The 'Stop Hs2' campaign's dirty tricks.

[RichmondCommu]

If the NIMBYS dont like it then tough. Issue a compulsory purchase order and get shot of them. I would make the compensation as low as possible. Why pander to these people? Why engage in deabte or surveys or campaigns or any of the other things. Just build it. NOW

Thankfully democracy prevents these bully boy tactics from being implemented.

 

[Snapper]

Paul, I know this is going to look as though I'm picking on you here, but ....



How is HS2 going to reduce road deaths and reduce pollution? The vast majority of freight that can be carried economically by rail is already being transported by rail. The rest is made up of wagon load at best.

I don't see how building HS2 is going to reduce road deaths, unless magically every car driver suddenly decides to get rid of their car and use the train instead.

PS in the majority of accidents involving HGVs, it is a car driver that has caused the accident, usually by cutting up the lorry and forcing them to swerve, or a mechanical failure, such as a tyre blowout. (Have you seen 1 let go on a lorry while it's on the motorway?)

For a start, without Hs2 the railways will lose out to roads. More freight on roads leads to more accidents. It's that simple.

Also, research shows that the greatest cause of lorry accidents isn't the fault of car drivers. It's lorry drivers falling asleep at the wheel.

 

[TGV]

That's the thing about France though. Because of the size of the country, towns and cities are more spread out from each other. Paris - Lyon may only be roughly 290 miles apart by road, but the real benefit of TGV Sud Est is that services extend to Perpignan and Marseille which are considerably further away.



Same point again, towns and cities are further away from each other.

Paris - Marseille (via LGV sud est and LGV Méditerranée) = 486 miles. It's hardly an order of magnitude greater than London-Glasgow (400 miles). It's well within the same ball park when talking about high speed journey times. To say that the distances are so much more in France as to be in a different scale is incorrect in my opinion.

The Paris-Bordeaux route is well under the London-Glasgow or Edinburgh distances by around 65km - even if you take the classic route and avoid the LGV via St Pierre des Corps. The intermediate towns are more densely located in the UK (England, really), but as the high speed line won't be serving them, it is a moot point. Taking the line in isolation it would be very similar to any one from France or Japan.

I think your comment about Japan having a 1250 mile high speed line is misleading as there is no through service at Tokyo to reach one end of the country direct from the other - it is a hub for the other lines.

 

[Snapper]

Thankfully democracy prevents these bully boy tactics being implemented.

Indeed. The ironic thing is that something the antis complain about. They seem to see democracy as some sort of 'X-Factor' competition where they should get to decide what's good for the country.

 

[HSTEd]

And as Central Railway would probably not allow the existing FOCs on their track, they would thus be in possession of a North-South route with none of the congestion problems, and minimum speed limits, encountered by current freight.

That would seriously damage the FOC's business models, which means it would be in their interest to kill it.
Conversely, if they thought it was a terrible idea that would never cover its costs they would like it, because after CR go bust they can pick up the infrastructure for a song and solve said national congestion problems.

You have to escape the idea that FOCs want what we want, what they want is to make as much money as possible.

EDIT:
If we were to assume that 40% of the HGV traffic through the Chunnel or coming over the channel ports is heading to places in the vicinity of or north of the southern side of the M25, and that 60% of this traffic could be captured, that would be enough to justify effectively hourly mile long TOFC trains, or actually more trains than that because they would be a mix of TOFC and rolling highway stock.

And this is before we consider the effect of the drastic reduction in rail shipping costs has, or any internal traffic generated by this. (190 TEU with a single driver who has ATO and is thus paid less than regular staff? And this is before we consider that double stack 8'6" containers would already be cleared through to Calais. There may be no container traffic now but there might be if container transport costs were slashed.)

And the reason 9'6" containers are replacing 8'6" ones is that most shipping firms charge th same for either, but if 8'6" can be double stacked through the chunnel but 9'6" ones can't this won't be the case.
And with modifications to the apparently standard OLE in the Chunnel they might be able to fit double stack high cube container trains (using Furrer and Frey Contact Rail type jobs).

 

[tec]

For a start, without Hs2 the railways will lose out to roads. More freight on roads leads to more accidents. It's that simple.

Also, research shows that the greatest cause of lorry accidents isn't the fault of car drivers. It's lorry drivers falling asleep at the wheel.

Just add 3 more lanes each way on the M40.

The truck drivers will then have more room to swerve across all the lanes and thus reduce the number of collisions.

It will also probably be cheaper than HS2.

 

[jon0844]

No. Don't add any more lanes. Get the middle lane hoggers into lane one and then you can make do perfectly fine with three lanes, or even two if you stop lorries overtaking at peak times.

