Jump to content

High Speed 2: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m fixing "the the"
→History: Removed sentence fragment at end of history section, which didn't make much sense
Line 40: Line 40:


On 11 March 2010 the High Speed 2 report was published, together with the government [[command paper]] setting out government policy on high speed rail, informed by High Speed 2's report. Also published were a number of detailed supporting studies.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8561286.stm|title=High-speed rail plans announced by government |work=BBC News|accessdate=2010-03-11 | date=2010-03-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/|title=High Speed Rail|publisher=Department for Transport|accessdate-2010-03-12}}</ref>
On 11 March 2010 the High Speed 2 report was published, together with the government [[command paper]] setting out government policy on high speed rail, informed by High Speed 2's report. Also published were a number of detailed supporting studies.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8561286.stm|title=High-speed rail plans announced by government |work=BBC News|accessdate=2010-03-11 | date=2010-03-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/|title=High Speed Rail|publisher=Department for Transport|accessdate-2010-03-12}}</ref>

This report looked at the tactical issue of congestion, with a passing consideration for any strategic links to Scotland and Mainland Europe. See page 11 of <ref name="networkrail.co.uk">http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/About%20us/New%20Lines%20Programme/5886_NewLineStudy_synopsis.pdf</ref>


==Route==
==Route==

Revision as of 16:29, 17 May 2010

For other uses, see High Speed 2 (disambiguation).
High Speed 2
Overview
StatusProposed for 2025
LocaleUnited Kingdom
(Greater London,
West Midlands initial)
Termini
Stations4 (initial)
Service
TypeHigh-speed railway
SystemNational Rail
Technical
Track gaugeStandard gauge 1,435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in)
Operating speedUp to 250 mph (400 km/h)[n 1]

High Speed 2 (HS2) is a proposed high speed railway in the United Kingdom serving The Midlands and North West with a possible "Y" shaped route from London to Birmingham and then spurs to Manchester and to Leeds via the East Midlands. The project is being developed by High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd, a company established by the UK government in January 2009. High speed rail is supported in principle by the three main UK political parties; there is however debate about which cities should be served and on the environmental performance and impact of high speed rail. If approved, construction would begin in 2017 with the first trains running by 2025. The only other high speed route in the UK is High Speed 1 (the Channel Tunnel Rail Link).

History

The Department for Transport published a document in January 2009 giving details of various options for a new high speed railway in the UK[n 2] and concluded that the most appropriate initial route for an entirely new high speed line in the UK was from London to the West Midlands.[n 3]

In January 2009 the government established a separate company, High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd chaired by Sir David Rowlands, to develop the project along the successful lines used for other long lead time rail infrastructure projects such as High Speed 1 and Crossrail.[n 4][n 5] The company would provide advice on the cost and benefits of a proposed route with any options as appropriate, options for a Heathrow International interchange station, options for access to central London and other cities on the route, connectivity with HS1 and the existing rail network, and proposals for financing and construction.[n 6]

In August 2009, Network Rail published their own study outlining its proposals for the expansion of the railway network which included a new high speed rail line between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh, following a route through the West Midlands and the North-West of England.[1]

In December 2009, HS2 handed its report to the British government. Details released to the public showed proposals for a new railway station in London. The study investigated the possibility for links to Heathrow Airport, connections to Crossrail, the Great Western Main Line and the High Speed 1 Channel Tunnel Rail Link. For the report, a route had been decided and investigated to an accuracy of 0.5 metres (18 in).[2]

On 11 March 2010 the High Speed 2 report was published, together with the government command paper setting out government policy on high speed rail, informed by High Speed 2's report. Also published were a number of detailed supporting studies.[3][4]

Route

File:High Speed 2 route.gif
Approximate route of the London-Birmingham section based on the official description, also available as KML

The line would run from London Euston, mainly in tunnel, to an interchange with Crossrail, west of Paddington, thence along the New North Main Line (Acton-Northolt Line) past West Ruislip alongside the Chiltern Main Line with a four-kilometre viaduct over the Grand Union Canal and River Colne, from the M25 to Amersham in a new 9.6 km tunnel. After emerging from the tunnel, the line would run parallel to the existing A413 road and London - Aylesbury line corridor, moving into the Chiltern area of outstanding natural beauty passing close by Great Missenden to the East, alongside Wendover immediately to the West, then onto Aylesbury. After Aylesbury, the line would run alongside the Aylesbury line, joining north of Quainton Road and then broadly following the route of the dismantled stretch of this line, the Great Central Main Line, to Brackley. North of Brackley the line runs through open countryside.

