There's another good reason for not taking HS2 for Paddington: it's poorly sited in relation to central London, and also the stations serving the north of England and the Midlands. My working life has been spent in NE England, the East Midlands, and North West England. If you live there Paddington is one of the London stations you have very little reason to use.
True but why would you come from the north, into London, and then travel back out to the north? I suppose there is a familiarity argument but then we also had that in the south east… we’re used to using Victoria, Charing Cross and Cannon Street yet our high speed lines took us up to St Pancras. It actually might make it more convenient… in the same way if we ever want to travel up to the north we take HS1 up to St Pancras and then go to either Kings Cross or Euston by just a short walk… terminating at Paddington could make it easier to travel out west… just take HS2 south into Paddington, walk to another platform and board the train heading west. I understand they just *can’t* because of capacity but I’m not really getting the argument about keeping all the services in the same place, as I said for Kentish people our trains mostly come up through the south of London on the commuter networks but in 2007 we all of a sudden got a new line that speeds up through tunnels under East London and curves from the north into a central London terminus in the “north” of London… but it is actually really cool because depending on where we are going it gives us options of which line we take.
That's not a reason at all. If you live in the East Midlands or northern England, HS2 is no use whatsoever to you. It's only useful to people who want to get between London and Birmingham. If you live in the East Midlands or the north, HS2 isn't the quickest way to London, and it isn't the quickest way to Birmingham, so its London terminus could be on the Moon, for all the difference it would make to you.
@@tobeytransport2802Travelling from Chatham to Holyhead (and on to Dublin and thence Tullamore), I'd take the train to St Pancras and walk to Euston, with the added benefit that on a SailRail ticket, the high speed service didn't cost any extra.
@@qwertyTRiG makes sense. Took the train from my local station (Chatham main line too) to St Pancras and then walked to Euston too, stopped for some dinner on the Euston road, then boarded the Caledonian sleeper to Inverness. I’ve also used the convenience of St Pancras to go to York via Kings Cross and Cornwall and Bath via Paddington.
@@Zveeboit may have interchanges stops with tube stations in the core but tfl say it is not a tube line. This due to the trains being bigger legnth and height wise, but the biggest reason is a the larger amount of it runs on national rail lines owned be great western and great eatern railways.
If anyone has seen episodes of the TV show _Paddington!_ which chronicles day-to-day operations there, it's no surprise that any little thing can have a huge knock-on effect. A faulty signal box, kids playing on the lines or a lorry smashing an overpass bridge can frustrate thousands of passengers. So yeah, Paddington does not need any more traffic.
Our rail network is so overcrowded and in need of expansion that a single small incident, like something or someone falling on the line practically anywhere along any of the main lines mean every single train running over it is then delayed. We were coming back from London to Manchester a couple of years ago and had to wait an hour for our train to get a slot to actually depart. Making matters worse they didn't have a driver because the original driver was scheduled to be on another service after terminating at Piccadilly so he had to jump on another train to make it in time and left us stranded (that's a management failure, not a driver failure). To top it all off, we were stuck in Euston, where your soul drains from your very being.
I find Jago’s voice, in particular, his speech rhythm, intonations and stresses, as soothingly hypnotic and reassuring as the shipping forecast, only his content is far more interesting than the shipping forecast. I just love these videos. I didn’t even know I was a fan of trains and tube line histories until I listened to this channel. Please keep up with the great work! Love it.
Hello there Jago, Another reason why High Speed Two should terminate at London Euston is due to its close proximity with London St Pancras and London Kings Cross. Add to that connections with the Northern line and Victoria line of the London Underground at Euston, it is very well connected with other railway networks. You could argue that you could walk to Euston Square for the Circle line and walk to Kings Cross/St Pancras for the Piccadilly line. Best wishes and take care. Kind regards, Peter Skuce. St Albans. Hertfordshire
Quite ... and there have been suggestions that the proposed total rebuild of Euston could involve a tunnel with travelators covering the short(ish) distance to Kings Cross/St Pancras.
@@kwlkid85You mean Euston and St Pancras? The rebuild of Euston is already going to join Euston and Euston Square underground. When it starts that is.
I saw the title and thought you meant it as a more humorous "What if HS2 just ran from Euston to Paddington?" At the rate things are going, it wouldn't surprise me all that much...
Until recently there was an ideal site at Paddington for HS2: the old goods depot on the northern side of the station. But... they sold it off and built on it. Of course.
The closing shot as the train left Paddington brought back memories, being able to drop people *on* the platform using the ramp from Bishops Bridge Road and then drive straight through into Praed Street. I used to work for the RNIB and would regularly drop off clients and their guide dogs straight on the platform, unheard of these days!
It's a very long game but a benefit of terminating at Euston is that in future, hopefully, Crossrail 2 will be passing through Euston giving you an interchange, while maintaining an interchange with the Elizabeth line at Old Oak Common
Similar problem at Birmingham New Street - only 4 tracks south of the station so it's fairly regular to be sat there waiting for a route through to an empty platform.
Hence the plan to divert some of the New Street services into Moor Street via Camp Hill line and proposed Bordesley chord. Can anyone provide an update on the latter?
@@jackmartinleith As a Brummie, these are plans for when Curzon Street opens but nothing much has come to light yet exept that they are going ahead with the upgrade of the line through Kings Heath to passenger carrying status and Castle Bromwich Station in Birmingham and two in Coventry are on the books to reopen
Millions perhaps billions of pounds worth of work has already been spent on the Old Oak common to Euston connection. Bridges have been widned seveal graveyards have been moved, existing train lines have had to shove over to make room for 2 HS2s extra lines. All that is left well- quite a lot is left to do is for those TBMs to bore 4 miles of tunnel to Euston . But millions of more Pounds would have to be spent again to take HS2 to another station.
Brunel and the Great Western Railway never had plans to run into London Euston, London Euston was operated by the London and Birmingham Railway through Camden
Such a shame the GCR was closed. I actually remember the final service passing the top of our road in Leicestershire. Though at least part of it but not enough has been converted into a cycle track for a quick route into the city centre.
Certainly with hindsight the closure of the Great Central was a tragedy but I’m rather bored by repeatedly hearing the mantra “closed by Dr Beeching”. Of course it was his recommendation but he had returned to ICI (1965) before the GCR was progressively closed between 1966-69. It’s clearly uncomfortable for some people to acknowledge which colour the Government was at the time of the actual closure.
The irony is that Paddington will indeed take the extra traffic until the Euston link is built - but on the Elizabeth Line that wasn't designed for that load.
Well except that almost nobody will actually want to go to Paddington. Other than St Mary's Hospital which is a local rather than national trip generator, there isn't really much there other than the station. Some will obviously get off there to change onto the Bakerloo line, or the Hammersmith/Circle/District lines if they are heading west from the station. Most people who take the Elizabeth Line, I suspect, will get off at a station other than Paddington.
If they have to get the Lizzie Line from OOC, they donlt have to get off at Pad - they could (ostensibly) stay on anywhere till Abbey Wood or Shenfield@@katrinabryce
nice video Jago. I really miss the Bree Louise pub though, it was my 'go to 'real ale destination in the area and for all the advantages of rebuilding Euston, it seems (to a simpleton town planner) that every effort should've been during the planning of CTRL to have a future plan to through run to the North
I believe on of the early plans was for Hs2 to connect directly with Hs1 thus making it an international through line. If it gets as far as Euston some far future government may see that as an option again. Excellent video as always Jago.
That would make sense. If HS2 ever gets as far as Euston, passengers bound for Eurostar will have the choice of tube, taxi, bus or foot to make the final connection!
Realistically that isn’t likely to make sense. The Eurostar is under-used for much of the year (not that you’d know it from how crowded the waiting rooms get). Too few people would want to make the journey to Birmingham or Manchester for it to make sense to run the trains all the way. There would also, unless the UK joined Schengen, be a need for passport controls at each station on the route, which require both space (greater construction costs) and time (more friction for travellers). You’re not actually allowed to disembark at Rotterdam or Lille (and possibly not Brussels) on “westbound” EuroStars for this reason. The final consideration that comes to mind is that if you ran trains from Manchester to Amsterdam it would cause issues for the train crew, and also make it more likely that there would be delays on some part of the route.
@@tomwantshelp I disagree, Eurostar is pretty well frequented all year, with occupation of most trains over 80%, that's better than most domestic services. Quite a few Eurostar passengers already come from the Midlands and even further, making the trek between Euston and St Pancras, so I'm convinced there's a market for it. Yes, it would require the same border facilities as in the other Eurostar Channel stations, as I don't see the UK joining Schengen anytime soon, but there is precedent for that, with Amsterdam and Rotterdam as recent additions. There's likely not going to be a through service from Birmingham to Amsterdam, but overlapping services which increase frequency on the main core of Eurostar's network, with Amsterdam - London and Brussels - Birmingham, for instance. It's not going to be an hourly service, of course, neither is Amsterdam, btw. Maybe shorter trains (coupled with another shorter train) will have to be put into service (current Eurostars are 400 m long, double of regular TGV sets, and the requirement to be this long has been dropped quietly since), but I'm convinced there's a market for such a service.
Unfortunately the government has done a very thorough inquiry into this and found that it is practically impossible. You can find the extensive documentation online.
I'm amazed that any thing ever gets done in the UK anymore. All the procrastination.. The French would just do it while in the UK it very rarely gets built. It was comical for a while that the Eurostar had to run into Waterloo on a third rail electric system at speeds of around 90mph . It's nice to think that St Pancras which was even boring when I was a kid in the late 50s is now some really lovely station with exotic destinations like Paris, Lille or even Luton.
At Paddington there were acres of derelict land for decades suitable to extend the existing station. Then the soulless Sheldon Square and Paddington Basin were built about 20 years ago.
The Shinkansen mostly uses elevated tracks over the previous commuter lines when it comes to reaching the central stations in Kyoto and Tokyo. Can the same be done for reaching Paddington? It might have been cheaper than tunnels to Euston.
Unfortunately, the answer is 'not easily or cheaply'. There are a lot of bridges and infrastructure over the rail lines into Paddington, and a significant amount under them as well. Euston was also the best option as it would mean that the existing WCML trains could be effectively replaced by HS2 services avoiding the problem of causing additional crowd control problems at other London terminus stations.
Look at the shot of the approach to Paddington again. See all those bridges, signals, cables, office buildings, and the rat's nest of tracks? You'd have to deal with all of that.
Blunder through is an endemic problem within the transport bureaucracy and blinkered politicians relying on their advice. This holds for Australia as well as the UK. Oh, and thank you Jago for your thoughtful video.
@@peterwilliamallen1063 The connection to the WCML is irrelevant. It is the cities that are connected to High Speed rail services that are important. It’s a job half done, and is HS1.5 until Leeds and Manchester are connected.
@@Deepthought-42 The connection to Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland will be there via this Junction, Leeds will never be connected as it is on the East Coast and HS2 is a West Coast Railway Line being Operated only by Avanty West Coast Trains and they do not operate to Leeds, this being operated by X Country Trains.
I believe terminating HS2 at Marylebone would be a much better idea than Paddington or Euston. The majority of the services are Chiltern to the old GWR network around Birmingham Snow Hill. They could possibly run new lines for HS2 into Marylebone and re-route the B’ham services back into Paddington just like before Snow Hill closed in 1972. They could also possibly relieve congestion on the GWR mainline north of London by opening a link running through the North Warwickshire line. Mind you, it’s just an opinion and would still require a lot of work around London.
Marylebone has 6 platforms none of which are long enough for 400m HS2 trains, so you'd have to rebuild it, just as it being done at Euston. Also the tube connections are very poor, as there's only one line, the Bakerloo or a long walk to Baker Street. Not the right choice for anyone travelling beyond the terminus.
Presumably Euston is the terminal for HS2 because the lines from the channel tunnel at St Pancras can be connected easily to our national high speed network. (There appears to be very little 'joined up' thinking on this matter.)
There is very little need to connect HS1 with HS2. The main passenger flows on HS2 will be to London, not the continent. The requirement to clear immigration also renders the connection pointless, as a through train means you’d need to provide immigration and customs facilities at every station up the line, such as Birmingham and Manchester. Why would you spend millions providing all that for a tiny market? Far simpler for passengers to take a train to Euston and self-connect to St Pancras where they can clear immigration there.
The original plans for HS2 included a link to HS1 (and Heathrow Airport), but these were dropped early on; however, my understanding is that the planned tunnels between OOC and Euston include a passive provision for a connection to HS1 to be constructed at a later date
@@grumpyoldman47 Nobody knows if the tunnels are even going to make it to Euston, never mind include a passive connection to HS1. And even if and when they do build the tunnels to Euston they include a passive connection, that doesn’t mean they will actually use it. The chances of a connection being made between HS1 and HS2 is pretty much zero. There is simply no need for it because there is only a tiny number of people who would use it.
@@mofomatAs it stands I don't think many people in Birmingham and Manchester are going to faff around changing trains in London to get to the continent, they're going to go to their respective airports and fly like they've done for the past 50 years or so. If passport control could be streamlined enough for a simple onboard check, or even no passport check at all (I know, that'll never happen) then a through service to the continent might actually work. It is a tiny market now, but with the right level of convenience it could be a lot bigger.
