Could/should HS2 Eastern leg be shelved?

[squizzler]

There's going to be a parliamentary debate in the next week on stopping all work immediately and repealing HS2 legislation after a petition reached the required threshold

Petition: Stop work on HS2 immediately and hold a new vote to repeal the legislation

We ask Parliament to repeal the High Speed Rail Bills, 2016 and 2019, as MPs voted on misleading environmental, financial and timetable information provided by the Dept of Transport and HS2 Ltd. It fails to address the conditions of the Paris Accord and costs have risen from £56bn to over £100bn.

petition.parliament.uk

MPs to debate ‘stopping work on HS2 immediately' following petition success

Campaigners want legislation for the planned high speed line repealed

www.mylondon.news

No chance of succeeding of course.

Its much more convenient to those in power, of course, to have the proles scrabbling over what meagre public spending happens rather than address the ease by which businesses like Geoff Bezos' outfit (a particularly well known and egregious example) manage to get away with paying barely any tax in the UK.

If all the businesses and people who made money in the UK had to pay their taxes there then you would be able to afford the public infrastructure you felt entitled to.

 

[MattRat]

There's going to be a parliamentary debate in the next week on stopping all work immediately and repealing HS2 legislation after a petition reached the required threshold

Petition: Stop work on HS2 immediately and hold a new vote to repeal the legislation

We ask Parliament to repeal the High Speed Rail Bills, 2016 and 2019, as MPs voted on misleading environmental, financial and timetable information provided by the Dept of Transport and HS2 Ltd. It fails to address the conditions of the Paris Accord and costs have risen from £56bn to over £100bn.

petition.parliament.uk

MPs to debate ‘stopping work on HS2 immediately' following petition success

Campaigners want legislation for the planned high speed line repealed

www.mylondon.news

No chance of succeeding of course.

Here's hoping. If it succeeds, it sets a bad precedent. You'd suddenly find a lot more rail infrastructure projects cancelled, and we desperately need more rail infrastructure right now. HS2 has It's problems, but we need to work with it as best we can, not against it.

 

[daodao]

Here's hoping. If it succeeds, it sets a bad precedent. You'd suddenly find a lot more rail infrastructure projects cancelled, and we desperately need more rail infrastructure right now. HS2 has It's problems, but we need to work with it as best we can, not against it.

A compromise would be to proceed with the segments already approved (London-Birmingham-Crewe), but to scrap the pending legislation for further extensions (HS2 phase 2b). This would avoid cancelling that part of the HS2 rail infrastructure project that has already started.

 

[MattRat]

A compromise would be to proceed with the segments already approved (London-Birmingham-Crewe), but to scrap the pending legislation for further extensions (HS2 phase 2b). This would avoid cancelling that part of the HS2 rail infrastructure project that has already started.

That's political suicide. There would be outrage in the North. Particularly becuase I bet most of the complaints are from those in the South. It would be the 80s all over again.

 

[daodao]

That's political suicide. There would be outrage in the North.

Why? It would still reach the north of England and for Liverpool the further extension is of no benefit.

 

[MattRat]

Why? It would still reach the north of England and for Liverpool the further extension is of no benefit.

Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, York, Scotland technically.....

 

[daodao]

Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, York, Scotland technically.....

Manchester and Scotland will still benefit from faster trains via HS2 from London to Crewe. Sheffield could be served with a faster service than that from St Pancras by running trains from HS2 via a connection near Lichfield/Tamworth onto the ex-Midland main line from Birmingham to Sheffield via Derby.

 

[MattRat]

Manchester and Scotland will still benefit from faster trains via HS2 from London to Crewe. Sheffield could be served with a faster service than that from St Pancras by running trains from HS2 via a connection near Lichfield/Tamworth onto the ex-Midland main line from Birmingham to Sheffield via Derby.

It still looks bad. It's the optics. Liverpool wouldn't notice as it isn't going that way anyway, but the others certainly would. They need to see the infrastructure to be satisfied, nothing less.

 

[Ianno87]

It still looks bad. It's the optics. Liverpool wouldn't notice as it isn't going that way anyway, but the others certainly would. They need to see the infrastructure to be satisfied, nothing less.