Less studied are the routes of any possible extensions from Birmingham to Manchester and to Sheffield and Leeds which would allow connections to the North and Scotland. Also how trains would run from Birmingham to Paris is not covered in the proposed route. [n 7]

The route to the West Midlands would be the first stage of a line to Scotland[n 8] and passengers traveling to or from Scotland would be able to use through-trains with a saving of 45 minutes from day one.[5] If approved, construction would begin in 2017, with the first trains running by 2025.[6]

It is possible to view the route over Google satellite photography and on an OpenStreetMap map base. Note that the route may not be completely accurate as it has been traced from some very unclear and awkward to use PDF maps. The route can also be viewed using the official maps published by the DfT.

Possible connection to High Speed 1

Whether and how High Speed 2 should connect to High Speed 1 has not yet been decided or funded. The government command paper says:

"... the new British high speed rail network should be connected to the wider European high speed rail network via High Speed One and the Channel Tunnel, subject to cost and value for money. This could be achieved through either or both of a dedicated rapid transport system linking Euston and St Pancras and a direct rail link to High Speed One."[n 9]

The route engineering study conducted by Arup for High Speed 2 costed a "classic speed" GC loading gauge direct rail link at £458m (single track) or £812m (double track). The connection would be from Old Oak Common to the High Speed 1 St Pancras portal, via tunnel and the North London Line. A double track high speed connection would cost £3.6bn.[7]

The High Speed 2 report recommended that if a direct rail link is built, it shoud be the classic speed, double track option.[8]

Journey times

Proposed journey times for some routes:[n 7][9][10][11]

London to... Currently Proposed (following completion to Birmingham) Proposed (following completion of 'Y' to Manchester and Leeds) Projected (following completion to Glasgow/Edinburgh)+
Birmingham 1 hour 22 minutes 49 minutes
Manchester 2 hours 8 minutes 1 hour 40 minutes 1 hour 20 minutes
Liverpool 2 hours 10 minutes 1 hour 50 minutes 1 hour 36 minutes
Leeds 2 hours 20 minutes 2 hours 20 minutes 1 hour 20 minutes
Edinburgh 4 hours 30 minutes 4 hours 30 minutes 3 hours 30 minutes 2 hours 40 minutes
Glasgow 4 hours 30 minutes 4 hours 3 hours 30 minutes 2 hours 40 minutes

+ An extension to Scotland is described in the government command paper as a "longer term aspiration."[n 10]

Proposed stations

Euston Terminus, also showing nearby terminus of High Speed 1 at St Pancras
Crossrail Interchange in west London
The proposed 'Birmingham Interchange'
Proposed layout for Curzon Street Station

London Euston

The line would start from an expanded London Euston which will serve both conventional rail and high speed rail. A rapid transit link between Euston and London St Pancras may be provided but is not currently funded or committed. The Command Paper also anticipates that the connection with Crossrail at Old Oak Common in West London will mean that the prospective additional passenger load at Euston will be mitigated.

Crossrail interchange

Main article: Old Oak Common railway station

The March 2010 report proposes that all trains would stop at a new "Crossrail interchange" located near Old Oak Common between London Paddington and Acton Main Line stations with connections for Crossrail, Heathrow Express and services on the Great Western Main Line to Heathrow Airport, Reading, South West England and South Wales. The Station also may also have connections with London Overground and Southern services on the North London and West London Lines and also with London Underground's Central Line.[n 11]

Birmingham Interchange

The March 2010 report proposes that a new "Birmingham Interchange" station would be built on the other side of the M42 motorway from the National Exhibition Centre, Birmingham International Airport and Birmingham International Station.[n 12] The new interchange would be connected by a "rapid transit people mover" to the other sites; the AirRail Link people mover already operates between Birmingham International station and the airport.