@@Croz89 I agree. Most people will fly. It’s the reason why the Regional Eurostar services were dropped before they even began in the 1990s. Once aviation was deregulated in 1997, high-speed trains from north of London to the continent were doomed. And immigration and customs will never not be exactly as it is now, and this is why it’s pointless building the infrastructure for it.
Interesting vid, cheers! My forefathers were all Londoners since at least 1863. I now live in Vienna, Austria (with family). What I dont get is that the UK gov has quitt the high speed rail project in excess Birrminham (?). Madness.
The craziest thing is that it was only cancelled because the current government is very unpopular (and thought cancelling it would be popular). And yet the opinion polls haven't moved at all. So they've potentially destroyed decades of infrastructure planning for literally nothing. Anyway... there's an election this year so they'll probably be gone soon. Hopefully Britain makes new high speed rail plans soon, but it is very difficult to predict, at this time
Thanks as always for the interesting perspective. On the subject of capacity constraints -- maybe you could do a video on how rail transport in London has recovered or changed post-COVID. Ridership is still way down here in the US, so I was surprised (and heartened) to hear you talk about London traffic as though it's back to normal and continues to grow.
As somebody who works on the railway, I can tell you it’s not back to ‘normal’ but numbers are certainly almost the same as they used to be, just spread differently. Weekend leisure travel has increased significantly and commuter traffic with people working from home typically on Mondays and Fridays, means that only tues-thurs are the real busy commuter days. This is a London centric outlook I must point out, I’m not sure how it’s changed on other lines around the country but I would hazard a guess that they’re experiencing a similar thing
Thinking of HS2, it could provide an excuse to take an existing train up to Brum and grab a bunch of footage of Curzon Street, Moor Street, New Street, Snow Hill and the Duddeston Viaduct (its history is classic Railway Mania: disputes between train companies result in both its construction and abandonment before completion) to do some videos on the history of the railways up there, if you ever feel like a mini-series set in the big scary world outside London.
I really, really, really wish HS2 could be connected to HS1. The Eurostar network is far too tiny, we need longer distance international trains from them or at least a competitor starting trains through the Channel Tunnel
This. High speed rail is only worth the money over long distances. Connecting the midlands and the north to Europe without having to get a tube across London would be game changing.
Unrelated, but seeing Paddington reminded me of a story my late Dad told me. He used to be a Steam Train driver on southern lines, and later on very early Diesels. One day he had an empty train (Diesel) and decided to "Open the taps" on the main line into Paddington. I believe he was over 3 figures which for the time was very good going. Only problem was, the damn thing would not slow down. Apparently he had the brakes on Miles before coming into Paddington, and as he came into the Platforms he opened the door and bailed out !, falling and rolling onto the platform. As the train ran into the buffers at about 5mph. He said the damage was substantial. Somehow he didnt loose his job !. This would have been in the early 70's.
that sounds like a great idea! ... to watch a documentary about 50+ years later from the comfort of somewhere very far away that never has to deal with the consequences.
My favoured route of HSx would be if HS1 dove under St Pancras (with a station there) and then turned 90 degrees right and ran between the N Circle and Central lines all the way to Paddington (with another deep station) and then followed the line to Old Oak Common. And then the original Manchester leg extended to Glasgow and the original Leeds leg extended to Edinburgh (with a HS route linking them). 😃 Crazy fantasy I know, but but in the last 20 years China has built enough high speed rail to encircle the planet twice, so... 🤔 And Spain and Italy have been even more inspirational, all things considered.
Except they have room (Spain) or they forcefully make room (China) the latter not always so desirable. As you always already have to change HSL trains anyway because of Border Security, it doesn.t matter that much if the other HSL line is in a building next door, though with much luggage changing at the same stations if of course more desirable but will be a challenge to implement.
@@shereesmazik5030 You know you can have it run at much slower speeds than top speed? A car can go about 180 km/h before hitting rev limits, but you usually go a lot slower than that.
A big issue at St Pancras for any tunnels is the British Library which has a 7 floor basement ie down to level -7. The Victoria Line passes through this structure at level -5. So any lines have to go north or south of that barrier.
The only way for the government to stop thinking Birmingham is the north is to force them all to move to somewhere like York, Leeds, Carlisle or Preston, let alone Glasgow or Edinburgh. Then they will see how poorly connected the north is. Bonus points for moving half to either side of the Pennines and making them get the train between them every day!
Euston all made a of sense in the original plans, where HS2 was meant to tie into HS1 (or least be easily able to in the future) and allow through running of Eurostar services to Birmingham and the north. IMHO this is one aspect of the project that should never have been dropped
It's an operational headache due to the UK not being in the Schengen Area. From the HS2 side, international services could not be used for domestic journeys, infrastructure would have to be overbuilt to accommodate all the extra space for passport checks and contained waiting areas, needing dedicated platforms. I totally see how the business case wouldn't be strongest and the extra costs in building and operating would be a deterrent. This project isn't even going ahead to the extent it needs to solve internal mobility needs, much less international travel.
Most cross border (non Schengen) trains manage to do passport control on the moving train between stations. I'm not sure why Eurostar has turned it into such a palaver.
The border/security issue is a red herring. The real issue is the very low demand between the Midlands/North and Europe/Kent compared to the high demand for trains from those 4 places to London. Almost everyone would get off through trains to Europe in the London area, even without factoring in the disperse destinations at either end meaning most of the small through demand would end up changing trains in London anyway. The best (and far cheaper) approach is making the change easier with a travelator between termini, rather than seeking to eliminate the change for a fraction of a fraction of passengers (especially as it would also make other changes easier - most importantly between Euston and Thameslink). Plus the mismatch between lines. HS2 was looking at 12-18 Intercity trains per hour. HS1 is talking 3tph Intercity and 8tph regional as somewhat of a maximum. Linking them isn't a good idea operationally. Euston was chosen because it - has space for a large new terminus - is on N-S tube lines (and Thameslink not far away) to complement the E-W line providing onward travel at OOC - is the part of London where existing trains from those places arrive - a couple of other things - the proximity to HS1. And in that order of importance. Proximity to St Pancras was certainly seen a good thing when selecting Euston, but Thameslink and the Midland Mainline were far more the reasons why than HS1.
I'm sure many people grow up never hearing of the Battle of Waterloo wondering why there is a big station that appears to be named after a toilet. I know I did.
I’ve used Eurostar many times both from Waterloo and from St Pancras. Waterloo was far better; all I needed to do was change platforms. The extra journey from Waterloo to St Pancras is slow and difficult especially with luggage because of the many changes of levels required when changing tube trains. It takes a long time too. Don’t forget not everyone lives in North London or north of London. For the large numbers living South & West of London Waterloo was an excellent terminus for Eurostar and still is the gateway into London.
As an stupid continental person, I’ve had this question for a longer time. The whole concept of changing stations to continue a travel seems so 19 th century to me. Greetings to Paris. But well as someone from Berlin it’s easy talking. Even that no one considered that travelling from the continent wouldn’t end in London , but could be continued to the northern parts of your country , maybe inside the same train? , 😮, is worth a discussion. Or maybe not. Greetings from Berlin.
This reminds me of when Philadelphia was looking to combine their two separate termini, they considered building an extension off Reading Terminal.....except Reading Terminal was kind of land locks and the tracks faced south instead of west. Extending it would've ruined the historic facade on Market St. So naturally it was scraped in favor of underground east-west station who entrances would be linked into Reading Terminal facade while the former terminal shed was converted to Convention Center space.
The capacity argument holds water for sure and development is simply needed. But I always assumed HS2 was part of the European Project for Regions: 1. Connect Eurostar = France -> UK (London) 2. Connect HS2 = UK (London) -> Midlands and North of England (aka European Regions) Euston - St Pancras (moved from Waterloo). Itself perhaps a window into the future with less cars/roads/CO2 and private vehicle ownership and more pubic for longer distances?
Is the issue with HS2 trains going to Paddington more a lack of capacity (ie platforms) at the station, rather than the tracks running from Old Oak Common? After all, there are (presumably) fast lines carrying the GWR expresses along the pretty short distance between OOC and Paddington fairly swiftly, but I can imagine that there's no space for them at Paddington station.....unless you start building extra platforms underground at enormous expense!
Precisely. You'd need to build the same platforms planned for Euston and a connecting tunnel and end up at a location which is nothing like as good for onward connections. One major advantage of Euston is the whole University of London campus is within walking distance of the station.
Why don't they just use Stratford International for HS2? This would have several advantages. 1. Stratford is a modern station surrounded by a modern area and has great connections to National Rail, Underground, Overground, DLR and Crossrail, 2. The station is already there and they would only need to do smaller modification work and extend HS2 to connect with the existing HS1 before the tunnel mouth at St. Pancras (Some HS2 trains could even go to St. Pancras International if capacity is there), 3. Connecting HS1 with HS2 could mean DIRECT Eurostar services from Manchester or Birmingham to Paris or Brussels, 4. Stratford International was already built for HS2 (Specifically for Eurostar trains going further north bypassing St. Pancras) and is currently a pretty useless station and doesn't even have international services right now.
True but, it's quite a lot further than Euston, though they may be able to hook onto current HS1 tracks at St. Pancras? Also, that could lead to international trains from Birmingham and Manchester...
And how do you get HS2 to Stratford, considering getting it the short distance to Euston is considered prohibitively expensive? And for what reason? The vast majority of people using HS2 will have London as their final destination, but you’re suggesting dump them in East London for the sake of a tiny number of people who may want to go to the continent? Eurostar services pass through Stratford International now but they don’t stop because it’s too close to St Pancras. Eurostar have never wanted to stop at Stratford. The infrastructure was already put in place for Regional Eurostars to bypass London at Stratford International with stock ordered and partially delivered, but services never started because they realised there was simply no market for European services from anywhere other than London. It’s a mental idea.
@@mofomat there are plans to combine Euston with St Pancras that way you can do a crossover with HS1 at St Pancras and run trains all the way up to Stratford international where HS2 would terminate
@@Adam-Farr As you said London St pancras International is to far from Euston, does not have the capacity to operate HS2 services along with East Midlands Trains and South Western Javelin Kent Coast services plus their is no requirement for HS2 to connect to HS1 as there is no call for international train services from Birmingham or Manchester to the continent as it is quicker and cheaper to fly from these two Cities
@@LOLE_Editz This is not true. There are no plans to combine Euston and St Pancras. There is talk of a fast moving walkway between the two stations to help passengers connect between the two stations, but that’s it. HS1 and HS2 are not going to be connected!
I'm sorry for sounding like an idiot but if HS2 only goes to Birmingham and the plan is for all the land bought for other phases is to be sold, why would Euston need more than one HS2 platform?
@@craigmarriott6759 Because all the long distance services are using HS2 that's why. Not just to Birmingham. This is why Old Oak Common will have six HS2 platforms. North of Birmingham HS2 is connecting to the slower tracks. If you think you can run any decent train service off one platform (allowing twenty minutes to load and unload at the terminus) you are very much mistaken.
I would disagree with building 11 platforms now, because they would be surplus to requirements if the northern leg never goes ahead (I.e. if the land is sold before the next election, and before any government has a chance to u-turn on sunaks cancellation), although you could safeguard some space for additional platforms though, so that way capacity problems could be sold in the future.
Why not cantilever a second layer of tracks above the existing layer of tracks? There appears to be plenty of room, even under the canopy at least in the centre. That would cause a minimum amount of disturbance to existing service. As for the Euston versus Paddington question, why not both?
Paddington would never work because you’ve got very important buildings either side like st Mary’s hospital, and the the people in the area are very rich and buying their property would be costly and those rich people would probably lobby against it and win, Euston on the other hand had a massive train shed that hadn’t been used for 20+ years in the space where HS2 is supposed to come out the tunnel and there are no key buildings that stood in the way of extending the station. You could also argue that originally HS2 was supposed to be connected to HS1 and being a stones throw from St Pancras somewhat fulfils that original idea. Either way Euston had the space before it even had the green light, Paddington would be EXTREMELY expensive to change and would never ever be viable
A better question than "Why not terminate HS2 at Paddington?" is "Why not have HS2 follow Crossraiil from Old Oak Common, have an underground station at Paddington, a second underground station mid-way between Euston and King's Cross St Pancras (with travelator links leading west and east to connect to the three stations, and then have the line pop up at Stratford International, to merge HS2 with HS1?"" We have known for decades that Crossrail was needed to deal with people travelling across Zone 1 of London and there are obviously going to be people from Wales who want to either get HS2 to Scotland or HS1 to France. So "Crossrailing HS2 through London's InterCity stations and onto HS1" makes much more sense than what the UK government did. The Scottish Parliament have said, in the past, that they want Eurostar trains to go to Edinburgh and Glasgow and a through tunnel in London would make that into something that could eventually be facilitated. Likewise, with a GWR high speed rail replacement, Cardiiff and maybe South West England could also gain Eurostar services, as well as having high speed InterCity trains to London, the Midlands, the North and Scotland.
Some goos points. Indeed, the basis behinbd Stratfiord "INternational"! But then folk wanting to go fron Wales to Scotland are more likely to go Via Birmingham or Crewe rather than London!