[/off topic]

 

[The Ham]

Adding 6 extra lanes to the M40 is a brillant idea, that will not carve through the Chiltens, would be welcombed by the locals and would be safer than a railway line so less deaths. Also most of the residents who are along the M40 who are wanting sound barries will not have to worry any more about noise.

Scrap the idea of HS2 and just build it. NOW!!!

 

[Toots]

I also work with the railways a lot of the time, with people at all levels. The idea that NR want to turn the S&C into a pure freight railway is way off-beam. We all know that some of the wildest gossip comes from people within the railways. The fact they work there doesn't mean they actuallyknow what's either practicable, possible or really happening.

A couple of things here,first off where did I say that the S&C was to become a 'pure freight railway'?,I said that the aim was to transfer freight from the WCML to the S&C which it is.My evidence is simple,a vast amount of money has been and is being spent on track renewals and extra signals and we are told by Network Rail, ie not 'wild gossip' ,this is the reason ,and the fact that the people I work with and attend meetings with are people who are in charge of and work on that particular line!
Now then,you work 'with' the railways a 'lot of the time',you are happy to cast doubt on my credentials so what does working 'with' and a 'a lot of the time' entail Paul?.

 

[NSEFAN]

Adding 6 extra lanes to the M40 is a brillant idea, that will not carve through the Chiltens, would be welcombed by the locals and would be safer than a railway line so less deaths. Also most of the residents who are along the M40 who are wanting sound barries will not have to worry any more about noise.

Scrap the idea of HS2 and just build it. NOW!!!

 

[Nym]

Adding 6 extra lanes to the M40 is a brillant idea, that will not carve through the Chiltens, would be welcombed by the locals and would be safer than a railway line so less deaths. Also most of the residents who are along the M40 who are wanting sound barries will not have to worry any more about noise.

Scrap the idea of HS2 and just build it. NOW!!!

Please, please study the route of the M40...

 

[Metroland]

Actually HS2 adds to equivalent to 9 lanes in each direction to the M40, making it a 24 lane highway. Against the backdrop that the urban road network around the motorway is already extremely congested due to space limitations in UK cities, it would run at 1/3 of the speed, be far more noisy and polluting.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Please, please study the route of the M40...

I think there may have been some serious sarcasm in his post If not then wow just wow...

 

[starrymarkb]

Please, please study the route of the M40...

I think someone was being sarcastic I certainly read it as being the case

 

[Snapper]

A couple of things here,first off where did I say that the S&C was to become a 'pure freight railway'?,I said that the aim was to transfer freight from the WCML to the S&C which it is.My evidence is simple,a vast amount of money has been and is being spent on track renewals and extra signals and we are told by Network Rail, ie not 'wild gossip' ,this is the reason ,and the fact that the people I work with and attend meetings with are people who are in charge of and work on that particular line!
Now then,you work 'with' the railways a 'lot of the time',you are happy to cast doubt on my credentials so what does working 'with' and a 'a lot of the time' entail Paul?.

Ok, a misunderstanding perhaps. I read what you posted as suggesting the S&C was to become a freight railway.

But I would still take issue with the idea that the proposal is to 'transfer' freight from the WCML to the S&C. The FOCs submission to the RUS makes it clear that they don't want this. They see the S&C as useful for some services and as a vital diversionary route, but clearly, a lot of services can't use it unless NR decide to electrify it. NR has acknowledged the undesirability of sending freight the 'long way round', so clearly, the S&C is of limited use to many services.

But, back to Hs2, all this is a sideshow. The Northern WCML is more affected by the new first franchise than Hs2 right now. What matters now is the route from London - Birmingham. NRs assessment of what could happen after Hs2 P1 makes for some very interesting reading and puts the idea that we can 'do without' Hs2 into sharp perspective;

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/upload...cuments/FuturePrioritieSWestCoastMainLine.pdf

 

[jones_bangor]

No. Don't add any more lanes. Get the middle lane hoggers into lane one and then you can make do perfectly fine with three lanes, or even two if you stop lorries overtaking at peak times.

Bloody lorries - that is my view entirely, ban them from all outside lanes AT ALL TIMES. Cut congestion in an instant.

 

[carriageline]

Bloody lorries - that is my view entirely, ban them from all outside lanes AT ALL TIMES. Cut congestion in an instant.

You obviously didn't think that stupid comment through, did you

 

[Nym]

Bloody lorries - that is my view entirely, ban them from all outside lanes AT ALL TIMES. Cut congestion in an instant.

So what happens when the 120 year old man with his fog lights on at midday in the middle of July on the M18 with his nose pressed against the windscreen decided he loves doing 45, since he's a fully paid up member of the 45 club...?

Increases emissions massively as HGVs brake and accelerate significantly and increses the chance of accidents.

