HS2

[adb968008]

13 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Well that's informed me what I should do next time I go from Maidstone to the north via London Bridge - get off and use a Thameslink to St Pancras, not walk for 20 minutes to get to London Bridge Tube to get to Euston, the short walk down Euston Rd is better than an underground experience.

Theres even a few pubs to break the short walk..…

Euston Flyer has some good railwayana decor, free wifi, good breakfast (i use this for work). O’neils works as does the Rocket.. and if you go all the way, you can goto the Euston Tap inside whats left of the old arches structures…

There is a pub with loads of railwayana in the Euston complex underground..never done that one though.

 

its much better than tube options than say between StP and Euston, or Farringdon to Euston Sq.

i do tend to short cut by Phoenix Road and Eversholt Road (using the side exits at TL and Euston P1 end) and behind the British library .. if i’m in a rush…done it in 7 mins with a suitcase once.

 

As long as I can use my feet, that will be faster to go direct HS2 to Euston, flat straight walk to St P and go.. than changing at OC, loads of stairs, XR, then changing at Farringdon after 3 stops, then go from underground to above ground to go back below ground to go south…Euston. its the lesser to two evils…but its still evil.

Edited October 15 by adb968008

[phil-b259]

4 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

 

i would suggest your delibrately missing the point.

Totally agree.

 

But… if TL Terminated at St Pancras, and the other half terminated at London Bridge…. There is over 100 million entry exits that have to change get to where they want…

Its the fact its joined that it works.

Lets not pretend TL is a big tubeline…. Its over 120 miles from Brighton up to Peterborough !.. the length of HS2…

 

According to GTR.. 341mn passengers a year, yet it doesnt need a Palace to terminate in.. just a tunnel and 10 existing stations to turnback.

Thats why I think HS2 would be more beneficial to cut out the palace and travel through, and increase its value to the passenger.. who is ultimately not going to camp down and goto work in OC or Euston in reality.

 

 

 

Thameslink is however a rather utilitarian experience - walk through carriages which lack privacy due to conventional inter carriage doors and any form of catering plus laughable 1st class provision.

 

Moreover its 1/3rd and 2/3rd doors allow for quick boarding while the lack of reservable seats means no passengers rushing up and down the platform (or trying to push their way through inside to find them)

 

Yes Thameslink works a a commuter route - and given 95% of passengers will alight in central London will only be on the train for half its total journey its shortcomings compared to more traditional trains like Electrostars can be tolerated.

 

Also, though cleaners do try and make trains presentable at each turnaround point, the amount of discarded rubbish left behind by travellers who have alighted in Central London (and thus has to be experienced by those joining the trains there) can be considerable, which hardly makes for a plessent journey experience

 

InterCity trains are a fundamentally different beast!

 

They will have doors at the ends of each coach, reserveable seats, some form of catering noticeably better 1st class accommodation  -   and people expect these trains to be cleaned properly before they depart London.

 

That in tun massively increase station dwell time (the door configuration being the reason why Old Oak need 3 platforms in each direction if it is not to cripple HS2 service frequency - assuming trains start or finish at Euston) and turn around time.

 

In short if HS2 extended further under London each place it stopped at would require 6 HS length platforms tunnels to be dug with its final termini still needing between 6 - 10 platforms so that train servicing could take place. This amount of tunnelling would make even the  current HS2 budget look like mere spare change and anyone with any degree of sense realises that its completely unafordable.

 

That is why HS2 ends, on the surface at Euston - its simply unafordable to do anything else!

Edited October 15 by phil-b259

[jamie92208]

Away from discussions about the legacy of our forebears there is real progress taki gnp, ace on Phase 1.  This video shows the new bridge at Wormleighton between Southam and Brackley.  There is a lot of progress.  Once these road bridges are in use a lot of sections of trackbed will be joined up. 

 

 

Jamie

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, adb968008 said:

How will tickets be sold… via London and not via London ?

Will the current fare go down, or the via London fare go up ?

who will want to buy the slow train when they can go a faster route for the same fare ?

Empty XC / standing on GWR ?

 

It depends on what you mean by 'Not London'....

 

From where I live a ticket to Southampton can be routed (cheapest to most expensive):-

 

(1) 'Via Barnham' - Along the coast via Havant

 

(2) 'Not via London' - Up to Clapham Junction (a stones throw from Victoria) then get a SWR train back down 

 

(3) 'Via London' - which means either getting the Underground between Vic and Waterloo OR getting out at Clapham Junction then getting a SWR train from Clapham to Waterloo*

 

* Not all SWR trains stop at Clapham Junction so depending on your destination you might have to change a couple of times on the SWR network which could take longer overall than doubling back via Waterloo to take advantage of a direct SWR service.

