Lord Hendy: finishing HS2 and getting it to Euston 'even bigger challenge than completing Crossrail'

[@MrDavidht]

Everything he said is absolutely correct, but as a minimumn to make it work it has to go the extra 36 miles to Crewe,

[@gorgu08]

Word!

[@perkinscrane]

“We don’t know how much it will cost or how long it will take take” As a taxpayer and one who lives nowhere near HS2 I’m a little concerned.

[@MrDavidht]

@@perkinscrane me me me ay!

[@perkinscrane]

@ You don’t make any effort to address the lack of clarity in the costing or time line of the project. So I guess it’s more important to you to make personal comments.

[@conradharcourt8263]

@@perkinscrane The sentence began 'At present'. Naturally, as the project has been so poorly managed until recently these are early days. We must be grateful for this more honest approach in contrast to the constant stream of lies that we had before.

[@mikehindson-evans159]

An honest and frank assessment of the remaining challenges around London. But do not forget the massive capacity demand north of Handsacre Junction. Nice to see the senior leadership team speaking with confidence. This meets just part of the UK's need for a new spine railway.

[@edc1569]

Now let’s do the easy northern part

[@Rick-n7v]

It’s great to contribute towards a good railway infrastructure for the next generation

[@taiterobinson793]

Why such a massive fuss over building a 4.5 mile stretch from Euston to Old Oak Common??? HS1 from St Pancras to Stratford wasn’t as big as an issue

[@deeznoots6241]

Hey Hendy why did you force the sacking of a railway engineer who brought up safety concerns about Euston station?

[@sssdddkkksss]

2:40 Huw Edwards makes a comeback

[@tomthornton6259]

Haha good spot!

[@peterdawson2645]

It does make sense to connect HS2 to Euston, IF and only IF it is a genuine long distance spine railway. But at the moment it isn't. Even HS2's own website talks about commuting times from Birmingham!!! Without the link to Crewe (minimum), and the north of England (desirable) it still looks like a vanity project from here in South Wales where we will gain no benefit. And there even seems to be doubt about whether it will actually increase capacity on the WCML.

[@sssdddkkksss]

The main benefit is from taking non-stopping services off the other main lines. Delay on a local service currently impacts all services. So putting non-stopping services on their own dedicated track by-definition frees up capacity on WCML and will reduce delays across the board

[@nicolasblume1046]

This will not be the case if the extension to Crewe is not build. North of Birmingham the HS2 trains ​would need to share tracks with other trains @@sssdddkkksss

[@sssdddkkksss]

@@nicolasblume1046 I know. A youtuber called Rail Focus has an excellent video on it

[@edc1569]

It is madness not to build the Crewe link

[@gingertom2355]

The Cardiff area Metro system currently under construction and implementation more than likely provides minimal benefit to the people of the West Mids, North West and London. Is that too a 'vanity project'? The debate needs to grow up and the past juvenile style of major transport policy on the hoof by the post 2019 Tory administration ended. HS2 is and ALWAYS was about providing LINE capacity to relieve FUTURE constraints on WCML. The pandemic (or Gov't policy and messaging) set demand for rail services back somewhat. But HS2 isn't for the 2020's, but the 2030's and the decades beyond. Demand for rail use continues to recover and will eventually exceed the capability of the existing network to serve it. That is why fare levels in this country are already set by DfT to explicitly to suppress user demand at times most would like to travel? But policy also REMAINS to put more trunk haul freight from road to rail. The previous Tory administration had this policy yet cynically (or foolishly) cancelled the single biggest project which can ensure this policy can happen. It is why Handsacre to Crewe capacity enhancement (and beyond) must be provided sooner rather than later if future economic growth isn't also to be throttled by inadequate transport capacity. The M6 is hardly any better for effective movement either, and capacity enhancement on the cheap (so called Smart Motorways) has also met the same fate as HS2 Phase 2b.

[@fndjfgsdk]

Well then, maybe you shouldn’t conspire to get railway engineers fired because your feelings got hurt Mr Hendy.

[@adrianhendy]

Nice to see my lordy namesake is in charge...

[@fiddley]

The fact that HS2 doesn't go to Birmingham New Street is just as big of a tragedy as it not going to Euston, yet no-one seems to care.

[@guyosborne2696]

Madness that HS2 does not go the Heathrow airport and does not link smoothly with HS1 and the Channel Tunnel

[@chris8405]

Not madness, only a small amount of passengers would ever be going to the airport and what you suggest would delay the vast majority of rail users and need a lot more railway to be built underground at far greater expense. All this was worked out a decade ago, it was a non-starter.

[@f.g.9466]

Madness that there isn't a better interchange between HS2 and HS1, but the through connection wouldn't be viable and this has been well studied. The idea of trains running directly from the Midlands or North into the continent sounds romantic but it would be a costly operational nightmare and it would take capacity away from the British network. In a scenario where the UK isn't a part of Schengen forget that, way more efficient to concentrate all travelers in a single border point. And connecting HS2 with HS1 for the sake of running trains from the North to Kent has a poor benefit cost ratio. When the Kings Cross / St Pancras area was redeveloped 20 years ago the space for the terminal should've been safeguarded and today instead of Euston we would be building HS2 straight into Kings Cross St. Pancras with a more direct interchange not just for London but other areas of the Southeast via Thameslink.

