In September, after years of debate and argument – and in the teeth of a pandemic that has seen rail passenger numbers drop to their lowest levels for more than 150 years – construction work finally began on HS2, the new £100bn high speed rail network that will ultimately link London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
The government hailed the start of the project as the beginning of an infrastructure-led recovery, with Boris Johnson claiming it will “fire up economic growth” and create thousands of jobs.
However, it’s hard to escape the feeling that HS2 has been somewhat overtaken by events.
With commuters around the UK working from home, and businesses increasingly enjoying the efficiencies and flexibilities offered by remote working and conferencing tools there are few guarantees that – despite our collective hankering for a bit more face-to-face contact – our patterns of behaviour haven’t changed permanently.
Indeed it could be argued that whilst HS2 was supposed to level up the UK’s economic landscape, the pandemic – and the way in which it has accelerated the adoption of digital tools – has reshaped the geography of the UK’s business landscape far more profoundly than any railway network could.
Please continue to join the debate below the line. Please note, all comments are moderated.
One railway engineer wrote that HS2 is not like other high speed rail projects. They run high speed to their destination. HS2 will run high speed part of the journey & then finish on old existing track. He worries about the switch between the two causing problems.
I have limited knowledge of rail, but I note the latest Pendolino trains can do 182 mph on high speed track with the tilt turned off. They can then do 155 mph on old track with the tilt turned on. This I think, would be ideal for Britain. We are a small island. We do not need HS2 running arrow straight through treasured sites at 220 mph. 186 mph track would still be straight, but give you a little leeway for the gentlest of curves to avoid special sites. A new Pendolino running 182 mph on HS2, then 155 mph with the tilt on, to Scotland, would be a whole route thought through choice.
Once the costs were known, within the nearest billion!, and paying for pandemic, government should have said no.
we need the trees more . it should stop now.
Not needed & not wanted..
Should never have happened as 50 billion was a fairytale. Now 106 billion is a nightmare and this is a staggering result already….over 90% against……why won’t they listen.
Incredible waste of money and an eco disaster in the making. A white elephant that will be too expensive for most to use. This will be the epitaph for Johnson. The project needs to be halted now
The cost of this train does not justify the tremendous destruction of our countryside and people’s homes. Anyone with any sense can see that it will run at a loss from the beginning.
Complete and utter waste of money. Never should have been built in the first place. no economic case what so ever
HS2 is a Johnson vanity project , it’s not needed and ecocide is being committed in the name of progress.
Really didnt see the need for it in the first place, but with the pandemic and the damage that is being done to the economic there is even less need for 20 minutes. The amount of pubic money spent, could have gone on improving the whole of the rail network!
Where do I start?
Capacity:- HS2 claim 14 trains per hour in each direction – that’s 1 every 4:17 minutes with 570,000 travelers a day (250,000 for phase 1)? If it was a commuter line I could believe it but it’s an intercity line point to point between esentially two point (phase 1), I doubted it before COVID-19, I doubt it even more now. I wonder how many seats will be empty?
Cost:- It started as up to £36 billion for the whole project. with a cost benefit ratio of 2.5, this rapidy increased to £44 billion, and was estimated in the Oakervee report to ultimately be £106 billion with a cost benefit ratio of less than 0.9. That was based on pre-COVID estimates of benefits.
Where are those costs going? Many of the contract are going to companies outside of the UK. Tunelling machines being supplied by German companies
Job Generation:- This is a myth since many of the jobs being ‘created’ are at the expense of other capital projects. How many businesses have been eliminated due to the methods employed by HS2 in procuring and paying (or reluctantly paying) for land.
Damage to the environment:- Many of the few ancient wood in the UK are being destroyed or partially destroyed not only by the railway, but by preparation and access work.
Fare charges:- It is estimated that the fares will be roughly equivalent to the current average. I find this difficult to believe since they will eventually claim this to be a premium service.
Overall, this is a vanity project which will benefit the few and compromise spending on essential services for the many.
Moving fast trains to HS2 benefits the entire network, main beneficiaries are places it dissent go – Peterborough, Berwick, MK, Stockport…
Demand +250% since 1995.
Speed matches air cutting 150 daily London – Edb/Glas flights
Creates 150 daily freight trains, equiv 2.5m HGVs
Need to remember why HS2 was conceived in the first place – to provide extra capacity in/out of London from the North, as the Fast lines are full of long-distance non-stop trains, to the detriment of commuter, interurban and freight services. The opportunities that follow from that were then – speed for long distance trains inter alia competing with the 100+ flights a day between London and central Scotland, backfilling the WCML with trains that do stop at stations, and providing a core route that could be extended beyond the West Midlands, which is when the really dramatic time savings for routes such as Birmingham – Manchester come in.
Apart from the folly that cancelling a project that is not just shovel-ready but actually under way, I think the capacity argument still stands. Even if commuting does drop somewhat with working from home, the capacity problem was so gross that it doesn’t go away. What’s more, if we are only going into the office 2 or 3 or 4 days each week, people are likely to spend their mental time budget on making longer journeys on the days that they do travel, so a conceivable effect is a shift from commuting from, say Milton Keynes and South thereof to London to commuting from South of Birmingham and Crewe, which would be a big increase for those longer journeys. As for long distance, I’ve “worked from home” for 30 years, and as a result have made a wider range of longer journeys than someone with and office base. One really values those days out, whilst mobile communications mean that I don’t try to pack all my meetings into one day so as to minimise the opportunity cost any more.
Frankly, anyone who thinks they know what the world will look like post-Covid is being rather bold, but I am sure it will still involve transport and rail transport in particular. We may not know exactly which of long-distance, commuter, interurban or freight will be the biggest need, but with capacity we can meet it, whatever it is, but without capacity, we can’t.
I nearly have a full house on my stophs2 buzzword bingo card…..
’20 minutes’
‘Ecocide’
‘No economic case’
‘Tremendous destruction’
‘White elephant’
Perhaps my recent letter to a newspaper on the subject:
The economic case for HS2 was never clear; this was just a vanity project from the previous Conservative government. It should have been shelved once the ecological damage was known and it should be stopped NOW before even more damage is done. The past few months have shown beyond any doubt that a high speed rail line is irrelevant in our small country and that high speed communication links are far more important. And the projected costs now are just ludicrous.
Total wast of money
We have to get to zero CO2. Transport is currently the biggest contributor and the hardest one to tackle. We’re going to have to travel less, use lower-CO2 modes and improve efficiency. For short distances, favouring active travel and public transport over car use works well, but the real bulk of the CO2 comes from longer journeys and moving freight around on roads. To tackle that we need rail – but we don’t have the capacity for a big shift. That’s what HS2 gives us: loads more space on the existing rail network for local, regional trains and freight – PLUS it’s fast enough to compete effectively with the London – Scotland air routes. All this is a huge saver of CO2.
Totally pointless
It has never been wanted by the majority of this country and the cost of a seat will make it prohibitive for all but the minority. Let’s also not forget this is public money paying for it. But as usual with us, we moan instead of doing something to make this corrupt government listen. Everyone against should march into central London and surround parliament so they have no choice but to listen. Socially distanced of course
Never should have gotten off the drawing board, a colossal waste of money that totally undermines the entire UK rail network to benefit a few well off suits in London.
The initial USPs were: it would save 45 minutes between London and Birmingham; It would revitalise the North; it would ‘only’ cost £50Bn. Every one of those points has been proven false.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – the money being wasted on HS2 should be spent/invested on upgrading the entire UK rail network – it would be money well spent, it would create jobs nationwide and it would benefit everyone.
Can/will this government do the right thing ? experience says no.
The financial and environmental cost is way too high. Costing tax payers billions and won’t be carbon neutral until this planet is long gone sadly. HS2 NO THANK YOU!
The UK Pendolino is designed to run at a maximum speed of 225km/h (140mph); it was tested at 155mph because a 10% margin for overspeed is required. It would not necessarily be comfortable at this speed, and to run at 140mph would require infrastructure improvement which would be difficult and expensive. The newer Pendolinos that run at 250km/h (155mph) in Poland and Italy do not tilt – again 182mph is a special test run; just as the Alstom TGV holds the world rail speed record of 574.8 km/h (357.2 mph) but does not run at this speed in normal service.
Trains to Birmingham and later to Manchester, Nottingham, Sheffield and Leeds will run on HS2 all the way.
Hell yes, it needs to go ahead despite what the naysayers say you need a fast route to connect the powerhouse of London with the powerhouse of the north however it is also a faster route to spread a virus between some very large densely populated areas of the UK!
When Coss Rail has been commissioned and open for 5 years and we have had the Public enquiry to highlight all that contracts failures the the answer to should we be building HS2 will become an obvious NEVER
What we need are longer trains and shorted separation times like HK has been running since the 70s
Its time all public enterprises were reviewed by current expert panels not ignorant politicians. Without a professional review most public projects are over budget and operate below their expected proposals.
HS2 started at £40 B , todays its estimated at £100 B and when finished who knows.
Our whole infrastructure has been neglected since 1990.
HS2 is a total waste of a massive amount of money & by 2040 probably £180 Billion, when putting on a few more carriages on to a train & improve-service existing train lines,
With that money we could have supported the following
NHS, Staff, Hospitals & Research.
