HS2 Is A Good Idea
It must be as according to The Times, golfers are leading the protest against the line.
How To Make A Mountain Out Of A Molehill!
George Osborne didn’t have a First Class ticket, but as he got on the train at Wilmslow, he sent an aide to find the conductor to rectify the problem. The BBC report it here.
According to Virgin, the fare upgrade was paid and there was no abuse to staff. As one would hope!
But according to some statements, you’d think Osborne had refused to pay and more! After all, if there hadn’t been an ITV journalist on the train, no-one would have known about this non-story.
The real problem here are the very strict terms and conditions of the rail companies. We’ve all had a ticket for a train with a seat reservation and have missed our selected train. In many cases it doesn’t matter as our ticket is not a train specific one, so getting the next one is not a problem.
When I buy tickets to say go to Liverpool for the day, I will often buy a First Class Off Peak for the return, as there are always lots of free seats in the afternoon and evening. I won’t have a specific seat, but I’ll have a comfortable one.
Osborn’s problem was that he was returning to London on a Friday afternoon, which is not Off Peak and I suspect trains were pretty full, with all those footballers wives going to London for a weekend’s shopping.
The terms and conditions don’t need to be rewritten to disadvantage the train companies, but there needs to be a more flexible return part of a ticket. After all on many routes like Liverpool, you already have it within the current structures.
If he wasn’t sure about when he was returning to London, he should ave bought an Anytime First Ticket. I’ve just looked at next Friday and it would appear that there are few deals available from Wilmslow to London. It could be one of those routes where if you don’t book weeks earlier, the only ticket is the £189.50 Anytime First.
The question has to be asked, as to whether we expect important members of the government to organise their lives around cheap train tickets.
Surely though, his aides should have known of the problem. They certainly do now!
This problem will continue on this line until HS2 runs to Manchester.
The Rubbish Talked About HS2
I listened to some of the phone-in about HS2 on Radio 5 this morning, but gave up after most of those in the discussion, weren’t letting facts get in the way of a good selfish argument.
So here’s a few facts and my observations.
The West Coast Main Line is rather a nightmare. It is overloaded now and longer and bigger trains would probably only mop-up a small amount of the increase in passengers that will happen in the next few years. In my travels any Virgin train to or from Glasgow was severely overloaded and this section needs action now.
It was intended that the speed limit on the line would be increased, but because the line isn’t very straight, the cost would be high both in monetary terms and also in blockades whilst it was upgraded. Wikipedia says this about the reasons for the bad design of the line.
Because of opposition by landowners along the route, in places some railway lines were built so that they avoided large estates and rural towns, and to reduce construction costs the railways followed natural contours, resulting in many curves and bends. The WCML also passes through some hilly areas, such as the Chilterns (Tring cutting), the Watford Gap and Northampton uplands followed by the Trent Valley, the mountains of Cumbria with a summit at Shap, and Beattock Summit in southern Lanarkshire. This legacy of gradients and curves, and the fact that it was not originally conceived as a single trunk route, means the WCML was never ideal as a long-distance main line.
The East Coast Main Line is better, but it doesn’t solve the problem on the western side of the country.
So those who talk about increasing the capacity on the West Coast Main Line had better look at the engineering problems involved.
Christian Wolmar, a respected commentator on rail, said on television this morning, that the money for HS2 would be better spent on improving local tranport in cities and large towns, by providing trams and better bus services. He has a point, but there is one fault in his argument.
If we take Manchester as an example, where the tram system is being substantially developed, this will make it easier for long distance travellers to get to Manchester Piccadilly and the West Coast Main Line. If trams are frequent and have substantial car parking outside of the city, it may well persuade many more to take the train rather than driving.
So in fact, his plan will in the long term increase the long distance train traffic increasing the need for long distance services from Manchester and in a decade or so for HS2.
More passengers will also be brought to the line, by improvements to cross country and branch lines. Some of these like Manchester to Leeds are scheduled to be electrified and this can only attract more passengers to the fast London lines, where their local station has no connection.
One point on this is that Network Rail is investing in a special overhead line installation train, that can install a mile of overhead wiring every night with only minimal line closure. This will mean that some lines where only a marginal case exists now, will be electrified. An example is possibly from Felixstowe to Nuneaton via Peterborough, which would allow freight trains to be electric hauled all the way to the North of England and Scotland.
