If you would like to consider supporting the channel click: www.patreon.com/Chris_Rail_Focus or become a Member here on RUclips Or you can support the channel by making a purchase on my Redbubble gallery www.redbubble.com/people/engphotography/shop Or alternatively by becoming a RUclips member
What a relief to be able to view a sensible, informative, non-clickbait video that is narrated by a non-AI actual human. As a result of this pleasant discovery I have subscribed to your channel, and I urge other viewers with an interest in what is really happening to UK railways to do the same.
Thank you 🙂. From the very start I've had the aim of providing people with accurate information in a straightforward way and despite struggling to begin with was adamant I wasn't going to use AI.
Thank you - very informative. How anyone ever thought it was a good idea to deal separately with the main HS2 route and the OOC to Euston section I will never understand.
It’s still not going to be beautiful . Do we have no architects left in the UK? It obvs needs 10 platforms. It’s bloody infrastructure guys. It needs 120 year resilience and IT NEEDS GOVERNMENT FUNDING.
@@RWL2012 probably because it costs so much and takes so long...no one wants to fund more. They _justify_ the expense and schedule by saying it is a "one off" never to be repeated ever again.
Gaudi was an architect, his Cathedral is still being built. Building boxes is easier and cheaper. If there was a 10% increase in rail fares and in delivery time, how many passengers would opt to pay it? Most passengers want seating, clear signage and less walking … and clean toilets. After that, they might as well be in old Euston or modern Kings Cross, designed by below average shopping mall designers.
6 platforms is nowhere near enough capacity. They at least need to build the 10 to take advantage of the little remaining benefits for anywhere north of Birmingham that remains at the moment.
HS2, it is said, will potentially provide up to 18 trains per hour capable of holding up to 1100 passengers each which is a capacity of 19800 passengers per hour (356400 over an 18 hour day). It is currently estimated that around 1000 people per day commute from Birmingham to London in a morning - you can quite easily more or less have a carriage to yourself on a peak time morning departure from New Street in my experience - the train only really fills up at Milton Keynes and beyond. Where are the rest of the passengers coming from to fill the huge potential capacity of HS2? Either I have missed something or HS2 is going to be running a lot of empty trains every day.
@@mikefish8226 maybe. However, will the Chiltern line ever get electrification and >> 100 mph ? Will Oxford station get electrification? When will EWR upgrade get partial electrification, and running 100 mph ? Will EWR chord to Aylesbury get built soon ? The future GenIV nuclear won't go in for another 2 decades so electricity will remain expensive the next 20 years. Many balls in the air ! All good challenges. Cheers from across the Pond.
You missed that £2 billion of the increase in cost of station was the inclusion of work to upgrade the underground capacity at Euston with a fundamental remodelling of the existing line and station to increase capacity, this cost was originally to be taken by Cross Rail 2, however this was cancelled by Sunak when he was Chancellor after the responsibility for the project was taken by Central Government (for cancellation as the Treasury had opposed the project from the outset) in return for the emergency funding TFL received after Covid Restrictions collapsed TFL's fare revenue.
On RUclips check out *Jago Hazzard* or *Geoff Marshall* or *RailNatter* for all the good historical bits; also *Green Signals* (1.5 years old now). and other *Rail Focus* have covered some of these topics.
Are there at least some provisions for the possible future Crossrail 2 station included in the underground upgrade? like stub tunnels for future pedestrian tunnels?
Thank you Chris for now covering this important HS2 topic with interesting details. Hopefully there will be strong support for Euston HS2 expansion (additional platforms, economic development) going forward in 2025 with inchstones and milestones.
That was a great white auditorium of the 1070s spacious and high ceilings, 2towers and a great modern electric loco and coaches, now cramped airline seating, no staff to talk to, cramped eating and drinking areas, black painted and dull and ruined, the new slab covered station is another use of controlling clouds rather than enjoying a rail trip.
With HS2 now having a new terminus at London Euston. Do you think that the existing station at London Euston could be knocked down and to be rebuilt to make London Euston station lot brighter and bigger. As well with more extra platforms built for extra longer trains.
That is one of the discussions that is going on in the background. There is a strong case for building just one large integrated new station rather than building the HS2 station and then rebuilding the normal station afterwards. Regardless it will almost certainly all be done in phases.
If they demolished the existing station where would the trains be diverted to while they built a new station? Couldn't make use of the new HS2 station as it wouldn't be big enough. Much more likely will be a refurbishment like they did at King's Cross.
This has been a big part of the problem with the 10 platform design. No thought was given to the existing station and Network Rail was left to develop its own plans. But HS2 will free up platforms on the existing station allowing Network Rail to do something. I'm not sure if it'll be knocked down, but certainly improved some somehow.
There's no way the existing station can be demolished as such. But HS2 will mean less existing platforms are needed so Network Rail should be able to move things around and make improvements incrementally
It looks to me like an odds on certainty the existing station will be refurbished with a new roof as part of the Network Rail budget rather than any cost charged to the HS2 budget. The new roof will have to blend in architecturally with the new HS2 station roof so the same Architect will be commissioned for both resulting in a very expensive design solution.
I’m not sure it was a lack of vision as much as a willingness to do anything he thought he could get away with that might buy a few more seats at the election.
Was one of the options considered routing the line from OOC further to the south and then approaching Euston underground from the west? This could have created a four platform through station at Euston-St Pancras and continued to Stratford or Canary Wharf and beyond, where a larger terminal may have been more feasible.
Great vid. You forgot to mention the original reason for the pause was due to lack of planning of integration with TFL and underground services. This was mentioned by Mark Thurston in his interview with Nigel Harris.
There's so much more I could've said and I'm sure this won't be my last video on the subject. Let's just hope integration is written back into the plan.
Tories made a blood mess of everything they touched. They seem to be putting together a Euston deliver group to be in charge all of all of this. I doubt they will have much in the way for us for a year to eighteen months as try and come up with a plan.
Adding to the final cost will be the years long public enquiry to be headed up by Lord **enter name here** that always follows government project cock-ups. This will, of course delay the opening, but be a nice little earner for lawyers, hotels, taxis, etc.
The cock up is the government changing their minds every 5 minutes and caving into every single NIMBY on the route. Do we really need a enquiry to discover that?
The rail lines into the terminal stations in the cities of the UK should be linked up underground. At most each new through station under an existing terminal station will need six platforms to match current train volumes. The current concourse and platform levels could become a shopping centre, hotels, etc.
I still think that London Euston should be rebuilt to match the same with the HS2 station that is to be built next door. And to have few extra platforms to accommodate more extra trains.
I'm not sure the existing station will be built to the same standard, but HS2 will provide Network Rail with the opportunity to make substantial improvements.
It's easy to blame politicians, but I'd blame the media and the Daily Mail in particular always for always bleeting on about "waste of taxpayer's money".