Birmingham Curzon Street

Main article: Curzon Street Station

A new station would be built partly on the site of the old Curzon Street Station, as the Birmingham terminus for High Speed 2. It would be reached via a spur line from the main route. The site is termed Birmingham Curzon Street in the government's command paper[n 13] and as 'Birmingham Fazeley Street' in the report produced by High Speed 2 Ltd with reference to a nearby street.[12] The two names do however refer to a station at the same location.

Curzon street was the main station for Birmingham until the nearby Birmingham New Street railway station was completed in the 1850s. Birmingham New Street is however already operating at full capacity and would be unable to accommodate new high speed services.

East Midlands "parkway" station

Not to be confused with the existing East Midlands Parkway railway station on the Midland Main Line.

A new "parkway" station in the East Midlands is also proposed at a new site (not the site of the current East Midlands Parkway station). It is not yet known where this station would be sited, as Sir David Rowlands of High Speed Two explained: "Taken individually, Nottingham, Leicester or Derby may not have adequate capacity for a high-speed line. They are not as big as Birmingham or Manchester ... but if you take them together, and have something that can serve all three, that's maybe the best way to go."[13]

Business leaders in the area supported high-speed rail coming to the East Midlands but were concerned that "If a station was connected to a city rather than a parkway it would cut connecting traffic ... The time it would take to get to a parkway would also negate the shorter journey times of the high-speed train itself.[13]

Infrastructure

Like High Speed 1, the new line will be built to the European GC loading gauge.[n 14][14]

The line would have a maximum design speed of 250 miles per hour (400 km/h).[n 15] Initially trains would run at a top speed of 225 miles per hour (362 km/h).[n 16]

The line would be built to handle freight trains if required, although it would not be feasible to run freight trains as part of normal operations due to their low speed. However, the high speed line would release capacity on the West Coast Main Line and Midland Main Line for freight.[n 17]

Cost

The overall cost for the project, including rolling stock, is estimated at £34.012bn [15] with a 66% allowance for cost overun. This does not include links to the HS1 to extend the European High Speed Network or to Manchester and Scotland.

The return on investment or payback is estimated by NetworkRail at 1.6 times over a period of 60 years, without including the cost of capital [15] page 9.

Rolling Stock

Two types of high speed trains are planned:[n 18]

  • 'Classic compatible' trains would be built to the British loading gauge and could run off the high speed line onto conventional routes such as the West Coast Main Line.
  • Wider and taller trains with suitable lower platforms which could include double decker trains (similar to the TGV Duplex). These would be confined to the high speed line (or other areas cleared to GC loading gauge).

The operating characteristics of both types of train would be the same, including a maximum speed of at least 225 miles per hour (362 km/h). Each train would be 200 metres (660 ft) long. Two trains could be joined together for a 400 metres (1,300 ft) train, but only stations built for the high speed line would be able to accommodate such long trains.[n 19]

Because of their non-standard nature, classic compatible trains are expected to be more expensive to procure.[n 20]

Environmental impact

Destruction of homes

The scheme would result in the demolition of 440 homes; 250 around Euston station, 'dozens' in West London and most of the rest in Birmingham. The Government has announced plans to compensate those affected by the route who have a "pressing need to sell their homes" but are unable to do so after a period of three months. After May 2010, homeowners who can't sell their houses while the scheme is in the planning stage can apply to have the property bought at market value by High Speed 2. The compensation scheme would remain in place until the project received formal planning approval at which point compensation would be handled by existing measures aimed at homeowners affected by major strategic projects.[16]

Loss of wildlife habitat and recreation space

There are concerns that the route is likely to damage the Chiltern Hills area of outstanding natural beauty, the Colne valley regional park on the outskirts of London, and other areas of green belt.[17]

The proposals also include the re-alignment of more than 1 kilometre (1,100 yd) of the already re-aligned River Tame, construction of a 635 metres (694 yd) long viaduct and a cutting[18] through ancient woodland at The Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and the Black Country nature reserve at Park Hall on the edge of Birmingham.[19] There are a number of protest groups along the proposed route [20], including one group [21] whose main concern is the impact to the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Carbon emissions

In 2007 the Department for Transport commissioned a report to investigated likely the carbon impacts associated with the construction and operation of a new rail line to either Manchester or Scotland, and in particular the comparison with emissions from domestic flights, when airport infrastructure carbon costs are discounted.

