What happens if HS2 Euston proves to be unbuildable?

[Nottingham59]

The reality is the concept for Euston is simply undeliverable on the space available - and tearing down even more of Camden to make room is also unworkable for political reasons.

EDIT:
And that old plan to hack Euston suburbans onto Crossrail to make room at the station is unworkable now with the construction already complete at OOC.

They've really made themselves a gordian knot.

The NAO is saying that Euston will now cost £4.8 Billion, and that's at 2019 prices. God knows what the estimate would be at 2023 prices. And presumably the tunnels from Old Oak will cost a couple of billion on top of that. (2x8km @ £100m/km or more).

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/high-speed-two-euston-summary.pdf

£2.6bn: High Speed Two Ltd’s (HS2 Ltd’s) budget for High Speed Two (HS2) Euston station (2019 prices)
£4.8bn: HS2 Ltd’s estimate for HS2 Euston station as at March 2023 (2019 prices)
£548mn: spend on HS2 Euston station as at the end of December 2022 (in cash terms)

So what happens if Euston really does prove to be unbuildable? These are some thoughts:

• Just run a permanently reduced HS2 service, terminating at OOC. There will only be 6 platforms and a station throat not optimised for reversing. How many tph could these handle, in practice?
• Build a much reduced station at Euston (say 6 x 450m platforms) and accept fewer tph on HS2. AIUI, the Euston throat is designed with a flying crossover to facilitate reversing, so 6 platforms could handle more trains than OOC could.
• Could they terminate half the HS2 traffic at OOC (using the central 4 platforms) and terminate the other half at a much smaller Euston? i.e. running through OOC platforms 1 and 6 without stopping? This gives 10 terminating platforms overall.
• Add a junction in the vicinity of Ruislip and run the classic-compatible HS2 trains down the New North London line to surface platforms at OOC, using the space ear-marked for Chiltern Trains.

Any other ideas?

 

[cle]

Surely reworking the throat at OOC assuming it might be the terminus, would be the easiest.

And then a reduced schedule of something like:
3tph Birmingham
2tph Manchester via Crewe (classic route)
1tph Glasgow
1tph Liverpool

to start with, and then see what else can be added in time - like a slower Lancs service.

 

[HSTEd]

Well my own position depends on whether there is still a practical route from the west end of Old Oak Common classic station to the WCML.

If there is room for a minimum radius curve onto the Dudding Hill Line, then we could potentially revert to southern WCML commuter trains going into Crossrail.
That combined with extending the Bakerloo and scrapping the Watford DC could free up several platforms worth of capacity at Euston, which would allow work to consume more of the west side of the existing station.

Either partial demolition and new structure, or if you can get the ramp into the tunnels to fit, just extend the existing platforms.

If there isn't..... run HS2 as a Birmingham to OOC Shuttle at the highest achievable intensity.

 

[Snow1964]

The problem now the budget is heading to nearer £5bn is that the plan starts to look wrong, simply because for that money could have built a new north south Crossrail style tunnel from Primrose Hill to say Victoria approaches and diverted all the LNWR and Watford Overground line trains into it, then altered the throat of current Euston

The big extra cost for tunnelling is adding lots of stations, not the plain tunnels.

If the current idea of clearing a mile long strip of Camden for widening Euston without a build plan is sensible long term solution is yet to be seen.

 

[fishwomp]

So what happens if Euston really does prove to be unbuildable? These are some thoughts:

• Just run a permanently reduced HS2 service, terminating at OOC. There will only be 6 platforms and a station throat not optimised for reversing. How many tph could these handle, in practice?
• Build a much reduced station at Euston (say 6 x 450m platforms) and accept fewer tph on HS2. AIUI, the Euston throat is designed with a flying crossover to facilitate reversing, so 6 platforms could handle more trains than OOC could.
• Could they terminate half the HS2 traffic at OOC (using the central 4 platforms) and terminate the other half at a much smaller Euston? i.e. running through OOC platforms 1 and 6 without stopping? This gives 10 terminating platforms overall.
• Add a junction in the vicinity of Ruislip and run the classic-compatible HS2 trains down the New North London line to surface platforms at OOC, using the space ear-marked for Chiltern Trains.