Having just spent 25 days touring Shanghai, Suzhou, Nanjing, Zhengzhou, Xian, Chengdu, Chongqing, Guiyang, Kunming, Nanning and Guangzhou by HSR in China my impression is the Chinese always put their high speed stations at the periphery of the city reached by the metro system. This saves a huge amount of cost building a HST station in busiest district of a city. I cannot stop thinking the HS2 may be heavily influenced by the stakeholders wanting to enhance the land value of the central London but that puts the unit cost per km of HS2 about 20 times the Chinese as a significant portion of the track is over the densely populated area. Thus HS2 will be a lost cause permanently in debt but the land owners along the route can become fat cats overnight. I am convinced any of the Shanghai Hongqiao, Shanghai, Suzhou South, Nanjing South, Zengzhou East, Xian North, Chengdu East, Chongqing West, Guiyang North, Kunming South, Nanning East and Guangzhou South that I have been is much larger than Euston Station and has more passengers passing through yet universally each is located away from the busy centre without absurdly high cost of building over the built-up downtown areas. Every one of these huge HSR stations are fully integrated with the local metro system. For example Guiyang metro has just four metro lines but it serves three HSR stations of Guiyang.
I imagine Old Oak Common is something similar. But modelling suggests even though OIC will be served by Crossrail that 70% of passengers will still want to travel to Euston. Tunneling is undoubtedly expensive, but serving transport nodes in city centres has overall benefits.
I suspect a lot if not all of what you save by not taking HS2 to Euston would be swallowed up in improving the transport from Old Oak to the centre of town.
Can't say I love thr platforms being underground - it seems to squander the benefits of a terminus - but maybe it could at least make for an easier connection to the Tube? I've also been wondering lately whether this should really be called Euston, or if it's effectively a new London terminus deserving of its own name.
There were plans to fully integrate the new platforms with the Underground including building a link to Euston Sq, but they were put on hold. It does look like this is back on the table though
@@Rail_Focus tbh I’m not sure if that is a god thing or not, I just started following this project a couple of days ago, always nice to se what the Brits are building across the North Sea😄
Before deciding what kind of station to build, the government first needs to decide what HS2 is. The original plan was a fast and comprehensive connection between the north and south of the country. This plan was pushed through despite local opposition and a multitude of more needed local connection projects, which are now to be forgotten for many years, and its, err... questionable value for money. It was opposed by many Conservative MPs, but also coincidentally by Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner, who campaigned hard against HS2. However, I understand its value for UK Plc branding. No matter how little economic sense the whole project makes at the current price tag, I have to admit the value for the UK brand is significant. When the dreadful economics of the project became evident, the government of Rishi Sunak had a problem: carrying on despite the evidence would be bad politics in an election year, while cancelling it completely would open them to attacks for wasted money. So the middle ground they found was to cancel all the not-started phases and rebrand it over time into a high-speed extension of the London Underground, bringing a significant population of Birmingham into the London commuter belt. In that respect, HS2 terminating at Old Oak Common made sense, although if sufficient private resources for the station are found, the government did not mind extending it to Euston. So the current government now needs to decide if they want to revive the original plan or go with Sunak's plan. Only then can they decide on the configuration of Euston station. From what I understand, they have already decided to go with the latter, but they cannot admit that Sunak's decision was the right one, so they are trying to keep the options open. In that case, they do not need to build a big extension-4-6 platforms are good enough. Build it to British loading gauge to be able to cross-use the platforms and modernize the rest of the station. Everyone knows Euston needs some love. WCML is congested beyond Birmingham, but this is mainly due to freight traffic. Maybe investigate and build a new dedicated freight line without electrification on the land purchased for HS2?
The politics should never have affected HS2 planning for the start of construction. Everything was agreed & should have gone to plan regardless of PM feeling towards the project. Because of that HS2 is costing more, be less efficient & take longer to construct & wouldn’t help much with the moving capacity from the crowded West Coast Main Line onto HS2. But given Euston will have only 6 platforms could consider extending HS2 more south helping with another over crowded line between London & Brighton via Waterloo & Gatwick Airport. At Euston there could be 3 platforms for Birmingham, Manchester & Liverpool (via WCMLat Crewe & 3 heading south towards towards Brighton. Making Euston a Thruway Station instead of the terminus.
We live in a representative democracy. The Government of the day controls all expenditure. Alway has and always should. Don’t like them, don’t vote for them.
Would that be practically possible to tunnel to South London from Euston and would it be economically viable? Economically no chance. Practically??? You will need a map of all the infrastructure in the way.
@@quickclipsbyjmj rebuilding the arch to modern safety codes would probably exceed the cost of the 0.8km bat shed near the Calvert IMD. The HS2 did retain and will safety upgrade the circa 1838 Curzon Street station .
There will be a lot of space that is not used. Use of the London Tube would decline by 25% as there would be two or three stations in London to board a HS train. Door to door not station to station should be the network metric.
Whilst it's true to say it's predicted around 30% will change at Old Oak Common this will only take the pressure off the underground temporarily as passenger figures continue to rise. Best to build in capacity now, rather than waiting for Euston Underground to become overcrowded again.
Why is HS2 connecting with Euston and not St. Pancras to form a connection with HS1? I was hoping that there would be a direct connection from the Mainland to the north of England, or would that have been too simple?
The limited need doesn't justify the cost. There would've only been a handful of trains from Birmingham and the North each day. Then there's the issue of passport control.
@@Rail_Focus Maybe the more HS2 expensive/expansive approach would have been to make Stratford International (much further) a true International station tied in to HS1 infrastructure. Many more expensive options.
@@Rail_Focus That doesn’t really answer my question. On the one hand, well planned and direct high speed rail routes are there to compete with the airlines and are conceived to alleviate overcrowding and bottle necks on the existing network. My concern is that what is initially a strong idea, is weakened by HS2 not being directly and seamlessly connected to HS1.
@@flippop101 the vast majority of people want to go to central London not Paris. So HS2 has been designed to cater for that market. A connection to HS1 is a 'nice to have', but ultimately wouldn't justify the cost, at least not in the eyes of the Treasury
@ l was perhaps perceiving the whole too much from my own perspective or at least those traveling to England from the continent. I live across the channel!
It should be a through station with tracks at right angles to the LNWR ones with an onward connection to HS1. Stuttgart has managed it, why not London !
@@DavidKnowles0 in this case money isn't even the biggest issue in my opinion, operating trains to the mainland is a headache because the UK isn't part of Schengen so you need border control and dedicated platforms and slots. It would take away capacity from HS2 that is much needed for national services and that is defeating the actual purpose of HS2 (which isn't acknowledge enough). If you had a direct interchange from HS2 to the international services terminal that would be much more sensible and practical. Sadly, space for a terminal wasn't safeguarded when St. Pancras and the surrounding area was rebuild a couple of decades ago, quite the opposite.
yes, the earlier HS2 plan to St. Pancras was just that...for 1 or 2 new tracks to chord from HS2 Euston to St. Pancras. I think it just cost a billion for that mile and re-alignment...it was one of the earliest cutbacks on the HS2, before Phase2b was cut.