The report concluded that there were "no potential carbon benefit in building a new line on the London to Manchester over the 60-year appraisal period. In essence, the additional carbon emitted by building and operating a new rail route is larger than the entire quantity of carbon emitted by the air services".[n 21] It did also note that "Construction emissions are only considered for the new line rail options, no construction emissions are assumed for domestic air."[n 22] The report, "Estimated Carbon Impact of a New North South Line", was commissioned from Booz Allen Hamilton.[n 23]

The "High Speed Rail Command paper" published in March 2010 estimated that the carbon impact of the scheme would be between -25.0 to +26.6 MtCO2 over a 60-year period and noted that the figures would be very sensitive to the assumptions relating to load factor, the modal shift achieved away from aviation and the carbon intensity of electricity generation. Should no reduction in aviation be achieved and if there was no change to carbon intensity of electricity generation then the scheme would increase emissions by 0.44 million tonnes per year.[n 24]

The Eddington Report states "Given that domestic aviation accounts for 1.2 per cent of the UK’s carbon emissions, it is unlikely that building a high-cost, energy-intensive very high-speed train network is going to be a sensible way to reduce UK emissions." A particular environmental concern with high speed rail is its inherently higher energy use and consequent emissions, when compared with conventional rail. Energy use rises approximately with the square of speed; so trains operating at 300 km/h (1.5 times faster than conventional rail’s maximum speed of 200 km/h /125 mph) will have over twice the emissions.

In 2008, Rail minister Tom Harris said that Britain did not need faster trains that would consume more energy but should instead focus on reducing congestion and reliability on the existing network. "The argument that high speed rail is a green option does not necessarily stand up to close inspection," said Harris, in a letter to Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies. "Increasing the maximum speed from 200km/h to 350km/h leads to a 90% increase in energy consumption. In exchange, it cuts station-to-station journey times by less than 25% and door-to-door journey times by even less."

Timeline to opening

High Speed 2 Ltd suggest[n 25] that following ministerial approval, public consultation, parliamentary approval through a hybrid bill, and detailed engineering design, construction could commence in mid 2018. Construction is estimated to require 6.5 years, with a further year to finish testing.[n 26] The reconstruction of Euston Station "would probably take the whole of the construction period and would form the critical path for the whole programme."[n 27] Opening would be at the end of 2025.[n 28] Note that this timetable refers to the London-Birmingham section only.

The government command paper suggests that opening to Birmingham should be possible by the end of 2026.[n 29] The government timetable includes the additional work of preparing the routes to Leeds and Manchester, for approval by Parliament in the hybrid bill. Including the whole of the initial Y-shaped network in one bill would facilitate planning it as a single coherent project and avoid using excessive parliamentary time.[n 30]

Management

High Speed 2 Ltd

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd was established in January 2009,[n 31] to study the feasibility and viability of a new line[n 32] using trains capable of travelling at speeds over 150 miles per hour (240 km/h).[n 33] The company's stated purpose was to "help consider the case for new high speed services from London to Scotland."[n 34] As a first stage, initial proposals for a new line would be considered for routes between London and the West Midlands,[n 34][n 35] with the new line extended over time to reach Scotland.[n 36] The company would report formally to the Government on the initial issues affecting this first stage by the end of 2009.[n 37]

The company would draw on existing consultation produced for the Department for Transport (DfT) and Network Rail, soliciting new consultation where needed, and would utilise Department for Transport and Network Rail staff as well as recruiting externally.[n 4] While the project was launched as an independent initiative, in launching the HS2 company the government acknowledged the contributions of both the consultancy group Arup in suggesting a high speed link from Heathrow to London, and of HSR advocacy group Greengauge 21 in justifying High Speed rail based on the limitations of the WCML, as both having been important.[22]

The board consists of:[23]

  • Sir David Rowlands - Non-Executive Chairman
  • Alison Munro - Chief Executive and Board Member
  • Sir Brian Briscoe - Non-Executive Board Member
  • Andy Friend - Non-Executive Board Member
  • Mike Welton - Non-Executive Board Member
  • Tim Wellburn - Non-Executive Board Member