Any other ideas?

Considering OOC may be the right choice for anyone going to Docklands, Heathrow or Central London - the train may find itself quite empty on the last leg to Euston (just folks going to the British Library and UCL?). The more I think about it, the less appealing Euston is as destination - sure HS1 etc is near, but flying is as viable as HS2+HS1 given the Eurostar security check-in theatre.

So.. how about a Crossrail 3 - one using the tunnels planned for HS2 to add a new underground line with more stops that either terminates at Euston, or takes over the existing western spur of the Northern Line thus linking into eg. Waterloo and the west end.

 

[cle]

OOC would definitely need both NLL and WLL stations building for the onward dispersal of people, for more than just Crossrail (and GWML). I would think an 'airside' connection to North Acton maybe useful too - and the Dudding Line/Orbital. Chiltern bays too.

I'm assuming that we might have a little to invest if Euston was permanently cut, and OOC needed Stratford-levels of diverse services, as very few people would leave on foot.

And also assuming a connection to the WCML around Lichfield would get done - vs a Birmingham shuttle which wouldn't be worth it. At least the Lichfield route would see a 15-20 min saving on existing services, and enable a few additional paths to be repurposed out of Euston.

 

[RailAleFan]

.

 

[Nottingham59]

The more I think about it, the less appealing Euston is as destination

I've always said it's completely unnecessary for HS2 to have two London stations. The really scarce resource in Central London is space for long platforms, especially on a North-South axis. So it is a complete waste for HS2 trains to set off from Euston, only for them to curve round to the south-west to stop again at Old Oak.

But if HS2 does terminate at Old Oak, then there's a big hole in the ground at Euston that needs using.

For the same length of tunnel, you could connect new platforms at Euston to the ECML at, say, Alexandra Palace and use them as an alternative terminus for 400m long-distance ECML trains, calling only at Peterborough and Doncaster, where they would split before continuing to Leeds and York/Edinburgh. You'd only need 4 new platforms at Euston to deliver the sort of ECML uplift that is promised in the IRP.

EDIT: And with ETCS, these trains could do 250km/h (155mph) on the straight bits.

 

[dosxuk]

With today's technology can work sites not be project managed remotely from vacant office space rather than require a 3x2x12story prefab temporary office block onsite?

Yes. But the portacabs don't just house the project managers, most of the space is normally taken up by facilities for the people working on the site; canteens, showers, locker rooms, toilets, stores & meeting rooms just as a start. You're always going to require some office space on site too, not least for when the project managers do need to visit, but also there always needs to be an element of management who are at hand.

 

[JonathanH]

Is the other question here about what £5bn could buy in terms of connectivity to Clapham Junction and, perhaps, somewhere like West Hampstead Thameslink for conventional trains?

Building a proper interchange at Old Oak Common for the West London Line, and a link line to West Hampstead Thameslink would make access to HS2 almost as easy as just requiring that catchment to go to Euston.

 

[Brubulus]

So what happens if Euston really does prove to be unbuildable? These are some thoughts:

• Just run a permanently reduced HS2 service, terminating at OOC. There will only be 6 platforms and a station throat not optimised for reversing. How many tph could these handle, in practice?
• Build a much reduced station at Euston (say 6 x 450m platforms) and accept fewer tph on HS2. AIUI, the Euston throat is designed with a flying crossover to facilitate reversing, so 6 platforms could handle more trains than OOC could.
• Could they terminate half the HS2 traffic at OOC (using the central 4 platforms) and terminate the other half at a much smaller Euston? i.e. running through OOC platforms 1 and 6 without stopping? This gives 10 terminating platforms overall.
• Add a junction in the vicinity of Ruislip and run the classic-compatible HS2 trains down the New North London line to surface platforms at OOC, using the space ear-marked for Chiltern Trains.

Any other ideas?