[@guyosborne2696]

@@chris8405 But surely the whole original concept of HS2 was to make train travel quick and stop using planes (look at France). I understand that the reduced line is ok but originally taking the HS2 from Manchester directly to Heathrow surely would have made sense? Can see why I am not in Whitehall 🤣

[@f.g.9466]

@@guyosborne2696 the original concept for HS2 has nothing to do with reducing air travel or even reducing journey times. This is never communicated to the public and I believe none of the recent prime-ministers really understands (or cares to understand) this, but the true purpose of HS2 is to sort our congested railway network by releasing capacity, in particular on the West Coast Mainline but also in a few other bottlenecks upstream. Before completing the last modernisation of the West Coast Mainline railway engineers realised that it wouldn't have enough capacity and a new line was needed. This is a common railway issue: the mixture of slow moving freight, stopping regional trains, and the long distance trains trying to move fast, on the same tracks, stations and junctions, really constrains capacity and spreads delays across the network. Segregation of the fast moving trains into a dedicated line is the best solution to this problem and it's a tried and tested one. As a matter of fact, this is the exact reason why France decided to build their first ever LGV, and same for Japan. I always highlight that "Shinkansen" literally means "new main line" and not bullet train or high speed or anything like that. And if you're building a new line for the long distance faster trains that doesn't need to go through all the town centers along the way then you might as well build it for higher speeds which will have a few extra benefits. But I don't think the general public is able to grasp the enormous positivr impact that fully building HS2 (all phases and Norther Powerhouse) would have for regional rail and freight transport.

[@fiddley]

Lol! If you just arrived in Heathrow, then you just flew here from somewhere. High Speed Rail is going to make zero difference to the remainder of your journey.

[@eldrago19]

UK building its first new major rail line in 100 years: I didn't realise this was going to be a challenge!

[@michaelmcnally2331]

Really don’t know why HS2 had to divert down to Old Oak Common as opposed to straight to Euston. Could have done a spur down to Old Oak Common if really is required.

[@alfredlamowen]

Old Oak Common will connect HS2 to the Great Western Mainline and the Elizabeth Line which means that People travelling from the west to the north-west won't have to go directly into London to switch from Paddington to Euston. It also means people travelling from the North West down to Heathrow won't have to do the same

[@timw.8452]

Well here's some reasons. Many of the passengers on HS2 will be heading onward to Heathrow, or to business destinations such as the City. Old Oak Common will have the Elizabeth Line which speeds up those onward journeys - Euston does not. In fact I would suggest that the money being spent on the link to Euston would be better spent on getting HS2 to Crewe and Manchester.

[@andrewhotston983]

@@timw.8452 So who will stay on board between OOC and Euston, and do they warrant spending all that money? Or could it be that OOC station is just an unnecessary expense and will end up like Stratford International, where only local trains stop?

[@chris8405]

@@andrewhotston983 , I suggest you look at why users use the transport hub at Euston today. For many journeys it will still be a much better option than Old Oak, and what is more the Elizabeth Line cannot possibly carry all the passengers that will use HS2. It also makes no sense to only have one way to distribute the arriving HS2 passengers as a signal failure on the line to Paddington would bring the system to a halt. The experts who planned HS2 understood these points.

[@timw.8452]

@@andrewhotston983 I think you misunderstand me. I'm saying that for many people, OOC will be more useful than Euston, particularly for air travellers and people on business. In the unlikely event that I actually live long enough to use HS2, I'd also get out at OOC because it makes getting home using the Elizabeth Line and then the Thameslink from Farringdon a better option than going to Euston. Obviously if you live in somewhere like Belsize Park you'd prefer the train to go straight to Euston.

[@iano4027]

If he says it will take 18 months, he actually means 180 months. And at 5x the cost.

[@baggypipestv]

So that’s where Huw Edwards went

[@johnturner4400]

Two tunnel Kier?

[@TomTomicMic]

Two tunnel Kier and all bends are going far left!?!

[@eldonhughes6780]

not THAT Huw Edwards

[@davidrutter3192]

All these top bananas wearing brand new safety gear.Wouldn't know 1 end of a shovel from another!

[@-Osiris-]

It's funny to hear OOC referred to as "the outskirts of London". I mean ok it's not in Westminster but it's a hop, skip, and a jump away from Paddington i.e. quite close to the action

[@boldford]

For those that live out to the west that's true. People live elsewhere too.

[@chris8405]

Its three miles from the edge of zone 1 and badly situated for the majority of rail users who are not heading west of the city.

[@ce1834]

Hendy needs to go

[@andrewb9790]

What an utter and disgusting waste of money.

[@richard_wenner]

What's with the irrelevant and obtrusive whooshing noises?

[@RitaFarrow]

so you said its going to take 18mths to get from euston to old oak common, which is 7 miles,u r joking ,its a bloody joke,typical british workers ,milking the job

[@rosswhite7615]

you've got no idea what you are talking about.

[@TrevorWilliams-fq8mg]

If you think 18 months is a joke what period of time do you think it could be done in ? And what nationalities would you employ ? Incidentally of the three companies doing the job only 1 is British. The others are Swedish and Austrian.

[@mlc4495]

Stop reading the Express.

[@lon3don]

7 miles of tunnelling through difficult terrain. Full size rail tunnels. 18 months is doing well.