Great video Jago, good points made. Please do more about HS2. I'm still seething about the way the project has been paired down because of us as a country pandering to NIMBYs and environmentalists more interested in looking after lesser spotted newts than human endeavour. To add to the mix of comments of where HS2 should run into, and to no doubt promote the ire of those who disagree, I can't for the life of me see why provision was not made to somehow run some services onto HS1 tracks into St Pancras? Integrated rail system? Why, there's an idea!! But I guess the farce over regional and night Eurostars has taught us a lesson.
I;m not so sure about that - seems monumental cost and damage to both landscape and property owners merely to reduplicate routes from London to Birmingham - not to mention when a railway is finally built around places like Brackley, it isn't intended to serve them! Agreed re St Panceas though
Strange thing is this country is crying out for investments that will make us better off, while our government fritters away money by constantly changing its mind and wasting huge amounts. Look at all the substitute spending plans for HS2 money (75% of which won’t happen) and taken all together they have nowhere near the economic benefits of linking London and Manchester with a reliable transport connections, let alone the huge growth in freight traffic that the existing line could ( and now can’t) have taken.
The big question is, will it get to Euston? One video I saw with someone talking to HS2 staff (Geoff?) said the plans they were working to had them dropping two tunnel boring machines into the east end of the OOC station and that would complete their contract. If it gets there and Euston does get its overhaul, i'd be behind rebuilding the Euston arch ...but if costs are a thing, that wont happen. But hey....
Rebuilding the arch at Euston as been on the cards for ages and using some of the orgional pillar stones, don't know if it will ever happen but they found some of the orgional pillar bits in the canal by Stratford and I believe they salvaged them around 2011 in prep for the 2012 Olympics when they cleaned up the river/canal in that area.
Great video. Could HS2 be built under Euston Station and the British Library to connect directly to St Pancras/Kings Cross (thus linking HS1 and HS2)? Are there underground services (such as the Tube) in the way? Massive project but would provide a solution to one of the major failings of the current disconnected HS network. Could the underground station have additional capacity to include future HS lines to London from West and East England?
Would be great also to have some connection of Kings X and Euston underground, a bit like how you can walk from Moorgate to Liverpool Street now as a result of the Elizabeth Line.
I met a friend at Paddington in early December around evening rush hour time and I was shocked and a bit saddened. There really wasn’t a lot going on, empty platforms, but for a few long distance trains leaving every twenty minutes or so. All the people were on the Elizabeth line stopping at every single station. The people of Slough must be rightly livid that now they must get on stopping trains to and from Paddington?
From upstairs at peak times, there should be 4 Heathrow Express trains, 8 fast trains to Reading and beyond, 2 slow trains to Didcot, and about 2 fast trains that have their first stop somewhere beyond Reading for a total of about 16 trains per hour.
From Old Oak Common, HS2 should go to Euston underground, then Waterloo underground, then a new underground station at that mess of lines south of Southwick with connections to those lines, then join HS1 south of Ebbsfleet, to allow stops at Ashford Kent, then across the channel to Europe and to a maintenance depot south of Ashford.
Also with the current spate of failure of the overhead line equipment on the lines out of Paddington, without a good fix, how often would HS2 trains have to be terminated at Old Oak Common anyway???
Even if/when HS1 goes to Euston, it may be possible to divert some trains to Paddington at Old Oak Common, so you can get to Birmingham quickly from either terminus.
You'd have to build a connecting line up from the tunnels at OOC to the lines into Paddington and then find the line capactiy to do that. HS2 is not at the same level as the main line at OOC.
At 4:22, I saw a train with the name "Dr. Paul Stephenson". Stephenson is a well-known name in rail terms, but I never heard of Paul. He is known for his civil rights activism, and his activism was transport-related. I found the wiki page ( en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Stephenson_(civil_rights_campaigner) ) interesting and I think you a video on him would not be without merits! Thanks as always for making this video, and enjoy 2024!
Could you do a video on travelling post offices? The Royal Mail office at Southend still has a platform for one adjacent to the sidings at Southend Victoria.
Apart from HS1, Euston has a ted closer proximity to the City (a short taxi, tube or bus ride). From Paddington it’s either the Elizabeth line (that is also available at OOC) or H&S/Circle just before the Edgware Road & Baker Street junctions 😉
Somewhat ironically when Eurostar ran to Waterloo the trains then ran empty to their depot in North Pole in west London the opposite side of the GWR track to the new HS2 station. North Pole is now occupied by Hitachi for the GWR 800 series trains.
Does the Euro Tunnel connect with London. In my opinion the HS2 project is no different to when the network was original laid down. The amount of money is just far bigger?
The problem with simple questions is when people like simple answers which is not always the case. The first question to be answered is, which companies are going to operate on HS2? I believe in competition on lines like HS2. Instead of setting up new companies, use the existing ones. 1)- Avanti West Coast already operates out of Euston to the North West and Scotland. Let it continue to do so stopping at Birmingham International on its way north but not entering Birmingham city centre. 2) Run two trains per hour from Marylebone, by Chiltern Trains, to run up HS2 and into Birmingham city centre but then continue via Smethwick(one per hour) and the other through Tame Bridge Parkway(one per hour) both terminating at Wolverhampton. 3) The third company would be GWR running two trains per hour to Birmingham city centre leaving from Paddington. Two freed up platforms can be achieved at Paddington by not terminating the Heathrow Express there but continuing it along the Elizabeth line to Liverpool St. from where it would continue to Stansted Airport.The frequency would be two trains per hour. In such a way you can have two established train companies running into Birmingham with a frequency of 4 trains per hour to Birmingham city centre (to whichever station you choose to run them). This is the desired frequency but you have two different London termini to choose from. It also spreads the load between the stations, and subsequently the Underground. The Avanti trains are just icing on the cake.
maybe that is some future expanded plan. Have four OOC tunnels (two 2-way spurs) from OOC to London...one tunnel pair to Euston and new tunnel pair spur to (a lower level grade/subway) Paddinton. Some trains would run to Euston and others to Paddington. Someone in blog mentioned the future Crossrail2 subway station located between St. Pancras and Euston could provide a 3-way underground walk/moving-walkway path to Euston Square subway too.
Jago, would you be able to make a video about St. Pancras capacity ( passengers + trains)? I heard recently that new train operator want to do London-Paris route plus SBB thinking about Zurich/Geneva to London and DB about Frnkfurt - Cologne - London. Will all of them find space on St. Pancras and HS1 with tunnel crossing?🤷
Marylebone’s 6 platforms are fairly well used by the Chiltern Mainline (and Oxford spur) and Aylesbury line and there’s very little room for expansion there either. It would finally bring electrification there though, which is something that probably won’t materialise for a good while yet!
Even more carefully watching tbis space as a trip to London and the North are in the plans for the family, potentially as soon as this summer and I do plan on making as much of it by rail as possible. Too bad there isn't a Pond Tunnel yet....
Shame all that excess land next to Paddington, that was used for freight and parcels up until the 1960's, was sold off. Choking off any future expansion.
I seem to recall that French railways built an underground terminus under one of the major Parisian terminus stations and of course there is Berlin Central (Hauptbahnhof)? Lack of vision in U.K. and a complete inability to manage engineering projects. Although I won’t mention Stuttgart or Berlin airport?
Many of the interchange problems mentioned below, not to mention overcrowding, could be fixed by the proposed New Airport & City line. In simple terms. This would consist of Dual Fuel, Elizabeth line loading gauge type trains running over EL rails from Heathrow to Westbourne Park then running on Hammersmith & City rails to Aldgate or on to the East. Baker Street platforms 5&6 would be extended west & Euston Sq. platforms extended East (Note: At present two new subways adjacent to the old Met tunnels are proposed as a link to a new underground concourse between Euston Sq. and Euston ML an unbelievably short sighted proposal.) Other stations platforms would be extended in time. Circle line trains would then be confined to the Inner Circle and H&CL timetabling modified. As the existing supposed EL to London Underground connection at Paddington is not fit for purpose due to level and transit distance. A cross platform or step free change from the EL to the H&CL would be made pre Paddington at Royal Oak or Westbourne Park (a bus interchange).
The big snag here is the issue in the video. Minor delay on the Circle delays all trains on the H&C which then delays everything heading for Heathrow and my train gets in to Penzance 20 mins late.
Great video, and clearly explained thank you, but... "the unfortunately named Waterloo". 🤔 I commuted to and from France in the early 3rd rail days and the average French person didn't give a toss about the name. I never heard them complain about the ABBA song either. 😄
Line capacity is one thing, if you've ever tried to navigate the main concourse at Paddington with, let's say, 20 minutes to go until a Plymouth/Penzance train departs, you'll know it's a nightmare with everyone standing around waiting for the platform announcement. Add a train's worth of passengers for Birmingham into the mix and there wouldn't be room to swing a cat.
It's pretty simple. Old oak common station gives access to Crossrail (now the Elizabeth line). Euston will give access to Crossrail 2 once that's built. So anyone travelling from the north to London will have their choice to get off the train for Crossrail 1 or Crossrail 2
Anybody who's travelling from the north into London isn't interested in getting on HS2 to go to Birmingham. If they wanted to go to Birmingham, they'd have just gone straight there, rather than going into London and back out again.
Something else that may have gone under the radar is that the planned train lengths are being shortened and will have less seats than the current Pendolinos! They will also run much slower on the traditional WCML track as they don’t tilt. Can you imagine the embarrassment with your new high speed train having to move onto the slow track to allow the Pendolinos to overtake! Therefore why don’t they scrap the planned new trains and just run the Pendolinos at 140mph. That way you could also stick a couple of intermediate stations serving Bucks and south of Birmingham making it more like HS1? Or even better, look at the Amelia Liberty trains Alston are building for the US Northeast corridors Acela service. Traditional length train of 9 carriages and two power cars, 200mph+ top speed with no tilt, then up to 180mph with tilt. Surely these should be bought for HS2/WCML use, getting the best of the new and existing infrastructure?
No, I meant just convert and run the Pendolinos at 140mph (or whatever their top speed actually could be)on HS2 and then they can continue as tilt trains once they rejoin the WCML. The current issue is that the new trains currently ordered don’t tilt. This means for every mile they have to run on the WCML, they will actually go slower than a Pendolino. Not so much of an issue when they would only rejoin the WCML way north of Manchester, so really only affecting the Glasgow bound service. However now they will only get to Birmingham before having to rejoin the WCML, any train, apart from the Birmingham terminating service, will start to give back those minutes it gained by now having to switch back onto HS2 much earlier, so the journey time cut from London to Manchester and Liverpool, still exists, but becomes much less when using HS2 to Birmingham and then the reminder of the journey on the WCML as a non tilt train. That’s why I think the rolling stock needs a rethink. Fewer non tilt trains could be ordered just for the London to Birmingham service, and a train akin to the Amelia Liberty could be ordered to run the services that start on HS2, but that will need to continue on the WCML after Birmingham interchange for the remainder of their journey.
Of course, had the Elizabeth Line connected Euston, the Kings Cross / St Pancras complex and Paddington you could have travel to Heathrow there would have been even less reason for wondering why HS2 doesn't terminate at Paddington.
I never understood why they didn't just terminate HS2 at Old Oak Common. OOC has 14 High-Speed platforms, so it should have the capacity for a terminus. If not, they could have built more. Make better connections with the North London and West London lines, and maybe a shuttle bus over to the Central Line (or reroute it). Rebuild the West Coast Mainline platform at Willesden Junction. You already have the Elizabeth Line and Great Western Mainline. Maybe not quite as convenient as Euston, but a heck of a lot cheaper.
OOC is going to have six high speed platforms, not fourteen. Besides which, you may have lots of connections at OOC, but very few people going there as a final destination. Euston has lots of connections to everywhere in central London…via a taxi. That’s how most people will get to their final destination at Euston. Imagine you’re on business from Birmingham, and you need to get to a meeting in central London. If it terminates at Euston, you can jump in a taxi and get anywhere within central London, quickly. If it terminates at OOC, you have to hope your meeting is close to one of four Elizabeth Line stations, or you face either a LONG taxi ride from OOC, or a separate train journey and THEN a taxi ride. All of that means it will be quicker and cheaper to just take a legacy train on the existing WCML into Euston, which will still run after HS2 opens.
So terminate all existing London to Manchester trains at Stockport and all Liverpool trains at the airport and let people use the local trains to get into the cities. OOC is not in London.
They didn't plan to terminate HS2 at Old Oak Common for the simple reason that nobody wants to go to Old Oak Common. If HS2 dumps you at Old Oak Common and then you have to spend an extra half-hour to get to your actual destination, HS2 is no faster than the existing rail network. (Literally: HS2 is 45 minutes London to Birmingham; the WCLM is 75.) The same problem existed with the Leeds extension of HS2. They couldn't decide whether it should go through Derby or Nottingham, so they put it half way in between. But, again, that means that the extra time taken to transfer between -the middle of nowhere- Sandiacre and your actual destination means you may as well have just got on a direct train to London from Derby or Nottingham.
Why there isnt a link between HS1 and HS2 I dont know..maybe we need a sort of Lille-Europe mega junction station in London..or is that too logical?Food for thought, Jago! keep em coming!
