And People Worry About HS2 And Other Developments!
I do sometimes worry about the grip some people have on sense. Look at this article, about the damage done by the slag heap from a coal mine to the railways near Doncaster.
We should have got rid of our coal mines just after we found we had North Sea Gas and Oil, and probably developed nuclear power for most of or electricity. Instead we struggled on with the world’s most polluting fuel for many years.
Now the Nimbys don’t want any developments, be they fracking, nuclear power, wind power or even new railways like HS2. I suspect, if you had a vote on new motorways it would pass, provided they didn’t build one near to the voters.
But how many people will call this trouble with the trains near Doncaster, an environmental disaster caused by not getting rid of coal years ago? I will!
The Real Arguments For HS2 Start Now!
The government has announced the route of HS2 this morning, as is detailed in this article on the BBC.
There is going to be masses of opposition.
In fact, I think that the amount of opposition is such, that the line will not get built. certainly, as I look forward at 65, I doubt I’ll ever see it.
Let’s face it, if you had a referendum, which asked if we wanted a high speed rail or more motorways, the man stuck in the jam on the M1 would vote for the roads.
HS2 also doesn’t help our biggest transport problem of the next twenty years. Or at least not directly! How do we get all the freight containers, to and from the major ports like Southampton, Felixstowe and Thames Haven? It deals with them indirectly, by making more paths available on the classic lines to the North and Scotland, especially if a few strategic freight by-passes are built and lines like Ipswich to Nuneaton are electrified.
There also seems to be a lots of opponents saying that London and the South East will be the biggest beneficiary. So perhaps we should built it from Birmingham to Scotland? Or at least that should be the first phase to open!
There is the classic opportunity here for a political party to fight an election on an anti-HS2 platform. I don’t think, any of the three major parties would do this, but who’s to say, some smaller party wouldn’t? After all, UKIP has said no to the project in this article on its web site.
High Speed Trains Compared
out of curiosity, I thought I put the various speeds and size of some of the high-speed trains in Europe.
Fyra – V250 – 8 car trains seating 546, running at a maximum speed of 250 km/hr.
UK – IC 225 – 9 car trains running at a maximum speed of 225 km/hr. Although they are limited to 201 km/hr. because of signalling.
Eurostar – 373 – 20 car trains seating 750, running at a maximum speed of 300 km/hr.
ICE 1 – 12 car trains seating 743, running at a maximum speed of 280 km/hr.
ICE 2 – 8 car trains seating 391, running at a maximum speed of 280 km/hr.
ICE 3 – 8 car trains seating 441, running at a maximum speed of 320 km/hr.
Although, they are all different, it’s surprising how with the exception of Eurostar, they are all fairly shortish trains.
The IC 225 is slower, but also as they run on normal lines with other traffic, and generally stop a few times on their journeys out of London, their performance isn’t as slow as you would think.
It may lead you to the conclusion, that on shorter high-speed services with stops, 200 km/hr may well be fast enough.
But as the French like to show, there is quite a lot of pride, that your trains run very fast. But then France and Spain are probably the only countries in Western Europe, that have the space for long high speed lines.
We have had only a few details about HS2, the line from London to the Midlands, North and eventually to Scotland. They seem to be planning for speeds of up to 400 km/hr., but how much is that to just prove they can do what the French do?
Putting an engineering hat on, it’s well known that the faster you go, the more energy you need and the more noise and damage to the track you make. And if you go at 400 km/hr instead of 200 km/hr, you don’t do the journey in half the time, as you have to accelerate and brake for longer.
We also get the old chestnut, of why don’t we have double-deck trains like they do in many places on the continent. Having travelled on a TGV Duplex to the South of France, I am very sceptical about them on short high speed distances, as loading and unloading can be a nightmare, given the excess baggage people take with them these days.
So I am veering towards shorter nimble trains with superb acceleration. Taking the HS2 route to Birmingham, which has two stops between Euston and Birmingham, they might even be as quick as a faster heavier train.
But then the trouble with a slightly slower service, is that it doesn’t polish the egos of politicians, who love to say they have things like the fastest or biggest in the world.
Obviously, past Birmingham, where there is more space, the service could go faster towards the North and Scotland.
You have to remember that most of the saving in journey times from high speed trains come from taking a direct flat route. Brunel and those that built the East Coast Main Line, knew that and were able to create tracks that now allow trains to run at 200 km/hr. The West Coast Main Line had to be threaded through country estates of the landed gentry and over quite a few hills, so it is much slower.
Looking at my target of Fyra, the Dutch don’t really need a 400 km/hr. line and in fact, limit the speed of trains to 300 km/hr., although they’re not going as fast as that yet.
So there would appear to be good reasons for not building short high-speed lines capable of 400 km/hr. But by all means build them capable of 200 km/hr.
Is Making Stratford London’s HS2 Terminus A Good Idea?
A former director of projects at British Rail has suggested that London’s HS2 terminus should be at Stratford. Read about it here on the BBC’s web site.
One of the main reasons he gives is that it would stop the demolition of 200 homes at Euston. But then Euston station is a disgrace, as I said here and rebuilding it will probably mean it requires more space. So there would be some demolition anyway.
Euston has several problems.
1. I don’t think there are actually enough platforms for the amount of traffic coming into the station without HS2, let alone, when that line is built. The 2007 proposals for the rebuilding of the station without HS2 envisaged three new platforms.
2. The concourse is typical 1960s and 1970s rubbish, that isn’t big enough for the number of passengers the station handles at present.
3. The Underground station is not really fit for purpose and needs a new booking office, platforms on the Metropolitan line and lifts everywhere.
4. If the station was to be rebuilt properly, the space above the station could be used for new developments of housing and offices.
In my view to solve the problems at Euston even without HS2, the station needs a complete rebuild. 200 homes would be demolished, but many more would be built.
So his first argument that the homes would be saved is spurious.
His proposal that HS2 terminate at Stratford is ludicrous, as there are just two spare platforms there. But HS2 would require probably an extra six very long platforms. And those two spare platforms would be ideal for the TransManche Metro, if that were to be built. After all Stratford is a good interchange now and will be better with Crossrail.
And how do you get from HS2 to Stratford? On the North London line I suppose. Although he did suggest that the trains go up the crowded Lea Valley lines and across to Biggleswade and then to Southam to link up with HS2
It’s an idea, that holds water like a collander. Shame on the BBC to give it publicity!
But those against HS2 will clutch at this weak straw.
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 Anonymous Widower 