Education Providing Online Education to All Children in a Pandemic, Zoom online Classroom videos supported all parents financially,
Gone 100% Green Solar PV Energy in the UK long before 2030, & at the same time lowered energy bills for ALL The Public.
Police, better Border security control.
Supported Businesses in a pandemic & supported people who are made redundant, in the Pandemic,
Supported better Children needs in providing laptops whilst learning from home.
Research into Green Energy & storage systems,
Better Support OAP’s
I can be very certain that less ancient forests would have been destroyed keeping a lot of people happy in the UK.
Unlikely Johnson will be still in power by the time it is completed..
The evidence never convinced me for the need of another prospective white elephant. We should be spending our money to redress the run down of NHS, police, social services et al. Our supine acceptance is indeed disappointing. With the present dodgy government aren’t we just filling the pockets of some other Tory chums?
HS2 is not about expensive seats on a fast train. HS2 releases much needed capacity on the existing rail network for slower moving rail freight trains. If we are to ever reduce the number of lorries on the roads then we need rail freight services to expand, particularly on many routes where paths are currently unavailable or not viable. The environmental benefits of rail freight over road are significant and proven.
It has always been a vanity project that is not required. We live in the 21st century so use zoom,internet etc. Too expensive for most people. Already have trains so use them. Spend money on upgrading the current rail system.
The money would be better spent improving local rail services.
It shouldn’t be cancelled but extended to connect the “garden bridge” over the Thames and the Scotland to Ireland bridge.
HS2 Waste of money,
It won’t make people stop using their own cars which are very convenient for them, & spend £100’s on a train ticket,
They still have to use cars or public transport from the stations to where they are going to,
It will take tons of CO2 to build from construction to making of all the materials,
It should have gone to a National UK Vote before spending Billions, especially in a Pandemic,
Thats my answer
Trucks will soon be a thing of the past, the rail network will be used for cargo, hs2 for public
The point of HS2 was and is to provide additional North-South rail capacity, the speed was a subsidiary argument, but if you are going to build a new line why not take advantage of higher speed. Yes, at present rail usage is very much down, but it will recover, very probably not to immediate pre-Covid levels, but the need for HS2 was established well before Covid and the existing lines had been clogged for a long time, so the need for more capacity will return. Opponents of HS2 should consider what the alternative might be – more car use will mean more CO2, higher death rates and if more motorway construction a greater impact on the environment Read Gareth Dennis’s letter above – he is right.
It should be funded. If you doubt this, have look at the ‘Absoute zero report – by engineers. Almost all fres=ight goes by rail, which will clog up the old network, and we will need something high-speed to make up for the additional problem of no airports and no flights.
Allwood, J. M., C. F. Dunant, R. C. Lupton, C. J. Cleaver, A. C. H. Serrenho, J. M. C. Azevedo, P. M. Horton, G. Clare, H. Low, I. Horrocks, J. Murray, J. Lin, J. M. Cullen, M. Ward, M. Salamati, T. Felin, T. Ibell, W. Zho and W. Hawkins (2019). Absolute zero. Cambridge, UK, UK FIRE.
There is much talk in these comments about improving the existing rail network. that is exactly what HS2 does. It also gives our fading engineering sector a much-needed boost.
A compete waste of money. Nothing more than a vanity project to pander to the London centric major employers wanting more staff in the city, and therefore a way of expanding the dormitory zone. Does nothing for the rest of the country. People still have to get to the major stations it will serve, still requiring private cars to do so. Loss of ancient woodland, and for a marginal increase in capacity and a marginal improvement in journey times for the few. With home working now to be a proven concept for many why travel to some huge warehouse office block to work? It isn’t as if there are large scale manufacturing plants needing a huge labour force. The money would be better spent on improving the national grid and corresponding generation capacity in parallel with developing the hydrogen infrastructure to support a move to H/B electric vehicles. If rail is truly to replace road we need more lines and stations elsewhere to service the semi-suburban and rural areas. Undoing Beeching in the process.
And while the few hundred thousand who live within reach fo the new stations and displaced from the existing commuting routes it will do nothing to provide any meaningful capacity for additional freight, which will still require local distribution. Railways like this only ever service the few major population centres themselves in the centre of localised transport webs. This vanity project was all about allowing major developers to make more money over the next few decades following which the workforce will be out of jobs as the march of robotic manufacturing will render replacement employment even less skilled.
Better to spend the vast cost of HS2 on battery charging (or hydrogen) infrastructure etc for cars, rather than rail. This would give far better environmental gains than a rail system no one wants or needs.
Should definitely be cancelled. There was never a need for it in the first place – are we really so desperate to get to a destination 20 minutes sooner, that we are prepared to accept the cost, damage to wildlife and communities that this project will involve. That 20 minutes could be spent enjoying the passing countryside , reading or doing work (if so desired). Now, also, post Covid, I think more people will have got used to working remotely and conducting meetings etc. digitally that there will be less appetite for unnecessary long-distance travel. The opportunity for face to face meetings could become a kind of novelty to be enjoyed less frequently
@ Gareth Dennis 27th October 2020 at 12:09 pm
” intermediate stations like Aberystwyth,”
Since when was Aberystwyth an intermediate station ? It was built as a terminus, have they extended the line onto the beach ??
There does not seem to be a lot of support for this project. Rightly so. It was and remains a fatuous vanity project dreamed up by Lord Adonis and “advisors” within the DfT . The claims for educed travel times between cities is dubious at best. It does very little for large parts of the country (Wales, the South West, East Anglia and much of the North which will remain served by links using existing lines.
The Y shape of the network suggests potential problems if the London-Birmingham section is compromised. The argument about capacity release does not stand scrutiny. Ditto the use of the classic lines to accommodate more freight. What freight? Where will it come from and why would shipers use it. This suggests a degree of commercial naivety by those proposing this tsunami of freight will suddenly move to rail. It won’t unless there is a compelling case to do so.
The claims made for delivery on time and on budget sound increasingly shrill. HS2 could be Cross Rail on steroids. Bets on it going North of £200 billion before any additional funding for public transport links?
The funding for HS2 could and should be stopped immediately if there was the intestinal fortitude to do so. Our spineless leaders (all parties) have swallowed the claimed case (must have one) for this project. The word gullible remains in the OED despite rumours to the contrary. The monies could be spent on a real national programme of upgrades and rapid electrification across the network as a better alternative.
Scrap HS2! Whats wrong with the east and west coast mainlines? Maybe put some of the money into upgrading these lines and save a fortune in the process. Then spend some of that on building new / extending existing tram networks. Also why not use some of the billions saved to create direct routes between smaller cities and towns by efficient busses. This way, instead of people who happen to live near the big cities maybe benefiting from a single huge overkill project the money spent will serve the majority. Oh and maybe create lots of dedicated cycle / electric scooter routes. Il bet this way the government would still save a few billion and create real needed transport solutions in the process.
I want another option that says it should go ahead only if they went with a different plan. For example if the rebuilt and ran the east coast mainline to Japanese shinkansen standards, the journey from London to Yorkshire would be halved and the journey from London to Scotland would be cut by more than half. For those that are saying that we are too small of an island to have one, the east coast mainline is several tens of miles longer than the shinkansen from Tokyo to Osaka.
Investment in upgrading existing rail infrastructure & re-instating old lines would I believe have benefited many more communities. e.g. Dual track and electrification between Exeter and London
In my view, HS2 is not needed and is a waste of money. As COVID has shown us, there is very limited actual need for people to travel between major cities for work and in the “new normal”, this will not change significantly. Of course, cancelling now will not help the irreparable damage that has already been done to the environment
Let’s go back to living in caves. Or should we be a forward looking modern day country with modern day transport. Just travel around Europe and see how behind we are.
It’s amazing that an engineering journal is promoting the abandonment of a scheme which is the largest investment in public transport for over 100 years, and which has already spent 15 billions on early works, tunnelling machines etc.
The Engineer is in no way ‘promoting’ the abandonment of HS2. It is asking questions of HS2 in light of the current COVID-19 crisis and the nationwide change in working/travel habits, which look likely to remain in place once the pandemic is over.
Working practices have changed forever and the need for additional capacity no longer exists The main line destinations on the WCML are adequately served and if in the distant future more capacity is needed this can be increased by the simple expedient of providing more carriages. All destinations can handle up to 13 as distinct from the 9 and 11 car4 pendolinos currently in use. Even before Corvid demand for long distance rail travel was levelling off. A wholly political vanity project dreamt up by the Cameron/Clegg coalition because airport expansion and motorway building were off the agenda.
