-Lowest journey times and directness is not critical to freight. Efficiency of operation and reliability are
-Yes, the WCML is a 24 hour route 6 days a week via one route or another. FOCs can bid for paths within this
-Can take W12.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)
- Thread starter ABB125
- Start date
- Status
-Lowest journey times and directness is not critical to freight. Efficiency of operation and reliability are
-Yes, the WCML is a 24 hour route 6 days a week via one route or another. FOCs can bid for paths within this
-Can take W12.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
You can prove that? HS2 will make journeys more attractive, it creates journeys that would not have happened before. People will move further from London and drive to the station (and also price out locals needing housing)
I think it is a negative effect for the regions, not a positive one
Many peoe who live nearer London drive to the station already.
And it will reduce the ridiculous house price pressure in London & South East, if further out commutes become more practical.
Current population estimates for 2017 has the UK population at 66 million, by 2035 that's due to grow to 73 million (+10%).
We each currently travel 7,134 miles a year by car. That's 470bn miles by car as a population. If we all do the same miles (although it is true that our number of miles by car has been falling) that increases it to 520bn miles.
Given that most people do a lot of their miles at peak times, without provision for them to drive (i.e. extra roads) they would be looking for alternitve ways of getting around. If there's limited scope (as the trains get busier and busier) for them to opt for rail and more bus routes being cut due to subsidys being withdrawn along with the limitations of how far people car cycle what other options are there? Pretty much only flights.
Can I prove that this will definitely be the case, no, but then neither can you prove that it won't. However given the above I would suggest that it is a fairly likely outcome if we don't provide extra rail capacity.
However not all rail capacity is created equal. In that a Beeching reopening wouldn't help with the long distance rail capacity. If anything it would make it worse as more people would be able to get to the long distance services.
As I've said before, about 1 hour from London is fairly typical for ~10% of workers to work in London but for a lot of the other workers who work in that area work for companies which are based there for semi regular travel.
All those workers (whether they work locally or on London) then spend quite a lot of their money locally, which then benefits the local economy. Especially if they have families (children having swimming lessons, learning musical instruments, going to local attractions, buying clothes, etc.).
Sure HS2 will result in some people working in London and inflating house prices, but probably not by very much given how much a season ticket would cost.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
There's nothing remotely wrong with creating journeys that would not have happened before PROVIDED those journeys are eco-friendly and don't contribute significantly to greenhouse emissions or congestion etc. Creating new car journeys is obviously problematic because cars contribute so much to congestion and global warming. Creating new electric train journeys generally doesn't have those problems - unless of course the electricity is generated by burning fossil fuels. But HS2 trains are likely to be very fuel efficient - much more so than cars. That means that if it creates some new short car journeys to parkway stations, compensated by removing some much longer car journeys as people making existing long-distance car journeys swap to the train, then the net impact will still be to reduce overall CO2 emissions (and overall congestion). Besides, if - as seems very plausible - the UK moves gradually to generating electricity almost entirely from clean sources over the next few decades, then HS2 won't be a problem at all for emissions.
And it's likely that HS2 stations, even when not in established city centres, will become major transport interchanges in their own right, so many journeys to them should be possible using other forms of public transport including trains, trams and buses as well as private cars. Another factor is that even private car journeys can be drop-offs and pick-ups by other family members so they might not be entirely new individual journeys. For example at Toton a partner might divert via the station and drop off on the way to work, school or shopping activity locally. Positioning of the station at the heart of the road network is crucial here so the station is actually on a lot of potential local journeys. Toton is much better in this respect than East Midlands Parkway for example, which is comparatively 'out on a limb' in respect of the wider Derby - Nottingham extended conurbation. Toton, with its excellent connections is also likely to become an important centre for new commercial development with office jobs, which could attract further improvements in local public transport provision. There could be similar effects at Crewe.
Indigo Soup
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2018
- Messages
- 1,486
Depending on which pollutant you're looking at... yes, ish. I suspect a large part of that is because heavy vehicles are the major overall polluters, and those are almost entirely diesel fuelled.
I'd argue that in most respects, one petroleum fuel is largely interchangeable with another, assuming that both have been refined to equivalent specifications and burnt in engines designed to equivalent environmental regulations. Even on particulates, the latest regulations are sufficiently stringent that petrol engines are having to consider it. With that in mind, the less fuel is burnt the less pollution is created. Fuel duty is quite effective in that respect, and the fact that it's a blunt instrument isn't really a downside; sometimes, a whacking great hammer really is the best tool for the job. Adverse effects on rural mobility need to be given special consideration, but allowing them to dominate the discussion seems unwise.
Based on that, HS2 will see about 10% of the working population of Birmingham travelling to London. I have a hard time seeing that as a positive development.