Liverpool would notice as it would mean them not getting NPR (which you can't have without 2b north of Crewe).

A compromise would be to proceed with the segments already approved (London-Birmingham-Crewe), but to scrap the pending legislation for further extensions (HS2 phase 2b). This would avoid cancelling that part of the HS2 rail infrastructure project that has already started.

Why do you want to cancel it? What's the benefit? Note my previous point about how it is actually funded.

 

[daodao]

Liverpool would notice as it would mean them not getting NPR (which you can't have without 2b north of Crewe).

Liverpool doesn't need NPR - it is so roundabout between Liverpool and Manchester that it won't save significant time over the Chat Moss route. All that is needed between Manchester and Leeds is full electrification and some route re-alignment, as envisaged under the Trans-Pennine upgrade (TRU). A Manchester Victoria-Leeds journey time of less than 50 minutes was already achievable pre-Covid on the existing line, with just 1 stop at Huddersfield, and a Leeds-Liverpool journey time of under 90 minutes.

Why do you want to cancel it? What's the benefit? Note my previous point about how it is actually funded.

It will cost lots of money to construct (and the costs will inflate massively by the time it would ever be built) and will require an ongoing subsidy, all for the benefit of a maximum of 5 tph on the Manchester leg. I also question the usefulness of the greenfield site for the East Midlands "hub".

IMO, massive rail projects like this should at least be paused to reassess likely future travel demand, as I am not convinced that it will recover fully post Covid.

The UK's financial position is dire, given the need this week to implement an unforeseen emergency tax rise (by increasing NI), breaking a key manifesto promise from the last general election. There's only so much money that government can borrow on the "never never".

 

[edwin_m]

Liverpool doesn't need NPR - it is so roundabout between Liverpool and Manchester that it won't save significant time over the Chat Moss route.

Between Liverpool and Manchester NPR is mostly about capacity. Both routes have poor service at intermediate stations due to having to accommodate fast services, and then there's the perennial bottleneck of the junctions round Castlefield and Salford. Relieving Chat Moss and the line via Runcorn also frees capacity for freight on Merseyside.

 

[camflyer]

A compromise would be to proceed with the segments already approved (London-Birmingham-Crewe), but to scrap the pending legislation for further extensions (HS2 phase 2b). This would avoid cancelling that part of the HS2 rail infrastructure project that has already started.

All that would do is give you a rail line which would give a quicker service from London to Birmingham without any of the benefits further north. Precisely what the critics were complaining about.

 

[daodao]

All that would do is give you a rail line which would give a quicker service from London to Birmingham without any of the benefits further north. Precisely what the critics were complaining about.

It would significantly accelerate journeys from London to NW England and Scotland as far as Crewe, and could (via a short link) accelerate journeys to Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield as well.

 

[The Planner]

It would significantly accelerate journeys from London to NW England and Scotland as far as Crewe, and could (via a short link) accelerate journeys to Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield as well.

That short link would have to happen or you are into redesigning a significant part of phase 1 which is well under way along there.

 

[Purple Orange]

Manchester and Scotland will still benefit from faster trains via HS2 from London to Crewe. Sheffield could be served with a faster service than that from St Pancras by running trains from HS2 via a connection near Lichfield/Tamworth onto the ex-Midland main line from Birmingham to Sheffield via Derby.

This has been explained time and time again. Scrapping phase 2b north of Crewe makes a white elephant of the whole project. Are you honestly proposing that Curzon Street should just see 4 trains per hour? (3 London and 1 Scotland)? That is a gross misuse of taxpayers money.

 

[daodao]

Scrapping phase 2b north of Crewe makes a white elephant of the whole project. Are you honestly proposing that Curzon Street should just see 4 trains per hour? (3 London and 1 Scotland)? That is a gross misuse of taxpayers money.

That is a distortion. Slight underuse of Curzon Street is trivial compared to the massive costs of the phase 2b leg to Manchester, including the new station at Hale Barns, the additional platforms at Piccadilly and the long tunnel from just north of Hale Barns to Piccadilly.