 

With regard to HS2 will Old Oak be considered 'Not London' in the same vein as Clapham Junction is also considered 'Not London' for some tickets....

 

[adb968008]

32 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

 

InterCity trains are a fundamentally different beast!

 

They will have doors at the ends, reserveable seats, some form of catering noticeably better 1st class accommodation  -   and people expect these trains to be cleaned properly before they depart London.

 

That in tun massively increase station dwell time (the door configuration being the reason why Old Oak need 3 platforms in each direction if it is not to cripple HS2 service frequency - assuming trains start or finish at Euston) and turn around time.

 

In short if HS2 extended further under London each place it stopped at would require 6 HS length platforms tunnels to be dug with its final termini still needing between 6 - 10 platforms so that train servicing could take place. This amount of tunnelling would make even the  current HS2 budget look like mere spare change and anyone with any degree of sense realises that its completely unafordable.

 

That is why HS2 ends, on the surface at Euston - its simply unafordable to do anything else!

I love German trains…
They are Intercity, they ring Berlin… Berlin zoo manages fine.

 

I love Dutch trains they too ring Amsterdam…

 

Then theres Manchester trains, they ring Manchester.. with 2 door class 156/158… for 30 odd years on P13/14

 

Its worth remebering that theres no chance a HS2 train carrying 1500 passengers a Thameslink does. Theres also no chance 1500 passengers will exit entry each station in the capital, with a half dozen central London options to pick from..inwhich case were down to around lets say a rammed full 700.. a 100-150 or so per station, over 8-10 coaches, so circa 5 people per train door…

A class 444 exits quite well at Clapham jn, and whilst Clapham has lots of platforms theres only own UF on the LSW and it seems to manage ok with 2 doors per coach… the 159’s arent dying either.. people seem to get on with it, when it comes to boarding and leaving.. its the commuters that have bigger doors, but then they carry double the number of passengers too.

The points moot anyway, its not going to happen the oppourtunity lost so theres no point noodling,

 

But,,,

 

i really hope a HS2 service isnt planned to be crammed link a Thameslink.. even if a HS2 journey might be half the time… yet somehow the passengers twice as messy on whats ultimately a sub 1 hour service from Birmingham… thats not even enough time to goto the buffet and back…i’m guessing on a 45 minute ride HS2 stock wont need a buffet… My ride from South London is 45 mins and I dont have one… indeed most operators dont…
 

at a Two hour journey HS2 is a commuter train… its not a TGV, ICE etc, just a faster class 350/450… if feels like the designers are still thinking more about distance than time… its an A320 not an A380.

 

Edited October 15 by adb968008

[corneliuslundie]

Careful adb. If the DfT reads your post they may decide HS2 doesn't need seats either.

Hat, coat . . 

J

[adb968008]

5 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

Careful adb. If the DfT reads your post they may decide HS2 doesn't need seats either.

Hat, coat . . 

J

Have you seen what the Nigerians did to GWRs HST coaches…

 

https://www.facebook.com/RailExpressMag/posts/the-interior-of-a-former-gwr-castle-mk3-exported-to-nigeria-the-hsts-will-be-use/955514589917392/

 

It even looks like they could have pole dancers for entertainment on the move too.

 

Edited October 15 by adb968008

[phil-b259]

15 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I

i really hope a HS2 service isnt planned to be crammed link a Thameslink.. even if a HS2 journey might be half the time… yet somehow the passengers twice as messy on whats ultimately a sub 1 hour service from Birmingham… thats not even enough time to goto the buffet and back…i’m guessing on a 45 minute ride HS2 stock wont need a buffet… My ride from South London is 45 mins and I dont have one… indeed most operators dont.

 

 

Firstly, following research which indicates passengers do not to leave their seats (and thus leave their belonging unattended) its unlikely that the HS2 fleet will have a buffet car / counter - they will most probably get a trolley service in standard and first / premium passengers be supplied with items at their seat from a galley area as per the IETs

 

Secondly with HS2 trains now being of a uniform design - and thus having to serve Manchester / Liverpool / Preston / Scotland customers then the means to provide catering will still be present on Birmingham services. Whether its used of course (or to what extent - i.e. just for first class) is of course up to the operator.