@@DavidKnowles0 given the public's reaction to the current budget and Treasury's insistence that ever penny spent provides a return, then unfortunately not.
An excellent and informative video. I am still of the opinion however that HS2 remains a huge white elephant although it will undoubtedly be less so if the trains can actually get to Euston. The HS2 usage estimates still seem to me to be grossly exaggerated. Try leaving Birmingham on a peak time train to arrive in London by 0830-0900 and it is not uncommon to more or less have a whole carriage to yourself. The bulk of the passengers board from Milton Keynes, on the edge of the 50 mile commuter belt, onwards. HS2, of course, bypasses all of this.
HS2 allows more trains to serve Milton Keynes, which is the big benefit. The whole point is that HS2 takes fast non-stop trains from Birmingham and the North off the WCML, there y freeing up capacity to improve connectivity south of Rugby.
It's not a white elephant. The WCML is the busiest mixed used line in Europe. They are doing all sorts to up the capacity of the ECML and the MML. Having 125mph trains mixed in with limited express stoppers averaging less than 90mph and sharing with 75mph containers is it eats capacity. The fast trains need a big clearance ahead of them. and then they still leave a wake that no slower trains can keep up with. Passing loops help to a point. HS2.. put fast trains on their own line Shinkansen style line. all trains do the same speed with same acceleration and you can bunch them up like tube trains. Bullet trains depart every 3 minutes too. This new line means people get to Brum, Manc, Leeds. ect in near half the time. But.. the real bonus of HS2 is... 3 of the UK busiest mainlines are primed to double, possible triple the capacity heading in and out of London to Manc and Leeds. Everyone wants more cleaner greener rail travel in and out of cities and more lorries off the road. This is a great plan to do that. Well if they bring it all fully back online.
@@alstonofalltrades3142 yes. HS2 Phase2a is the "missing link" required to support slow and freight decongestion in the UK. I think the most significant "hidden" issue with UK train electrification is the lack of baseload electric UK power. In Japan they have over 30 GenIII nuclear power plants to run their fast bullet trains...this is 8x the amount of nuclear power versus UK. It is going to take 10 to 20 years for the UK to install new GenIV nuclear power plants...so train electrification will be held up until then. France has 80% of their electric power by GenII and GenIII nuclear. So both France and Japan have good reliable "cheap" electric baseload power.
An interesting building of which there are many similar examples of. What else would you do with it. Turn it into a shelter to be covered in graffiti? 🤷. We can't save every interesting building for the sake of nostalgia
Don’t see the point in painting the Sugar Cube white, unless it is in anti- graffiti paint it will be despoiled by graffiti within days and be another eyesore in the area. On another separate point, as it is Rain 200 this year are Network Rail going to clean the grand tunnel entrance to Primrose Hill tunnel. It looks a right old mess now with overgrowth and graffiti covering it.
a white ceramic coating would: 1. reflect heat in sunlight so remove cooling requirements with all the kit inside the cube (dark colors absorb heat), 2. if a ceramic tile type coating would be very slick and not support graffiti build-up and quick/easy to clean.
This is what will happen 1) Taxpayer will fund the OSD slab works 2) Government will sell the development rights to the private sector for upfront cash 3) Private sector will make huge profits on a 30-50 year horizon 4) Taxpayer will once again loose out on short-sighted decision making.
It doesn't really matter if private companies profit as long as the cost of the associated OSD works are covered. The further regeneration of Euston will have added economic benefits and tax receipts. It's also unlikely that the OSD could ever fully be privately owned as I imagine the Government will have to retain the freehold on the 'land' due to its interface with the railway.
@Carlos-im3hn yes indeed but we can see the way the costs are going. The station is vast, largely underground with a lot of high tech gear like people movers, escalators etc. And the Architect will want to make a statement with the roof ( again). The cost will go round in circles back to where it has been, back to 6 billion plus a bit for additional inflation.
The station will have to be a number of metres below the existing station due the constrained space to get from the tunnel portal to the station throat. But that doesn't mean they have to build a dark station covered completely by OSD.
@@TrevorWilliams-fq8mg yes, ok. We semi-agree. But peoplemovers and small carts and small tunnels between underground stations is much cheaper than a new Crossrail2....even if I perfer Crossrail2 overall....or some tunnelled extension track from Euston to St. Pancras....or original planned overground track chord from Euston to St. Pancras. There are many options to be traded. Using the HS2 subgrade access can "easily" tie HS2 Euston, to Euston and underground subway, and possibly St. Pancras a km away, then King's Cross (?). This would allow for actually a very trouble-free 'pedestrian' travel interconnection (but yes perhaps a billion more; hopefully less ?).
It would have been much cheaper to put almost the entire HS2 route underground. No lawyers, no bridges over roads, rivers, and other railroads, no costly courts, no consultants, no delays, identical tunnel almost the entire route so estimated cost known with much more certainty.
@@johnfrancis4401Vent shafts and emergency exit points were objected too. But there is absolutely no way you could tunnel the whole way for less than twice the existing cost.
And you would still need consultants to design the work, and lawyers to draft the contracts and agreements where the tunnels went under roads, railways and rivers. And where would the excavated material go ? . The volume of earth could be calculated quite easily ...say .140 miles with twin tunnels about 8 metres in diameter. You would also need vent shafts and escape passageways.
A complete and utter shower that’s a monument to political indecision, negligence, and malice. Why would private finance invest in Euston given government’s track record of scope changing, pauses, and uncertainty over the project?
HS2 is a competency clock, Labour continuing Tories mess is why they will fall off soon. I dont see them staying more than 5 years if they continue tories chop and change.
Seems your making a political judgement - Conservatives procured this and the plans were drawn up by them - whatever the government after, has had to cut the cost to meet the budget - I find budget inflation difficult to understand as when you as a person get a quote for work then that is generally what the end cost is ,it changes if you require extras and that should be agreed by both parties before work begins in a contract - the whole project has changed from the beginning so extras are applied
At this stage Euston is political. From Sunak's decision to "Pause" to Labour choosing to continue with the plan being developed by the Tories. This is all about optics, rather than what's best for Euston or the future of HS2.
The size of the project is what makes fixed price contracts difficult. I want an extension to my house, the builder can easily see the scope of the work. I want 200km of railway including 50 km of tunnels, 100 bridges and 25 big viaducts etc etc it’s almost impossible to make a good estimate. As a result you either go with a variable cost model or contractors will need to add massive contingencies to protect themselves.