Considering OOC may be the right choice for anyone going to Docklands, Heathrow or Central London - the train may find itself quite empty on the last leg to Euston (just folks going to the British Library and UCL?). The more I think about it, the less appealing Euston is as destination - sure HS1 etc is near, but flying is as viable as HS2+HS1 given the Eurostar security check-in theatre.

So.. how about a Crossrail 3 - one using the tunnels planned for HS2 to add a new underground line with more stops that either terminates at Euston, or takes over the existing western spur of the Northern Line thus linking into eg. Waterloo and the west end.

My view is that HS2 now needs to deliver the most possible benefits for the lowest possible price. In order to do that, I feel there is no need for the Euston link, as much of London is better served by OOC, esp if Crossrail 2 never happens. Suburban links from OOC could be hugely advanced by a people mover from East/North Acton to Willesden Junction via OOC. WCML slow line platforms at Wilesden Junction would further help as it would give the WCML a proper Zone 2/3 interchange.

 

[MattRat]

If Euston is fully scrapped, could alternate arrangements be made to go to Paddington? You'd still need more platforms most likely, but the expansion would be cheaper than at Euston.

 

[JonathanH]

If Euston is fully scrapped, could alternate arrangements be made to go to Paddington? You'd still need more platforms most likely, but the expansion would be cheaper than at Euston.

How would the expansion of Paddington be cheaper than at Euston? There is no spare land at Paddington for expansion.

 

[Sm5]

Do whats needed for it to use Crossrail as a through London service, put a spur southbound at Farringdon.

Make all services run “beyond” London, to Norwich, Dover, Brighton, Southampton etc.

It could replace GA long haul for instance, and some Thameslink routes.

reduces the need to change and cross London for passengers, and spreads the changes across multiple existing stations, rather than one central termini.

 

[Snow1964]

If Euston is fully scrapped, could alternate arrangements be made to go to Paddington? You'd still need more platforms most likely, but the expansion would be cheaper than at Euston.

Not really the land available at Paddington

For that kind of money could have carried the tunnels on to somewhere like Marble Arch or Green Park, dug a big hole like they did with the underground Park Lane car park near Marble Arch, covered it over and restored the park.

Wouldn't have been in the busy or popular part of Central London, but Euston isn't either.

 

[stuu]

Why would it be unbuildable?

What has happened is that the proposed scheme and the budget are miles apart, which is not remotely the same thing as unbuildable. Any changes to the fundamental plan will add many years of delay, as well as cost. What is needed is compromise over either the design or the budget

 

[philosopher]

My view is that HS2 now needs to deliver the most possible benefits for the lowest possible price. In order to do that, I feel there is no need for the Euston link, as much of London is better served by OOC, esp if Crossrail 2 never happens. Suburban links from OOC could be hugely advanced by a people mover from East/North Acton to Willesden Junction via OOC. WCML slow line platforms at Wilesden Junction would further help as it would give the WCML a proper Zone 2/3 interchange.

Ideally the Central and Bakerloo Lines would be realigned to provide in station interchange with HS2. This I assume would be expensive, but I suspect it would still be cheaper than building HS2 to Euston.

 

[Wolfie]

Do whats needed for it to use Crossrail as a through London service, put a spur southbound at Farringdon.

Make all services run “beyond” London, to Norwich, Dover, Brighton, Southampton etc.

It could replace GA long haul for instance, and some Thameslink routes.

reduces the need to change and cross London for passengers, and spreads the changes across multiple existing stations, rather than one central termini.

That'll be the Crossrail that was majority funded by London council taxpayers to improve local transport. What makes you believe for one minute that Londoners will accept that aim being destroyed to save this pathetic Government's face?

 

[sjoh]

Do whats needed for it to use Crossrail as a through London service, put a spur southbound at Farringdon.

Make all services run “beyond” London, to Norwich, Dover, Brighton, Southampton etc.

It could replace GA long haul for instance, and some Thameslink routes.

reduces the need to change and cross London for passengers, and spreads the changes across multiple existing stations, rather than one central termini.