From the earliest days of railway construction, people have been against the intrusion of rail transport on their locality. Leaders in the city of London would not accept a railway crossing London so the northern lines terminated north of the Thames and the southern lines south of the Thames. Their lack of foresight has cost us dearly in the connection called Crossrail which is linking routes east to west at a cost of 18bn plus and then Crossrail 2 linking north and south. History shows no matter what complaints are made railways are pushed forward and become a part of our national infrastructure. The British political system operates on a short term strategy if things change it can cost us dearly as has been proven with the ridiculous decision to cut the rail network back in favour of road transport. The cost of rebuilding lines that were shut unnecessarily has proven prohibitive. I know it is easy with hindsight to now see the road traffic system is going to gridlock within 15 years if we carry on as we are but the government are aware of the population growth per year. Since the Beeching era, the population has grown by 18.7% you don’t have to be bright to see road traffic in its present form is very limited unless you want to spend your life gridlock. People who regularly visit Europe will see how things should be done how you can actually get a seat on a train and using modern technology how you can allow passengers to book their seat on a train using a machine no bigger than an ATM. This guarantees you a seat instead of the overpriced British network where passengers are forced to pay the going fare irrespective of whether they have a seat or have to stand. I say going ahead with HS2 is a good idea as long as they follow ingenuity and system control as shown in the rest of Europe.
If we cancelled HS2 now this would only join a long list of past projects where millions if not billions of pounds were spent with nothing to show for it, finish it I say
Discussions about HS2 always remind me of the quote by Macbeth “I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o’er”
Let’s just get it done
Vanity project, waste of money, not needed, loss making, of no use, etc, etc…….
All of these statements remind me of what was said about the Channel Tunnel.
Well written Gareth Dennis. The UK should have had HS2 from London to Glasgow and Edinburgh years ago. All the procrastination sees costs escalate, while we need more capacity, and as Gareth writes, HS2 will relieve other lines for more local trains that we are going to need more and more of. The advent of HS rail in Europe has boosted local economies just like steam did in the UK in the 19th century. Its time for the UK rail network to catch up with the rest of Europe.
HS2 misled parliament it is the worst fraud commons pac have ever seen! How could this have been approved? The only explanation is corruprion surely?? Working from home blasts a hole in the business case the trains are mostly empty. This will put the country in debt for decades
Thank goodness the Victorians didn’t take such a negative attitude to progress, as many have in this survey, otherwise where would we be today?
I did used to be a rail project manager so I understand the arguments for this more than most on this site, however I do question the continuing assertion that the capacity will be there by the time this is ready. The idea of 14 trains an hour is ludicrous, the busiest commuter line in Birmingham only has about 6 per hour, they’re talking about TfL levels. It reminds me of the M6 toll where the charges for the distance resulted in extremely poor take up. HS2 will be relying on the majority of journeys being between London and Birmingham which the additional cost of fares will struggle to justify once the capacity is released on WCML. It’s naive to think the other operators won’t compete. Don’t forget HS1 nearly died out until tourism to Brussels andParis saved the day, it was never going to be sustained by MEPS. What Covid has taught the nation is that working from home, even if for a couple of days a week, is now easily possible with improving technology and this will have an impact on the future ways of working. Reducing the workforce attending the office results in massive savings to businesses on leased properties and building projects and many will never go back to old practices. The world is changing and Tech is taking over which will benefit the environment and reduce capacity on both rail and road long term. The question of converting freight to rail has always been tricky due to the expense of creating rail/depot connections and persuading freight companies to use them as they often don’t have the margins to fund it and end up back on the roads. This is one project which will never show a payback and the costs will have to be written off.
As I understand it, high speed trains dominate the existing rail network, making it difficult for all the other trains to operate on the same rails.
It’s rather like having a pedestrianised city centre with a one way walking system, and then someone adds bicycles into the mix.
The solution is surely to remove the high speed trains, and improve the regular trains?
Michael Smith – Are you aware of the saying: don’t throw good money after bad ?
The funding overrun on this HS2 fiasco WILL get worse.
The business case for HS2 includes assumption reports concerning the capacity that HS2 would release on the existing ‘classic’ rail network. It is misleading to assume that ‘Aberystwyth, Adderley Park and Acle’ would benefit from an increase in classic services when the HS2 business case relies on no such services being created at Aberystwyth and Acle, and a reduction to classic services at Adderley Park.
There is a tendency among rail industry lobbyists and their supporters to dismiss the environmental impact of HS2 as being a minor issue but the HS2 Environmental Impact Assessments confirm that the impacts on precious species and habitats would be adverse, significant and permanent at up to County/metropolitan level.
On the subject of cost, £800 million has been over-spent since the start of construction earlier this year, while the Government could not commit to finding an extra £20m per week to feed hungry children. For perspective, £5.6 billion of HS2 costs incurred to the end of December 2019 were sunk from the budget to get the scheme underway.
As a minimum, HS2 should be paused until the long term impact of working from home is fully known.
Never wanted or needed by the majority. Better invest the money in education and health.
As a commuter, it’s been clear that capacity doesn’t meet demand for our local services. However it’s not clear how HS2 is the answer.
Gareth Dennis suggests that commuters will benefit by increased services on existing railways, which would be great if it were true. However, it’s clear from other comments, such as those by Murray Sinclair, J Holt, and Peter Johnson, that they believe there will only be increased freight capacity.
This brought home to me the lack of clarity around these ideas. If we are to have extra commuter services, where are the published plans? Where is the detail? It’s certainly unclear what the budget is for these additional trains and crew, or what the environmental impact of these additional services would be. Recruitment and training is already a problem for existing franchises, let alone new services.
There’s a problem – but HS2 is not the asnwer.
If it was needed in the first place, it definitely isn’t now. The way to encourage more people on to trains is to make tickets cheaper, not upgrade to a shinier, whizzier route. HS2 tickets would likely be more expensive even than the St Pancras high-speed train. We shouldn’t cause all this destruction for the sake of cutting a few minutes off the journeys of the few wealthy commuters who can afford such prices.
The real calamity which would have avoided HS2 completely was the closure of the original Great Central rpute between Marylebone and Manchesterin 1966 by an incoming Labour government elected partly on the promise to reverse and negate some of the Beeching cuts of the previous Tory administration. Reusing the abandoned formation would have cost a monetary and ecological pittance compared with the eye-watering sums needed to build the white elephant that is HS2.
Grayling kept reporting to parliament that HS2 was on time and on budget when he should have known that it wasn’t. If Parliament had been given the correct information regarding cost I don’t think the project would have got this far. I agree that we need to invest in our transport network even now when demand has dropped due to Covid, but HS2 is basically old technology and we should spend more money on regional services first. We don’t even know what a return ticket on HS2 will cost . If it is going to cost the same or more than the current peak period train ticket then most of the taxpayers who are paying to build it will find it cheaper to drive their electric cars.
Some comments here suggest that HS2 is good for the environment and tackling global heating. If that were the case, why are all of the major climate and environmental organisations opposed to HS2? It’s because they haven’t fallen for the Greenwash doled out by the numerous PR firms. We need to reduce emissions drastically in the next decade, just the very time that HS2 phase 1 will be chucking out thousands of Tonnes of CO2 in its construction, eg using huge amounts of concrete for the track, (cement has a huge carbon footprint) instead of using ballast so that it can cope with extra high speeds. The Climate Crisis movements have done their homework. I suggest that all your readers do too. PS in the preamble to the poll, you wrongly state that HS2 will be completed between 2029 and 2033. HS2 phase 2 wont be completed, if at all, until after 2040.
I cannot do much more than reiterate what Gareth Dennis has said. but would also like to make the following comments:-
Most of the “anti-posts” sound like people who never have to use rail so are not interested in service or reliability & / or are speaking on behalf of the road lobby!
In the transport sector road transport is the biggest contributor to global warming and pollution. If we are to meet our carbon reduction targets and save the planet then something must be done – and done quickly. There must be a large modal shift to rail – freight in particular and this needs increased capacity and reliability. Which in many cases is not available today.
If rail is to capture a greater share of the market then we need a railway that is able to be operational as near to 24/7/365 as practical – not one that is only able to operate efficiently now and again.
Most of the railway system in UK is well over 100years old – and some of it now approaching 200.
The older the infrastructure becomes the more maintenance it requires. The main trunk route in the UK is the WCML. £m’s have been spent on this route over the past 30 years or so but is it any more reliable? No! Every Bank Holiday it is closed in at least two and sometimes three places for major engineering work. As time goes on this will get worse not better.
Trying to upgrade existing routes is very disruptive and expensive. As other European countries have found out it rarely works.
We must build new and provide relief to existing trunk routes so that services on these routes can be developed and increased – bringing also benefits to those people who do not live along the route of HS2.
I’m longing for the day when I can get from Leeds or York to Birmingham quicker that I can currently get to London!
Not needed as technological advances will virtually eliminate any need for mass business travel by the time it is built. On top of that – being built to 2020 standards when current speed trains in other countries (eg Japan) are already ahead of HS2
It is heartbreaking to see the destruction for something we don’t need . Shameful !
HS2 should be stopped as a matter of urgency, for its cost but mainly because of its negative impact on climate change and its disastrous impact on the UK’s natural environment. Someone earlier in favour of HS2 said the impact on ancient woodland was insignificant, everyone should read the Wildlife Trusts Report – What’s the Damage? (2020) to understand the real, irreversible and dramatic impact that this project will have. We can not afford this.
Creating a wide concrete path through the nation is not clever. Recognised by everyone as never able to achieve carbon neutrality in its lifetime should be enough to call a pause and review. We are currently in a situation, enforced by Covid-19, where we have the opportunity to rethink how we would like to live and work. The natural environment for all of us during this crazy time has become extremely important, no one is in favour of destroying any of this, but it is already happening – this has to stop.