@@ATH_BerkshireAnd those are exactly the reasons the civil engineering contracts have all been let on a cost plus basis with no price written into the contracts.
Money down the drain that could have been used to upgrade and enhance existing rail and roads. No end date in sight for the entire project. Thousands forced to move out from their homes and for what?
Argh the old "upgrade the existing network" mythology, but reality is we are upgrading the existing network and yet no solution provides the capacity new infrastructure like HS2 does.
Cancelling HS2 would not mean money for other projects or "upgrades", that's not how infrastructure spending works. But I'd be surprised if anyone who says "upgrades" even knows what that would entail.
The current West Coast Mainline is full. No amount of reasonable upgrades would change that. HS2 isn't just about faster journeys, it's fixing a critical problem with the current network
@@Polarbear1-b6j yes. it is a large UK-wide 24/7 network (also including freight) of different lines and service providers ! After HS2 Phase2a and 2b were cut some billions were loosened up to speed-up TRU funding, and some probably trickled into EWR as well. All good.
Total waste of money! Money that could be used on the existing railway to benefit the majority rather than a minority that will use this line to nowhere.
Not building project A does not mean money for project B, that's not how government finances work. But you may want to look at the work Network Rail is doing at the same time as HS2 is being built. They're continuing to renew and upgrade existing lines all the time.
It is a colossal waste of money as rail networks should be grid and not terminate in city centres for service maximisation and efficiency. But you Brits enjoy wasting your money why the poor suffer - this is particularly the Labour way.
This is just a waste of public money as far as I can see, and a backward step in terms of climate change. We already have a London to Birmingham rail line, the WCML, which is electrified, and soon we will duplicate this, but with planet harming diesel trains instead! That's without the huge environmental impact of these works - on the physical landscape, the resources used for construction and because concrete is highly energy intensive.
And yet the WCML is full and standing, precisely why we need the capacity HS2 brings. And your "diesel trains" point is just laughable when HS2 is an all electric railway.
Even if HS2 reduces flights from Manchester and Scotland to London by a small fraction it will easily repay the embedded carbon. We need to have bold plans in place to really cut air and road transport. Simply tinkering with existing railways will not provide the step change required to drive a considerable modal shift.
Why didn't you just say you don't understand the current state of the railways and have made no attempt to understand it, instead of posting what you did.
So a journey from Manchester to Paris etc includes a 15 minutes walk to HS1 at St Pancras - coordinated transport planning at its best? There could have been HS2 platforms above traffic height over King's Cross road, though terminus akin inside the train shed, it doesn't take long for the driver to change ends, or change of drivers the replacement could be waiting at the north end to reduce turn round time. St Pancras is admirable renovation but the Midland main line ought to reach the clock buffers, the undercroft shops/cafés never needed to be open to the roof - putting Britain first now we're ex EU ought to restore the MR status quo on a par with Eurostar? 🚆🚃🚃🚃🚃🚃🚆
The thing is the majority of people don't want to go from Manchester or Birmingham to Paris. Probably only fill a handful of trains per day. So it's really not worth the expense, as nice as it would be to have direct trains.
And the walk to St Pancras is shorter than many airport internal walks. But of course you don't have to walk outside, LU options are available just as terminal shuttles are in some airports.
They definitely need to have an undercover route between stations. A travelator or shuttle would be good too, but the most important thing is to avoid people getting frozen and drenched during the transfer, which is rather likely in the UK. This is also a problem at the Birmingham end, with no covered route between HS2 and New Street. I'm just glad I can get a train to Moor Street if they ever extend northwards.
@@martineyles I absolutely agree that transfer between terminals needs to be optimised in many ways, and full shelter is one of them. That said, one of the biggest myths is the idea that it rains a lot in London. Annual rainfall is relatively low in London, it's below half of the UK's average rainfall. The sky is often grey, indeed, but it barely rains. And I say this as someone who has spent quite a few years living in London and in Southern Europe, London rarely sees proper rain! Manchester, significantly rainier than London but still quite below the UK's average. If you want to talk about Cardiff where annual rainfall is just above the UK's average, then yes, it's a rainy place. But in London it rains significantly less than in places like Lisbon, Porto, Milan, Barcelona, etc, etc. Compared to Tokyo, London is a dry desert.
@@martineyles Travelators and peoplemovers could be done. In the USA there are similar underground movers in Bolder Colorado airport. All the Disneyland(s) around the world have huge underground transports to get the workers and materials around the property.
![Turkish High-Speed Train Journey [business class] from Istanbul to Ankara](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/naL1yLfPZG0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Turkish High-Speed Train Journey [business class] from Istanbul to Ankara](/img/tr.png)
If you would like to consider supporting the channel click: www.patreon.com/Chris_Rail_Focus or become a Member here on RUclips
Or you can support the channel by making a purchase on my Redbubble gallery
www.redbubble.com/people/engphotography/shop
Or alternatively by becoming a RUclips member
What a relief to be able to view a sensible, informative, non-clickbait video that is narrated by a non-AI actual human. As a result of this pleasant discovery I have subscribed to your channel, and I urge other viewers with an interest in what is really happening to UK railways to do the same.
Thank you 🙂. From the very start I've had the aim of providing people with accurate information in a straightforward way and despite struggling to begin with was adamant I wasn't going to use AI.
Should definitely have provisions for more platforms in the future
Passive provision for future expansion is usually a typical feature especially at this level of investment.
Thank you - very informative.
How anyone ever thought it was a good idea to deal separately with the main HS2 route and the OOC to Euston section I will never understand.
Glad you found it informative 🙂
yes, but keeping what they do have "sold" was critical...and yet, Phase2a to Crewe _should_ have been kept in plan.
It’s still not going to be beautiful . Do we have no architects left in the UK?
It obvs needs 10 platforms. It’s bloody infrastructure guys. It needs 120 year resilience and IT NEEDS GOVERNMENT FUNDING.
I don't think we'll know what it will look like until next year at the earliest. But I can't imagine it being attractive.
Why are XR/EL and HS2 both meant to last "120 years"?
@@RWL2012 probably because it costs so much and takes so long...no one wants to fund more.
They _justify_ the expense and schedule by saying it is a "one off" never to be repeated ever again.
Gaudi was an architect, his Cathedral is still being built. Building boxes is easier and cheaper. If there was a 10% increase in rail fares and in delivery time, how many passengers would opt to pay it? Most passengers want seating, clear signage and less walking … and clean toilets. After that, they might as well be in old Euston or modern Kings Cross, designed by below average shopping mall designers.
“Do we not have architects…?”
We have architects of our demise in parliament
Why the eff do politicians continue to change the scope. Just build it. We’ll never regret it if we maximise the opportunity.
6 platforms is nowhere near enough capacity. They at least need to build the 10 to take advantage of the little remaining benefits for anywhere north of Birmingham that remains at the moment.
yes.