@@peterwilliamallen1063No. In any sensible country they would both be part of a domestic and international high speed network, designed from the start for the ultimate goal of nationwide coverage, like Germany, France, Spain and Italy are doing! Why is the UK always so determined to think small? At one time we were pioneers; now we are merely also-rans.
@@michaelwant8501 Why not, because HS2 is purely a domestic High Speed line to allow more capacity on the WCML and HS1 is an International Railway line, but the problem is although in Europe all TGV type service run on domestic routes across Europe, but they do not require Customs Checks at Borders as they are in the free passport SHenegan zone, we are not and not only that no European Domestic train service runs through the Channel Tunnel only Euurostar services and Le Shuttle special trains and that is why no domestic High Speed service would run from Birmingham or Manchester via the Channel Tunnel plus there is no custom for it as it was tried just after the Channel tunnel opened at it failed and people in Birmingham and Manchester would rather fly to Europe quckly and Cheaply than trundle along on a train.
@@peterwilliamallen1063Just through run HS2 to Ashford and put customs and immigration with a timed transfer there. It would give you more capacity along the London part of the route and more single seat domestic rides. People have to go through the exact same customs to fly as they do to take the train, so that’s not a benefit for one over the other. As for why people would do so, trains are potentially cheaper and definitely far more comfortable and luxurious than flying, and people have routinely demonstrated that they will accept an extra hour or two in order to avoid air travel.
@@sonorioftrill You don't understand that Brummies and Mancunins do not want to get a train to Ashford for anything, and even the Euro Star trains do not stop now at Aford International Station, it is quicker to fly and cheaper from our respective Airports.
I used to commute between West Drayton and Paddington. Signal failures every week. Old oil lamps on the platforms to warn drivers. Then the Ladbroke Grove rail crash.
Thanks Jago, but why not 'terminate' HS2 at St.Pancras and at the same time link it to HS1 so that trains could run directly from the Midlands and beyond to the Continent? Or is that just too difficult for our planners to contemplate?
Go to St Pancras in daytime, count the number of empty platforms there are and it will become obvious why that wouldn't work. Then have a long hard think about security, Immigration and Customs checks and how they could be done if you mix domestic and international services together.
@@chris8405 Like as I say, does Eurostar really need 6 platforms - or would it if AShford and Ebbsfleet had their Eurostar calls back? And Immigration/Customs is only applicable on International Travel - which HS2 isnlr - as far as I last checked!
As HS2 is now only running from London to Birmingham and as you’ve already pointed out that there is a service from London Marylebone to Birmingham Snow Hill, the next logical step is to scrap HS2 completely and use the money elsewhere! The first thing to do would be the electrification of the Marylebone to Snow Hill line plus to put back the passing points that have been removed at Bicester North, High Wycombe, Beaconsfield & Gerrards Cross as these allow the faster trains to go around the slower stopping trains.
Do some more reserch, the HS2 line actualy goes past Birmingham North into Staffordshire and will connect onto the WCML at Handsacre where HS2 trains will join the WCML to run to Manchester. This line will be operated by Avanti West Coast trains and the London Marelabone line on leving Birmingham goes to Worcester not Manchester, this connection is now a part of the Midland Metro tram system, so no the Chiltern line is not a substitute to the new HS2 line and is operted by Chiltern Trains.
HS2 is not and never has been a separate system. Just as with the TGV lines in France or the AVEs in Spain, the trains carry on on the existing network, where capacity exists. Hence the original plan to join the existing network at Golborne near Wigan and east of Leeds.
@@ollie2074 All lines should be full electrify, an the costs would apparently be drastically reduce if the government committed to do it all because they could buy at scale and employ a dedicated force of workers to do it, instead of doing it bit by bit with years between projects.
There used to be 8 tracks, however, from Old Oak Common to Paddington, and new platforms could've gone where the goods station once was (had the Sheldon Square development not got there first). I don't particularly like this plan however, because it functionally has a connection to only one London Underground line (the Hammersmith & City), with the other tube platforms at Paddington all being too far away to be attractive.
As an exiled southerner, I recently drove south from Manchester to a funeral. Another exile from Doncaster travelled by bus. It took longer than train but only required a bus change at Victoria that dropped her at the Surrey doorstep she required. It was also a much cheaper ticket. My journey passed through HS2 works close to Birmigham with a notice proudly proclaiming "Open in 2025". Alas I could not read the smaller print saying exactly WHAT would be open but it had the ring of HS2 blurb. The Shanghai Pudong Maglev terminates on the edge of the city above a subway station because pushing it through or under dense urban congestion did not make economic sense and it is only a trial show piece, not unlike HS2 which is of course older technology and a bit longer. Unlike the Elizabeth line, HS2 is about getting to London. The Elizabeth line makes sense as a means of not being inconvenienced by the obstacle of London if you need to get to the other side and avoiding becoming extra London clutter as a traveller. Of course access to Central London from "green fields" without a suburban ramble makes even better sense. Come to think of it, it is just what HS2 should link up with if you throw away the blinkers. That HS2 was to bring relief to East Coast mainlne traffic is not a material fact. My perspective is based of the properties of what is being built not the political verbal junk that is naively offered to us as justification. The view, with relief, from Manchester shows the whole wood and not just the Old Oak Common trees.
Connecting HS2 with the Elizabeth Line is obviously a good idea, but *forcing* everyone on a HS2 train into the Elizabeth Line is obviously a terrible idea (for both them, and for anyone else that wants to use the line)
@@bighamster2 True but that depends on just how many travellers actually make use HS2 when available and where they want to go ; towards London, towards Reading or the rest of the home counties. The current mainline stations have fed their passengers into the tube, taxis or the streets as long as I have been alive. Whether the way was going to be crowded or clear has never been certain. Not being able to get off a Seoul subway until the station beyond the one of choice in the 1990s because of the crowd did happen but was not common enough to deter use. Of course it might well make the current Euston service look like a closer starting point if travelling the other way from Central London ? For me, there is a very slim chance I will want to use HS2 or even be around when it opens. That I require a very pressing need to get me into Central London now does put my attention on the popular focus on getting into London instead of escaping from it.
To partly answer your question, during the early public discussions of HS2, Andrew MacNaughton said that the rationale for two separate London stations was to distribute the passengers, because a proportion of London would find it more convenient to get on at Old Oak Common and a proportion in Euston. Since Paddington is largely on the same routes, the advantage of terminating there would, I assume, be lower.
Hi Jago. Great video. Slightly controversially I would suggest if this were in Scotland I reckon we would build the rather shorter tunnel and a set of undergound platforms at Paddington... We already did something like that under Glasgow Central quite a wee while back. Yes I know there are already underground lines etc in Paddington - but then again there are also subway lines under Glasgow, and it probably wouldn't be any more complicated and expensive to sort out a proper "Padington undercroft" station, than the whole Euston and rather longer tunnel project thingy that Rishi seems so reluctant to fund.
@@mofomat I did, but scots don't understand just how cluttered and crowded London is. There's literally nowhere to put MORE underground platforms with three lines already going through it underground, as well as the surface lines. It's not like Scotland, where you can just dig a hole and expect to find nothing but dirt. Half the reason for Crossrail's delays was that they kept hitting Roman mass graves. That's not a problem under Glasgow, because they're in the habit of killing any Romans they see.
@@Skorpychan Actually I live in Scotland now - but I grew up and lived and worked in London for many of my nearly 7 decades so no - I'm quite well aware of the situation in London, but with a background as an engineer I also have a fair idea what could be done if there was a will to do it.
My question is why build a terminus on very expensive real estate in central London ? How many people from Birmingham end their journey in Euston ? Most will get on a bus or tube and go somewhere else. So why not terminate at Old Oak Common or Join HS1 and terminate somewhere East of Euston ?
can you tell me why there are ticket barriers covering only part of St Panc station? It just seems strange to me when sometimes you can just get off your train and walk freely to the outside world and yet at other times you have to use your ticket to go through a ticket barrier.
Ah, Beeching closing the GCML route from Marylebone to Manchester pops up. And it's at this point I think we need to remember the privately funded (and backed by SNCF IIRC) Central Railway proposal to reuse much of it up to the MIdlands to remove freight from the other London mainlines to give them more capacity. Which is of course what we're now told HS2 is really all about (and is just really badly named to confuse people into thinking its main aim was high speed). Central Railway was scuppered by politicians multiple times, including worries that the UK Government/taxpayers would have to pick up the bill if the private funding failed. In light of HS2 funding that should raise eyebrows now!
I am a believer that the Great Central had its uses - certainly as far north as LEicester, and might have given towns like Buckingham, Brackley, Southam and Lutterworth a rail service!
There are a lot of people in the locale of Euston Station, who are to put in mildly not too keen on HS2, because their neighbourhood was subjected to compulsory purchase, plus demolition for a station, that appears not to be getting built at the moment.
Why does the Heathrow Express still exist? Given it is now largely duplicated by direct(ish) Elizabeth Line services which only takes 30m (not at all unusual transit time for a European airport, even the Maglev in Shanghai takes longer...), and there's the Picadilly line for those who really want to take their time... how much capacity would it free up if we got rid of it altogther? Given the trains run every 15 minutes presumably they have to have at least one or two platforms available at all times?
Heathrow Express seems desolate half the time, not surprised when to my knowledge a single is 25 pounds! Platforms six and seven are dedicated to it, but seconded, it really does feel like it wouldn’t be a huge loss given it only shaves off 10 minutes or so
It could be said that adding capacity to an already stuffed Paddington is more that it could... bear.
It would just be panda-monium.
Uhh, not to concern anyone, but there seems to be...marmalade.. leaking out from under the restroom door...
"unfortunately named Waterloo" was the best unexpected joke I heard this year
There's another good reason for not taking HS2 for Paddington: it's poorly sited in relation to central London, and also the stations serving the north of England and the Midlands. My working life has been spent in NE England, the East Midlands, and North West England. If you live there Paddington is one of the London stations you have very little reason to use.
There's probably a Jago video coming soon about how Brunel wanted a terminus at Oxford Circus but couldn't afford the property purchase costs!
True but why would you come from the north, into London, and then travel back out to the north? I suppose there is a familiarity argument but then we also had that in the south east… we’re used to using Victoria, Charing Cross and Cannon Street yet our high speed lines took us up to St Pancras. It actually might make it more convenient… in the same way if we ever want to travel up to the north we take HS1 up to St Pancras and then go to either Kings Cross or Euston by just a short walk… terminating at Paddington could make it easier to travel out west… just take HS2 south into Paddington, walk to another platform and board the train heading west. I understand they just *can’t* because of capacity but I’m not really getting the argument about keeping all the services in the same place, as I said for Kentish people our trains mostly come up through the south of London on the commuter networks but in 2007 we all of a sudden got a new line that speeds up through tunnels under East London and curves from the north into a central London terminus in the “north” of London… but it is actually really cool because depending on where we are going it gives us options of which line we take.
That's not a reason at all. If you live in the East Midlands or northern England, HS2 is no use whatsoever to you. It's only useful to people who want to get between London and Birmingham. If you live in the East Midlands or the north, HS2 isn't the quickest way to London, and it isn't the quickest way to Birmingham, so its London terminus could be on the Moon, for all the difference it would make to you.
@@tobeytransport2802Travelling from Chatham to Holyhead (and on to Dublin and thence Tullamore), I'd take the train to St Pancras and walk to Euston, with the added benefit that on a SailRail ticket, the high speed service didn't cost any extra.
@@qwertyTRiG makes sense. Took the train from my local station (Chatham main line too) to St Pancras and then walked to Euston too, stopped for some dinner on the Euston road, then boarded the Caledonian sleeper to Inverness. I’ve also used the convenience of St Pancras to go to York via Kings Cross and Cornwall and Bath via Paddington.
Well, I'll be controversial too, I Like The Elizabeth Line.
I sing its praises as well.....
ghastly.
It’s my favourite tube line 👍
So do I. When it works that is 🙄
@@Zveeboit may have interchanges stops with tube stations in the core but tfl say it is not a tube line. This due to the trains being bigger legnth and height wise, but the biggest reason is a the larger amount of it runs on national rail lines owned be great western and great eatern railways.
If anyone has seen episodes of the TV show _Paddington!_ which chronicles day-to-day operations there, it's no surprise that any little thing can have a huge knock-on effect. A faulty signal box, kids playing on the lines or a lorry smashing an overpass bridge can frustrate thousands of passengers. So yeah, Paddington does not need any more traffic.
Our rail network is so overcrowded and in need of expansion that a single small incident, like something or someone falling on the line practically anywhere along any of the main lines mean every single train running over it is then delayed. We were coming back from London to Manchester a couple of years ago and had to wait an hour for our train to get a slot to actually depart. Making matters worse they didn't have a driver because the original driver was scheduled to be on another service after terminating at Piccadilly so he had to jump on another train to make it in time and left us stranded (that's a management failure, not a driver failure).
To top it all off, we were stuck in Euston, where your soul drains from your very being.
That's without the additional Hazzard of roaming bears?!
Quite plus the wires fall down more often than a whores knickers!
How much can Paddington Bear?...........................I'll see myself out. Greetings from Australia.
