Re: HS2 or FTTP?
(remember as originally conceived it didn't actually go into London or Birmingham, yet would cut journey times between the two...)
You might have to be more specific. Every document back to the DfT's January 2009 paper and the March 2010 High Speed Rail Strategy has assumed London-Birmingham proper. Perhaps a few people spitballing at party conferences conceived of some weird high-speed bit in the middle, but no serious design work ever proposed such a project.
I suggest the economic and business cases are even more important if only to make it crystal clear what the expectations are.
Well that certainly is a problem. Repeated failures by HS2 Ltd and the DfT to properly model the business case makes the project look weak or marginal. As I say, WebTag is garbage. Politicos and journos like to bang on about "Faster journey times" and "it only saves 5 minutes to Birmingham". Some have even labelled it a "vanity project" (for whom? Gordon Brown? Adonis? Cameron? May?).
The truth is that Capacity has always been the underlying raison d'etre for HS2. Higher speeds (and sensible loading gauges) are just a byproduct of building a new intercity line in the 2020s rather than the 1820s. If there were any sense in the world, the PM of the day would inaugurate HS2 by taking a new local rail service between two reopened stations. But they won't. They'll pop champagne at 200mph on a train to Brum.
From March 2010:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The most significant capacity benefits of this network would be felt on the three principal rail corridors heading north from London, and particularly the critical London-West Midlands corridor, whose rail capacity would be more than trebled. This would address the substantial demand growth expected on these key strategic routes, which serve extensive long distance, commuter and freight markets, as well as providing the foundation for journeys to a wide range of destinations further north, on both sides of the Pennines.
The very high capacity of the new line would be achieved both through its dedicated use for high speed operations, allowing an intensive service pattern, and through the use of longer (and larger) trains of up to 400 metres (compared to the current 207-metre Pendolinos currently in service on the West Coast Main Line).
By transferring long distance services to the high speed line, significant amounts of capacity would also be released on the existing West Coast Main Line for commuter and freight trains, including services to key areas of housing growth around Milton Keynes and Northampton.
A Y-shaped core high speed rail network yields similar increases in capacity on the East Coast and Midland Main Lines. Long-distance services to the East Midlands, South Yorkshire and Leeds would switch to the new network, as well as the southern portion of journeys to Newcastle and Edinburgh. All these lines are expected to experience significant capacity constraints over the next 20 to 30 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as costs and OpEx go. HS2 will of course be one of the cheapest and most reliable sections of line in the UK. Modern tunnels that do not require periodic manual repointing of Victorian brickwork. Slab track that demands far lower annual maintenance than ballasted sleepers. Segregation from disparate services, reducing the knock-on of other trains arriving late to a platform.