 

[Purple Orange]

That is a distortion. Slight underuse of Curzon Street is trivial compared to the massive costs of the phase 2b leg to Manchester, including the new station at Hale Barns, the additional platforms at Piccadilly and the long tunnel from just north of Hale Barns to Piccadilly.

It’s not distortion, that’s what would happen. You couldn’t run Birmingham-Manchester via Crewe - think of the knock-on effects. It would seem that you would rather see that Manchester has no uplift in capacity, Birmingham under-utilised, a complete halt to the prospect of decongestant castlefield through taking away TPE trains because you think it’s not worth investing the money in a railway that will last centuries? Sorry, but your argument doesn’t stand up.

May I ask, how close do you live to the proposed line?

 

[daodao]

You couldn’t run Birmingham-Manchester via Crewe - think of the knock-on effects.

In a separate thread, I proposed withdrawing the 1 tph Manchester-Stockport-Alderley Edge stopping service, and adding an extra call at Handforth on the S.Wales service, to free up a path on the existing Manchester-Crewe line. In due course this could be used for a 1 tph Curzon Street-HS2-Piccadilly service, and initially for reinstating a 2nd fast train from New Street to Manchester.

 

[HSTEd]

It’s not distortion, that’s what would happen. You couldn’t run Birmingham-Manchester via Crewe - think of the knock-on effects. It would seem that you would rather see that Manchester has no uplift in capacity, Birmingham under-utilised, a complete halt to the prospect of decongestant castlefield through taking away TPE trains because you think it’s not worth investing the money in a railway that will last centuries? Sorry, but your argument doesn’t stand up.

May I ask, how close do you live to the proposed line?

You could always extend the Manchester-Crewe stoppers to Birmingham over HS2.

 

[daodao]

a complete halt to the prospect of decongestant castlefield through taking away TPE trains

HS2 phase 2b isn't needed to solve this issue. There's more than one way to crack an egg, but further discussion about solving the Castlefield line problems is off topic for this thread.

 

[Purple Orange]

In a separate thread, I proposed withdrawing the 1 tph Manchester-Stockport-Alderley Edge stopping service, and adding an extra call at Handforth on the S.Wales service, to free up a path on the existing Manchester-Crewe line. In due course this could be used for a 1 tph Curzon Street-HS2-Piccadilly service, and initially for reinstating a 2nd fast train from New Street to Manchester.

Yes there is more than one way to crack an egg, but Castlefield requires several eggs cracked, of which HS2 infrastructure is one of those instruments. Manchester needs new rail infrastructure and there are no other ways to solve the problems there with what is currently in situ. Removing commuter services is the last thing that should be done, unless you want more cars on the road.

HS2 phase 2b isn't needed to solve this issue. There's more than one way to crack an egg, but further discussion about solving the Castlefield line problems is off topic for this thread.

Quite, and actually phase 2b West is off topic for this thread also.

You could always extend the Manchester-Crewe stoppers to Birmingham over HS2.

You wouldn’t be able to run 3 London, 2 Birmingham, 1 South Wales and Northern commuter services on the existing Crewe-Manchester line. Phase 2a has the Birmingham services continuing as they are, so without phase 2b west, Birmingham to Manchester will see no improvement whatsoever.

 

[Ianno87]

.


You wouldn’t be able to run 3 London, 2 Birmingham, 1 South Wales and Northern commuter services on the existing Crewe-Manchester line. Phase 2a has the Birmingham services continuing as they are, so without phase 2b west, Birmingham to Manchester will see no improvement whatsoever.

This. Phase 2b enables a seismic improvement of the Birmingham-Manchester offering. Today's (pre-Covid) offering is 2tph taking 90 minutes, squealing their way through the Potteries and bogged down with local passengers. No wonder the M6 around Holmes Chapel is so regularly snarled up.

Replace that with 2tph taking around 40 minutes, and that is something transformational. There's nothing else that can be done with the present network, unless south Manchester local services were significantly negatively impacted.

 

[HSTEd]

You wouldn’t be able to run 3 London, 2 Birmingham, 1 South Wales and Northern commuter services on the existing Crewe-Manchester line. Phase 2a has the Birmingham services continuing as they are, so without phase 2b west, Birmingham to Manchester will see no improvement whatsoever.

So are the Crewe-Manchester stoppers via Styal being withdrawn?