I find Jago’s voice, in particular, his speech rhythm, intonations and stresses, as soothingly hypnotic and reassuring as the shipping forecast, only his content is far more interesting than the shipping forecast. I just love these videos. I didn’t even know I was a fan of trains and tube line histories until I listened to this channel. Please keep up with the great work! Love it.
Hello there Jago,
Another reason why High Speed Two should terminate at London Euston is due to its close proximity with London St Pancras and London Kings Cross. Add to that connections with the Northern line and Victoria line of the London Underground at Euston, it is very well connected with other railway networks. You could argue that you could walk to Euston Square for the Circle line and walk to Kings Cross/St Pancras for the Piccadilly line.
Best wishes and take care. Kind regards, Peter Skuce. St Albans. Hertfordshire
Exactly it'll be so convenient to be across the road from the Eurostar terminal.
Quite ... and there have been suggestions that the proposed total rebuild of Euston could involve a tunnel with travelators covering the short(ish) distance to Kings Cross/St Pancras.
If crossrail 2 gets built it'll connect Euston and Euston Square
@@kwlkid85You mean Euston and St Pancras? The rebuild of Euston is already going to join Euston and Euston Square underground. When it starts that is.
@@hairyairey The Euston rebuild is pretty up in the air atm I'm not sure if it still will.
I saw the title and thought you meant it as a more humorous "What if HS2 just ran from Euston to Paddington?" At the rate things are going, it wouldn't surprise me all that much...
Until recently there was an ideal site at Paddington for HS2: the old goods depot on the northern side of the station. But... they sold it off and built on it. Of course.
Alas
The closing shot as the train left Paddington brought back memories, being able to drop people *on* the platform using the ramp from Bishops Bridge Road and then drive straight through into Praed Street. I used to work for the RNIB and would regularly drop off clients and their guide dogs straight on the platform, unheard of these days!
It's a very long game but a benefit of terminating at Euston is that in future, hopefully, Crossrail 2 will be passing through Euston giving you an interchange, while maintaining an interchange with the Elizabeth line at Old Oak Common
Why is Euston 'beneficial' but Paddington not? Paddington is already on the Crossrail, Euston is not.
Through Euston? To where?
Good points for Paddington ; i hope the planners "bear" that in mind!
A bit late for that now
yes....i know...the network will have "jammed" up in that immediate track network.@@peterwilliamallen1063
😂👍🏼
yes....closing the stable door...after the horse has bolted!@@peterwilliamallen1063
I like a good pun when I'm Peru sing the comments.
It would make even more sense for HS2 to make an end on junction with HS1 and for HS2 to go all the way to Edinburgh and to Glasgow.
Yep but it would be 2050 before it reached Glasgow
@@peterwilliamallen1063 It doesn't have to, that was a political decision and as usual when politicians get involved it's a foul up.
Similar problem at Birmingham New Street - only 4 tracks south of the station so it's fairly regular to be sat there waiting for a route through to an empty platform.
Hence the plan to divert some of the New Street services into Moor Street via Camp Hill line and proposed Bordesley chord. Can anyone provide an update on the latter?
Yes, but does it add any delay to the advertised time?
@@jackmartinleith As a Brummie, these are plans for when Curzon Street opens but nothing much has come to light yet exept that they are going ahead with the upgrade of the line through Kings Heath to passenger carrying status and Castle Bromwich Station in Birmingham and two in Coventry are on the books to reopen
Millions perhaps billions of pounds worth of work has already been spent on the Old Oak common to Euston connection. Bridges have been widned seveal graveyards have been moved, existing train lines have had to shove over to make room for 2 HS2s extra lines. All that is left well- quite a lot is left to do is for those TBMs to bore 4 miles of tunnel to Euston . But millions of more Pounds would have to be spent again to take HS2 to another station.
Also worth noting that Paddington was nearly not built as the original plan was to run into Euston.
Brunel's original plan?
Brunel and the Great Western Railway never had plans to run into London Euston, London Euston was operated by the London and Birmingham Railway through Camden
Such a shame the GCR was closed. I actually remember the final service passing the top of our road in Leicestershire. Though at least part of it but not enough has been converted into a cycle track for a quick route into the city centre.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 such a shame as it would have saved me lots of time on my regular commute to London.
If the GCR went where HS2 was planned to go it would have been a success.
Certainly with hindsight the closure of the Great Central was a tragedy but I’m rather bored by repeatedly hearing the mantra “closed by Dr Beeching”. Of course it was his recommendation but he had returned to ICI (1965) before the GCR was progressively closed between 1966-69. It’s clearly uncomfortable for some people to acknowledge which colour the Government was at the time of the actual closure.
@@hairyairey I dought if the GCR railway would go to Birmingham
@@neiloflongbeck5705 So it’s okay to continue to blame Dr Beeching and not the politicians (of either party) who ultimately signed off the closures ?
The irony is that Paddington will indeed take the extra traffic until the Euston link is built - but on the Elizabeth Line that wasn't designed for that load.
Well except that almost nobody will actually want to go to Paddington. Other than St Mary's Hospital which is a local rather than national trip generator, there isn't really much there other than the station. Some will obviously get off there to change onto the Bakerloo line, or the Hammersmith/Circle/District lines if they are heading west from the station. Most people who take the Elizabeth Line, I suspect, will get off at a station other than Paddington.
Half the crossrail trains end at Paddington. Extend them to Old Oak Common and there’s plenty of capacity - an extra 12tph or 18,000 people an hour.
@@katrinabryce Or they will change on to London Overground trains directly to the suburbs.
@@IndigoJo Yes indeed.
If they have to get the Lizzie Line from OOC, they donlt have to get off at Pad - they could (ostensibly) stay on anywhere till Abbey Wood or Shenfield@@katrinabryce
nice video Jago. I really miss the Bree Louise pub though, it was my 'go to 'real ale destination in the area and for all the advantages of rebuilding Euston, it seems (to a simpleton town planner) that every effort should've been during the planning of CTRL to have a future plan to through run to the North
I believe on of the early plans was for Hs2 to connect directly with Hs1 thus making it an international through line. If it gets as far as Euston some far future government may see that as an option again. Excellent video as always Jago.
That would make sense. If HS2 ever gets as far as Euston, passengers bound for Eurostar will have the choice of tube, taxi, bus or foot to make the final connection!
That was the first thing the current donkeys in government cancelled with HS2.
Realistically that isn’t likely to make sense. The Eurostar is under-used for much of the year (not that you’d know it from how crowded the waiting rooms get). Too few people would want to make the journey to Birmingham or Manchester for it to make sense to run the trains all the way.
There would also, unless the UK joined Schengen, be a need for passport controls at each station on the route, which require both space (greater construction costs) and time (more friction for travellers). You’re not actually allowed to disembark at Rotterdam or Lille (and possibly not Brussels) on “westbound” EuroStars for this reason.
The final consideration that comes to mind is that if you ran trains from Manchester to Amsterdam it would cause issues for the train crew, and also make it more likely that there would be delays on some part of the route.
@@tomwantshelp I disagree, Eurostar is pretty well frequented all year, with occupation of most trains over 80%, that's better than most domestic services. Quite a few Eurostar passengers already come from the Midlands and even further, making the trek between Euston and St Pancras, so I'm convinced there's a market for it.
Yes, it would require the same border facilities as in the other Eurostar Channel stations, as I don't see the UK joining Schengen anytime soon, but there is precedent for that, with Amsterdam and Rotterdam as recent additions.
There's likely not going to be a through service from Birmingham to Amsterdam, but overlapping services which increase frequency on the main core of Eurostar's network, with Amsterdam - London and Brussels - Birmingham, for instance. It's not going to be an hourly service, of course, neither is Amsterdam, btw. Maybe shorter trains (coupled with another shorter train) will have to be put into service (current Eurostars are 400 m long, double of regular TGV sets, and the requirement to be this long has been dropped quietly since), but I'm convinced there's a market for such a service.
Unfortunately the government has done a very thorough inquiry into this and found that it is practically impossible. You can find the extensive documentation online.
I'm amazed that any thing ever gets done in the UK anymore.
All the procrastination..
The French would just do it while in the UK it very rarely gets built.
It was comical for a while that the Eurostar had to run into Waterloo on a third rail electric system at speeds of around 90mph .
It's nice to think that St Pancras which was even boring when I was a kid in the late 50s is now some really lovely station with exotic destinations like Paris, Lille or even Luton.
At Paddington there were acres of derelict land for decades suitable to extend the existing station. Then the soulless Sheldon Square and Paddington Basin were built about 20 years ago.
The Shinkansen mostly uses elevated tracks over the previous commuter lines when it comes to reaching the central stations in Kyoto and Tokyo. Can the same be done for reaching Paddington? It might have been cheaper than tunnels to Euston.
You try getting permission to do that in a city full of NIMBYS who care deeply about their property prices.
Unfortunately, the answer is 'not easily or cheaply'. There are a lot of bridges and infrastructure over the rail lines into Paddington, and a significant amount under them as well. Euston was also the best option as it would mean that the existing WCML trains could be effectively replaced by HS2 services avoiding the problem of causing additional crowd control problems at other London terminus stations.
Look at the shot of the approach to Paddington again. See all those bridges, signals, cables, office buildings, and the rat's nest of tracks? You'd have to deal with all of that.
The Westway is in the way !
I take it you're not familiar with the route into Paddington. The answer to your question is 'no'.
Blunder through is an endemic problem within the transport bureaucracy and blinkered politicians relying on their advice. This holds for Australia as well as the UK.
Oh, and thank you Jago for your thoughtful video.
I’m glad you mentioned Westminster, and loved your comments about its Sci-Fi look . Which immediately wowed me when it was first built.
HS2 is now a misnomer and should be called HS 1.5 until it goes beyond Birmingham.
It does go beyoned Birmingham, HS2 extends from Birmingham to Handsacre in Staffordshire where it connects onto the WCML
Ok. So HS1.6 then
@@peterwilliamallen1063 The connection to the WCML is irrelevant. It is the cities that are connected to High Speed rail services that are important.
It’s a job half done, and is HS1.5 until Leeds and Manchester are connected.
@@Deepthought-42 The connection to Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland will be there via this Junction, Leeds will never be connected as it is on the East Coast and HS2 is a West Coast Railway Line being Operated only by Avanty West Coast Trains and they do not operate to Leeds, this being operated by X Country Trains.
@@peterwilliamallen1063 Connection yes.
High speed service as originally planned, no !
I believe terminating HS2 at Marylebone would be a much better idea than Paddington or Euston. The majority of the services are Chiltern to the old GWR network around Birmingham Snow Hill. They could possibly run new lines for HS2 into Marylebone and re-route the B’ham services back into Paddington just like before Snow Hill closed in 1972. They could also possibly relieve congestion on the GWR mainline north of London by opening a link running through the North Warwickshire line. Mind you, it’s just an opinion and would still require a lot of work around London.
Marylebone has 6 platforms none of which are long enough for 400m HS2 trains, so you'd have to rebuild it, just as it being done at Euston. Also the tube connections are very poor, as there's only one line, the Bakerloo or a long walk to Baker Street. Not the right choice for anyone travelling beyond the terminus.
I like Marylebone but it does have a bit of in the middle of nowhere vibe to it despite being central.
The caption of this video is the question that's been ringing around my head for some time! 🤔🤷🏾♂️Keep up the good work, Jago👌🏾😉👍🏾
Presumably Euston is the terminal for HS2 because the lines from the channel tunnel at St Pancras can be connected easily to our national high speed network. (There appears to be very little 'joined up' thinking on this matter.)
There is very little need to connect HS1 with HS2. The main passenger flows on HS2 will be to London, not the continent. The requirement to clear immigration also renders the connection pointless, as a through train means you’d need to provide immigration and customs facilities at every station up the line, such as Birmingham and Manchester. Why would you spend millions providing all that for a tiny market? Far simpler for passengers to take a train to Euston and self-connect to St Pancras where they can clear immigration there.
The original plans for HS2 included a link to HS1 (and Heathrow Airport), but these were dropped early on; however, my understanding is that the planned tunnels between OOC and Euston include a passive provision for a connection to HS1 to be constructed at a later date
@@grumpyoldman47 Nobody knows if the tunnels are even going to make it to Euston, never mind include a passive connection to HS1. And even if and when they do build the tunnels to Euston they include a passive connection, that doesn’t mean they will actually use it. The chances of a connection being made between HS1 and HS2 is pretty much zero. There is simply no need for it because there is only a tiny number of people who would use it.
@@mofomatAs it stands I don't think many people in Birmingham and Manchester are going to faff around changing trains in London to get to the continent, they're going to go to their respective airports and fly like they've done for the past 50 years or so. If passport control could be streamlined enough for a simple onboard check, or even no passport check at all (I know, that'll never happen) then a through service to the continent might actually work. It is a tiny market now, but with the right level of convenience it could be a lot bigger.
@@Croz89 I agree. Most people will fly. It’s the reason why the Regional Eurostar services were dropped before they even began in the 1990s. Once aviation was deregulated in 1997, high-speed trains from north of London to the continent were doomed. And immigration and customs will never not be exactly as it is now, and this is why it’s pointless building the infrastructure for it.