If HS2 remains the major new service provider in decades, then futureproofing the capacity is existential.
HS2, it is said, will potentially provide up to 18 trains per hour capable of holding up to 1100 passengers each which is a capacity of 19800 passengers per hour (356400 over an 18 hour day). It is currently estimated that around 1000 people per day commute from Birmingham to London in a morning - you can quite easily more or less have a carriage to yourself on a peak time morning departure from New Street in my experience - the train only really fills up at Milton Keynes and beyond. Where are the rest of the passengers coming from to fill the huge potential capacity of HS2? Either I have missed something or HS2 is going to be running a lot of empty trains every day.
@@Twmpa You've completely missed that point. Not by a small amount, but by miles.
@@mikefish8226 maybe. However, will the Chiltern line ever get electrification and >> 100 mph ? Will Oxford station get electrification? When will EWR upgrade get partial electrification, and running 100 mph ? Will EWR chord to Aylesbury get built soon ? The future GenIV nuclear won't go in for another 2 decades so electricity will remain expensive the next 20 years. Many balls in the air ! All good challenges. Cheers from across the Pond.
@Carlos-im3hn Whataboutism.
Organise - piss up - brewery - can’t - spring to mind.
Apparently 12 years or wasn't long enought to plan the construction of HS2 or a piss up at a brewery.
Thanks!
Thank you 😀
Have you used "Euston, we have a problem" yet? If not, that one's on the house :)
Unfortunately not 😅
You missed that £2 billion of the increase in cost of station was the inclusion of work to upgrade the underground capacity at Euston with a fundamental remodelling of the existing line and station to increase capacity, this cost was originally to be taken by Cross Rail 2, however this was cancelled by Sunak when he was Chancellor after the responsibility for the project was taken by Central Government (for cancellation as the Treasury had opposed the project from the outset) in return for the emergency funding TFL received after Covid Restrictions collapsed TFL's fare revenue.
I'm sure there's much more I could've said, but try to keep videos between 8 and 9 minutes usually
@@Rail_FocusFair Enough
On RUclips check out *Jago Hazzard* or *Geoff Marshall* or *RailNatter* for all the good historical bits; also *Green Signals* (1.5 years old now).
and other *Rail Focus* have covered some of these topics.
Are there at least some provisions for the possible future Crossrail 2 station included in the underground upgrade? like stub tunnels for future pedestrian tunnels?
Excellent video Chris, thanks!
Thank you Chris for now covering this important HS2 topic with interesting details. Hopefully there will be strong support for Euston HS2 expansion (additional platforms, economic development) going forward in 2025 with inchstones and milestones.
That was a great white auditorium of the 1070s spacious and high ceilings, 2towers and a great modern electric loco and coaches, now cramped airline seating, no staff to talk to, cramped eating and drinking areas, black painted and dull and ruined, the new slab covered station is another use of controlling clouds rather than enjoying a rail trip.
👍
I preferred the doric arch 👍
@ the pub isn’t bad either
With HS2 now having a new terminus at London Euston. Do you think that the existing station at London Euston could be knocked down and to be rebuilt to make London Euston station lot brighter and bigger. As well with more extra platforms built for extra longer trains.
That is one of the discussions that is going on in the background. There is a strong case for building just one large integrated new station rather than building the HS2 station and then rebuilding the normal station afterwards. Regardless it will almost certainly all be done in phases.
If they demolished the existing station where would the trains be diverted to while they built a new station? Couldn't make use of the new HS2 station as it wouldn't be big enough. Much more likely will be a refurbishment like they did at King's Cross.
This has been a big part of the problem with the 10 platform design. No thought was given to the existing station and Network Rail was left to develop its own plans.
But HS2 will free up platforms on the existing station allowing Network Rail to do something. I'm not sure if it'll be knocked down, but certainly improved some somehow.
There's no way the existing station can be demolished as such. But HS2 will mean less existing platforms are needed so Network Rail should be able to move things around and make improvements incrementally
It looks to me like an odds on certainty the existing station will be refurbished with a new roof as part of the Network Rail budget rather than any cost charged to the HS2 budget. The new roof will have to blend in architecturally with the new HS2 station roof so the same Architect will be commissioned for both resulting in a very expensive design solution.
Very interesting video. Sunak's lack of vision really was depressing, but hopefully next year will be a year of progress.
I’m not sure it was a lack of vision as much as a willingness to do anything he thought he could get away with that might buy a few more seats at the election.
@@ATH_Berkshire Alienating the North of England is not a good vote winner, as he found out!😀
Next, they need to restart the already approved HS2 Phase2a to Crewe...without that there will be so many lost HS2 benefits.
WW3 is on hold until HS2 is complete. (What's not to like...(?!).)
How many trains will stop at Old Oak Common per hour after the Euston platforms are open?
9 or 10. Every HS2 train will stop at OOC.
Was one of the options considered routing the line from OOC further to the south and then approaching Euston underground from the west? This could have created a four platform through station at Euston-St Pancras and continued to Stratford or Canary Wharf and beyond, where a larger terminal may have been more feasible.
Great vid. You forgot to mention the original reason for the pause was due to lack of planning of integration with TFL and underground services. This was mentioned by Mark Thurston in his interview with Nigel Harris.
There's so much more I could've said and I'm sure this won't be my last video on the subject. Let's just hope integration is written back into the plan.
Tories made a blood mess of everything they touched. They seem to be putting together a Euston deliver group to be in charge all of all of this. I doubt they will have much in the way for us for a year to eighteen months as try and come up with a plan.
Adding to the final cost will be the years long public enquiry to be headed up by Lord **enter name here** that always follows government project cock-ups. This will, of course delay the opening, but be a nice little earner for lawyers, hotels, taxis, etc.
👍
The cock up is the government changing their minds every 5 minutes and caving into every single NIMBY on the route. Do we really need a enquiry to discover that?
Very informative video, wondered if the workers told Sunak to F off when he announced the pause of Euston Station and they just carried on 😂
Cheers. I can imagine the workers had many words to say about Sunak 😅.
Thanks.
The rail lines into the terminal stations in the cities of the UK should be linked up underground. At most each new through station under an existing terminal station will need six platforms to match current train volumes. The current concourse and platform levels could become a shopping centre, hotels, etc.
Not sure everyone would agree that mainline stations should be buried beneath shopping centres. See Birmingham New St.
thanks
I still think that London Euston should be rebuilt to match the same with the HS2 station that is to be built next door. And to have few extra platforms to accommodate more extra trains.
I'm not sure the existing station will be built to the same standard, but HS2 will provide Network Rail with the opportunity to make substantial improvements.
It's easy to blame politicians, but I'd blame the media and the Daily Mail in particular always for always bleeting on about "waste of taxpayer's money".
