
Joined
·
14,874 Posts
As per the Sheffield thread, we will be getting diddly squat from either HS2 and HS3/NPR.

Shambles.
I wouldn’t worry, it’ll probably be the 2040s before we get high speed rail in Leeds, by which point Manchester and Birmingham will already be reaping the rewards.

The eastern half of England continues to get screwed over.
 
23181 - 23200 of 23512 Posts
Top