Interesting vid, cheers! My forefathers were all Londoners since at least 1863. I now live in Vienna, Austria (with family). What I dont get is that the UK gov has quitt the high speed rail project in excess Birrminham (?). Madness.
The craziest thing is that it was only cancelled because the current government is very unpopular (and thought cancelling it would be popular). And yet the opinion polls haven't moved at all.
So they've potentially destroyed decades of infrastructure planning for literally nothing.
Anyway... there's an election this year so they'll probably be gone soon. Hopefully Britain makes new high speed rail plans soon, but it is very difficult to predict, at this time
Thanks as always for the interesting perspective. On the subject of capacity constraints -- maybe you could do a video on how rail transport in London has recovered or changed post-COVID. Ridership is still way down here in the US, so I was surprised (and heartened) to hear you talk about London traffic as though it's back to normal and continues to grow.
As somebody who works on the railway, I can tell you it’s not back to ‘normal’ but numbers are certainly almost the same as they used to be, just spread differently. Weekend leisure travel has increased significantly and commuter traffic with people working from home typically on Mondays and Fridays, means that only tues-thurs are the real busy commuter days.
This is a London centric outlook I must point out, I’m not sure how it’s changed on other lines around the country but I would hazard a guess that they’re experiencing a similar thing
Thinking of HS2, it could provide an excuse to take an existing train up to Brum and grab a bunch of footage of Curzon Street, Moor Street, New Street, Snow Hill and the Duddeston Viaduct (its history is classic Railway Mania: disputes between train companies result in both its construction and abandonment before completion) to do some videos on the history of the railways up there, if you ever feel like a mini-series set in the big scary world outside London.
Jago in Birmingham I wouldn’t believe it need that
I really, really, really wish HS2 could be connected to HS1. The Eurostar network is far too tiny, we need longer distance international trains from them or at least a competitor starting trains through the Channel Tunnel
This. High speed rail is only worth the money over long distances. Connecting the midlands and the north to Europe without having to get a tube across London would be game changing.
Cheaper & quicker to fly most of the time. That's what killed Regional Eurostar
Unrelated, but seeing Paddington reminded me of a story my late Dad told me. He used to be a Steam Train driver on southern lines, and later on very early Diesels. One day he had an empty train (Diesel) and decided to "Open the taps" on the main line into Paddington. I believe he was over 3 figures which for the time was very good going. Only problem was, the damn thing would not slow down. Apparently he had the brakes on Miles before coming into Paddington, and as he came into the Platforms he opened the door and bailed out !, falling and rolling onto the platform. As the train ran into the buffers at about 5mph. He said the damage was substantial. Somehow he didnt loose his job !. This would have been in the early 70's.
What we need is an innovator for modern railways. A cross between Musk and Yerkes. A Murkys. Or a Yursk.
definitely not musk, that man is an anti-rail fraud
Musk hates railways, he basically does everything he can to sabotage public transport projects.
that sounds like a great idea! ... to watch a documentary about 50+ years later from the comfort of somewhere very far away that never has to deal with the consequences.
My favoured route of HSx would be if HS1 dove under St Pancras (with a station there) and then turned 90 degrees right and ran between the N Circle and Central lines all the way to Paddington (with another deep station) and then followed the line to Old Oak Common. And then the original Manchester leg extended to Glasgow and the original Leeds leg extended to Edinburgh (with a HS route linking them). 😃
Crazy fantasy I know, but but in the last 20 years China has built enough high speed rail to encircle the planet twice, so... 🤔
And Spain and Italy have been even more inspirational, all things considered.
Except they have room (Spain) or they forcefully make room (China) the latter not always so desirable.
As you always already have to change HSL trains anyway because of Border Security, it doesn.t matter that much if the other HSL line is in a building next door, though with much luggage changing at the same stations if of course more desirable but will be a challenge to implement.
A high speed train and a 90 degree turn to the right ? Sounds like the making of a disaster video .
@@shereesmazik5030 You know you can have it run at much slower speeds than top speed? A car can go about 180 km/h before hitting rev limits, but you usually go a lot slower than that.
A big issue at St Pancras for any tunnels is the British Library which has a 7 floor basement ie down to level -7. The Victoria Line passes through this structure at level -5. So any lines have to go north or south of that barrier.
The only way for the government to stop thinking Birmingham is the north is to force them all to move to somewhere like York, Leeds, Carlisle or Preston, let alone Glasgow or Edinburgh. Then they will see how poorly connected the north is. Bonus points for moving half to either side of the Pennines and making them get the train between them every day!
Euston all made a of sense in the original plans, where HS2 was meant to tie into HS1 (or least be easily able to in the future) and allow through running of Eurostar services to Birmingham and the north. IMHO this is one aspect of the project that should never have been dropped
It's an operational headache due to the UK not being in the Schengen Area. From the HS2 side, international services could not be used for domestic journeys, infrastructure would have to be overbuilt to accommodate all the extra space for passport checks and contained waiting areas, needing dedicated platforms. I totally see how the business case wouldn't be strongest and the extra costs in building and operating would be a deterrent. This project isn't even going ahead to the extent it needs to solve internal mobility needs, much less international travel.
Most cross border (non Schengen) trains manage to do passport control on the moving train between stations. I'm not sure why Eurostar has turned it into such a palaver.
The border/security issue is a red herring. The real issue is the very low demand between the Midlands/North and Europe/Kent compared to the high demand for trains from those 4 places to London. Almost everyone would get off through trains to Europe in the London area, even without factoring in the disperse destinations at either end meaning most of the small through demand would end up changing trains in London anyway. The best (and far cheaper) approach is making the change easier with a travelator between termini, rather than seeking to eliminate the change for a fraction of a fraction of passengers (especially as it would also make other changes easier - most importantly between Euston and Thameslink).
Plus the mismatch between lines. HS2 was looking at 12-18 Intercity trains per hour. HS1 is talking 3tph Intercity and 8tph regional as somewhat of a maximum. Linking them isn't a good idea operationally.
Euston was chosen because it
- has space for a large new terminus
- is on N-S tube lines (and Thameslink not far away) to complement the E-W line providing onward travel at OOC
- is the part of London where existing trains from those places arrive
- a couple of other things
- the proximity to HS1.
And in that order of importance. Proximity to St Pancras was certainly seen a good thing when selecting Euston, but Thameslink and the Midland Mainline were far more the reasons why than HS1.
Waterloo is superbly named, not at all unfortunate. The Eurostar running into there for many years was utterly delicious.
I'm sure many people grow up never hearing of the Battle of Waterloo wondering why there is a big station that appears to be named after a toilet. I know I did.
I’ve used Eurostar many times both from Waterloo and from St Pancras. Waterloo was far better; all I needed to do was change platforms. The extra journey from Waterloo to St Pancras is slow and difficult especially with luggage because of the many changes of levels required when changing tube trains. It takes a long time too. Don’t forget not everyone lives in North London or north of London. For the large numbers living South & West of London Waterloo was an excellent terminus for Eurostar and still is the gateway into London.
As an stupid continental person, I’ve had this question for a longer time. The whole concept of changing stations to continue a travel seems so 19 th century to me. Greetings to Paris. But well as someone from Berlin it’s easy talking. Even that no one considered that travelling from the continent wouldn’t end in London , but could be continued to the northern parts of your country , maybe inside the same train? , 😮, is worth a discussion. Or maybe not. Greetings from Berlin.
This reminds me of when Philadelphia was looking to combine their two separate termini, they considered building an extension off Reading Terminal.....except Reading Terminal was kind of land locks and the tracks faced south instead of west. Extending it would've ruined the historic facade on Market St. So naturally it was scraped in favor of underground east-west station who entrances would be linked into Reading Terminal facade while the former terminal shed was converted to Convention Center space.
The capacity argument holds water for sure and development is simply needed.
But I always assumed HS2 was part of the European Project for Regions:
1. Connect Eurostar = France -> UK (London)
2. Connect HS2 = UK (London) -> Midlands and North of England (aka European Regions)
Euston - St Pancras (moved from Waterloo).
Itself perhaps a window into the future with less cars/roads/CO2 and private vehicle ownership and more pubic for longer distances?
Is the issue with HS2 trains going to Paddington more a lack of capacity (ie platforms) at the station, rather than the tracks running from Old Oak Common? After all, there are (presumably) fast lines carrying the GWR expresses along the pretty short distance between OOC and Paddington fairly swiftly, but I can imagine that there's no space for them at Paddington station.....unless you start building extra platforms underground at enormous expense!
Precisely. You'd need to build the same platforms planned for Euston and a connecting tunnel and end up at a location which is nothing like as good for onward connections. One major advantage of Euston is the whole University of London campus is within walking distance of the station.
@@ADAMEDWARDS17 Though the advent of the Liz line means that Paddington is much better connected than it used to be.
Why don't they just use Stratford International for HS2? This would have several advantages. 1. Stratford is a modern station surrounded by a modern area and has great connections to National Rail, Underground, Overground, DLR and Crossrail, 2. The station is already there and they would only need to do smaller modification work and extend HS2 to connect with the existing HS1 before the tunnel mouth at St. Pancras (Some HS2 trains could even go to St. Pancras International if capacity is there), 3. Connecting HS1 with HS2 could mean DIRECT Eurostar services from Manchester or Birmingham to Paris or Brussels, 4. Stratford International was already built for HS2 (Specifically for Eurostar trains going further north bypassing St. Pancras) and is currently a pretty useless station and doesn't even have international services right now.
True but, it's quite a lot further than Euston, though they may be able to hook onto current HS1 tracks at St. Pancras? Also, that could lead to international trains from Birmingham and Manchester...
And how do you get HS2 to Stratford, considering getting it the short distance to Euston is considered prohibitively expensive? And for what reason? The vast majority of people using HS2 will have London as their final destination, but you’re suggesting dump them in East London for the sake of a tiny number of people who may want to go to the continent? Eurostar services pass through Stratford International now but they don’t stop because it’s too close to St Pancras. Eurostar have never wanted to stop at Stratford. The infrastructure was already put in place for Regional Eurostars to bypass London at Stratford International with stock ordered and partially delivered, but services never started because they realised there was simply no market for European services from anywhere other than London. It’s a mental idea.
@@mofomat there are plans to combine Euston with St Pancras that way you can do a crossover with HS1 at St Pancras and run trains all the way up to Stratford international where HS2 would terminate
@@Adam-Farr As you said London St pancras International is to far from Euston, does not have the capacity to operate HS2 services along with East Midlands Trains and South Western Javelin Kent Coast services plus their is no requirement for HS2 to connect to HS1 as there is no call for international train services from Birmingham or Manchester to the continent as it is quicker and cheaper to fly from these two Cities
@@LOLE_Editz This is not true. There are no plans to combine Euston and St Pancras. There is talk of a fast moving walkway between the two stations to help passengers connect between the two stations, but that’s it. HS1 and HS2 are not going to be connected!
I like the Elizabeth Line too and I would love to take a trip on it.
Oddly enough... The Paddington terminus did cross my mind! A lot of building work, yes, but cheaper than tunneling to Euston?
Unless Euston is built to the original 11 HS2 platforms we're just saving up problems for the future.
everything is short term.
@@CarolineFord1 Yes, but build it for future expansion now.
I'm sorry for sounding like an idiot but if HS2 only goes to Birmingham and the plan is for all the land bought for other phases is to be sold, why would Euston need more than one HS2 platform?
@@craigmarriott6759 Because all the long distance services are using HS2 that's why. Not just to Birmingham. This is why Old Oak Common will have six HS2 platforms. North of Birmingham HS2 is connecting to the slower tracks. If you think you can run any decent train service off one platform (allowing twenty minutes to load and unload at the terminus) you are very much mistaken.
I would disagree with building 11 platforms now, because they would be surplus to requirements if the northern leg never goes ahead (I.e. if the land is sold before the next election, and before any government has a chance to u-turn on sunaks cancellation), although you could safeguard some space for additional platforms though, so that way capacity problems could be sold in the future.
Why not cantilever a second layer of tracks above the existing layer of tracks? There appears to be plenty of room, even under the canopy at least in the centre. That would cause a minimum amount of disturbance to existing service.
As for the Euston versus Paddington question, why not both?
And what about the two road bridges that would block the route?
I think they're having to do plenty of that anyhow @@chris8405
Sounds like another 10 years and 30 billion.
I’m sorry, but the Elizabeth Line is an absolute masterpiece
Paddington would never work because you’ve got very important buildings either side like st Mary’s hospital, and the the people in the area are very rich and buying their property would be costly and those rich people would probably lobby against it and win, Euston on the other hand had a massive train shed that hadn’t been used for 20+ years in the space where HS2 is supposed to come out the tunnel and there are no key buildings that stood in the way of extending the station. You could also argue that originally HS2 was supposed to be connected to HS1 and being a stones throw from St Pancras somewhat fulfils that original idea. Either way Euston had the space before it even had the green light, Paddington would be EXTREMELY expensive to change and would never ever be viable
A better question than "Why not terminate HS2 at Paddington?" is "Why not have HS2 follow Crossraiil from Old Oak Common, have an underground station at Paddington, a second underground station mid-way between Euston and King's Cross St Pancras (with travelator links leading west and east to connect to the three stations, and then have the line pop up at Stratford International, to merge HS2 with HS1?""