The project as a facilitator of air travel through linking cities and airports is also something we should not be working toward or encouraging.
The funds for this project should be going into investing in improving existing infrastructure (see below), education and retraining to focus on renewable energy and a circular economy. HS2 is currently employing a lot of people, but the majority seem to be security – low paid and low investment in these positions, when they could be doing something useful and interesting. (HS2 is also putting a lot of people out of work.)
HS2 can not be trusted with our natural environment. It is overseeing its own actions and uses its HS2 Bill as a license to do whatever it wants. It uses its compulsory purchase powers as a modern day land grab, turning greenfield into brownfield wherever it treads, as well as destroying property and the nations heritage – big time. How it treats those whose land and property it takes is comparable to how the 18th and 19th Century landed gentry treated the population across the UK then – restricting payments and using gaging orders. On this point of the 19thC., when removing those who are protesting against HS2 and highlighting their wildlife crimes – legally, the mercenaries HS2 employs, the NET, use the same 19thC laws used to evict farmers in Ireland in the 19thC when they would even burn them alive in their homes. This is where we are at with HS2.
So when I have to listen to engineers and those who are currently benefiting from this nightmare, telling me in 20 years, when this is nearly finished, we are all going to be living in some fantasy future, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. When, as is forecast, the whole of Birmingham is going to spend the whole day travelling between there and Euston, or maybe just to Old Oak Common, so fast they can’t see what’s outside. I live in North London, people are already being made ill by this project and this is to continue for 15 or 20 years. This is to spread all across the country – you really want this?
Engineers – have you ever had to travel between Manchester and Leeds, Liverpool and Hull, or Newcastle and Manchester Airport? That would be a good place to start if the nation is really interested in improving infrastructure and levelling up.
Given the science says we can expect to see a continued increase in Corona style viruses, what would be the most sensible thing would be to slow trains down and have windows that open. The science also says we ought not cut any more trees down and we should take care of our natural environment – news from across the globe is bringing this into sharp relief on a daily basis. HS2 says flatten everything at high speed.
Did anyone ask about how people are going to catch this train, get to it, if it doesn’t stop at very many places?
And did anyone mention the Lorax?
After the total mess of Crossrail HS2 should never have been started, the final cost of Crossrail will never be known, millions wasted by companies and site personnel fiddling now we have another big fiddle starting, they are ripping up beautiful country side it should be stopped NOW
I’ll be very surprised if it ever gets past Birmingham before they run out of money, where it will be London exporting it’s housing problem.
The viability of high speed rail is questionable given what the UN have told us about the fast looming trouble of climate and ecological crises. Wherever that viability might lie, however, HS2 seems not to be anywhere near. We really need to stop thinking of the construction industry as a saviour of economy and society. That Parliament could have voted through such devious poor quality thinking of course, suggests that neither can we trust such an in-august institution as this.
I’m certain this project (which will mushroom in cost) benefits too few people. The money could be better spent improving the network as a whole. In particular I favour the suggestion of increasing the loading gauge from Folkestone allowing trucks to stay on the tunnel trains for onward journeys to regional centres. This would have the advantage of taking a large proportion of the traffic off the London orbital and distribution motorways.
Stop it now.
Megabus, London to Birmingham tomorrow = £10.
When the buses go electric price will be £8.
When they go autonomous cost will be £5.
When they become connected they will zoom along at 200mph.
Safely.
With as much capacity as you would ever need.
Why can’t they see it?
Far too much money and destruction when a cross country network in the North would be far more beneficial. People don’t want to go to London!!!!
If it gets cancelled now, it will get resurrected ten, twenty, and thirty years later at a higher cost. Just like Crossrail. I’m for it, but with intense scrutiny of the costs as it goes along
The scheme was a vanity project by the high speed enthusiasts from the start; the clue’s in the name. The suggested need for extra capacity was a later claim to try to justify the project. At best it would only help those living or working in close proximity to the few stations and the time saved on the long haul could easily be lost in local travel to final destinations. Far better to spend the money on reversing Beeching and improving local lines, particularly in the North where so much has been cut out of the system, including Skipton to Colne; Manchester to Sheffield via the ‘new’ Woodhead tunnel; Peak Dale to Matlock; Oxford to Aylesbury, giving the station back to Thame; Northallerton to Leeds and so many more, to release original routes. Ask the people of the City of Ripon whether they would prefer to have HS2 from London to Leeds or to have their own station back so that they can at least catch a train to Leeds to catch one of the many existing fast trains that already run to London. Consider the journey from Manchester to Derby, once an express service, now a two-train trip along secondary routes taking twice as long or more.
Once passengers from Manchester had the choice of three routes to London , to Euston, St Pancras and Marylebone. With the electrification of the Euston route the other two were closed in order to exploit the costs of the electrification. Small wonder that the Euston route is now busier than ever. Diversion of a portion to St Pancras at least would alleviate pressure on the WCML.
Even before the Covid pandemic, there was a need to increase funding for the NHS, the Police, the Fire Service, Education , local buses other many Social Services for the benefit of the whole population. These worthy cases are far more deserving than HS2. And we haven’t even mentioned the destruction to swathes of landscape and woodland and the disruption and misery caused to those living along the route who will never benefit from its trains. Comparison with the opposition to the construction of Victorian projects is not realistic as before the railway came there were only the slow horse drawn road vehicles and canals. The advent of the railway transformed transport far more than HS2 would today.
The quicker the Govt., reassesses its priorities the better. HS2 was never top of the national list and the sooner it is halted the better. To those who would say it is too late as much has been spent, it is surely better to save the much greater part of the cost. There have been other rail schemes where construction was halted before completion and unused embankments, bridges and even viaducts can be seen as a result of changed priorities. Scrap HS2!
HS2 Not needed, not wanted and we can’t afford it. Cancel it now.
As I understand it the only train which is currently full on the WCML is after 7pm after the peak pricing finishes otherwise the Load Factor is just over 50% Capacity is therefore not an immediate issue. When one day it becomes an issue there are a number of we’ll documented options already in place to increase the capacity such as some changes to a junction near MK, grow the Chiltern Line and then re-lay the track on the unused Great Central route all at a fraction of the cost. Re demand the fact that the shorter journey time to Birmingham is offset by the change to New Street for onward travellers will mean that the catchment is limited until Phase 2 is completed in 20 years! Heathrow is a success due connectivity – Stansted loads of capacity but no connections ! Re saving Flights this is a complete fallacy as the airport slots will always be used post Covid and for more polluting longhaul flights ! Economic growth along the route only sucks in activity from wider region , Northern France economy shrank as Lille grew as TGV introduced ! Environmental disaster and quite possible destroy the aquifers under the Chilterns! Comments above re Freight also very true , the project to build the associated Freight terminal at Denham died a death years ago . In summary loads of cheaper options , benefits if any are years away, and the money better spent across the country and get returns much quicker . Description as a Vanity Project understates the insanity of the whole thing !
If the government truly believed in ‘levelling up’ the country, they would focus on the repair and improvement of existing rail lines, and improving connections to the North. This, combined with new sustainable energy solutions, would be much more in the interests of the economy and the environment, instead of driving the country into industrial devolution.
Euston to Curzon St, Birmingham, is exactly 100 miles.
DfT says it will take 52 minutes to travel the 100 miles.
That is an average for the 100 miles of 116mph, on a 250mph railway.
It cannot do any faster as the tunnels will not allow it.
The WCML with bottlenecks removed and in-cab signalling can run tains in section at 160mph. That mean it will equal HS2 in time.
HS2 is SLOW.
Capacity?
The WCML can have two extra tracks south of Rugby to London. The Gt.Central trackbed is still intact that runs onto the used Gt.Central Aylesbury bypass.
Once the Continental access was eliminated and the speed was slow, its raison d’etre dissolved. It then should have been cancelled.
Northern Powerhouse Rail is clearly needed and should go ahead
The Victorians never had existing fast railway lines that can be made even faster as we do right now.
Forty years ago approx one third of Liverpool’s Merseyrail metro was canned with men ordered off site. Underground junctions are still there ready to be used. About five miles of tunnel and miles of surface trackbed still await trains. The east of the city does access the underground city centre section. The city suffered ever since.
This is where money should be spent. Liverpool only wants them to finish off what was promised. Leeds only has buses.
It is complete madness to build another fast line to London when major cities lack essential rail transport infrastructure.
Post covid the way we work will have changed forever. Spend the money on improving broadband and local businesses. Cancel HS2
this sums it up, Britain isn’t the same scale as other European countries whose tracks are also wider and can support double decker vehicles. Our situation is unique. Standardisation is the bugbear of modernity, frequently causes vast problems- take the Grenfell situation that exposed how badly cladding worked for blocks of flats. From one disaster follow more – that’s the reasoning behind the objectors powerful actions to desist the building of a rail extension like HS 2 this wintertime.
By the time HS2 is completed, Europe will be running maglev type trains even faster than the TGV. The UK government should jump technologly to this rather than being behind. They can’t think of skipping a generation of technologly that other countries have already done! It will also be cheaper to build.