 

[6Gman]

Manchester and Scotland will still benefit from faster trains via HS2 from London to Crewe. Sheffield could be served with a faster service than that from St Pancras by running trains from HS2 via a connection near Lichfield/Tamworth onto the ex-Midland main line from Birmingham to Sheffield via Derby.

The response to coming off HS2 and then dawdling to Manchester behind the all-stations stopper/ Trafford Park freightliner would - I suspect - be rather negative.

To say the least.

 

[Purple Orange]

This. Phase 2b enables a seismic improvement of the Birmingham-Manchester offering. Today's (pre-Covid) offering is 2tph taking 90 minutes, squealing their way through the Potteries and bogged down with local passengers. No wonder the M6 around Holmes Chapel is so regularly snarled up.

Replace that with 2tph taking around 40 minutes, and that is something transformational. There's nothing else that can be done with the present network, unless south Manchester local services were significantly negatively impacted.

Oh it could certainly be transformational. In fact at 40 minutes, without the eastern branch, perhaps Manchester-Birmingham could have a similar frequency to Manchester-Leeds today. Actually it could well be the case London, Birmingham & Manchester form a very high capacity, high frequency network in itself one day

So are the Crewe-Manchester stoppers via Styal being withdrawn?

I’ve not read anything to say they will, but in my opinion the Crewe-Manchester via Styal is a useless service, even now.

 

[MattRat]

May I ask, how close do you live to the proposed line?

Well, according to their profile, they live in two places at once that are hundreds of miles apart.....

 

[Starmill]

I’ve not read anything to say they will, but in my opinion the Crewe-Manchester via Styal is a useless service, even now.

Er, why? It was well used in the old days to access Manchester Airport from the south, it is the only service that does that.

It would significantly accelerate journeys from London to NW England and Scotland as far as Crewe, and could (via a short link) accelerate journeys to Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield as well.

Plus if you want all of the Sheffield, Chesterfield and Derby to London traffic to run via Burton-on-Trent this will need additional capacity and electrification on this route.

In a separate thread, I proposed withdrawing the 1 tph Manchester-Stockport-Alderley Edge stopping service, and adding an extra call at Handforth on the S.Wales service, to free up a path on the existing Manchester-Crewe line. In due course this could be used for a 1 tph Curzon Street-HS2-Piccadilly service, and initially for reinstating a 2nd fast train from New Street to Manchester.

Withdrawing local services to support HS2 ones is the opposite of the purpose of building HS2. This has been explained to you already.

Plus you'd need some way to increase capacity from Crewe to Wigan to permit the HS2 trains to divert that way.

 

[Purple Orange]

Er, why? It was well used in the old days to access Manchester Airport from the south, it is the only service that does that.

Really it is a Crewe to Manchester Airport and a Manchester Airport to Liverpool service stitched together, which in that perspective is fine. The point I’m making is when it's referenced as a Crewe to Manchester service, whereby let’s say you are at Piccadilly and travelling to Wilmslow or points south, there are up to three services that depart Piccadilly after the airport service that arrive at Wilmslow before the airport service would get there.

 

[Starmill]

Really it is a Crewe to Manchester Airport and a Manchester Airport to Liverpool service stitched together, which in that perspective is fine. The point I’m making is when it's referenced as a Crewe to Manchester service, whereby let’s say you are at Piccadilly and travelling to Wilmslow or points south, there are up to three services that depart Piccadilly after the airport service that arrive at Wilmslow before the airport service would get there.

I agree it's not tremendously well at the southern end, and nobody would catch it end to end intentionally (except of course they may do nowadays because its relative low loading means that Northern sell a lot of cheaper Advance tickets on it, but that's not necessarily a good reason for its existence), and it's generally unattractive from Manchester to Wilmslow and beyond. Now that it served Styal more effectively it is more useful too, or would have been if it weren't for the emergency timetables in 2018, the long period of the strikes and then a pandemic.

 

[XAM2175]

Well, according to their profile, they live in two places at once that are hundreds of miles apart.....

Notwithstanding the fact that there are members here who split their time between a number of distant places, I suggest that you check the map again but this time looking for Bowdon.