Another big problem is freight, which most would feel is better carried by rail to and from the ports to where it is needed. A few years ago, Felixstowe had just three freight trains a day out of the port. Now it’s a lot higher. Much of the freight will come and go through Felixstowe, Southampton and in the future the new London Gateway development and it will need to be either collected from and delivered all over the country. This would add greatly to the number of freight trains going everywhere. Many of course, will have to go up to Birmingham, the North West and Scotland.
So whatever we do we’ll have to find some way to take the freight north or alternatively free up the West Coast Main Line, by building HS2. Or do we put more trucks on the motorways and clog them up?
Those that propose upgrading the West Coast Main Line with longer and bigger trains, forget one problem, that under the current plans also applies to HS2. And that is what to do with the totally inadequate station at Euston. Of London’s main stations it is one of the worst, as I said here. It will have to be rebuilt whether we build HS2 or not. It really doesn’t have the good ongoing transport links that Kings Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge and Paddington have or in some cases will have after Crossrail.
In fact it could be argued that if HS2 has a station at Old Oak Common, this might be a better London terminus for that line, as it links to Crossrail, the Great Western Main Line and possibly Heathrow.
There are also a lot of technology that will make HS2 better from an engineering, environmental and passenger point of view.
For a start tunnelling technology has improved substantially in the last decade or so. If you look at the speed of building the Crossrail tunnels, I think that this shows a big increase to the similar tunnels bored for HS1. Having listened to Justine Greening’s statement in the House of Commons, this improvement is being used to put more of the line underground. We may actually be getting to the point, where tunnels are cheaper to build that lines on viaducts.
We also know a lot more about how to minimise problems when we build large projects. Crossrail for example seems to be causing a lot less problems with construction than HS1 did. Admittedly, it has caused a bit of a problem at some Central London station sites, but no more than say the average large building site or an office block.
Project management has also got a lot better over the last few decades and it is much more likely these days that a large contract is built on time and on budget. Provided the politicians and the civil servants don’t stick their oar in too much and change the specification, it will be all right in the end.
As the Sunday Times pointed out at the weekend design is getting better and the trains on HS2 could be a lot better than Eurostar. We might also see other technologies like anti-noise cutting the noise signature of the trains.
It has also been said that passengers won’t use HS2 because it will be too expensive and too much hassle. But here is where technology will help, in such things as buying tickets, where hopefully we’ll see a touch-in touch-out system like Oyster.
So the doom-mongers will continue to knock HS2, but it has a lot going for it.
The trouble with rail projects, is that if we had a referendum about spending £32 billion on rail or the same amount on roads, the public would vote for the roads. But within a few years they’d be just as gridlocked.
Double-Decker Trains for HS2
According to the Sunday Times today, a design consultancy, Priestmangoode has been asked to make the trains on HS2 as sexy as possible.
I’m all for this and have stated that we should make trains more passenger friendly several times. Here’s a piece where I advocated a better approach to the trains to the West Country and the north of Scotland from London using rebuilt High Speed Diesel Trains.
Transport for London have used this design-led approach on the New Bus for London and I hope it goes well for them, when the bus is introduced next month.
So get the trains right and of course build them in the UK and we might have a railway to be proud of. As someone, who’s travelled from London to Nice on Eurostar and a TGV Duplex, we don’t have much competition from the French. The TGV Duplex may look impressive on the outside, but inside it’s rather cramped and stuffy and the ride is not as good as a High Speed Diesel Train.
My Worry About HS2
HS2 is the proposed new high-speed railway to Birmingham, the north of England and Scotland.
I have my doubts about the viability of the line, but feel that it should be built, if only to release capacity on the other main lines to the north for freight.
My big worry though is that because so many Nimbys oppose HS2, then there will be opportunity for a political party to stand at the next election on an anti-HS2 ticket. After all the cost of the line at £32billion would go a long way in other directions.
It would be unlikely that the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats would do this, as it is their policy, but the Labour Party might despite it being theirs too! After all power is everything!
I can’t see the Greens being against HS2, but UKIP is according to this on their web site.
So will all those opposed to HS2 vote for UKIP?