Well this was a worthwhile exorcise wasn’t it, who’d of thought readers of The Engineer would vote against Europe’s largest engineering project?! It’s almost like it’s been hijacked by a protest campaign…
For God sake, this country, which once led the world in rail technology, has slower trains now than even in Portugal, with about 1/3 of the UK’s area and a sixth of our population.
It’s about time Brits stop being a bunch of luddites and get on with building high speed rail, if for nothing else than just so we can boast to be the best at railways once again.
And yes, we can build HS2 and still go ahead with all the rail upgrades currently underway and a few billion pounds for more upgrades, with gilts hovering around zero, the government ought to borrow & spend on infrastructure.
HS2 will never come anywhere near become CO2 neutral, even by HS2s own admission it will take 120 years and thats with it using 100% zero carbon electricity, which it wont. The infrastructure will not even last 120 years before much needs renewing, most of it being built on a 99 year life expectancy. If 200 million a week for the next 10 years (which is what HS2 will cost if it comes in on budget…which it wont) is spent on innovative local low carbon transportation solutions it will save megga tonnes more CO2 from being released into the atmosphere. As it is from now on all other transportation projects will be starved of capital. If clearing paths on the WCML are so important, then the introduction of 21 century signaling can create many new paths, and if more capacity is needed strategic reopenings of previously closed railways could be used to move freight from the WCML and free up to 127 paths a day. The loss and destruction of natural habitat from building HS2 can never be replaced another serious consideration that is being ignored.
Instead of this very expensive vanity project,why doesn’t our govt invest in upgrading the UK’s energy production(new Nuclear)instead? When May visited our area she was asked about investing in Moorside,indirectly answering that “it was a commercial project” It has now been shelved(the various companies have withdrawn due to lack of govt investment)& despite numerous articles in the local paper stating it “might be back on the drawing board…” nothing has occurred. Apparently,we’re now going to have jobs supplying other nuclear projects… I’ll believe this when I see it. I’m in no position to foresee the future,but I can guess that HS2’s promised improvement to our lives will not happen(UK’s present trains are cancelled due to flooding/wet leaves/snow etc etc & often staffing is inadequate)
The latest news carried the information that COVID sufferers developed antibodies,which then reduce markedly in just a few months thus COVID is likely to still be an health issue when HS2 is ready so passenger numbers will be halved(social distancing)& journeys will be cancelled as destinations are subjected to lockdowns. Shelve HS2 until COVID has a vaccine(although it’s looking likely this vaccine will need be administered @ least yearly,like the flu vaccines)
I cannot understand why the government back this project which has dubious advantages but refuse to back a link off the East Coast mainline into Doncaster/Sheffield Airport the fastest growing regional airport in the country.
When I talked to my local Conservative Member of Parliament he also agreed it was a total waste of money, & agreed that putting on a few extra carriages would be better than spending Billions on something that could be improved without spending so much money, he has been fighting to protect ancient woodland that the HS2 would destroy
Not all Conservative Members of Parliament agree with the HS2 as you can see from the Twitter link to Graham Brady Conservative MP for my area near to Manchester Airport
https://twitter.com/SirGrahamBrady/status/1227245891012218881?s=19
No it couldn’t, the money being provided for HS2 is for the sole purpose of building HS2.
Cancel the project, you cancel the money and still have to pay back what’s already been spent
Fares for high speed travel in Europe are not significantly higher than for 200km/h inter city routes, and Eurostar has captured more than 80% of the London-Paris/Brussels market – people love it. In France, Ouigo is a low cost TGV service that has expanded massively in the last few years; in the UK, HS2 will have to compete with lower speed services on parallel routes. HS2 is the only practical way to increase capacity on the WCML for freight, it is not just about high speed. The myth of reusing the Great Central Mainline trackbed needs to be buried once and for all – it is a low speed route, it was NOT built to Continental loading gauge, and significant parts of the trackbed have disappeared.
HS2’s business plan wouldn’t get on the table in any boardroom in Britain. The reason it didn’t attract private capital back in 2009 (the original plan) is because private business wouldn’t touch it with a stick.
It should have been scrapped years ago. HS2 economics are entirely based on meaningless assumptions, and the BCR (Benefit Cost Ratio) excludes the bulk of the costs (capital finance and compensation costs).
The figure we see in the media and HS2 publications (the £100 Billion type figure) is only the estimate of the construction cost).
The total cost will be very much more than this.
HS2 still has no revenue projections either!
It is a deceitful and flawed economic plan, the most expensive project ever proposed by any British Government in peacetime.
There are many more reasons why it should be scrapped, the unsubstantiated job creation claims, the hideous environmental destruction for two.
HS2 does not meet the needs of the UK transport infrastructure needs and never has done.
£200bn to save 20 minutes on a journey from Leeds to London, the hs2 gravy train must be cancelled.
Where is Dr Beeching when he’s really needed?
The original plan for HS2 was a vanity project dreamt up by the Labour peer, Lord Adonis. One would have hoped that the Tories would have had more sense, and cancelled it.
The contractors are aware that there is no need for this HS2 but they want the contracts. They have the opportunity of making billions out of this so are pushing the Government to ensure it goes through. It has been shown that this train will not meet the specifications that is claims. In layman’s terms, this is a complete con and will be a running cost to the tax payer for the next 100 years.
In the (maybe vain) hope decision makers ever read these comments, consider moving the East Midlands hub station from the proposed Toton site by couple of miles southwards down the track, to next to the existing East Midlands Parkway and so providing a connection with the Midland Main Line, convenient access off junction 24 of the M1 and close enough to East Midlands Airport to link the two train stations and airport as they plan to for Birmingham https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hs2-reveals-designs-for-automated-people-mover
Apart from the obvious damage to public travel caused by Covid, Brexit will also have a stifling effect on the economy. Our ability to manage
the Crossrail project suggests another massively expensive afair.
HS2 has sucked investment away from non-London lines across the whole of the North, like some panacea for all the North’s travel needs.
The UK has the largest economic wealth gap of any G20 country, yet HS2 started in London to that well known Northern city of Birmingham.
If HS2 construction had started in Newcastle and Glasgow with the final stretch on the 2040s being completed between Birmingham and London then I could believe the spin about Northern powerhouse, but it is another London centric project being paid for by all tax payers but will just drive London growth on the additional capacity on SE.
There is a tradition in the UK to object to rail infrastructure projects dating back to the original installation of rail eg, a campaign and protests to stop the railway going into Portsmouth in the 1800s. Other European countries seem to have a longer term view of the advantage of high speed rail. There is over 10,000 km of high speed rail under construction in Europe at the moment, of which HS2 is 230km. The UK is currently 7th in the world in installed high speed rail lines, but 18th in the world with high speed rail under construction behind most other European countries except Belgium, Netherlands and Portugal. Italy found advantages in the reduction of aircraft travel once it was possible to travel from the North to South of Italy by high speed train. The EU is partially funding construction of high speed rail through the alps to link France and Italy’s high speed rail networks. Once completed it will be possible to travel from Paddington to the south of Italy by high speed rail, and to other destinations on the European high speed rail network. HS2 will extend this to the Midlands and northern England. With an emphasis on reducing air travel, high speed rail provides an effective alternative as found in Italy. Although the journey may be a little longer the reasons given to switching from air to train travel included being able to work on the train, the train is city centre to city centre, no hassle getting to/from the airport and all of the airport queuing and waiting. Italy are also the first country to introduce high speed freight which is reducing the number of long distance lorries on their roads. Without HS2 the midlands and north of England will be denied the opportunity to take advantage of using the European high speed rail network.
Working next to construction site in Curzon St Birmingham you are wrong it is most certainly wanted by everyone I know & work with the City & full credit to Metro Mayor Andy Street for championing the project.
This absolute waste of money for a white elephant, when we could be funding long abused and ignored branch lines, fund a new/old design of carriages limiting people to six/per cabin, and or spend these vast sums on sustainable jobs for the future.
Sad to see Tories feeding bank, I suppose that what they do until they are massively interrupted.
As engineers, one of our primary aims is/should be to design, develop and deliver to cost and budget – HS2 fails on that account on a regular basis.
As engineers we ‘should’ be aiming to deliver projects that benefit society, all of it, not just for the few – HS2 fails on that account as well.
As to our current railway infrastructure, we are still using a patched up version of what the Victorians bequeathed us over 100 years ago. If we are going to spend vast amounts of tax payers money on the railways then it would be better spent on upgrading ALL existing rail infrastructure, for example: dual lines, electrification, removal of height restricting bridges so that we can use double decker trains, etc.
I’m not against innovation but HS2 is not innovative and it has no discernible benefits and the costs will cripple investment in the rest of the rail network. Let’s do this properly, let’s see a viable investment and development strategy for the UK. As an engineer I would not want to be involved in this environmentally destructive, overpriced, failining, white elephant project.
John Hartley,
The APT 35 years ago was designed to run at 155mph on existing tracks. Speeds are faster today as computerised signalling if far superior.
I believe the APT still holds the Glasgow to London speed record.
Richard Jones,
Curzon St is a stand alone station. There are no connections to the rail lines or services.
To change to New St is a walk along winter streets in the rain dragging a large case on and off pavements.
No kidding.