Media hostility definitely hasn't helped and probably made Sunak think cancelling the northern leg was a vote winner
@@malcolmsmith4603 Stop bothering with aesthetic analysis and get on board with cIass analysis! It's so much more useful!
It's all the same, two fingers of the same hand.
Having just spent 25 days touring Shanghai, Suzhou, Nanjing, Zhengzhou, Xian, Chengdu, Chongqing, Guiyang, Kunming, Nanning and Guangzhou by HSR in China my impression is the Chinese always put their high speed stations at the periphery of the city reached by the metro system. This saves a huge amount of cost building a HST station in busiest district of a city.
I cannot stop thinking the HS2 may be heavily influenced by the stakeholders wanting to enhance the land value of the central London but that puts the unit cost per km of HS2 about 20 times the Chinese as a significant portion of the track is over the densely populated area. Thus HS2 will be a lost cause permanently in debt but the land owners along the route can become fat cats overnight.
I am convinced any of the Shanghai Hongqiao, Shanghai, Suzhou South, Nanjing South, Zengzhou East, Xian North, Chengdu East, Chongqing West, Guiyang North, Kunming South, Nanning East and Guangzhou South that I have been is much larger than Euston Station and has more passengers passing through yet universally each is located away from the busy centre without absurdly high cost of building over the built-up downtown areas. Every one of these huge HSR stations are fully integrated with the local metro system. For example Guiyang metro has just four metro lines but it serves three HSR stations of Guiyang.
I imagine Old Oak Common is something similar. But modelling suggests even though OIC will be served by Crossrail that 70% of passengers will still want to travel to Euston.
Tunneling is undoubtedly expensive, but serving transport nodes in city centres has overall benefits.
I suspect a lot if not all of what you save by not taking HS2 to Euston would be swallowed up in improving the transport from Old Oak to the centre of town.
I wish they would just build the full 11 platform station as originally planned.
Can't say I love thr platforms being underground - it seems to squander the benefits of a terminus - but maybe it could at least make for an easier connection to the Tube? I've also been wondering lately whether this should really be called Euston, or if it's effectively a new London terminus deserving of its own name.
There were plans to fully integrate the new platforms with the Underground including building a link to Euston Sq, but they were put on hold. It does look like this is back on the table though
Have they decided what they are going to do at handsacre yet?
I'm fairly certain they will build the "slow lines" junction as planned. But I doubt there will be an announcement until the spring.
@@Rail_Focus thanks
@@Rail_Focus tbh I’m not sure if that is a god thing or not, I just started following this project a couple of days ago, always nice to se what the Brits are building across the North Sea😄
Before deciding what kind of station to build, the government first needs to decide what HS2 is. The original plan was a fast and comprehensive connection between the north and south of the country. This plan was pushed through despite local opposition and a multitude of more needed local connection projects, which are now to be forgotten for many years, and its, err... questionable value for money. It was opposed by many Conservative MPs, but also coincidentally by Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner, who campaigned hard against HS2. However, I understand its value for UK Plc branding. No matter how little economic sense the whole project makes at the current price tag, I have to admit the value for the UK brand is significant.
When the dreadful economics of the project became evident, the government of Rishi Sunak had a problem: carrying on despite the evidence would be bad politics in an election year, while cancelling it completely would open them to attacks for wasted money. So the middle ground they found was to cancel all the not-started phases and rebrand it over time into a high-speed extension of the London Underground, bringing a significant population of Birmingham into the London commuter belt. In that respect, HS2 terminating at Old Oak Common made sense, although if sufficient private resources for the station are found, the government did not mind extending it to Euston.
So the current government now needs to decide if they want to revive the original plan or go with Sunak's plan. Only then can they decide on the configuration of Euston station. From what I understand, they have already decided to go with the latter, but they cannot admit that Sunak's decision was the right one, so they are trying to keep the options open. In that case, they do not need to build a big extension-4-6 platforms are good enough. Build it to British loading gauge to be able to cross-use the platforms and modernize the rest of the station. Everyone knows Euston needs some love.
WCML is congested beyond Birmingham, but this is mainly due to freight traffic. Maybe investigate and build a new dedicated freight line without electrification on the land purchased for HS2?
👍
The politics should never have affected HS2 planning for the start of construction. Everything was agreed & should have gone to plan regardless of PM feeling towards the project. Because of that HS2 is costing more, be less efficient & take longer to construct & wouldn’t help much with the moving capacity from the crowded West Coast Main Line onto HS2.
But given Euston will have only 6 platforms could consider extending HS2 more south helping with another over crowded line between London & Brighton via Waterloo & Gatwick Airport.
At Euston there could be 3 platforms for Birmingham, Manchester & Liverpool (via WCMLat Crewe & 3 heading south towards towards Brighton. Making Euston a Thruway Station instead of the terminus.
We live in a representative democracy. The Government of the day controls all expenditure. Alway has and always should. Don’t like them, don’t vote for them.
Would that be practically possible to tunnel to South London from Euston and would it be economically viable? Economically no chance. Practically??? You will need a map of all the infrastructure in the way.
I will imagine the Euston arch isn't returning anytime soon. All the pieces were found about 15 years ago. Just needed piecing back together.
No, I think people need to forget about the arch tbh.
@Rail_Focus why?
It's probably unsalvageable and it's just nostalgia. It wouldn't really add anything to the area.
@@quickclipsbyjmj rebuilding the arch to modern safety codes would probably exceed the cost of the 0.8km bat shed near the Calvert IMD. The HS2 did retain and will safety upgrade the circa 1838 Curzon Street station .
Depends if their component parts are at the bottom of a riverbed or not. And re-building something for the sake of it is not restoration.
There will be a lot of space that is not used. Use of the London Tube would decline by 25% as there would be two or three stations in London to board a HS train. Door to door not station to station should be the network metric.
Whilst it's true to say it's predicted around 30% will change at Old Oak Common this will only take the pressure off the underground temporarily as passenger figures continue to rise. Best to build in capacity now, rather than waiting for Euston Underground to become overcrowded again.
Why is HS2 connecting with Euston and not St. Pancras to form a connection with HS1?
I was hoping that there would be a direct connection from the Mainland to the north of England, or would that have been too simple?
The limited need doesn't justify the cost. There would've only been a handful of trains from Birmingham and the North each day. Then there's the issue of passport control.
@@Rail_Focus Maybe the more HS2 expensive/expansive approach would have been to make Stratford International (much further) a true International station tied in to HS1 infrastructure. Many more expensive options.
@@Rail_Focus That doesn’t really answer my question. On the one hand, well planned and direct high speed rail routes are there to compete with the airlines and are conceived to alleviate overcrowding and bottle necks on the existing network. My concern is that what is initially a strong idea, is weakened by HS2 not being directly and seamlessly connected to HS1.