[KingEdwardII]

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

How will tickets be sold… via London and not via London ?

The irony at the moment is that it is often the case that it is cheaper to go via London than to use the XC services via Birmingham to travel north/south. I've looked quite often in relation to journeys starting at Winchester.

 

The reason is a simple one - the XC trains tend to be overloaded and there is zero incentive for XC to provide low fares. Try finding an Advance fare on XC, for example. The same is not always true on the trains in/out of London. I can easily get a cheap Advance fare from Winchester to Waterloo, for example.

 

It will be interesting to see the impact of HS2 on all these fares, once it opens.

 

The problem will still be the London obstacle course for travellers from outside the capital. At least Euston will only be 1 tube train from Waterloo, but it's a clumsy connection from most other London termini.

 

Yours, Mike.

[phil-b259]

31 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

 

A class 444 exits quite well at Clapham jn, and whilst Clapham has lots of platforms theres only own UF on the LSW and it seems to manage ok with 2 doors per coach… the 159’s arent dying either.. people seem to get on with it, when it comes to boarding and leaving.. its the commuters that have bigger doors, but then they carry double the number of passengers too.

 

 

 

It might look that way - but in reality station calls by SWR trains at Clapham really do make a massive difference on SWML capacity*. Thats why I understand that in the peaks no fast line trains call at Clapham - the feed up track capacity allows significantly more trains to run in / out of Waterloo

 

* The same is true as regards the BML - the difference is the later has the alternative London termi of London Bridge or indeed the Thameslink core to help deal with the volume of passengers to / from the south coast.

Edited October 15 by phil-b259

[adb968008]

10 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Firstly, following research which indicates passengers do not to leave their seats (and thus leave their belonging unattended) its unlikely that the HS2 fleet will have a buffet car / counter - they will most probably get a trolley service in standard and first / premium passengers be supplied with items at their seat from a galley area as per the IETs

 

Secondly with HS2 trains now being of a uniform design - and thus having to serve Manchester / Liverpool / Preston / Scotland customers then the means to provide catering will still be present on Birmingham services. Whether its used of course (or to what extent - i.e. just for first class) is of course up to the operator.

On PKPs new stadler intercity stock, they have a cafe / coffee shop (supported by full kitchen), very “starbucks” feel to it, which surprised me somewhat. Though there journeys can be 5-10 hours in some cases.

But what they do have is at seat dining.. scan the QR, and Soup, Pierogi and a steak is delivered to me with a beer in a real glass. DB has something similar.

On a 4 hour Scottish trip this might sense, even today.

 

But even from my home town, in UK reality, I can go 100 minutes without urge for a Butty made in a factory last night from the lowest cost ingredients assembled by someone who really wants to be somewhere else, and sold to me by someone whos fed up of dragging it about.

 

Edited October 15 by adb968008

[KingEdwardII]

4 hours ago, rockershovel said:

They didn't lack vision - they lived in a different world. 

I think that they did lack vision - they seemed not to be able to see that for passengers, there were plenty of folk wanting to go through London to places beyond.

 

It was Edward Watkin that eventually showed this kind of vision, but he was unable to pull off his ambitions, late in the day that he was. We are all worse off as a result.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

PS I think Watkin was a true visionary of the railways - he had a hand in railways in Canada as well as the UK and there he conceived of a Canadian trans-continental railway, before it became recognized as not only necessary and useful, but also as being essential to tie the Canadian provinces together politically.

[woodenhead]

Perhaps folk in Victorian times were more used to changing modes of transport and were less inclined to expect door to door services.

 

London would have been easier to cross back then too, a lot less people and traffic to contend with and plenty of horse drawn carriages waiting at stations.

[adb968008]

30 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Perhaps folk in Victorian times were more used to changing modes of transport and were less inclined to expect door to door services.

they had just evolved from Horse and Carriage taking 22 hours to reach Manchester, or splitting it over several days, in 1836…

By 1838 it was 5.5 hours to Birmingham, and around 10 to Manchester within a decade.

 

Changes wouldnt be an issue, they would be preferable.

 

 

30 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

 

London would have been easier to cross back then too, a lot less people and traffic to contend with and plenty of horse drawn carriages waiting at stations.

The horses just became redundant from long distance, so plenty of taxis.

 

Even Highwaymen had to find a new line of business as catching up, capturing and robbing a whole train would be a tough business.