I certainly hope not!
The Battle for HS2
I listened with interest to the debate on Radio 5 yesterday morning about the London to Birmingham route of the High Speed Rail route called HS2.
On the one side were a few people who feel the line should be built and extended to the north, but the vast majority, including the respected rail commentator, Christian Walmar, were against the proposal. Many on both sides preferred emotive arguments instead of facts.
A classic selfish comment was from a man with a Range Rover, who said that to turn up and use the train cost him much more than the fuel for his gas-guzzler.
He may have a point about costs and I suspect he’s one of those who wouldn’t really wants to be seen dead on a train and say if he had an appointment in the West End of London, he’d drive. He’s probably one of those who rants against fuel, parking and clamping charges too.
I am sceptical about the need for HS2, although I do concede that we need extra capacity to the Midlands, North and Scotland. But a lot of this is to get freight up and down the country. You’d think this was a no-brainer, but any freight developments like the Radlett freight terminal, will get the Nimbys, who are worried more about their house prices than the ecomony of the country out in force.
To be fair to the government, they are trying to get a coherent strategy together on HS2 and the essential freight developments, and realise that if they don’t the problems in the economy will mean they are a one-term government. But if the strategy is accepted by those of sense, the Nimbys will still vote against it, when the election comes.
After all a good rail strategy would mean that people will have to give up some of the things that they consider essential to their life, like the cottage in the country.
So what we see on HS2 is just a small skirmish in the long war against climate change. Many people will never change their selfish lifestyles and will fight and of course voteto keep their large car affordable.
So what would I do?
I did lay out a ladder strategy in Relections on My Journey to Scotland, with better West and East Coast routes. Whether or not we build HS2, some of that strategy needs to be done anyway.
- Higher capacity on the West and East Coast routes.
- Electrify Glasgow-Edinburgh, TransPennine and create a fast Birmingham to Peterborough route via Leicester or Derby.
- Create proper interchange stations, so that changing is easy and quick. We need stations to be proud of that are destinations in their own right at Birmingham and many other places. How many stations are places where you could meet someone special for lunch or a business meeting? It is a list of two; St. Pancras and Liverpool Street. Although to be fair, some could be there fairly easily with vision and a small investment.
- Scrap all of the dreadful rolling stock like Pacers, used in the North, East Anglia, the West and Wales that connect a large part of the country to the fast network and replace them with modern comfortable trains.
- Whether HS2 is built on not, Euston should be rebuilt and be properly connected to King’s Cross and St. Pancras.
- Safeguard the proposed route of HS2.
The Noise of a High Speed Train
There is quite a reasoned article on the BBC today about the sort of noise you might get from a high speed train on HS2 and how you could reduce it.
The article doesn’t mention a technology that by 2020 will probably be available to quieten the train and that is the use of anti-noise, where an equal and opposite noise is generated to cancel the sound of the train. I dabbled in this twenty years ago and even then the technology had been successfully applied in a few applications. But even if anti-noise itself is not used, in ten years or so how trains create noise will be better understood and better design will be used to cut the noise.
I may be generally against the building of HS2, but I do think that noise will not be one of its biggest problems.
What Do We Do With the Olympic Stadium?
The row about what to do with the Olympic Stadium in Stratford after the Olympics rumbles on apace.
The original plan to turn it into a smaller 25,000 seat stadium might be a wonderful legacy for athletics, but would it be the best use of it after the Olympics. There are perhaps a couple of meetings a year that could fill such a stadium, unless the World or European Championships are held in London. And knowing London and Londoners like I do, 25,000 seats would probably be too small. So we might have a white elephant that would require lots of continuing funding.
To have a dual-use stadium as West Ham propose may not be a good idea. Fans don’t like watching football over an athletics track and I can understand why. I watched Ipswich play in the old Olympic Stadium in Moscow and the view was atrocious. Especially, as I had forgotten my binoculars. I also went to Stamford Bridge, when it still had the dog track in place and that wasn’t good either. So I can understand the views of fans and Harry Redknapp, when they say football and athletics don’t mix.
But there is a more fundamental problem and that is that football (and cricket and rugby for that matter) rely heavily on providing a lot of corporate entertainment with boxes, restaurants and fast food bars. Athletics crowds are different, probably more knowledgeable and have different and conflicting needs. They also stay longer making a whole day of the trip.
