Tories Decide on Labour HSR Proposal

Transport chief welcomes Leeds high speed rail announcement: Updated | Leeds | guardian.co.uk

Transport bosses have welcomed the news that the government is backing a 250mph London rail link for Leeds.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond announced at the Conservative Party conference today that the government will support plans for high-speed rail links to Manchester and Leeds. The announcement follows fears that the plans - originally announced earlier this year by the previous government - could fall victim to the coalition's spending cuts.

The link will cut journey times from Leeds to the capital down to 80 minutes.

The agreement for a Y-shaped line - which will split at Birmingham - will lead to a new station being built in Leeds city centre to accommodate the 400m-long trains. Work is due to start in 2025 and be completed by about 2032.

I looked around in the official planning site, High Speed Rail, and the closest I could find to definite plans was Route Engineering Study Final Report: A report for High Speed Two Ltd. It featured a line running from Euston station in London to the West Coast Main Line at Lichfield, with a spur into downtown Birmingham.

Railway Gazette: Hammond backs high speed lines to Leeds and Manchester

Early next year consultation will also be undertaken on extending this to form a Y-shaped high speed network. With the tail at London, one arm will run from the West Midlands to Manchester and a connection to the West Coast Main Line. The other arm will branch off in the West Midlands to run through the East Midlands and South Yorkshire, with stations in both areas, to reach Leeds. There will be a connection to the East Coast Main Line north of Leeds.

An earlier proposal was for a reverse S-shaped route, going London - Birmingham - Manchester - Leeds - Edinburgh and Glasgow

So they'll likely start with London - Birmingham, then continue onward to Manchester, Leeds, and possibly eventually Edinburgh and Glasgow. In any case, the line will start at London's Euston station, which is a few blocks from the Eurostar's London station, St. Pancras.

why on earth would construction not start till 2025 ???is that really a comitment??? the current govt would be well and truly gone by then ( maybe some of the yonger mps will still be around .

David Benton wrote:why on earth would construction not start till 2025 ???is that really a commitment??? the current govt would be well and truly gone by then ( maybe some of the younger MPs will still be around).

The main message from this government is "reduce government expediture". They are extremely unlikely to spend anything at all on a new line. The line to Birmingham is the most likely but I have my doubts about whether they would find the money for that. Beyond Birmingham is much less likely.

There is a big problem coming up about NetworkRail. Although it is not a private company with shareholders, as a quasi-cooperative it is not responsible to anyone but has borrowed huge sums of money. The government will have to decide whether to nationalise it formally and then whether to sell it off. Ideologically they would prefer to sell it, but would anyone buy it?
And how long will this government last? It will soon be extremely unpopular.

There are far bigger issues at hand that are not related to Network Rail, for which the Tory government was elected to tackle. If anything will sink them, it is their backpedalling on issues related to European Union membership and especially a referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon, not a HSR project. Besides, Deutsche Bahn will end up owning all of Network Rail if matters proceed as they have been (DB currently owns EWS and Arriva).

amtrakowitz wrote:There are far bigger issues at hand that are not related to Network Rail, for which the Tory government was elected to tackle. If anything will sink them, it is their backpedalling on issues related to European Union membership and especially a referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon, not a HSR project. Besides, Deutsche Bahn will end up owning all of Network Rail if matters proceed as they have been (DB currently owns EWS and Arriva).

We shall see.

Huge fare increases (6%) have been announced for January. They are already high. When possible I buy cheaper advanced purchase tickets but these too will probably rise. They have postponed purchases of new carriages needed to ease overcrowding on trains.

There is no possibility of a referendum on the Lisbon treaty. It has been ratified and can't be undone. If they said they wanted to change it every other member state would have to agree and ratify a new treaty. That's not going to happen at all. (I don't see what the fuss is about, but I support membership of the EU.) In any case it's a coalition. The Liberal Democrats have always been keen supporters of the EU, whereas the Tories are full of opponents. Any attempt to alter the treaties would break the coalition.

Some other investments are more important than HS2. Remodelling Reading station is a big project that will increase capacity at this major junction. The same is true for Birmingham New Street - a horror show like New York Penn.

I've ridden on parts of the West Coast Mainline and parts (or maybe all?) of the East Coast Mainline. (I've ridden from Leeds to Edinburgh, and also Leeds to London on the ECML.) It seemed similar to the Northeast Corridor, and I recall it being completely grade separated. Is there any reason they can't upgrade the existing right of way for speeds above 125 mph?

And that got me wondering, at 150 mph is the Acela Express the fastest train operating on an older, non-dedicated right of way?

Matt Johnson wrote:I've ridden on parts of the West Coast Mainline and parts (or maybe all?) of the East Coast Mainline. (I've ridden from Leeds to Edinburgh, and also Leeds to London on the ECML.) It seemed similar to the Northeast Corridor, and I recall it being completely grade separated. Is there any reason they can't upgrade the existing right of way for speeds above 125 mph?

And that got me wondering, at 150 mph is the Acela Express the fastest train operating on an older, non-dedicated right of way?

Probably, the main reason for building a new line is that the existing line is full. There are no spare slots for passengers or freight. Both the east coast and the west coast lines are very close to capacity in the busiest sections.

125 mph is not any longer considered High Speed. Existing lines are not suitable for higher speed.
The main dispute between Tories and Labour was over the actual route. Of course the Labour plan would have seen the line go through a wealthy Tory area of the Chilterns - several Tory-held constituencies. These are organising to resist it. Labour did not want to go via Heathrow airport. Technical experts do not think it would be worth running the trains via Heathrow, but this could be addressed by having a connection with Crossrail (Heathrow Express), probably at Old Oak Common.

george matthews wrote:There is no possibility of a referendum on the Lisbon treaty. It has been ratified and can't be undone

It certainly can be undone. There is plenty in there for the UK to invoke clausula rebus sic stantibus over. Perhaps one day you should read a consolidated form of the Treaty of Lisbon and compare it with the constitution of the Soviet Union, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights (a disgusting travesty that the UK is trying to "opt out" of; a meaningless gesture, since opt-outs get legislated away before they can be put into the "next treaty").

matt johnson wrote:at 150 mph is the Acela Express the fastest train operating on an older, non-dedicated right of way?

Yes, in terms of top speed. However, in terms of average speed, it isn't; the ICE-T between Berlin and Hamburg achieved the highest triple-digit average speed that I can recall, in spite of its top speed being 143 mph.

george matthews wrote:There is no possibility of a referendum on the Lisbon treaty. It has been ratified and can't be undone

It certainly can be undone. There is plenty in there for the UK to invoke clausula rebus sic stantibus over. Perhaps one day you should read a consolidated form of the Treaty of Lisbon and compare it with the constitution of the Soviet Union, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights (a disgusting travesty that the UK is trying to "opt out" of; a meaningless gesture, since opt-outs get legislated away before they can be put into the "next treaty").

I don't think discussions of this kind have any point, and certainly not in a train forum. In any case British policy is for British voters.