 

Edited October 15 by adb968008

[Northmoor]

9 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I remember a time there wasn't an M25.  How would you like it if we had todays traffic volumes still using the North and South Circular?   Or perhaps the A1 to Tower Bridge and out the A2 to cross London - or better still, down Oxford Street?

The likely answer is you wouldn't have today's traffic volumes, because the travel times would discourage it.  Traffic levels are, to some extent, self-regulating. 

 

Many years ago when I lived in Scotland, the papers reported on a study that showed that by 2030 or something, traffic growth would mean the queues for the Forth Road Bridge would be three hours.  I remember thinking that if the person who wrote the report had actually concluded that, they should perhaps be paid no more than a week's pocket money for the child that could have arrived at the same answer.  Nobody would routinely queue for that long even to get to work; they would seek an alternative route, transport mode, move house or employer.  The study had simply extrapolated the graph of recent years to arrive at a nonsense headline number (and the journos were dumb enough not to question it).  

 

What's this got to do with HS2?  Well without creating the extra capacity for the ever-growing demand for (mostly leisure) travel, or for the freight that we'd all like to transfer to rail, it will be constrained off the WCML, mostly onto the M1 and M40.

[Northmoor]

9 hours ago, adb968008 said:

The traffics jams on the M25 speaks for itself.. its always A3-M3-M4-M40-M1 which magically happen to be North -South flows…

It's also known that a substantial proportion of M25 traffic - no, I don't know the percentage - is using it for between no more than two junctions.  It has inadvertently become the world's greatest amalgam of local relief roads.

[Ron Ron Ron]

1 hour ago, KingEdwardII said:

The irony at the moment is that it is often the case that it is cheaper to go via London than to use the XC services via Birmingham to travel north/south. I've looked quite often in relation to journeys starting at Winchester.

 

The reason is a simple one - the XC trains tend to be overloaded and there is zero incentive for XC to provide low fares. Try finding an Advance fare on XC, for example. The same is not always true on the trains in/out of London. I can easily get a cheap Advance fare from Winchester to Waterloo, for example.......

 

 

A situation I knew only too well, up to a 2 years ago, with my regular trips "up north".

In my case from Southampton Airport Parkway to Macclesfield on the Bournemouth - Manchester XC service (SOA is the previous stop before Winchester on XC services, for those not familiar).

 

A mate who regularly did Parkway to Stockport, put me on to routing via Waterloo and Euston instead.

The time difference is almost negligible, even accounting for the tube transfer from Waterloo to Euston and some contingency time., but not only were the advance and off-peak fares were lower, the WCML Pendolino was much better, even in standard.

I once went northbound SOA - MAC on a First Class single for £32, when the standard fare on the same combined train journey was £20 more !!!!  Work that one out !

 

The worst part about using XC all the way, was how often the train was uncomfortably full between Reading and New St. and how the XC train served as a local on certain sections of the multi-stop route.

Much worst though, was the pile on of local travellers and the overcrowding between BHX International and New St., especially when something big was on at the NEC.

On a couple of occasions with crush loads, standing in the isles along the full length of the carriage and bodies, shopping bags and coats pushing into some seated passengers faces, including mine, I thought that's enough, no more!

I didn't pay for a long distance journey to suffer that crap, so vowed never again to use XC (a concept that IMHO is long past its sell by date and well overdue for a complete rethink).

After that, I only went via London, until I eventually gave up on rail all together.

 

In the main however, we preferred to fly back in the days of firstly BA and then Flybe serving the Southampton - Manchester route.

The fares were generally cheaper than rail and it was far quicker, more comfortable overall and more convenient at both ends.

I only used rail when I couldn't get a cheap air fare, or the flights were fully booked.

When we went as a family, it was a flight or by car.

After my dad had to sell his car due to his age (he passed away a bit later on), I invariably needed a car at the other end and most of my/our  journeys were subsequently by road. 

I didn't miss the train at all, even though I came to hate the regular road journey.

 

Sorry that's all off topic.

However, even if it's too late for me, if HS2 were to be completed in full as originally planned, a 1 hour (from OOC) or 1 hour 7 minute (from Euston) dash up to Manchester, would have been a much more enticing prospect.

 

.

.

[rockershovel]

1 hour ago, KingEdwardII said:

I think that they did lack vision - they seemed not to be able to see that for passengers, there were plenty of folk wanting to go through London to places beyond.