"put a spur southbound at Farringdon" - do you realise how much deeper crossrail is than thameslink at that point? It'd need to be one very long spur for the gradient to be anywhere near acceptable - I doubt it'd be level with the thameslink route before the thames itself (not to mention having to negotiate around the central line during this ascent)!!
That aside, I think we'll keep crossrail for its intended purpose, thankyouverymuch.

 

[HSTEd]

Ultimately attempting an expansion of an existing station whilst it remained at full capacity was a terrible position.

It either had to be a greenfield station or they had to shift most of the traffic out of Euston before reconstruction started.

If it was just WCML fast line traffic in Euston at the moment the situation would be much better.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Why would it be unbuildable?

What has happened is that the proposed scheme and the budget are miles apart, which is not remotely the same thing as unbuildable. Any changes to the fundamental plan will add many years of delay, as well as cost. What is needed is compromise over either the design or the budget

Nothing is impossible with enough:

1. Time
2. Money
3. Political will

 

[Arkeeos]

So what happens if Euston really does prove to be unbuildable? These are some thoughts:

Does it violate the laws of physics? if no then its buildable.

There is absolutely no way that scrapping the design would ever be financially worth it

 

[HSTEd]

Does it violate the laws of physics?

It may well do, given that the reality is that two design teams have now failed miserably.

 

[Arkeeos]

The problem now the budget is heading to nearer £5bn is that the plan starts to look wrong, simply because for that money could have built a new north south Crossrail style tunnel from Primrose Hill to say Victoria approaches and diverted all the LNWR and Watford Overground line trains into it, then altered the throat of current Euston

You could build a mega chord at old oak common and route those service into the Elizabeth line tunnel, and they just join up with the Paddington terminators.

 

[stuu]

It may well do, given that the reality is that two design teams have now failed miserably.

Of course they haven't. Where do get this notion?

Again, they have failed to meet all the design requirements within the budget. Nothing at all to do with being physically impossible. It's not a very constrained site, it's not attempting to do anything particularly unusual in engineering terms

 

[JonathanH]

You could build a mega chord at old oak common and route those service into the Elizabeth line tunnel, and they just join up with the Paddington terminators.

Do you then use 345s on HS2, with a clever switch of gearing on the traction motors at the switch point?

 

[Nottingham59]

HS2 Euston may be buildable in the physical sense, but may not be politically deliverable. As MPs and ministers come to realise that OOC is going to be 4 stops and 1 change from Westminster on the Underground, the same as Euston, then they'll get more reluctant to spend £6Bn (at 2023 prices) or more on HS2.

 

[MattRat]

Of course they haven't. Where do get this notion?

Again, they have failed to meet all the design requirements within the budget. Nothing at all to do with being physically impossible. It's not a very constrained site, it's not attempting to do anything particularly unusual in engineering terms

The teams have done nothing other than essentially burning money. They have failed. That doesn't mean the project is impossible, just that they themselves likely won't be able to deliver it.

Add onto that the fact that anyone who could likely be able deliver is most likely foreign, and that this Government seems allergic to foreigners, then you could say, under the current Government, the project will be unbuildable/impossible.

 

[SussexSeagull]

I think it will be ludicrous if HS2 doesn't terminate at Euston and somewhat defeats the point of a high speed line. Also, haven't they started building it"?

As for linking it to Crossrail or Paddington, surely London isn't running out of paths for tunnels by now?

 

[Sm5]

I think it will be ludicrous if HS2 doesn't terminate at Euston and somewhat defeats the point of a high speed line. Also, haven't they started building it"?

As for linking it to Crossrail or Paddington, surely London isn't running out of paths for tunnels by now?

The UK is littered with started half hearted abandoned schemes that never get finished, especially when the “too difficult” becomes “too expensive”, and follows by political oppourtunity of “weve listened to voters and agree that”, “too much opposition” yada yada yada.

You dont have to go more than 1 mile from Euston to find a failed rail scheme…