@@flippop101 the vast majority of people want to go to central London not Paris. So HS2 has been designed to cater for that market. A connection to HS1 is a 'nice to have', but ultimately wouldn't justify the cost, at least not in the eyes of the Treasury
@ l was perhaps perceiving the whole too much from my own perspective or at least those traveling to England from the continent. I live across the channel!
It should be a through station with tracks at right angles to the LNWR ones with an onward connection to HS1. Stuttgart has managed it, why not London !
The few services a day that would operate to Europe wouldn't justify the huge cost of linking HS2 to HS1
@@Rail_Focus Can't we just do something that is commonsense instead of worrying about the money.
@@DavidKnowles0 in this case money isn't even the biggest issue in my opinion, operating trains to the mainland is a headache because the UK isn't part of Schengen so you need border control and dedicated platforms and slots. It would take away capacity from HS2 that is much needed for national services and that is defeating the actual purpose of HS2 (which isn't acknowledge enough).
If you had a direct interchange from HS2 to the international services terminal that would be much more sensible and practical. Sadly, space for a terminal wasn't safeguarded when St. Pancras and the surrounding area was rebuild a couple of decades ago, quite the opposite.
yes, the earlier HS2 plan to St. Pancras was just that...for 1 or 2 new tracks to chord from HS2 Euston to St. Pancras.
I think it just cost a billion for that mile and re-alignment...it was one of the earliest cutbacks on the HS2, before Phase2b was cut.
@@DavidKnowles0 given the public's reaction to the current budget and Treasury's insistence that ever penny spent provides a return, then unfortunately not.
They’ll probably end up building 4 platforms 😂
Don't give them ideas 😅
An excellent and informative video. I am still of the opinion however that HS2 remains a huge white elephant although it will undoubtedly be less so if the trains can actually get to Euston. The HS2 usage estimates still seem to me to be grossly exaggerated. Try leaving Birmingham on a peak time train to arrive in London by 0830-0900 and it is not uncommon to more or less have a whole carriage to yourself. The bulk of the passengers board from Milton Keynes, on the edge of the 50 mile commuter belt, onwards. HS2, of course, bypasses all of this.
HS2 allows more trains to serve Milton Keynes, which is the big benefit. The whole point is that HS2 takes fast non-stop trains from Birmingham and the North off the WCML, there y freeing up capacity to improve connectivity south of Rugby.
It's not a white elephant. The WCML is the busiest mixed used line in Europe. They are doing all sorts to up the capacity of the ECML and the MML.
Having 125mph trains mixed in with limited express stoppers averaging less than 90mph and sharing with 75mph containers is it eats capacity. The fast trains need a big clearance ahead of them. and then they still leave a wake that no slower trains can keep up with. Passing loops help to a point.
HS2.. put fast trains on their own line Shinkansen style line. all trains do the same speed with same acceleration and you can bunch them up like tube trains. Bullet trains depart every 3 minutes too. This new line means people get to Brum, Manc, Leeds. ect in near half the time. But.. the real bonus of HS2 is... 3 of the UK busiest mainlines are primed to double, possible triple the capacity heading in and out of London to Manc and Leeds. Everyone wants more cleaner greener rail travel in and out of cities and more lorries off the road. This is a great plan to do that. Well if they bring it all fully back online.
@@alstonofalltrades3142 yes. HS2 Phase2a is the "missing link" required to support slow and freight decongestion in the UK.
I think the most significant "hidden" issue with UK train electrification is the lack of baseload electric UK power. In Japan they have over 30 GenIII nuclear power plants to run their fast bullet trains...this is 8x the amount of nuclear power versus UK. It is going to take 10 to 20 years for the UK to install new GenIV nuclear power plants...so train electrification will be held up until then. France has 80% of their electric power by GenII and GenIII nuclear. So both France and Japan have good reliable "cheap" electric baseload power.
5:12 Another interesting building being knocked down to put something boring which will be covered in graffiti in weeks.
An interesting building of which there are many similar examples of. What else would you do with it. Turn it into a shelter to be covered in graffiti? 🤷. We can't save every interesting building for the sake of nostalgia
Don’t see the point in painting the Sugar Cube white, unless it is in anti- graffiti paint it will be despoiled by graffiti within days and be another eyesore in the area. On another separate point, as it is Rain 200 this year are Network Rail going to clean the grand tunnel entrance to Primrose Hill tunnel. It looks a right old mess now with overgrowth and graffiti covering it.
Just looks nicer than a grey concrete box until it's decided what the final cladding will be.
a white ceramic coating would: 1. reflect heat in sunlight so remove cooling requirements with all the kit inside the cube (dark colors absorb heat), 2. if a ceramic tile type coating would be very slick and not support graffiti build-up and quick/easy to clean.
This is what will happen 1) Taxpayer will fund the OSD slab works 2) Government will sell the development rights to the private sector for upfront cash 3) Private sector will make huge profits on a 30-50 year horizon 4) Taxpayer will once again loose out on short-sighted decision making.
It doesn't really matter if private companies profit as long as the cost of the associated OSD works are covered. The further regeneration of Euston will have added economic benefits and tax receipts. It's also unlikely that the OSD could ever fully be privately owned as I imagine the Government will have to retain the freehold on the 'land' due to its interface with the railway.
While OSD might generate returns can they please stop putting stations in the basement it’s just rather unpleasant
As the route into the station will be via a tunnel it wouldn't be possible to build the station at ground level.
the upside of basement level is sliding peoplemovers could allow quick access to underground and nearby stations.
@Carlos-im3hn yes indeed but we can see the way the costs are going. The station is vast, largely underground with a lot of high tech gear like people movers, escalators etc. And the Architect will want to make a statement with the roof ( again). The cost will go round in circles back to where it has been, back to 6 billion plus a bit for additional inflation.
The station will have to be a number of metres below the existing station due the constrained space to get from the tunnel portal to the station throat. But that doesn't mean they have to build a dark station covered completely by OSD.
@@TrevorWilliams-fq8mg yes, ok. We semi-agree. But peoplemovers and small carts and small tunnels between underground stations is much cheaper than a new Crossrail2....even if I perfer Crossrail2 overall....or some tunnelled extension track from Euston to St. Pancras....or original planned overground track chord from Euston to St. Pancras.
There are many options to be traded.
Using the HS2 subgrade access can "easily" tie HS2 Euston, to Euston and underground subway, and possibly St. Pancras a km away, then King's Cross (?).
This would allow for actually a very trouble-free 'pedestrian' travel interconnection (but yes perhaps a billion more; hopefully less ?).
It would have been much cheaper to put almost the entire HS2 route underground. No lawyers, no bridges over roads, rivers, and other railroads, no costly courts, no consultants, no delays, identical tunnel almost the entire route so estimated cost known with much more certainty.