 

It was Edward Watkin that eventually showed this kind of vision, but he was unable to pull off his ambitions, late in the day that he was. We are all worse off as a result.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

PS I think Watkin was a true visionary of the railways - he had a hand in railways in Canada as well as the UK and there he conceived of a Canadian trans-continental railway, before it became recognized as not only necessary and useful, but also as being essential to tie the Canadian provinces together politically.

Lack of vision? The first thing you see, if you open your eyes is that London was and remains bisected by a large, fast flowing and in their times, heavily used river. 

 

They DID build the first subway under a river in the world (Tower Subway) and the first rail tunnel (Shoreditch). They invented the bolted segmental tunnel lining and the Greathead Shield, and built the first electric Underground Railway in the world. Hungerford Bridge was state-of-the-art for its time. 

 

They produced the definitive aesthetic for ceramic polychromatic tiling for those railways.

 

They constructed cut-and-cover urban railways on a scale to rival anything done today. 

 

No. They pushed the Technical envelope to its limits. Its just that their goals were different. 

[rockershovel]

XC are a quite abominable travesty of a rail service. My misadventures between Birmingham, Bristol, Plymouth and London are documented elsewhere...

[corneliuslundie]

The problem is that CX provides a service which is needed, it is just that it is done badly.

The other aspect I don't like is that even if you get a seat you can find that at the next station it has been reserved since you sat down.

I used to use it to get from Birmingham NS to Derby for HMRS meetings on Saturday mornings, Usually full of already drunk football supporters (now we meet on Zoom). Fortunately later the timetable changed and there was an EMR class 170 at the right time.

One small mitigating feature used to be that many trains were HSTs, so at least comfortable if you did get a seat.

Jonathan

[Ron Ron Ron]

33 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

The likely answer is you wouldn't have today's traffic volumes, because the travel times would discourage it.  Traffic levels are, to some extent, self-regulating. ............

 

Don't forget that the UK population has grown by getting on for 14 or 15 million since the pre-M25 days, with the bulk of that growth in the SE of England.

Figures like millions and billions are bandied around so much these days, that most of us lose sight of such scale at what it really means.

14 or 15 million is a massive amount.

 

Also factor in that in general, we are far more mobile as a population, both for work and leisure, plus there are significant numbers of people travelling to and from the London airports, a large percentage of who will use the M25.

Of course the provision of roads like the M25 have facilitated that growth in mobility, but the demand and pressure was already there, as it already exists today in many areas of transport, road, rail and air.

 

 

.

Edited October 15 by Ron Ron Ron

[Bernard Lamb]

30 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

It's also known that a substantial proportion of M25 traffic - no, I don't know the percentage - is using it for between no more than two junctions.  It has inadvertently become the world's greatest amalgam of local relief roads.

Very much so locally. Coming home from London on the M1, you go west on the M25 and north on the A41 to get to Hemel, rather than staying on the M1 to the 'official' turning. Going to London? Straight onto the M1, as the approach to Junction 20 is a night mare at most times of the day. Junctions 20-23 must have a very high number of loal users, even if the percentage figure might not be that high.

Bernard

[adb968008]

Driving back from GETs on sunday it was a tailback from M1 to M4, and again from M3 to A3 (Grisley Wisley)..5pm ish.

 

I had the illest of fortunes as to have to goto East Tilbury for my pains on Monday, in monsoon downpours the entire way… Eastbound fine, but westbound 8 am wasnt going anywhere from M23 all the way back to M3.

 

Looping back to HS2.. MK has no benefits from HS2.. but I looked at rail options, and the Pendo was 35 minutes to Euston, the 350 was 1hr10.

How are the regions going to manage when the Pendos are replaced by HS2 and freeing up that freight capacity thats needed ?.. is 1h10 to become the new norm ?

 

My overall drive [M1/M25] on sunday was 2 hours, even with traffic, most of M1 being 50mph road works, and M25 being variable at 40-60…  Had I tried this by rail, I was looking at fastest option of 1hr 45 station to station due to waiting times, and slowest of 2hr30.. add in getting to station, and shuttle bus / waiting times, the car was a clear winner. That I paid £7 for parking, and c£20 in fuel, compares against the £34 off peak railfare, and £10 all day parking i’d pay at my station.
 

 

Edited October 15 by adb968008

[MidlandRed]

10 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Your saying Farringdon, City and Blackfriars are little used stations ?

 

I really beg to disagree.