Alternative proposals

See also: High-speed rail in the United Kingdom

The intention of the chosen scheme is to relieve congestion on the motorways, rather than replicating an existing route such as the West Coast Main Line.[n 38] and the selected route was identified as "the single most important and heavily used" strategic national transport corridors in England, for both passenger and freight traffic by road and rail,[n 39] with the corridor being cited as having twice the size of travel market as London to the North West and six times that of London to Scotland.[n 40] The DfT cited the significant rail market share (52%) of North East England, "a region well served by efficient and reasonably fast rail services", as showing that the new line could achieve a "modal shift" to rail, from road and air.[n 41]

In launching the project the DfT announced that the new High Speed 2 line between London and the West Midlands would follow a different alignment to the existing WCML, because it was considered to be too costly to provide extra capacity by building new rail alongside the existing WCML while the existing track was in use. Furthermore, parts of the existing Victorian era WCML alignment were not suitable for High Speed Rail service.[n 42]

The Government stated that the new line would improve rail services from London to "Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow and other destinations in the north of England and Scotland",[n 43] and an approach route west of London would allow opportunities to "improve surface access by rail to Heathrow Airport."[n 44] Furthermore, if the new line were connected to the Great Western Main Line (GWML) and Crossrail it would provide links with East and West London, and the Thames Valley.[n 45]

The DfT also said that the West Coast Main Line (WCML), the existing UK main railway line serving the corridor, was the United Kingdom's busiest, but was expected to be "overloaded south of Rugby by about 2025".[n 46] This was despite a recently completed upgrade, and the expected implementation of plans for longer trains and in-cab signalling.[n 47] Specifically for the WCML as opposed to other main lines, it was asserted that no further significant capacity enhancements were possible without "major disruption to passengers and freight services".[n 42] It was proposed that released capacity on the existing WCML due to construction of HS2 would then be used to enhance services for the Northampton, Milton Keynes and South Midlands area, identified as the "largest growth area in the UK" with a population of 1.6-million people.[n 48]

Atkins study

The Atkins study had identified routes to the West Midlands, Liverpool and Manchester as being capacity constrained by 2015 and this is almost certainly where the first HSL will be required. Atkins also recommended having two routes, one each side of the Pennines. The study recommends against a trunk and branch structure.

Network Rail proposal

A Network Rail study published in August 2009 proposed an alternative high speed route to Scotland via the north west which would replace the West Coast Main Line making it[vague] available for regional services. The report did not find in favour of the line running through Heathrow airport, but favoured a high-speed spur to the airport.[24]

Maglev

A line using maglev technology was dismissed as being too costly to build, not as environmentally friendly as conventional high-speed rail, unable to integrate with the existing UK rail network or future high-speed lines, and unable to bring the operational flexibility and advantages of conventional high speed rail, such as the development of domestic services on HS1 which use high-speed railways in part.[n 49]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ DfT (2010a), page 127
  2. ^ Atkins(2009)
  3. ^ DfT (2009a) page 4 paragraph 5
  4. ^ a b DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 62
  5. ^ DfT (2009a), page 6 paragraph 7
  6. ^ DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 63
  7. ^ a b DfT (2010a), page 67 F4.2
  8. ^ DfT (2009a), pages 16 paragraphs 37
  9. ^ DfT (2010a), page 9
  10. ^ DfT (2009a), pages 78 paragraph 4.47
  11. ^ DfT (2010a), page 107
  12. ^ DfT(2010a), page 118
  13. ^ DfT(2010a), page 112
  14. ^ DfT(2010a), page 127
  15. ^ DfT(2010a), page 127
  16. ^ DfT(2010a), page 129
  17. ^ DfT(2010a), page 130
  18. ^ DfT(2010a), page 129
  19. ^ DfT(2010a), page 129
  20. ^ HS2(2010a), para 4.1.23
  21. ^ Booz Allen Hamilton (2007), p.6
  22. ^ Booz Allen Hamilton (2007), p.13
  23. ^ Booz Allen Hamilton (2007)
  24. ^ DfT(2010a), page 53
  25. ^ HS2(2010a), Chapter 5.2
  26. ^ HS2(2010a), p213
  27. ^ HS2(2010a), p214
  28. ^ HS2(2010a), p213
  29. ^ DfT(2010a), page 140
  30. ^ DfT(2010a), page 138-9
  31. ^ DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 8
  32. ^ DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 61
  33. ^ DfT (2009a), page 23 paragraph 56
  34. ^ a b DfT (2009a), page 6 paragraph 9
  35. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 37
  36. ^ DfT (2009a), page 17 paragraph 40
  37. ^ DfT (2009a), page 24 paragraph 65
  38. ^ DfT (2009a), pages 12-16 paragraphs 32-37
  39. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 31
  40. ^ DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 48
  41. ^ DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 47
  42. ^ a b DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 36
  43. ^ DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 4
  44. ^ DfT (2009a), page 17 paragraph 41
  45. ^ DfT (2009a), page 18 paragraph 43
  46. ^ DfT (2009a), page 5 paragraph 6
  47. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 43
  48. ^ DfT (2009a), page 12 paragraph 38
  49. ^ DfT (2009a), page 23 paragraphs 58–60