There is probably only one mixed use stadium that works and that is the Stade de France in Paris. In some ways this illustrates the problems, in that the French stage football, rugby and athletics, whereas, in England, rugby has Twickenham and football has Wembley.
The question has also to be asked if athletics wants a spiritual home like football, rugby and cricket.
It probably does, but a 75,000 seater stadium would be a white elephant, costly to fund.
It could also be argued that it has a spiritual home at Crystal Palace, which has been the scene of some great days of athletics. But it needs to be knocked down and rebuilt, preferably to a size of 30,000 seats that could be temporarily expanded to stage World or European Championships. One of the other problems of the stadium, was that it didn’t have good transport links direct from North and East London. But this has been partly solved by the new East London Line.
In fact, it would be good for South London if the whole Crystal Palace site was properly developed as a sport and leisure park, to compliment Stratford. Very little has been done since the original palace burned down before the Second World War. And if Crystal Palace is properly redeveloped, why not do the same at Alexandra Palace? The famous race course is still there.
What we need is a proper strategy for London, that is properly thought through. In fact this is the main problem with the Olympic stadium in that it was built to a cost for a limited life, rather as part of a whole strategy.
I have just Karen Brady, the West Ham, Vice Chairman, on BBC Breakfast and she put a convincing case for their mixed-use plans, which would include cricket. So is this just one part of a strategy, which should include plans for North, South and West London as well.
And then there is the elephant in the room; Chelski. Arsenal have a 60,000 seat stadium and Tottenham will have one, whether they move to Stratford or not. They wouldn’t be able to develop at Stamford Bridge, but what about a new stadium, where HS2 connects to Heathrow at Old Oak Common?
So the problem is a lot bigger than just what you do with Stratford.
Reflections on My Journey to Scotland
In my Modern Railways for October, which I bought in Doncaster, there was an heretic article by Chris Stokes, asking if we really needed HS2 or the High Speed Line to the North, which would go to just Birmingham at first. He described it as a vanity project.
Twelve months ago, I was a sceptic on whether we needed a High Speed Line to the North, mainly because I didn’t think it would do anything for anybody in East Anglia where I lived. If I needed to get to the North, I wanted a fast line from somewhere I could drive to easily like Peterborough.
But when it was announced that the route would be to Birmingham in the last days of the disastrous NuLabor experiment, I warmed to it a bit, although I did think it needed to go via Heathrow. I also thought very much that it was a Nimby’s charter.
But Chris’s article has now turned me back to very much a sceptic. Competition being what it is, his argument, that unless you virtually close down the West Coast and Chiltern Birmingham services, no-one will pay a premium to go from London to the Midland’s premier city. My son incidentally always goes by Virgin and has never thought about using Chiltern, as Euston is on the same Underground Line as where he lives.
Chris also argues, that the amount of First Class traffic will decrease due to austerity, good housekeeping and modern technology removing the need to travel. Some years ago, I installed a Management Information System in a company, which was web-friendly and even allowed the computer-phobic CEO to find out how the company was doing from any computer in the world. But also, the modern traveller will become First Class smart and book it when and where they need it. So if you think there is a premium market that saves a few minutes, forget it!
Put simply, a lawyer say going to Birmingham from London for the day, will choose his route and class dependent on what is best for his needs. Hopefully, when I move to London, it will be in walking distance of Canonbury. Who’s to say that in 2015, someone isn’t running an express to say Milton Keynes, Coventry and Birmingham from Stratford and East London on the North London Line and possibly the Primrose Hill Tunnel?
So what will happen to lines to the North, if we don’t build HS2 on schedule? We’ll get the usual whining, we always get when the investment is cut, but let’s look at the reality of what will happen!
We now have two good and pretty reliable and fast train lines from London to the North of England and Scotland. I was told on my trip to to Inverness that it should be possible to be some minutes under four hours from Edinburgh to London. This compares with a fastest journey now of about four hours twenty minutes, although Operation Peppercorn is aiming for the magic four hours flat for the fastest trains with a stop at Newcastle. Glasgow to London by comparison is now about four hours and twenty minutes. Many of my Scottish friends say this is fast enough to mean they won’t bother to fly to London, as airport checks and delays are getting worse and they can use phones and laptops on the trains.