We have known for decades that Crossrail was needed to deal with people travelling across Zone 1 of London and there are obviously going to be people from Wales who want to either get HS2 to Scotland or HS1 to France. So "Crossrailing HS2 through London's InterCity stations and onto HS1" makes much more sense than what the UK government did.
The Scottish Parliament have said, in the past, that they want Eurostar trains to go to Edinburgh and Glasgow and a through tunnel in London would make that into something that could eventually be facilitated. Likewise, with a GWR high speed rail replacement, Cardiiff and maybe South West England could also gain Eurostar services, as well as having high speed InterCity trains to London, the Midlands, the North and Scotland.
Some goos points. Indeed, the basis behinbd Stratfiord "INternational"! But then folk wanting to go fron Wales to Scotland are more likely to go Via Birmingham or Crewe rather than London!
Great video Jago, good points made. Please do more about HS2. I'm still seething about the way the project has been paired down because of us as a country pandering to NIMBYs and environmentalists more interested in looking after lesser spotted newts than human endeavour. To add to the mix of comments of where HS2 should run into, and to no doubt promote the ire of those who disagree, I can't for the life of me see why provision was not made to somehow run some services onto HS1 tracks into St Pancras? Integrated rail system? Why, there's an idea!! But I guess the farce over regional and night Eurostars has taught us a lesson.
I;m not so sure about that - seems monumental cost and damage to both landscape and property owners merely to reduplicate routes from London to Birmingham - not to mention when a railway is finally built around places like Brackley, it isn't intended to serve them! Agreed re St Panceas though
Strange thing is this country is crying out for investments that will make us better off, while our government fritters away money by constantly changing its mind and wasting huge amounts.
Look at all the substitute spending plans for HS2 money (75% of which won’t happen) and taken all together they have nowhere near the economic benefits of linking London and Manchester with a reliable transport connections, let alone the huge growth in freight traffic that the existing line could ( and now can’t) have taken.
Thank you @Jago Hazzard, always enjoy your informative videos!
The big question is, will it get to Euston? One video I saw with someone talking to HS2 staff (Geoff?) said the plans they were working to had them dropping two tunnel boring machines into the east end of the OOC station and that would complete their contract.
If it gets there and Euston does get its overhaul, i'd be behind rebuilding the Euston arch ...but if costs are a thing, that wont happen. But hey....
Rebuilding the arch at Euston as been on the cards for ages and using some of the orgional pillar stones, don't know if it will ever happen but they found some of the orgional pillar bits in the canal by Stratford and I believe they salvaged them around 2011 in prep for the 2012 Olympics when they cleaned up the river/canal in that area.
I like the Elizabeth line too. I even bought the socks ;)
Great video.
Could HS2 be built under Euston Station and the British Library to connect directly to St Pancras/Kings Cross (thus linking HS1 and HS2)?
Are there underground services (such as the Tube) in the way?
Massive project but would provide a solution to one of the major failings of the current disconnected HS network. Could the underground station have additional capacity to include future HS lines to London from West and East England?
Would be great also to have some connection of Kings X and Euston underground, a bit like how you can walk from Moorgate to Liverpool Street now as a result of the Elizabeth Line.
7 basement levels under the British Library get in the way. Crossrail 2, which runs north of that basement would have a Euston St Pancras station.
If you just tunnelled under the British Library, you'd end up crossing HS1 at right-angles, not connecting with it.
That was the original plan, to prove a through route straight on to HS1 an to Europe.
@@beeble2003 Similar to Tamworth, Retford and Smethwick Galton Bridge then?
"We have a bit of a track record of this kind of thing" - love it :)
I met a friend at Paddington in early December around evening rush hour time and I was shocked and a bit saddened. There really wasn’t a lot going on, empty platforms, but for a few long distance trains leaving every twenty minutes or so. All the people were on the Elizabeth line stopping at every single station.
The people of Slough must be rightly livid that now they must get on stopping trains to and from Paddington?
From upstairs at peak times, there should be 4 Heathrow Express trains, 8 fast trains to Reading and beyond, 2 slow trains to Didcot, and about 2 fast trains that have their first stop somewhere beyond Reading for a total of about 16 trains per hour.
only a handful of trains per day skip Reading. @@katrinabryce
From Old Oak Common, HS2 should go to Euston underground, then Waterloo underground, then a new underground station at that mess of lines south of Southwick with connections to those lines, then join HS1 south of Ebbsfleet, to allow stops at Ashford Kent, then across the channel to Europe and to a maintenance depot south of Ashford.
😅😅😅 nice one. LOL.
Also with the current spate of failure of the overhead line equipment on the lines out of Paddington, without a good fix, how often would HS2 trains have to be terminated at Old Oak Common anyway???
Even if/when HS1 goes to Euston, it may be possible to divert some trains to Paddington at Old Oak Common, so you can get to Birmingham quickly from either terminus.
You'd have to build a connecting line up from the tunnels at OOC to the lines into Paddington and then find the line capactiy to do that. HS2 is not at the same level as the main line at OOC.
It will not be possible.
HS1 or HS2?!
At 4:22, I saw a train with the name "Dr. Paul Stephenson". Stephenson is a well-known name in rail terms, but I never heard of Paul. He is known for his civil rights activism, and his activism was transport-related. I found the wiki page ( en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Stephenson_(civil_rights_campaigner) ) interesting and I think you a video on him would not be without merits!
Thanks as always for making this video, and enjoy 2024!
Could you do a video on travelling post offices? The Royal Mail office at Southend still has a platform for one adjacent to the sidings at Southend Victoria.
Apart from HS1, Euston has a ted closer proximity to the City (a short taxi, tube or bus ride). From Paddington it’s either the Elizabeth line (that is also available at OOC) or H&S/Circle just before the Edgware Road & Baker Street junctions 😉
When they stopped running Eurostar to Waterloo what happened to the horses that pulled the trains through the London suburbs?
Somewhat ironically when Eurostar ran to Waterloo the trains then ran empty to their depot in North Pole in west London the opposite side of the GWR track to the new HS2 station. North Pole is now occupied by Hitachi for the GWR 800 series trains.
Does the Euro Tunnel connect with London. In my opinion the HS2 project is no different to when the network was original laid down. The amount of money is just far bigger?
HS1 is the connection from the Channel Tunnel to St. Pancras station London.
Great job! Another interesting video. Bravo! Also hi jago
The problem with simple questions is when people like simple answers which is not always the case. The first question to be answered is, which companies are going to operate on HS2? I believe in competition on lines like HS2. Instead of setting up new companies, use the existing ones.
1)- Avanti West Coast already operates out of Euston to the North West and Scotland. Let it continue to do so stopping at Birmingham International on its way north but not entering Birmingham city centre. 2) Run two trains per hour from Marylebone, by Chiltern Trains, to run up HS2 and into Birmingham city centre but then continue via Smethwick(one per hour) and the other through Tame Bridge Parkway(one per hour) both terminating at Wolverhampton. 3) The third company would be GWR running two trains per hour to Birmingham city centre leaving from Paddington. Two freed up platforms can be achieved at Paddington by not terminating the Heathrow Express there but continuing it along the Elizabeth line to Liverpool St. from where it would continue to Stansted Airport.The frequency would be two trains per hour.
In such a way you can have two established train companies running into Birmingham with a frequency of 4 trains per hour to Birmingham city centre (to whichever station you choose to run them). This is the desired frequency but you have two different London termini to choose from. It also spreads the load between the stations, and subsequently the Underground. The Avanti trains are just icing on the cake.
Why not split trains between Paddington and Euston - using existing tracks for both? Half trains go into one, half into the other?
maybe that is some future expanded plan. Have four OOC tunnels (two 2-way spurs) from OOC to London...one tunnel pair to Euston and new tunnel pair spur to (a lower level grade/subway) Paddinton. Some trains would run to Euston and others to Paddington. Someone in blog mentioned the future Crossrail2 subway station located between St. Pancras and Euston could provide a 3-way underground walk/moving-walkway path to Euston Square subway too.
Jago, would you be able to make a video about St. Pancras capacity ( passengers + trains)? I heard recently that new train operator want to do London-Paris route plus SBB thinking about Zurich/Geneva to London and DB about Frnkfurt - Cologne - London. Will all of them find space on St. Pancras and HS1 with tunnel crossing?🤷
So, why not run the trains to Marylebone if it already picks up some of the overspill from Paddington?
Marylebone’s 6 platforms are fairly well used by the Chiltern Mainline (and Oxford spur) and Aylesbury line and there’s very little room for expansion there either. It would finally bring electrification there though, which is something that probably won’t materialise for a good while yet!
Even more carefully watching tbis space as a trip to London and the North are in the plans for the family, potentially as soon as this summer and I do plan on making as much of it by rail as possible.
Too bad there isn't a Pond Tunnel yet....
Shame all that excess land next to Paddington, that was used for freight and parcels up until the 1960's, was sold off. Choking off any future expansion.
a common mistake when it comes to railways.
Euston is in need of rebuilding and has been since it was last rebuilt.
I seem to recall that French railways built an underground terminus under one of the major Parisian terminus stations and of course there is Berlin Central (Hauptbahnhof)? Lack of vision in U.K. and a complete inability to manage engineering projects. Although I won’t mention Stuttgart or Berlin airport?
Many of the interchange problems mentioned below, not to mention overcrowding, could be fixed by the proposed New Airport & City line.
In simple terms. This would consist of Dual Fuel, Elizabeth line loading gauge type trains running over EL rails from Heathrow to Westbourne Park then running on Hammersmith & City rails to Aldgate or on to the East.
Baker Street platforms 5&6 would be extended west & Euston Sq. platforms extended East (Note: At present two new subways adjacent to the old Met tunnels are proposed as a link to a new underground concourse between Euston Sq. and Euston ML an unbelievably short sighted proposal.) Other stations platforms would be extended in time.
Circle line trains would then be confined to the Inner Circle and H&CL timetabling modified.
As the existing supposed EL to London Underground connection at Paddington is not fit for purpose due to level and transit distance.
A cross platform or step free change from the EL to the H&CL would be made pre Paddington at Royal Oak or Westbourne Park (a bus interchange).
The big snag here is the issue in the video. Minor delay on the Circle delays all trains on the H&C which then delays everything heading for Heathrow and my train gets in to Penzance 20 mins late.
Why should they - they don't use the same tracks?!
@@ADAMEDWARDS17
Great video, and clearly explained thank you, but... "the unfortunately named Waterloo". 🤔 I commuted to and from France in the early 3rd rail days and the average French person didn't give a toss about the name. I never heard them complain about the ABBA song either. 😄
Line capacity is one thing, if you've ever tried to navigate the main concourse at Paddington with, let's say, 20 minutes to go until a Plymouth/Penzance train departs, you'll know it's a nightmare with everyone standing around waiting for the platform announcement. Add a train's worth of passengers for Birmingham into the mix and there wouldn't be room to swing a cat.
It's pretty simple. Old oak common station gives access to Crossrail (now the Elizabeth line). Euston will give access to Crossrail 2 once that's built. So anyone travelling from the north to London will have their choice to get off the train for Crossrail 1 or Crossrail 2
Anybody who's travelling from the north into London isn't interested in getting on HS2 to go to Birmingham. If they wanted to go to Birmingham, they'd have just gone straight there, rather than going into London and back out again.
who said othweise? @@beeble2003
Something else that may have gone under the radar is that the planned train lengths are being shortened and will have less seats than the current Pendolinos! They will also run much slower on the traditional WCML track as they don’t tilt. Can you imagine the embarrassment with your new high speed train having to move onto the slow track to allow the Pendolinos to overtake! Therefore why don’t they scrap the planned new trains and just run the Pendolinos at 140mph. That way you could also stick a couple of intermediate stations serving Bucks and south of Birmingham making it more like HS1? Or even better, look at the Amelia Liberty trains Alston are building for the US Northeast corridors Acela service. Traditional length train of 9 carriages and two power cars, 200mph+ top speed with no tilt, then up to 180mph with tilt. Surely these should be bought for HS2/WCML use, getting the best of the new and existing infrastructure?
There's probably not capacity on the WCML to run pendos at 140mph without catching up with other trains too often.
There's probably not capacity on the WCML to run Pendos at 140mph without catching up with other trains too often.
No, I meant just convert and run the Pendolinos at 140mph (or whatever their top speed actually could be)on HS2 and then they can continue as tilt trains once they rejoin the WCML. The current issue is that the new trains currently ordered don’t tilt. This means for every mile they have to run on the WCML, they will actually go slower than a Pendolino. Not so much of an issue when they would only rejoin the WCML way north of Manchester, so really only affecting the Glasgow bound service. However now they will only get to Birmingham before having to rejoin the WCML, any train, apart from the Birmingham terminating service, will start to give back those minutes it gained by now having to switch back onto HS2 much earlier, so the journey time cut from London to Manchester and Liverpool, still exists, but becomes much less when using HS2 to Birmingham and then the reminder of the journey on the WCML as a non tilt train. That’s why I think the rolling stock needs a rethink. Fewer non tilt trains could be ordered just for the London to Birmingham service, and a train akin to the Amelia Liberty could be ordered to run the services that start on HS2, but that will need to continue on the WCML after Birmingham interchange for the remainder of their journey.