Part of the £200b gravy train is being used to anchor the regeneration of the SouthSide district of the City Centre. It is must needed investment and should be welcomed and applauded
A project that will cost the people ~£1,600 each, with an estimated ticket price of £240 and no sight of carbon neutrality for a century makes this a trophy project for the rich. We have an existing infrastructure that serves ordinary folk and which is crumbling in places. The investment should be on improving the existing railways, not creating a service that is more expensive than flying.
Birmingham is currently served by the already crowded West Coast Mainline and the suburban Chiltern Service to London. As a regular passenger of both Pre-Covid both services were operating at almost full capacity as is the existing permanent way infrastructure. HS2 will ease the pressures on Avanti West Coast & Chiltern for the benefit of all users between Birmingham & London
I live in Leeds and work the south bank of Leeds, whilst i agree the Southbank needs investment im not sure decimating the existing businesses to erect a dead end terminal hs2 station and thousands of bland unwanted btr flats should be applauded.
Until lockdown i commuted into leeds on the ancient pacer diesels with a top speed of 35mph, these are overcrowded unreliable and definitely not environmentally friendly.
How can anyone justify spending £200bn on a single HS2 track when large swathes of the UK are unelectrified or not served at all by rail.
The money would be far better spent improving existing services and reopening branch lines and bringing rail in the UK to the masses not the privileged few.
Stuart Broadbent,
The Gt.Central was built for 100mph in the 1800s, when trains could not reach that speed. It looked ahead. It was built to continental gauge, as it was to run through a Channel tunnel.
The WCML can have two extra fast tracks from Rugby to London by reinstating just 40 miles of the Gt.Central trackbed. Make it 4-track then value added serving the towns along the way. Two for one.
A no-brainer.
Sprint will connect Curzon Street, Moor Street and New Street which will allow easy connections between all terminals in the City Centre & the new extension to West Midlands Metro. No one will need to walk anywhere in Birmingham City Centre in the rain if they wish not too by using TfWM Sprint & Metro
Transport for West Midlands will be providing the new rapid transit service which will connect Curzon Street, Moor Street, New St, Snow Hill Railway & West Midlands Metro providing an easy Interchange between all railway stations, light rail and local bus services in the City Centre.
Curzon Street will not be stand alone. Transport for West Midlands Rapid Transit Sprint will link HS2 to all other railway terminals in Birmingham City Centre & West Midlands Metro
The East Coast Main Line, Midland Main Line, and the West Coast Main Line are all full, to widen any the above lines would cost more than double the cost of the new line, having to demolish city centres to enable widening the existing lines. People are happy to demolish ancient woods to build motorways and other new roads and this would continue if the new HS2 is not built, a motorway takes more than double land take compared to a new railway. The HS2 would demolish less than half of one percent of ancient woods, more are being demolished to build new housing, near to me 30 acres of woodland has been demolished to build a new housing estate.
The only fault with the scheme to me, is that the line is nor going to be connected to HS1 to allow trains to carry straight onto the Continent, which means that passengers from up north will have to change trains and stations in London. The original proposal of the “EustonCross” station should be built, as not everybody from the North don’t want to travel to London, and want forward connections from London.
Birmingham City Council state HS2 will create 50,000 additional jobs (26,000 of which would be in Birmingham/Solihull). An average GVA increase of £680 per worker and an £4 billion increase in economic output per year.
HS2 is threatening our local drinking water supply in Colne Valley west London, with hundreds of piles to be sunk 45 meters into the chalk aquifer right across the valley on a gentle curve? One water pumping station already applied to be closed which provides water for 140,000 local people daily. Must be stopped. Worse than useless.
The HS2 budget cannot be used for funding eco buses. Birmingham City Council has sucessfully secured funding for hydrogen buses to operated in the City but funding for projects such as this is completely separate to HS2.
The capacity argument could have been rectified by upgrading the former GW line to Birmingham/Birkenhead and also re-instating the MML missing link in the Peak District to syphon traffic away from the WCML. Electrify these and allow 110 mph operations would be a much better bet than HS2. Extending the “paused” electrification on the MML to link up the main East Midlands cities, South Yorkshire and the West Riding would deliver connectivity and alternative routing that HS2 never could. It would also link up with existing wired up lines a create a systems “sparks effect”.
The freight arguments don’t stand close scrutiny until a rail/inter-modal product and service offer can match road transport on agility, responsiveness, cost and competence. Why would shippers pay more for poorer and slower service. We seem to be in a 1066 and all that scenario on this issue . Rail good, road bad. One has to ask why rail has been beaten out of the market or retreated on a sustained basis.
This project involves considerable destruction of ancient woodland. Those beautiful habitats are our heritage for heaven’s sake.
I won’t argue with the need for more capacity – for freight and stopping services.
But as Einstein said when he saw the power of the bomb, “everything has changed but our mode of thinking”. Trying to compete with absurdly cheap flights to the Midlands and Scotland is tackling the problem from the wrong end.
The cost of those flights should be far higher, to reflect their true environmental impact. At the same time, we seem to have forgotten the vast embodied energy of a concrete trackbed – and also the impact in operation. A train every 5 minutes, at 240 mph, is NOT an environmental improvement for a whole swathe of beautiful country – the acreage of woodland destroyed is just a fraction of the land that will be spoilt by this scheme.
I do believe – even if covid goes away – that there’s a need for greater rail capacity in our plans for zero carbon. I absolutely don’t believe that this damaging and expensive project is a sensible way to provide it. More of an ego-trip for yesterday’s men in Parliament. I suppose they were too young to remember Concorde…
We should be protecting our Eco system, History and wildlife. This project is unnecessary and a National disgrace. All the ancient woodland that is vital to our existence, and that has been preserved through generations eradicated, gone forever.
When will people understand that our rain forest is important?
The latest study that was commissioned about HS2 says Birmingham’s economy could be boosted between 2.1% and 4.2% a year does not this alone justify HS2 beside the tree restoration plans long term. Both Birmingham & the environment will benefit long term HS2 is win win win for the City of Birmingham in my opinion.
I have personally viewed some of the tragic and unfounded destruction that is taking place to make way for HS2.
The clearance of trees, the further decline in some endangered species, the destruction of precious habitats and environments, compulsory purchasing and all the terrible upset which goes along with that in so many cases, all this and so much more.
This ridiculous project needs halting in its tracks immediately! (pun intended!)
Wow! I have never felt so in step with the readers of the Engineer- Infrastructure and making it fit for future travelers is the goal-the only problem with that is the people who are designing the future have no interest in its use ;but after they have gone they will be able to show the blue plaque that states ‘I am, important’ Until this country stops awarding people for building things in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong goals we will all suffer .And if you think there is no alternative you would be right but if you are looking to the future then monorail may be the answer -following all current motorways it would be a more reasoned future with pods running on a loop system along the whole length of the M5 ,M6 , easily added to and the land is already secured –
The latest study commissioned by HS2 Ltd says Birmingham’s economy could be boosted between 2.1% and 4.2% a year long term by HS2 hardly a failure of Concorde terms.
The country is up to its eyebrows in debt and there are many more important things needed instead of this white elephant of a stupid train. Our police forces are stretched to the limit, as is the fire service and the nursing profession.
if I’ve got to put my two pennies worth in it’s a Disaster waiting to happen, let’s face it realistically crazy people out there in the world I’m not one of them I’m an idealist. My point being you don’t want another Titanic history railway disaster that could of been avoided, this could end up a ghost track and wouldn’t that be a waste of money. All said and done, if they dug deep, in there pockets and went under ground and saved the beauty spots and wild life it would be an excellent service. With all that said let’s hope I haven’t planted a seed for some ecoterrist but someone may read this and think twice before they destroy more of our eco system
The northern arm of HS2 could be useful linking cities not currently linked by rail but London – B’ham already has a rail link. Improve this, improve the roads. Leave the ancient woodlands to ease out carbon footprint. Saplings will never replace a 400 year old oak tree.
HS2 is predicted to bring inflows into economy of £4.2b which will contribute to a reduction in PSBR
7 million trees are due to be planted in the course of Phase One of HS2
Thanks for posting this Gareth. It’s good to read some material that adds value, and is useful in better understanding the issues. So often it’s way too much knee jerk opinion.
HS2 will actually be extremely useful in relieving the severe overcrowding outside lockdown that occurs on the existing rail lines between Birmingham & London by increasing capacity between the two cities a much needed requirement recently outlined in a report by Transport for West Midlands. In addition the loss of a few ancient woodlands will be compensated by the planting of 7 million new trees and shrubs on the first phase of the railway alone including 40 native species, specific to each location according to HS2Ltd.
The impact of HS2 goes against any positive action on climate change and if considered in relation to the Paris Agreement, which it ought to have been by now, should be stopped.
For a comprehensive understanding of the true impact of HS2 on the natural environment I recommend the Wildlife Trusts Report: What’s the Damage, published at the start of this year.
Richard Jones, please wake up and smell the coffee, do you have an undeclared interest in HS2 ?
>> “The latest study commissioned by HS2 Ltd says Birmingham’s economy could be boosted”, honestly what do you expect them to say ? Fracking companies say there are no environmental impacts, Airlines say the same – at the very best it’s dubious, turkeys don’t vote for Xmas !!