If there is a problem with the two stiles of a possible ladder reaching up the United Kingdom, is that some of the interfaces to other lines are poor. But the basics and some of the rungs of the ladder are already in place.
There are a succession of large stations on both lines, such as Peterborough, Crewe, Doncaster, York and Newcastle, which can be developed into easy change stations to other places. As I said earlier, Doncaster isn’t bad and I think Peterborough is going to be developed and hopefully linked to the nearby shopping centre, but a lot of work needs to be done.
As I rode out of Edinburgh towards Inverness, I was impressed to see that electrification has started to link Edinburgh and Glasgow. As it is trains now run every fifteen minutes and most take just fifty to link Scotland’s two capitals. I suspect that this will become a very important link between the two fast lines, not only because of level cross-platform interchange from the South to local trains, but also because full electrification would allow fast direct trains from Glasgow to York and Edinburgh to Liverpool. Taking the first journey, my road atlas estimates that at four hours ten minutes, which compares with about four hours by train now with two changes and two different companies. I estimate that something like a Pendelino could do this journey direct with perhaps just a stop at Newcastle in about three hours fofty-five minutes. Who would back against, Peppercorn 2, squeezing more minutes out of the East Coast Line.
A similar situation could exist between Newcastle, York and Doncaster in the East and Manchester, Liverpool and Preston in the West, by expanding and electrifying the TransPennine network. Edinburgh to Sheffield is a journey that uses either a direct diesel service or a change to TranPennine at Newcastle. If TransPennine was a level change at Newcastle from one fast electric to another, there would be a much better service.
London too has a strong link across, although as I said Euston is not a welcoming station, but when you’ve got three world-class stations in Kings Cross, St. Pancras and Euston, as you will have, an innovative transport solution along Euston Road could surely be achieved. For a start let’s have a proper walking route a hundred metres or so north of Euston Road, with cafes and shops. But I’m certain that people should be encouraged to take the Metropolitan Line rather than the Victoria or Northern. Perhaps we need a moving walkway! Euston is supposed to be being developed and also be a terminal for HS2. If the latter does happen, there will be a lot of grief and opposition in that area of London. That development, whether it incorporates HS2 or not, will divert rail passengers to other routes, such as Chiltern for Birmingham and East Coast for Scotland.
There is also another link that might be brought into use, especially if Euston has to be partially closed to traffic, whilst it is rebuilt. That is the link to Manchester out of St. Pancras, which was used reasonably successfully as Operation Rio during the West Coast Main Line upgrade. I’ve always argued that this should have stayed in place, as it interfaces well with the A14 at Wellingborough for those going from East Anglia to the North Midlands,Sheffield and ultimately Manchester.
So what’s missing?
As I found going to Scunthorpe, it’s not what’s missing in this case, but what’s still here; Pacers. All of these links to the two stiles of the ladder must be upgraded to the standard of the diesel trains, I used in Scotland. And where possible, they should link easily to the fast services. I think that this will happen, but in some ways it depends on a strong electrification program to release suitable diesel units.
The real problem though is the lack of a full East-West route between say Peterborough and Birmingham or perhaps Milton Keynes and Stevenage or Cambridge. The Peterborough to Nuneaton route is being upgraded for frieght and passenger trains between the two towns take seventy-five minutes. So it would look like that route could be another rung in the ladder. The other route is the possible Oxford-Cambridge Line, which could be built, if funds were made avaialable.
I believe strongly that the two route ladder offers advantages over just building a speculative line from South to North, which would cost several times the amount needed to build the two route ladder.
For example, as electrification progresses, subsidiary lines like Birmingham to Bristol could be further improved, so that more and more people had less than two hour access to the main network. More rungs could be opened up, by any company that feel there was a niche to be filled.
So should HS2 be built? I think that one day it might be built, so we must safeguard the route, so that at some future date it could be added as another part of the network.
If Beeching made one big mistake it was not in making sure that abandoned rail lines were able to be rebuilt. How many lines hastily abandoned in the 1960s are needed now? But perhaps it would mean knocking down a hundred or so houses and a Tesco’s!
The Anonymous Widower 