@@Flange-lw9sp Ah, right. I understand, now. Good point.
Actually the great central was closed by Barbara Castle, not Beeching... I might be wrong?
Of course, had the Elizabeth Line connected Euston, the Kings Cross / St Pancras complex and Paddington you could have travel to Heathrow there would have been even less reason for wondering why HS2 doesn't terminate at Paddington.
I never understood why they didn't just terminate HS2 at Old Oak Common. OOC has 14 High-Speed platforms, so it should have the capacity for a terminus. If not, they could have built more. Make better connections with the North London and West London lines, and maybe a shuttle bus over to the Central Line (or reroute it). Rebuild the West Coast Mainline platform at Willesden Junction. You already have the Elizabeth Line and Great Western Mainline. Maybe not quite as convenient as Euston, but a heck of a lot cheaper.
Then all the connections into central London will get heavily overloaded
OOC is going to have six high speed platforms, not fourteen. Besides which, you may have lots of connections at OOC, but very few people going there as a final destination. Euston has lots of connections to everywhere in central London…via a taxi. That’s how most people will get to their final destination at Euston. Imagine you’re on business from Birmingham, and you need to get to a meeting in central London. If it terminates at Euston, you can jump in a taxi and get anywhere within central London, quickly. If it terminates at OOC, you have to hope your meeting is close to one of four Elizabeth Line stations, or you face either a LONG taxi ride from OOC, or a separate train journey and THEN a taxi ride. All of that means it will be quicker and cheaper to just take a legacy train on the existing WCML into Euston, which will still run after HS2 opens.
it's nowhere
So terminate all existing London to Manchester trains at Stockport and all Liverpool trains at the airport and let people use the local trains to get into the cities. OOC is not in London.
They didn't plan to terminate HS2 at Old Oak Common for the simple reason that nobody wants to go to Old Oak Common. If HS2 dumps you at Old Oak Common and then you have to spend an extra half-hour to get to your actual destination, HS2 is no faster than the existing rail network. (Literally: HS2 is 45 minutes London to Birmingham; the WCLM is 75.)
The same problem existed with the Leeds extension of HS2. They couldn't decide whether it should go through Derby or Nottingham, so they put it half way in between. But, again, that means that the extra time taken to transfer between -the middle of nowhere- Sandiacre and your actual destination means you may as well have just got on a direct train to London from Derby or Nottingham.
Clarity incarnate -- thanks, Jago.
Why there isnt a link between HS1 and HS2 I dont know..maybe we need a sort of Lille-Europe mega junction station in London..or is that too logical?Food for thought, Jago! keep em coming!
Because their is no need to join HS2 to HS1, HS2 is just a high speed domestic line where as HS1 is a high speed international line
@@peterwilliamallen1063No. In any sensible country they would both be part of a domestic and international high speed network, designed from the start for the ultimate goal of nationwide coverage, like Germany, France, Spain and Italy are doing! Why is the UK always so determined to think small? At one time we were pioneers; now we are merely also-rans.
@@michaelwant8501 Why not, because HS2 is purely a domestic High Speed line to allow more capacity on the WCML and HS1 is an International Railway line, but the problem is although in Europe all TGV type service run on domestic routes across Europe, but they do not require Customs Checks at Borders as they are in the free passport SHenegan zone, we are not and not only that no European Domestic train service runs through the Channel Tunnel only Euurostar services and Le Shuttle special trains and that is why no domestic High Speed service would run from Birmingham or Manchester via the Channel Tunnel plus there is no custom for it as it was tried just after the Channel tunnel opened at it failed and people in Birmingham and Manchester would rather fly to Europe quckly and Cheaply than trundle along on a train.
@@peterwilliamallen1063Just through run HS2 to Ashford and put customs and immigration with a timed transfer there. It would give you more capacity along the London part of the route and more single seat domestic rides. People have to go through the exact same customs to fly as they do to take the train, so that’s not a benefit for one over the other.
As for why people would do so, trains are potentially cheaper and definitely far more comfortable and luxurious than flying, and people have routinely demonstrated that they will accept an extra hour or two in order to avoid air travel.
@@sonorioftrill You don't understand that Brummies and Mancunins do not want to get a train to Ashford for anything, and even the Euro Star trains do not stop now at Aford International Station, it is quicker to fly and cheaper from our respective Airports.
I used to commute between West Drayton and Paddington. Signal failures every week. Old oil lamps on the platforms to warn drivers. Then the Ladbroke Grove rail crash.
Thanks Jago, but why not 'terminate' HS2 at St.Pancras and at the same time link it to HS1 so that trains could run directly from the Midlands and beyond to the Continent? Or is that just too difficult for our planners to contemplate?
Go to St Pancras in daytime, count the number of empty platforms there are and it will become obvious why that wouldn't work. Then have a long hard think about security, Immigration and Customs checks and how they could be done if you mix domestic and international services together.
Bingo! Looking at a railway map, it doesn't appear the hardest thing to do!
@@chris8405 Like as I say, does Eurostar really need 6 platforms - or would it if AShford and Ebbsfleet had their Eurostar calls back? And Immigration/Customs is only applicable on International Travel - which HS2 isnlr - as far as I last checked!
As HS2 is now only running from London to Birmingham and as you’ve already pointed out that there is a service from London Marylebone to Birmingham Snow Hill, the next logical step is to scrap HS2 completely and use the money elsewhere! The first thing to do would be the electrification of the Marylebone to Snow Hill line plus to put back the passing points that have been removed at Bicester North, High Wycombe, Beaconsfield & Gerrards Cross as these allow the faster trains to go around the slower stopping trains.
Do some more reserch, the HS2 line actualy goes past Birmingham North into Staffordshire and will connect onto the WCML at Handsacre where HS2 trains will join the WCML to run to Manchester. This line will be operated by Avanti West Coast trains and the London Marelabone line on leving Birmingham goes to Worcester not Manchester, this connection is now a part of the Midland Metro tram system, so no the Chiltern line is not a substitute to the new HS2 line and is operted by Chiltern Trains.
Oh this idea is also around 4 years too late. Most earthwork on the scheme is completed, and they are only useful as railway corridor.
@@peterwilliamallen1063 I mean they should still electrify the Chiltern line, regardless or whether HS2 gets built.
HS2 is not and never has been a separate system. Just as with the TGV lines in France or the AVEs in Spain, the trains carry on on the existing network, where capacity exists. Hence the original plan to join the existing network at Golborne near Wigan and east of Leeds.
@@ollie2074 All lines should be full electrify, an the costs would apparently be drastically reduce if the government committed to do it all because they could buy at scale and employ a dedicated force of workers to do it, instead of doing it bit by bit with years between projects.
I wonder whether upgrading the Midland Main Line would have been a better alternative to HS2 as there is a direct connection to Eurostar services
"A Moloch--Like Beast".... Wouldn't be a Jaggo Vid without 'ole Yerkes 💥🤪👀👹🔥☠️!! Good man 👍!
There used to be 8 tracks, however, from Old Oak Common to Paddington, and new platforms could've gone where the goods station once was (had the Sheldon Square development not got there first).
I don't particularly like this plan however, because it functionally has a connection to only one London Underground line (the Hammersmith & City), with the other tube platforms at Paddington all being too far away to be attractive.
As an exiled southerner, I recently drove south from Manchester to a funeral. Another exile from Doncaster travelled by bus. It took longer than train but only required a bus change at Victoria that dropped her at the Surrey doorstep she required. It was also a much cheaper ticket. My journey passed through HS2 works close to Birmigham with a notice proudly proclaiming "Open in 2025". Alas I could not read the smaller print saying exactly WHAT would be open but it had the ring of HS2 blurb. The Shanghai Pudong Maglev terminates on the edge of the city above a subway station because pushing it through or under dense urban congestion did not make economic sense and it is only a trial show piece, not unlike HS2 which is of course older technology and a bit longer. Unlike the Elizabeth line, HS2 is about getting to London. The Elizabeth line makes sense as a means of not being inconvenienced by the obstacle of London if you need to get to the other side and avoiding becoming extra London clutter as a traveller. Of course access to Central London from "green fields" without a suburban ramble makes even better sense. Come to think of it, it is just what HS2 should link up with if you throw away the blinkers.
That HS2 was to bring relief to East Coast mainlne traffic is not a material fact. My perspective is based of the properties of what is being built not the political verbal junk that is naively offered to us as justification. The view, with relief, from Manchester shows the whole wood and not just the Old Oak Common trees.
Connecting HS2 with the Elizabeth Line is obviously a good idea, but *forcing* everyone on a HS2 train into the Elizabeth Line is obviously a terrible idea (for both them, and for anyone else that wants to use the line)
@@bighamster2 True but that depends on just how many travellers actually make use HS2 when available and where they want to go ; towards London, towards Reading or the rest of the home counties. The current mainline stations have fed their passengers into the tube, taxis or the streets as long as I have been alive. Whether the way was going to be crowded or clear has never been certain. Not being able to get off a Seoul subway until the station beyond the one of choice in the 1990s because of the crowd did happen but was not common enough to deter use. Of course it might well make the current Euston service look like a closer starting point if travelling the other way from Central London ? For me, there is a very slim chance I will want to use HS2 or even be around when it opens. That I require a very pressing need to get me into Central London now does put my attention on the popular focus on getting into London instead of escaping from it.
To partly answer your question, during the early public discussions of HS2, Andrew MacNaughton said that the rationale for two separate London stations was to distribute the passengers, because a proportion of London would find it more convenient to get on at Old Oak Common and a proportion in Euston. Since Paddington is largely on the same routes, the advantage of terminating there would, I assume, be lower.
In East Asia, high speed railways are built in a jiffy. I wish the UK had this passion for new useful railways. 🇬🇧
Quart into a pint pot comes to mind.
Hi Jago. Great video. Slightly controversially I would suggest if this were in Scotland I reckon we would build the rather shorter tunnel and a set of undergound platforms at Paddington... We already did something like that under Glasgow Central quite a wee while back. Yes I know there are already underground lines etc in Paddington - but then again there are also subway lines under Glasgow, and it probably wouldn't be any more complicated and expensive to sort out a proper "Padington undercroft" station, than the whole Euston and rather longer tunnel project thingy that Rishi seems so reluctant to fund.
Paddington already HAS a tunnel and set of underground platforms, though. For the Elizabeth Line.
And the Bakerloo line.
And the Circle/District line.
@@Skorpychan Did you not read her post?
Underground platforms for what? HS2?!! Do you know how many platforms would be needed and how expensive that would be to build?!!
@@mofomat I did, but scots don't understand just how cluttered and crowded London is. There's literally nowhere to put MORE underground platforms with three lines already going through it underground, as well as the surface lines.
It's not like Scotland, where you can just dig a hole and expect to find nothing but dirt. Half the reason for Crossrail's delays was that they kept hitting Roman mass graves. That's not a problem under Glasgow, because they're in the habit of killing any Romans they see.
@@Skorpychan Actually I live in Scotland now - but I grew up and lived and worked in London for many of my nearly 7 decades so no - I'm quite well aware of the situation in London, but with a background as an engineer I also have a fair idea what could be done if there was a will to do it.
My question is why build a terminus on very expensive real estate in central London ?
How many people from Birmingham end their journey in Euston ? Most will get on a bus or tube and go somewhere else. So why not terminate at Old Oak Common or Join HS1 and terminate somewhere East of Euston ?
can you tell me why there are ticket barriers covering only part of St Panc station? It just seems strange to me when sometimes you can just get off your train and walk freely to the outside world and yet at other times you have to use your ticket to go through a ticket barrier.
THat's the case at Euston
Ah, Beeching closing the GCML route from Marylebone to Manchester pops up. And it's at this point I think we need to remember the privately funded (and backed by SNCF IIRC) Central Railway proposal to reuse much of it up to the MIdlands to remove freight from the other London mainlines to give them more capacity. Which is of course what we're now told HS2 is really all about (and is just really badly named to confuse people into thinking its main aim was high speed). Central Railway was scuppered by politicians multiple times, including worries that the UK Government/taxpayers would have to pick up the bill if the private funding failed. In light of HS2 funding that should raise eyebrows now!
I am a believer that the Great Central had its uses - certainly as far north as LEicester, and might have given towns like Buckingham, Brackley, Southam and Lutterworth a rail service!
There are a lot of people in the locale of Euston Station, who are to put in mildly not too keen on HS2, because their neighbourhood was subjected to compulsory purchase, plus demolition for a station, that appears not to be getting built at the moment.
Why does the Heathrow Express still exist? Given it is now largely duplicated by direct(ish) Elizabeth Line services which only takes 30m (not at all unusual transit time for a European airport, even the Maglev in Shanghai takes longer...), and there's the Picadilly line for those who really want to take their time... how much capacity would it free up if we got rid of it altogther? Given the trains run every 15 minutes presumably they have to have at least one or two platforms available at all times?
Heathrow Express seems desolate half the time, not surprised when to my knowledge a single is 25 pounds! Platforms six and seven are dedicated to it, but seconded, it really does feel like it wouldn’t be a huge loss given it only shaves off 10 minutes or so