Err, no because there's a lot of Birmingham which wouldn't be within 11 minutes of the HS2 station and the £8,600-£11,000 season ticket (assuming that it is comparable to the existing services) price would be a limiting factor.
Anyway the point stands, the numbers involved would be fairly small, in that there would still be 90% (or more likely more) who would still be working locally.
Anyway, in still awaiting for someone to suggest a viable alternative to HS2....
Conventional rail would require two lines out of London, HSUK uses the MML to get out of London and Maglev is only good for the length of its track, try going beyond it and it involves a change of train.
Once there's a alternative then there could be reasonable calls for HS2 to be cancelled, until then it's the best on offer.
Isn't this unfair of you? It may well be that there's no problem, that HS2 is a solution looking for a problem, and it simply shouldn't be built without any alternative instead.
Every solution we offer in place of HS2 you dismiss anyway, we can't really win!
quantinghome
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 2,883
It's true. There is no problem; in fact there are several problems:
- The southern end of the WCML is rapidly approaching capacity, capacity which was provided only 11 years ago on the completion of the WCRM project.
- MML and ECML are likewise approaching capacity.
- Cross-country connections are very poor, particularly on the Leeds-Birmingham and Manchester-Birmingham axes.
- The overarching problem is that we desperately need to reduce our fossil fuel use in transport; providing a significant increase in long distance rail capacity is a key part of achieving that.
Ah yes, to the extent that we can allow 4-car sub-125mph trains to be introduced on the fast lines, sucking up multiple paths.
And Pendolinos which leave London in the morning with most first class seats empty, continuing the trend of gross overprovision of first class accommodation on this line.
And 5-car Voyagers taking over from Pendolinos on London-Birmingham short runs (yes, surprised me too) because presumably it's the cheapest way to run a train.
I do more than most here travelling on the WCML (including tomorrow), but I also do a lot of road travel up the parallel M1, where more straightforward. Not one of those journeys is going to divert from road to HS2. I know the books have been cooked to incorporate HS2 into the WCML franchise, to stop them attacking HS2 with cheaper fares, but if Chiltern get their act together and provide proper length trains all day at cheaper fares from London to Birmingham there seems no way to stop that competing substantially.
Last edited:
Since 2009 rail growth had gone up by ~70% and there's a need to reduce the need for flying and car usage so as to not to destroy the planet through CO2 emissions creating global warming. Add in the extra population growth which the UK is likely to see and there needs to be something.
View media item 3340
If HS2 was such a bad solution then it should be easy to produce an alternative. The problem is that unless we build a new line there's little else which could be done. If your building a new line the extra to make it high speed is low, especially given that you'd want to improve things on both the WCML and ECML, which without making it a HS line would require two lines (pushing the costs up).
It's not just me though, whenever it suggested that improved timetabling is suggested many (including those whose job it is) suggest that suggestions of what may help are provided, yet nothing had been forthcoming.
There is very little said which is critical of the comments I make about the alternitves to HS2 or the facts about the growth seen.
Show that there's not a need for something, or provide an alternitve or discredit what I say and I will listen.
When we those 4 coach services introduced and where do they serve?
There's some seats in first class on trains at certain times of the day so we shouldn't provide extra capacity. However even if we could double the capacity of the first class areas by removing all first class & replacing with standard class (btw, you can't) you'd add about 25% (in reality about 9%), which may help with capacity but just pushes the need for HS2 down the road a bit.
Again at what times do those 5 coach Voyagers services run? If it's at a time when there's low demand, what's the problem?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Ironically the time you most seem to get them is the peak - because the eye-watering fares mean demand is low. The 1610 to North Wales is one such train, and it leaves MKC with spare seats.
LNR need to pack in running 4-car trains on weekends, which they by and large are doing from May. 4-car sets at other times are caused by a lack of stock.
None of which happen within or represent peak periods of demand on the WCML.
The 1710 and 1810 are however doubles, in the busiest period of passenger demand.
Esker-pades
Established Member
What solution(s) have you offered?
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
No, it's so that higher-capacity Pendolinos can be used on the London-Birmingham-Scotland run.
There are also times when 10-car Voyagers do that run, but there aren't enough to double them all.
The 5-car Voyagers are likely to be Shrewsbury services, portions being doubled up somewhere, or stock working to/from Central Rivers on positioning runs.
The 5-car 1610 to Bangor is because there are no more Voyagers at that time to double up.
The remaining Blackpool Voyager is a single unit too (except the early up service which combines with a Holyhead portion at Crewe).
What the current ICWC frequency out of Euston at that time?
Now an extra 140% seats for that service sounds a lot, when you look at it being, say, one of 7 services (we'll assume 9 coaches for the others as it makes the increase look better) the increase is just 7%.
Then repeat for the whole day with, say, 15 hours of services and it's less than 0.5% (again using all 9 coach services).