 

[jones_bangor]

So what happens when the 120 year old man with his fog lights on at midday in the middle of July on the M18 with his nose pressed against the windscreen decided he loves doing 45, since he's a fully paid up member of the 45 club...?

Increases emissions massively as HGVs brake and accelerate significantly and increses the chance of accidents.

Could look at minimum speed, but how many of those flat cap types are left nowadays anyway?

Lorries cause congestion and tail-backs when they pull into Lane 2 - fact.

 

[Nym]

Could look at minimum speed, but how many of those flat cap types are left nowadays anyway?

Lorries cause congestion and tail-backs when they pull into Lane 2 - fact.

Plenty...

People who think they know how to drive and know more about traffic flow than the HA planning department cause more tailbacks, if everyone did as they were supposed to on the road there would be significantly less congestion.

So would you have barred my vehicle from lane 2 because I was limited to 70? Would you bar coaches from lane 2 because they're limited to 62?

 

[gordonthemoron]

the UK should follow germany, ban coaches & lorries from motorways, keep them for cars only (that's why they're called autobahns)

 

[jon0844]

? They're not banned from autobahns - whoever told you otherwise?

Many sections do have overtaking restrictions at peak times, which is all you really need. I believe there are some roads in the UK that do too but nowhere near enough.

 

[gordonthemoron]

lorries are banned at weekends and coach services are banned except between west & east german cities

 

[jones_bangor]

You obviously didn't think that stupid comment through, did you

You may think banning lorries from outside lanes is stupid, I think you may be surprised how popular it would be with the general public. It might need crawler lanes to work, but its not unfeasible.

 

[carriageline]

You may think banning lorries from outside lanes is stupid, I think you may be surprised how popular it would be with the general public. It might need crawler lanes to work, but its not unfeasible.

Yes it would be popular, but still silly IMO. Okay, on steep hills and the like I could understand, but it would be badly met by haulage companies, and lorries do sometimes overtake a lot smaller, heavier lorries. Not all lorries are maxed to their tonnage. Some have empty trailers, why should they sit behind something for miles on end, when they have deadlines to meet? And then, wht about when one lane up a hill is filled with 7-8 slow moving lories, and everyone else has to move into the outside lane, more congestion and accidents.

 

[jon0844]

Why more accidents because cars must now use lane two? On a three lane (or more) road cars rarely use lane one lorries or no lorries.

Go to Germany and see how you can have a car pull out to overtake in lane two at 90-100kph with cars doing 200+kph and no accidents. The fast car driver has already predicted the overtake and begun to slow. The slow car driver has signalled clearly and not just pulled out and crawled along to prove a point (as there's no limit, there's no point to prove). No crash, despite a large variance of speed. Fast car driver isn't upset because the car will soon return to lane one and half the fun of driving fast is the acceleration!

We could learn a lot from mainland Europe, where more countries are now increasing motorway speeds to 130kph (around 80mph).

Our roads would be safer if people were more disciplined and courteous. And the 70mph limit also means people get angry when they feel they've been unfairly slowed down!

Damn that was off topic!

 

[dggar]

Damn that was off topic!

I think this thread has been off topic for some considerable time

 

[carriageline]

Why more accidents because cars must now use lane two? On a three lane (or more) road cars rarely use lane one lorries or no lorries.

Go to Germany and see how you can have a car pull out to overtake in lane two at 90-100kph with cars doing 200+kph and no accidents. The fast car driver has already predicted the overtake and begun to slow. The slow car driver has signalled clearly and not just pulled out and crawled along to prove a point (as there's no limit, there's no point to prove). No crash, despite a large variance of speed. Fast car driver isn't upset because the car will soon return to lane one and half the fun of driving fast is the acceleration!

We could learn a lot from mainland Europe, where more countries are now increasing motorway speeds to 130kph (around 80mph).

Our roads would be safer if people were more disciplined and courteous. And the 70mph limit also means people get angry when they feel they've been unfairly slowed down!

Damn that was off topic!

You pretty much answered your own question haha.

The reason there would be more accidents, is because over here we are not courteous, we don't plan ahead, we don't anticipate anything happening beyond our steering wheel, and if it does, it's someone else's fault. We always have people with zero lane discipline, don't indicate, are selfish, and always in a rush, and don't care about anyone else!

We have a lot to learn as you said, but nothing will change

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Bloody lorries - that is my view entirely, ban them from all outside lanes AT ALL TIMES. Cut congestion in an instant.

They're already banned from lane three on a three lane motorway. It's alll very well going on an anti lorry rant but how do you think all of those things that you buy in your shops in town get there?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

It's alll very well going on an anti lorry rant but how do you think all of those things that you buy in your shops in town get there?

Magic, clearly.