References

Documents referenced from 'Notes' section
  • Booz Allen Hamilton (2007). "Estimated Carbon Impact of a New North South Line" (PDF). Department for Transport.
  • Atkins (2009). "High Speed Line Study: Summary Report" (PDF). Department for Transport. Retrieved 2010-03-13.
  • DfT(2009a): Department for Transport (2009). Britain’s Transport Infrastructure High Speed Two (pdf). Department for Transport. ISBN 9781906581800. Retrieved 2010-03-13.
  • DfT(2010a): Department for Transport (11 March 2010). High Speed Rail - Command Paper (pdf). The Stationery Office. ISBN 9780101782722. Retrieved 2010-03-13. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |publisherlink= ignored (help)
  • HS2(2010a): High Speed Two Ltd (11 March 2010). "High Speed Rail London to the West Midlands and Beyond: A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited". Department for Transport. Retrieved 2010-03-16.
Other references for article
  1. ^ "The case for new lines" (PDF). Meeting the capacity challenge. Network Rail New Lines.
  2. ^ "High-speed rail plans to be submitted to government". BBC News Online. 2009-12-27. Retrieved 2009-12-28.
  3. ^ "High-speed rail plans announced by government". BBC News. 2010-03-11. Retrieved 2010-03-11.
  4. ^ "High Speed Rail". Department for Transport. {{cite web}}: Text "accessdate-2010-03-12" ignored (help)
  5. ^ Savage, Michael (2010-01-02). "Adonis in all-party talks on high-speed rail link". The Independent. London. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
  6. ^ Pank, Philip (2009-12-30). "Britain in line for Europe's fastest railway". The Times. London. Retrieved 2009-12-31.
  7. ^ Arup. "Route Engineering Study Final Report: A Report for HS2, chapter 9" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
  8. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p134"" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
  9. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p147"" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
  10. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 6 p226"" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
  11. ^ "Virgin Trains timetable" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-04-09.
  12. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 3 p117" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-12.
  13. ^ a b "New 'parkway' station could be built in East Midlands". This is Nottingham. 2009-12-03. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
  14. ^ "High Speed Rail: London to the West Midlands and Beyond. A Report to Government by High Speed Two Limited. Chapter 2 p41"" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-03-17.
  15. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference networkrail.co.uk was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  16. ^ Millward, David (2010-03-12). "Hundreds of homes will go for new high speed rail line". The Telegraph. London. Retrieved 2010-03-14.
  17. ^ "8 Dec 2009 : Column 31WH—continued". Hansard. Retrieved 2010-01-04.
  18. ^ "West Midlands Map 4" (PDF). High Speed 2. Retrieved 2010-04-15.
  19. ^ "Park Hall". Retrieved 2010-03-18.
  20. ^ http://www.hs2actionalliance.org/yourlocalgroup.php
  21. ^ http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&ref=ts&gid=367587726768
  22. ^ Wright, Robert (2009-01-16). "High-speed line wins go-ahead". Financial Times. Retrieved 2009-01-20.
  23. ^ "About HS2". HS2 Ltd.
  24. ^ "Meeting the capacity challenge: The case for new lines" (PDF). Network Rail.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=High_Speed_2&oldid=362635350"