>> “7 million trees are due to be planted in the course of Phase One of HS2”, they already planted thousands and then let them all die ! Trees take decades to counteract CO2, and it doesn’t get away from the basic fact HS2 IS a major polluter – planting trees is not the answer ?
>> “HS2 will actually be extremely useful in relieving the severe overcrowding … that occurs on the existing rail lines”. Rubbish. Tell that to the commuters on the Brighton to London line or the Reading to London line. Overcrowded lines, overpriced tickets, rubbish services. HS2 will suck investments from the UK rail infrastructure. The situation will get worse.
And, let’s not forget the overpaid ‘executives’ running the HS2 fiasco who work for companies who sponsor the Government – that’s my and your taxes.
There is more than one rail link from London to Birmingham. The Chiltern line was reduced to two lines for most of its length some time ago. They could easily re-instate 4 lines at the stations to allow passing, and increase the capacity. Very few trains actually go all the way to Birmingham, presumably there is no demand. This was going to be the main freight route to Europe a few years ago, so plans to increase capacity must already exist.
There are very few business within SouthSide the majorty of the site of the HS2 terminal in Birmingham was derelict save for the historic Gun Barrel which has been saved.
Nobody has commented that the options in the poll are a false dichotomy (or trichotomy, perhaps). The answer is No, but not because “By the time it’s built, life will have returned to normal”. There is no “normal” when it comes to behaviours and travel patterns – they’re always evolving, decade by decade. What is clear is that demand for travel on all scales within the UK and Europe is not going away long-term. Working and commuting patterns may change, but there will be quite enough demand for HS2, providing it’s not priced out of the market by future bean-counters in Whitehall and elsewhere.
Also, the phrase “the age of Covid-19” is thrown out without any explanation of how you’re supposed to reconcile the lifetime of a pandemic (1-2 years) with the lifetime of a railway (170 years and counting for many).
The correct answer is “No – we will need it by the time it’s finished”. Cars and road-building cannot provide our future long-distance transport needs in the way we have tried to make them do up till now, if we’re serious about aiming for net zero carbon. Maybe we will get electric planes, but we know we have electric trains.
I hope you don’t mind some input from a Yank, but some scientists and enginners here in America have devised a rail system that can meet what HS2 is being built for, but at lower cost, lower environmental impact, higher speed, and more flexibility.
This proposed Magnetic-Levitation (MagLev) system uses quadrupole (instead of dipole) superconducting magnets. Its two inventors (sadly both deceased) were Americans Dr. James R. Powell, and Dr. Gordon T. Danby, although the latter was born in Canada — at least he’s Commonwealth. They first developed a dipole-magnet system, which is the basis of the Japanese MagLevs. Then, about twenty years ago, in order to minimize the magnetic fields within the vehicles, they switched to using quadrupole magnets, in which the magnetic-field strength falls off more rapidly with distance, allowing stronger magnets below, with weaker fields leaking into the passenger compartment. (To avoid confusion, I need to state that the superconducting magnets are in the vehicle, not the rail.)
It turns out quadrupole magnets have a lot of additional advantages. It is posssible to have electronically-actuated switching points with no moving parts, so switching can be done in milliseconds, not tens of seconds. This, plus the fact thet that MagLev network is a “closed course”, means that the vehicles can be individual robotically-controlled cars, and we no longer need human-controlled long trains.
Also, the magnetic fields are so strong that the MagLev vehicles can carry fully-loaded truck trailers, or even fully-loaded trucks. This, plus the flexibility of individual vehicles, gives you all the advantages of trucks, with the low-cost, high-speed, and saftey of MagLev rail.
Most of the system will be narrow elevated monorails, that can operate over farmland and not block off a lot of the sun. This is a lot less expensive than cut-and-cover tunnels, easier to maintain, and easier to handle any emergency.
Now, what happens when the MagLev vehicles need to use conventional railbeds, such as near or within a city? Powell and Danby had invented a system whereby passive MagLev coils can be placed, in flat plates, over railroad crossties, and MagLev vehicles can travel OVER the existing rail. However, because of the presence of other infrastucture close to the rail, you may have to reduce your speed to only half (150-175 mph) of what you could do on an unobstructed monorail. (The minimum speed for MagLev is about 15 mph — below that, you need some sort of landing gear or wheels.)
I have a wealth of information about this on my website, http://www.LeviCar.com Information about Powell, Danby, and their living associates can be found in Group-A. My own enhancements to their system are found in Group-D. My latest paper, recounting the history of Powell/Danby MagLev, my own enhancements to it, and even a speculative substitute for Hyperloop, plus many valuable references, can be viewed or downloaded from http://robotrail.com/SuperTurnpike/SuperTurnpike-14.doc
I hope that this meets the definition of Nick Clegg’s “Growth that lasts”.
Yes this project needs to be cancelled. Update the existing lines, put more money into the NHS , policing and Wild Life officers. Then put the rest into projects to restore the worlds balance.
I was very suprised at many of the comments of what I assume to be largely Engineers. What does come out of the correspondence (which I will freely admit I have not fully read – life is to short!) and that most of those commenting have little knowledge of the history of railway construction in the UK. I am sure that some of your correspondent will suffer the fate of Dr. Dionysius Lardner who certainly came off second best in clashing with Isambard Brunel.
Correction – Eastside
SouthSide is theatre land.
Geoff,
I hope you will concur with this view from an engineering perspective
The progress of civilisation is the progress of transport technology. in other words the rate of human progress is literally dependent on developing quicker and cheaper means of transport for people and goods.
‘The railways’ were originally wooden rails for carts to allow a horse to drag heavy minerals at a dependable rate, i.e. quicker and cheaper than relying on very variable weather-dependant cart-tracks. Unlike the permanent roads of the Romans, Telford, Macadam & co., these ‘railways’ were of necessity temporary and relocatable (i.e. not permanent ways), as mines were ‘wasting assets’.
Metal rails and steam were incremental developments making transport progressively quicker and cheaper. Much later the railways were used for carting people about as this mode because it was quicker and cheaper than long-distance stage coaches and toll-roads.
Now we have the private car and public roads, which offers the quickest and cheapest door to door travel mode to-date by far. It is so successful that congestion is appearing, as it is becoming politically impossible to build public road capacity to meet the demand. Traffic is now slowing, and therefor getting more expensive, and we have the spectacle of a reverse in the progress of civilisation. More Rail is frankly NOT the answer, as it is old-tech and too expensive when compared to road vehicles.
The answer is for rail routes to be tarmac-ed over. The subsequent increase in road capacity would allow civlised progress to resume.
We can then let the engineers carry on developing cheaper vehicles …. [note that ‘cheaper’ includes direct costs such as energy, as well as indirect costs such as pollution, accidents, congestion, etc]
As an engineer, I can see the similarities between HS2 and Concorde. Can you?
Why do designers of these projects not consider what has been achieved to date, possible improvements and then try and design something that will be realistic and enable a return on the investment.
Mr Davis states that HS2 , “When it opens, HS2 will be the most advanced form of high speed transport on the planet”. How far are we allowed to look??
I do feel the planners should have looked at how the Wendlingen-Ulm high-speed line in Germany has been constructed. First point is that 31km of the 60km route is tunneled. Not surprising HS2 chose German tunneling machines. The soggy ground they go through here doesn’t really compare with the Swabian Alps.
The Wendlingen-Ulm high-speed line projected capacity is 18 million journeys per year at up to 250km/hour, ( 155mph)
I do feel HS2 is a vanity project. Initial discussion involved train speeds that are possible on mag-lev tracks but impossible on tracked railways.
The HS2 project will bring better economic benefits to Birmingham & one hopes in turn this through regeneration will reduce the burden on the QEHB, WMP and Nature England leading to greater benefit for residents of the City.
Maglev operated in Birmingham from 1984 to 2001. It was removed due to excessive cost expenditure. Birmingham needs HS2 not another Maglev.
Alstom said in 2016 that it can build tilting single decker HS2 trains that will run to Scotland and non-tilting double decker HS2 trains that will terminate at Manchester and Leeds. At least one Scottish politician has complained non-tilting HS2 trains will slow down tilting Pendolino trains on the West Coast Main Line.
HS2 is the wrong answer to the wrong question. The same money spent on conventional rail would give us one of the best systems in the world.
HS2 seems to attract a lot of comments – with some interesting views.
I have found it odd that HS2 proponents often say it is really about capacity – but then are very vague as to which capacity and why. I must admit I cannot see how many more commuters will travel to London, if it is that, and if it is freight – well the railways only carry about 6%of freight and, as the network is only geared for endpoints in London (and rural and costal locations are far too distant from a “railhead”) then I cannot see any worries for the road freight industry.
And the Victorians, much as they may have liked to, did not just do it – they had to provide some useful service to local communities (both freight & passenger) – to get permission.
Possibly re-establishing a more network for UK infrastructure might be a better use of the money and provide a boost to local economies as well as reducing road traffic; but this will likely require a sea-change in thinking at the department of transport – and, of course network rail (who could think of the country rather than the rail companies)
@Gareth Dennis
Understand the argument Gareth is making , but improving private low carbon personal travel is a better way rather than encouraging expensive HS2 type travel. Most people are not doing these long distance train journeys (could they afford to anyway?).