There are so many reasons why building a 140 mile long tunnel would be a nightmare, but believe me when I say there's no way it would be cheaper.
John. Did you miss the opposition to the Chiltern Tunnels?? And the other tunnels didn't escape opposition.
@ What was the basis of the objections? Were those objections help up? Could going slightly deeper remove those objections?
@@johnfrancis4401Vent shafts and emergency exit points were objected too. But there is absolutely no way you could tunnel the whole way for less than twice the existing cost.
And you would still need consultants to design the work, and lawyers to draft the contracts and agreements where the tunnels went under roads, railways and rivers. And where would the excavated material go ? . The volume of earth could be calculated quite easily ...say .140 miles with twin tunnels about 8 metres in diameter. You would also need vent shafts and escape passageways.
We lost collector's corner.
A complete and utter shower that’s a monument to political indecision, negligence, and malice.
Why would private finance invest in Euston given government’s track record of scope changing, pauses, and uncertainty over the project?
yes, the planners waiting for a whale to pop-up it's head at Euston to provide billions quid, leadership & growth.
Indeed.
I think they would insist the government pay it share of the money into a ring fence account!
HS2 is a competency clock, Labour continuing Tories mess is why they will fall off soon. I dont see them staying more than 5 years if they continue tories chop and change.
Plus the Private sector will not let that poltical mess slide. They wouldve paid for Euston in the beginning but definitely not now.
Ok
Seems your making a political judgement - Conservatives procured this and the plans were drawn up by them - whatever the government after, has had to cut the cost to meet the budget - I find budget inflation difficult to understand as when you as a person get a quote for work then that is generally what the end cost is ,it changes if you require extras and that should be agreed by both parties before work begins in a contract - the whole project has changed from the beginning so extras are applied
At this stage Euston is political. From Sunak's decision to "Pause" to Labour choosing to continue with the plan being developed by the Tories. This is all about optics, rather than what's best for Euston or the future of HS2.
The size of the project is what makes fixed price contracts difficult. I want an extension to my house, the builder can easily see the scope of the work. I want 200km of railway including 50 km of tunnels, 100 bridges and 25 big viaducts etc etc it’s almost impossible to make a good estimate. As a result you either go with a variable cost model or contractors will need to add massive contingencies to protect themselves.
@@ATH_BerkshireAnd those are exactly the reasons the civil engineering contracts have all been let on a cost plus basis with no price written into the contracts.
Money down the drain that could have been used to upgrade and enhance existing rail and roads. No end date in sight for the entire project. Thousands forced to move out from their homes and for what?
I am suprised you watch this channel and still have this opinion...😅
Argh the old "upgrade the existing network" mythology, but reality is we are upgrading the existing network and yet no solution provides the capacity new infrastructure like HS2 does.
Cancelling HS2 would not mean money for other projects or "upgrades", that's not how infrastructure spending works. But I'd be surprised if anyone who says "upgrades" even knows what that would entail.
The current West Coast Mainline is full. No amount of reasonable upgrades would change that. HS2 isn't just about faster journeys, it's fixing a critical problem with the current network
@@Polarbear1-b6j yes. it is a large UK-wide 24/7 network (also including freight) of different lines and service providers !
After HS2 Phase2a and 2b were cut some billions were loosened up to speed-up TRU funding, and some probably trickled into EWR as well.
All good.
Total waste of money! Money that could be used on the existing railway to benefit the majority rather than a minority that will use this line to nowhere.
Not building project A does not mean money for project B, that's not how government finances work. But you may want to look at the work Network Rail is doing at the same time as HS2 is being built. They're continuing to renew and upgrade existing lines all the time.
It is a colossal waste of money as rail networks should be grid and not terminate in city centres for service maximisation and efficiency. But you Brits enjoy wasting your money why the poor suffer - this is particularly the Labour way.
So our existing main lines shouldn't have been built because they terminate in city centres? 🤷
This is just a waste of public money as far as I can see, and a backward step in terms of climate change. We already have a London to Birmingham rail line, the WCML, which is electrified, and soon we will duplicate this, but with planet harming diesel trains instead! That's without the huge environmental impact of these works - on the physical landscape, the resources used for construction and because concrete is highly energy intensive.
And yet the WCML is full and standing, precisely why we need the capacity HS2 brings. And your "diesel trains" point is just laughable when HS2 is an all electric railway.
Even if HS2 reduces flights from Manchester and Scotland to London by a small fraction it will easily repay the embedded carbon.
We need to have bold plans in place to really cut air and road transport. Simply tinkering with existing railways will not provide the step change required to drive a considerable modal shift.
Why didn't you just say you don't understand the current state of the railways and have made no attempt to understand it, instead of posting what you did.
So a journey from Manchester to Paris etc includes a 15 minutes walk to HS1 at St Pancras - coordinated transport planning at its best? There could have been HS2 platforms above traffic height over King's Cross road, though terminus akin inside the train shed, it doesn't take long for the driver to change ends, or change of drivers the replacement could be waiting at the north end to reduce turn round time.
St Pancras is admirable renovation but the Midland main line ought to reach the clock buffers, the undercroft shops/cafés never needed to be open to the roof - putting Britain first now we're ex EU ought to restore the MR status quo on a par with Eurostar?
🚆🚃🚃🚃🚃🚃🚆
The thing is the majority of people don't want to go from Manchester or Birmingham to Paris. Probably only fill a handful of trains per day. So it's really not worth the expense, as nice as it would be to have direct trains.
And the walk to St Pancras is shorter than many airport internal walks. But of course you don't have to walk outside, LU options are available just as terminal shuttles are in some airports.
They definitely need to have an undercover route between stations. A travelator or shuttle would be good too, but the most important thing is to avoid people getting frozen and drenched during the transfer, which is rather likely in the UK. This is also a problem at the Birmingham end, with no covered route between HS2 and New Street. I'm just glad I can get a train to Moor Street if they ever extend northwards.
@@martineyles I absolutely agree that transfer between terminals needs to be optimised in many ways, and full shelter is one of them.
That said, one of the biggest myths is the idea that it rains a lot in London. Annual rainfall is relatively low in London, it's below half of the UK's average rainfall. The sky is often grey, indeed, but it barely rains. And I say this as someone who has spent quite a few years living in London and in Southern Europe, London rarely sees proper rain!
Manchester, significantly rainier than London but still quite below the UK's average. If you want to talk about Cardiff where annual rainfall is just above the UK's average, then yes, it's a rainy place. But in London it rains significantly less than in places like Lisbon, Porto, Milan, Barcelona, etc, etc. Compared to Tokyo, London is a dry desert.
@@martineyles Travelators and peoplemovers could be done. In the USA there are similar underground movers in Bolder Colorado airport. All the Disneyland(s) around the world have huge underground transports to get the workers and materials around the property.