It could be something which could be fixed by the time HS2 is built anyway, especially given that the 222's being freed up which could allow one or two 221s to transfer from XC.
That's not true, 5 car Voyagers run to Chester and back all day off peak, whereas in the morning up peak and evening down peak they're mostly doubled. The 1610 is an exception, and rather than "eye watering peak fares" keeping demand low it is actually the only North Wales bound service with restrictions on off-peak tickets in the evening, to artificially reduce demand for it. Very few passengers will be using that service from Euston to beyond Chester as a result - they will be on the 16:40 to Crewe or 17:10 to Holyhead.
If they need more stock they should have more stock.
I see LNR have kept the guides to peak time train lengths that London Midland introduced. The amount of 8 coach trains in the evening peak is remarkable for a full railway line.
https://www.londonnorthwesternrailw...Bh_MzI9WXntTB8/london_euston_may_2018_tmc.pdf
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
From where, the rolling stock tree? They have ordered a substantial growth build but it won't be with us for a couple of years.
Esker-pades
Established Member
That map you quote is from the 20th of May 2018. So...1 year out of date.
Adding coaches can only increase capacity by so much. What happens when the 12 coach trains are full (as they already are)? 16 coaches? 20 coaches?
It's what is on their website. It is not yet the 20th of May. Which of the trains on that list are actually longer than listed?
You stop the pattern of ever increasing long distance commuting and the increasingly ridiculous extent of the London commuter belt.
Esker-pades
Established Member
How would you do that?
What counts as long distance commuting? Watford? Hemel Hempstead? Northampton? That's the sort of distances we're dealing with when one talks about LNWR.
That's looking at what the railway looks like now, not what it looks like in 10 years time or 15 years time or 20 years time. That's even before you consider that there's due to be changes in a few weeks time.
You'd need something like 5 extra trains to allow every service to be 12 coaches running to Birmingham New Street, however a) would all those services be possible to be extended b) the extra capacity would be something like 23%, that'll help but it's not going to make a big difference, especially given that's only on the LNW services and not all services to Birmingham.
What the UK could do is have two decades or more of continuous ruinous hard economic recession which might eventually moderate the price of property in London and the South East. That's what happened in Japan and among other things led to salarymen in suits essentially managing to live homelessly in abandoned buildings and basements while they held down city jobs, but eventually crashed and stabilised the Tokyo property market. That in turned moderated the super long distance commuting traffic that had built up on Shinkansen routes, as previously, significant numbers of people found they had to live hundreds of miles away from their jobs to be able to afford to exist at all. Hence the double-decker high speed fleets that had been built to carry those peak flows have now largely been phased out.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Or rather than putting people on the streets by way of such a thing, we could just introduce strict controls and heavy taxation on the ownership of property that is not your primary home. Much of the London price issue (as distinct from the issue in the wider UK) is due to investors.
Agree wholeheartedly, and we could reintroduce the concept of mass social housing, and rent controls too. I won't hold my breath though. Falls in property would also cut the cost of infrastructure projects.
The 4-car Desiros on the Fast Line are pretty limited in number.
And those same First Class Pendolino seats will be filled at other times.
The Voyagers to Birmingham are the result of the desire to run to Shrewsbury, and to run Pendolinos to Scotland.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Au contraire...
You're aware of Boris Johnson and his massively overspent projects, including £50m on a bridge that wasn't even built?
Tories are happy spending huge sums of money on vanity projects, as long as they are "their kind of vanity projects".
HS2 reminds me of those people who grumble about Foreign Aid because "charity begins at home" and "we should spend the money on tackling things like homelessness in the UK before we give it to problems in other countries", yet never seem to want to actually tackle such problems in the UK (despite the fact that the "fifth biggest" economy in the world can surely afford both commitments)...
...basically, it's just a fig leaf to cut spending elsewhere, disingenuously pretending that we'd love to spend it on the UK underclass, if only we didn't have to spend it on Foreign Aid.
Same nonsense with HS2 - people will suggest that we could have thousands of nurses or new schools or whatever if we cancelled HS2, but then never actually spend it on such things - given what HS2 will cost each UK taxpayer spread over a decade, we could afford it *and* various other publically spirited projects if we wanted - you just know that the people suggesting alternative things we could spend the "£50bn" on will quickly forget about those projects (and focus the "saving" on cutting corporation tax or inheritance tax or whatever).
(also worth pointing out that HS2 will bring in large incomes - the amount of tickets sold on a four hundred metre train - services departing Euston every three minutes - so it's foolish to just consider the "cost" without the money that it will raise)
A point lost when people claim that new roads get built at the drop of a hat whilst we've hardly had any new bits of railway line since privatisation!
I'm a big fan of the way that you come onto this thread once a week, stir the pot, ignore the questions/points raised by others, other than giving a glib response about "smarter signals" or some other hocus pocus! Effortless...
- Status