 

Farringdon had 40 million LUL entries / exits in 2023…, and 31 million National rail…

71mn on four platforms… thats a staggering amount.

In comparison thats over 2.5x the number of passengers using Manchester Piccadilly.

 

City Thameslink had 6 million… which proves that almost all of them are going North of or South of the Thames… i’d be staggered if most of them were simply going Farringdon to the south.

 

Blackfriars adds another 12 mn… with 9mn on the Tube… This is as big as Manchester Piccadilly again.

 

Combine the three your looking at over 100mn passenger entry exits, or nearly 2mn a week… and your suggesting most of them dont go beyond StP/KX  from the north, and trains are empty to the North until that point, so this lot are all southerners ?

 

If thats really the case then close the tunnel from St Pancras to Farringdon… and repurpose HS2 to use it south.. as evidently thats where the people are.

 

 

Seriously TL and EL sucess are evidence that thru trains are needed, even if the passengers change enroute… as they are clearly going where people want them to go… where they end is less important, as long as its not ending before its gone through… as this is clearly the secret sauce.

thats why OC is so bad, and Euston is the least worst.

 

I couldn’t agree more. Thameslink is massively used - and bear in mind journeys from places like Bedford and Peterborough are now possible on routes deep into what used to be SR territory. Towards the end of last year I travelled into St Pancras International from Kent via high speed and transferred to Thameslink to travel south to London Bridge - the train I caught was 12 coaches long, admittedly evening peak and Thursday, and I can honestly say it was the most crush loaded train I have ever travelled on - and bear in mind there is a train at least every five minutes on the route (in each direction) in fixed formations of 8 or 12 cars dependent on route. And despite crush loading at St Pancras (including plenty of people travelling from locations to the north), even more got on at the intermediate stations - it was quite difficult to alight at London Bridge where another huge influx got on - next stop E Croydon and onwards to Gatwick and Brighton. Whoever thinks no one travels on Thameslink from locations like Gatwick to locations north of London is misinformed. Observing the trains at the two platforms at London Bridge allocated to Thameslink arriving and departing at least every five minutes per direction is quite something, and the volume of passengers even in off peak is impressive.

 

As for commuting north from Euston towards Manchester and also  Birmingham, this is actually quite common, and maybe more so in these days of going into an office on limited days per week - as an individual, the speed up of services using HS2 from Euston to Birmingham will be most attractive (I know this is not the primary purpose of HS2 but to someone who makes that journey on occasion - on sometimes very crowded trains - despite Avanti giving a 30 min service). And only a 10 min max walk along Moor St Queensway to BNS (if needed) or a tram ride to other connections and business areas or towards Wolverhampton. Travelling to OOC would be bonkers really - presumably the Government required slicing of bits to match affordable capital finance, and this required the ludicrous cutting of the section to Euston (possibly owing to less affordable interest payments on government borrowing following the Truss/Kwateng budget ‘experiment’….). Presumably the availability of a lot of spare land at OOC, plus its potential to link to Liz Line, Overground (another hugely used service), and Willesden encouraged the siting of an interchange there. 

Edited October 15 by MidlandRed

[Ron Ron Ron]

11 hours ago, MidlandRed said:

...........Presumably the availability of a lot of spare land at OOC, plus its potential to link to Liz Line, Overground (another hugely used service), and Willesden encouraged the siting of an interchange there. 

 

Don't forget the link to Heathrow. This was an important factor as well.

Rather than route HS2 in and out of London via Heathrow, or alternatively having a separate spur off HS2 to Heathrow, from a junction in the Colne Valley area, a cheaper alternative was available at OOC, being sited alongside the GWML and with a ready made link to the airport.

It was the primary driver for having a station at OOC, rather than just a site for what would have been the Euston tunnel portals.

 

Most importantly though, OOC is sited at the London end of the only available surface corridor out of London to the NW, where they could build a brand new line (as mentioned by Phil recently in this thread).

It was only after the route was settled and nailed down, did they change the plan and decide to (expensively) tunnel all the way from OOC to West Ruislip, instead of building the line at surface level along that section.

 

Right at the beginning, when looking at the initial options for the HS2 route, the alternative route for getting in and out of London, was to tunnel all the way out from Euston towards Watford and beyond, but that was discounted on the basis of the cost of extended tunnelling ; which ironically they ended up with anyway, having changed their plans to tunnel between OOC and West Ruislip.

 

 

.

Edited October 16 by Ron Ron Ron