HS2 only deals with certain city to city journeys, most people need something more. The money being spent would be better spent on roads, cycle paths and building a green transport structure, (electric/Hydrogen) making local and intermediate journeys easier for the vast majority.
Personal transport is a lot more resilient to disease transmission, mass transit systems are simply the perfect virus spreading machine (speaking from personal experience!)
Time to stop listening to the anti-road and HS2 lobby and and start being realistic? Absolutely Yes.
@ Joshua Zev Levin
I hope you don’t mind some input from a pedantic Brit…
I know Americans like to think they’ve invented everything, BUT, Powell and Danby did not invent Magnetic-Levitation .
The principle was discovered by Charles Wheatstone 1840s.
First patent for transportation was by German – Alfred Zehden 1902:
Kemper made a working model in 1935:
Prof Eric Latithwaite (Imperial Collage London) developed the first full-size working model in late 1940s, (he also used the principle for levitating & driving shuttles on large textile looms):
In 1945 Linear induction motors were used for launching aircraft.
Powell and Danby came late to the party in mid 1960s.
Your current project ‘LeviCar ‘ is the same name (& same spelling ) as the 1959 Ford concept car; so nothing new under the sun.
The nonsense about converting rail lines to roads needs to be pushed into the long grass. This was advocated in the 1950s by some ex-military type. Studies in Norfolk in the 1970s also demonstrated it was not a cost effective option.
The funding allocated to HS2 would have been more equably applied to a complete and through modernization of the entire rail network including wiring up and possibly using existing but bored out infrastructure to allow semi-trailers to be carried on railcars. That would massively enhance rail’s competitive position for domestic and international traffic .
Maglev was invented by Lancastrian, Eric Laithwaite. Nice to see others are improving on it.
HS2 is 50 year old French technology. Hs2 is not even fast. It will no more than a super expensive WCML bypass. When 40 miles of the Gt.central trackbed south of Rugby can do the same.
The current West Coast Mainline is running at or near capacity. If a local train in front of the current high speed intercity is delayed, this can have knock on event resulting in the slowing down of the inter city train. The new line, mistakenly promoted as HS2, is to free up capacity on the West Coast Mainline for local and freight traffic. The current intercity routes will be transferred to the new HS2 line with the premise of more on-time arrivals. Freeing up this capacity is long overdue.
That MagLev was probably an old-fashioned system. If it was based on Transrapid, then it was out-of-date before it was built. If it was Superconducting MagLev, it was probably First-Generation. Powell’s and Danby’s Second-Generation MagLev uses quadrupole magnets, which give you all the advantages that I have noted, above.
Danby and Powell invented both First- and Second- Generation Superconducting MagLev. There were many MagLevs before, but not superconducting. James Powell’s son, Jesse, made a video recounting the history of MagLev. See “Powell and Danby’s Grand Idea: 50 Years of Maglev History”: (https://www.bnl.gov/video/index.php?v=514) especially between timestamps 20:42 to 21:44. Why just watch one minute? Watch the whole 49½ minutes.
The Ford Levacar product was an air-effect vehicle. They also had a one-seater MagLev car called “Levicar”. I capitalize the “C” to distinguish the theirs from mine.
As has been said so many times, HS2 is outmoded and obscenely wasteful. The Independent reported that the expected cost of £106bn could pay for the construction of ‘195 large hospitals’. Call it 100 and then we could also hire thousands of nurses, build schools and transform rail connections across the North. It’s curious how the government is so keen on the idea. Every opinion poll I’ve seen, including The Engineer’s, is against it. Johnson and co. clearly aren’t doing this for votes. It’s also curious that the government based the decision to green-light HS2 on the findings of the Oakervee Report. I wonder if apologists for the line could remind us what Doug Oakervee’s earlier job was. Oh, of course, it was Chairman of HS2. But perhaps I’m being too cynical. Maybe lots of money has swirled around and lots of contracts have been at stake, but I’m sure our government has acted cleverly – if that isn’t a backhanded compliment.
John Hussey
What £107bn buys you; the price of HS2 high-speed rail from London serving only three cities directly:
– 200 flagship hospitals similar to Birmingham’s Queen Elizabeth;
– 1,660,000 new social homes according to Shelter;
– 25 Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers;
– to supply & fit 4kw array of solar panels to 15 million homes.
Can we nail down the spurious argument re capacity on the WCML. The management of capacity on this route has been poor for decades and could stand some serious reviews and interventions to sharpen things up.
The injection of inter-modal trains from East Coast ports onto this route rather than avoiding the London area is a reflection of the low level of main line electrification on a national system basis and not a series of radial lines focused on London. There is life outside of the metropolitan area.
Alternative routes from London to the North West and Midlands were foolishly deleted or down graded in the 1960s as part of a programme that can only be characterized as short term economic vandalism. No doubt honours and gongs were passed around on the strength of this at the time. More will no doubt follow as HS2 inches its way to Birmingham (but probably not beyond).
Phil Mortimer,
The WCML was the first fast electrified inter-city line, with the first train running from Liverpool to London in 1966. As many services as possible were put on the new faster line. The Birmingham train was moved from the more direct diesel Chiltern Line to the faster WCML. Some diesel trains from Marylebone still run to Birmingham on the Chiltern Line with the fastest time not far behind the average London to Birmingham WCML times, as the route is more direct.
The Chiltern Line is overdue for upgrade and electrification. If, and when, done it may be possible to move all the Birmingham trains back to their original line alleviating the WCML. Or reinstate 40 miles of the Gt.Central south of Rugby to give two extra tracks from the WCML into London. Or ideally do both. Then capacity is not an issue.
All is assuming common sense prevails with HS2 cancellation. No track laying or tunnel boring has commenced yet, so an easy cancellation.
Apart from being convinced that the project should go ahead for previously stated reasons, I feel that there has been a serious omission in the planning of HS2, which is the lack of connection and operability with HS1 – it is absolutely ludicrous that to travel from Birmingham, Manchester or Liverpool by rail to continental destinations will need a break in journey and walk from Euston to St Pancras. If the government is serious about carbon emission reduction, then this must be rectified – through routes from UK to and from Europe should not start and finish at London.
The lies and disinformation around HS2 make the UK government a laughing stock. Democratically elected MP’s were whipped into silence to allow it to proceed. HS2 themselves stated that it was definitely not the answer for increasing capacity. It was only about the convenience of speed and the time saved by business users. When that was debunked by someone noting that people use laptops on trains, they fell back on the argument of increased capacity. This was not half as ridiculous as their arguments that it would save CO2 emissions. Millions of tons of cement cooked in China on old tyres now may pay back in 150 years time. Great! OK and they forgot to include bridges etc in the cement calculation. I have that in a letter!
And they dropped the 250mph claim because it was never promised – except in the marketing. It is embarrassing that our MP’s can not stop the lies.
The Government has just announced that the date of switching to electric cars will be brought forward to 2030. We have ten years to implement a nation wide charging network. That would be a better use of money and effort than building HS2.
Therre are a huge number of comments on this forum from people far more knowledgeable than me. My concern is about the environment. From the Government, HS2, down to the individual contractors and security workers there is no control over the wilful destruction and land theft going on throughout this project – and we are only on Phase 1! This project is lining pockets of the rich with no regard to the government’s ‘green’ project or climate change in general. If we do indeed have to have a new rail line built (and I’m not convinced) it requires serious scrutiny and ACTION! to address the various reports, protests and complaints they have received, which to date they choose to ignore.
Phase 2 of HS2 is being split yet again. The eastern leg is to be another phase. The eastern leg is impossible to justify.
Greengauge21 consultants, Beyond HS2:
“Upgrading the East Coast Main Line to 140 mph operation as a high priority alongside HS2 and to be delivered without delay. Newcastle London timings across a shorter route could closely match those achievable by HS2.”
http://www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/Beyond_HS2WEB.pdf
So the existing ECML matches HS2 times when bottlenecks are removed. The words, “across a shorter route” are key. Uprating the ECML, which takes half the traffic of the WCML, will mean Leeds, Newcastle, etc, will achieve HS2 times. The Birmingham to East Midlands line is easily upgradable to achieve similar times as HS2 to Birmingham from the eastern cities.
London wants a WCML relief line, hence HS2. To achieve that, the Chiltern tunnel can be built, as they are just setting up the boring equipment, then continue HS2 track from the northern portal, north of Amersham, to the Gt.Central trackbed taking the line to the WCML at Rugby. The line in Bucks can branch onto an uprated Chiltern giving the Birmingham train a fast tunnel out of Euston and then trains a more direct route to Birmingham. This will match the 52 minutes Euston to Birmingham HS2 time, a time so ridiculously slow it averages 116mph on a 250mph railway.
The rest of HS2 is not needed. 25% of land land for phase 1 has not even been bought yet. All is needed is bottlenecks removed from the ECML and WCML north of Rugby. A bypass tunnel under Crewe station for the Liverpool and Glasgow trains would be nice.
John, it never was a 250mph line. Where did you read that? 250 mph requires a TGV type concrete track bed and was never costed or considered. The mis-information was left to circulate to convince people it would be futuristic and fantastic.