HS2 should stop at more stations in the Chilterns

[growse]

No NIMBY has ever objected to major changes to contemporary life such the Internet, on-line shopping, hybrid cars or mobile phones.

Counterpoint: Solar panels (lower cost energy), Railway electrification (less polluted atmosphere), 5G masts (better internet connectivity), more electric car charging points in urban areas (less polluted environment).

NIMBYs are consistently against the lot of it.

 

[zwk500]

So why did every other country add more stops then? How does your worldview explain that?

Other countries added more *stations*, not really adding more stops (as has been pointed out several times).

And in France and Japan, by your own admission, they did it because of political concerns, not because it was the right thing to do when building the railway.

b) Every other high speed line in existence took the approach SNCF called a “mistake” as that meant the lines got built without fuss from the locals. Honestly I think they forgot.

The Chuo Shinkansen was delayed because one of the provinces didn’t get a stop - even though the part of the province the line goes through is literally uninhabited.

Your argument is that to mitigate opposition from local residents a station could have been offered them as a quid pro quo. However, if Aylesbury gets a station, why doesn't Ruislip, or Brackley, or Southam, or Kenilworth, or Berkswell.
Very soon you've chucked in stations everywhere, and the railway gets all gummed up. Like the junctions on the M25 chucked in too close together to appease locals so that now the western quadrant turns into a car park multiple times per week.
Or are only the Aylesbury complaints valid?

No NIMBY has ever objected to ... mobile phones.

They have objected to the towers required to operate them though, because they spoil the view. And then complain they can't get good reception.

 

[Zomboid]

Counterpoint: Solar panels (lower cost energy), Railway electrification (less polluted atmosphere), 5G masts (better internet connectivity), more electric car charging points in urban areas (less polluted environment).

NIMBYs are consistently against the lot of it.

It's Not In My Back Yard. The "My" being the crucial part. It's a self centred viewpoint that all these things should happen elsewhere - and whilst they're may be some kernel of a good point in some instances, that tends to get lost in the noise associated with general NIMBYism.

 

[Bletchleyite]

May be an idealist viewpoint but I'd rather have a rail network designed optimally for the public transport user, focus being on those who walk, cycle or take the bus or tram. If you achieve such a thing, those who still want to drive the whole way after that are likely to not be attracted by any carrots or sticks.

I don't agree. I would say they need to equally aim for that and convenience of access by car, because that maximises ridership and thus minimises the use of cars on journeys into urban areas where they cause most harm. (Remember most journeys are suburb to city centre, not city centre to city centre, something which most railway enthusiasts and the railway itself often seem to disregard).

 

[Krokodil]

This is an important consideration. HS2 (and any other subsequent HSLs) would be much easier and cheaper if London had 2 or 3 crossrails instead of just one, but currently many commuter lines still run into the mainline termini.

Unfortunately the ground underneath London is pretty much full. Crossrail 2 would provide some relief to Liverpool Street, Kings Cross and Waterloo but there's nothing in the pipeline for relieving Euston and I don't believe that there is a remaining clear route under the centre other than the one earmarked for XR2.

NIMBYism is rooted in resenting changes which spoil a person's life.

Resenting changes they perceive would spoil their lives. The reality is often different. They object to public transport because it might bring "the wrong sort of people" in.

NIMBYs do not object to changes that enhance their lives

Ha! They complain that their kids can't afford to buy houses and move out, while simultaneously objecting to the construction of any new housing supply.

not do they dislike changes which don't affect them

My grandparents unsuccessfully objected to their niece building a microbrewery. In order to see it from their living room, one would have had to sit facing backwards on their sofa and then peer through the vegetation to catch a glimpse. Didn't affect them in the slightest.

No NIMBY has ever objected to major changes to contemporary life such the Internet, on-line shopping, hybrid cars or mobile phones.

They've been objecting to public transport, electricity pylons and communications masts for as long as such things have been invented.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Those who will always pick sitting in traffic on the motorway over changing once or twice along a train journey will never be won over so it's no use pandering to these people by building an M25 Parkway in the same way as it's no use pandering to the Chiltern NIMBYs. Stockport and Manchester Airport HS2 have/would have many more roles than just a parkway. One's a dense urban centre, the other serves the main non-London airport.

Stockport is significantly used as a park and ride when it comes to London services, though a few will walk there, a few arrive by bus and a few by connecting train.

Manchester Airport HS2 is irrelevant to the airport. People aren't going to go there from London to fly somewhere, and it supposedly won't carry Manchester<->Airport passengers at all so as not to block seats for longer reservations. It is a parkway station that happens to be located near (but not at) the airport, and in some ways perhaps should just be called Manchester South Parkway!

 

[zwk500]

The one basis on which I'd agree with this is that I think not having an M25 Parkway (I think it would be around Handy Cross if I recall?) was a serious mistake.

People who might use an M25 Parkway are likely already within range of a classic line station that provides a reassonable journey time to central London, especially if you consider the unreliability of driving to and on the M25. Encouraging more traffic onto the M25 is also not a very good thing to be doing at the North end of the M1-M40-M4-M3-A3 series of interchanges.

Additionally, for the Midlands, Birmingham Interchange will fulfill *precisely* this function. It's easy to access from the Motorway network, it's already got boatloads of parking, and it's far enough from London that the penalty of railheading to it will be offset by the journey time (especially interchanging on to Elizabeth Line at OOC).

 

[Zomboid]

Manchester Airport HS2 is irrelevant to the airport. People aren't going to go there from London to fly somewhere, and it supposedly won't carry Manchester<->Airport passengers at all so as not to block seats for longer reservations. It is a parkway station that happens to be located near (but not at) the airport, and in some ways perhaps should just be called Manchester South Parkway

I don't agree that it's irrelevant - as the major international hub that not London, there will be traffic to Manchester airport from Birmingham and it's environs (probably not London, given Heathrow exists).

Not there main reason for it, but should it ever happen I'd expect there to be a need for a decent transfer between the station and airport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

People who might use an M25 Parkway are likely already within range of a classic line station that provides a reassonable journey time to central London, especially if you consider the unreliability of driving to and on the M25. Encouraging more traffic onto the M25 is also not a very good thing to be doing at the North end of the M1-M40-M4-M3-A3 series of interchanges.

I am more considering journeys to the likes of Manchester and Scotland, for which some people presently drive to MKC but most will just head up the M40 and drive all the way, or drive to an airport and fly.

I don't think HS2 would usefully carry Aylesbury Vale-London passengers.

Additionally, for the Midlands, Birmingham Interchange will fulfill *precisely* this function. It's easy to access from the Motorway network, it's already got boatloads of parking, and it's far enough from London that the penalty of railheading to it will be offset by the journey time (especially interchanging on to Elizabeth Line at OOC).

Yes, this function is provided for at the Northern and Midlands cities but not in London. It's almost like the only basis on which it was designed is getting people *from* the regions *to* London and all other use cases have been disregarded, though Birmingham Interchange will at least allow for journeys north.

 

[nw1]

Hear hear.

I think that depends on your point of view.

One person's "person with valid concern" might be another person's "whinger". For example, I think that people that go on and on complaining about immigration are whingers, but others disagree.

Likewise, someone who objects to a new major road through their local countryside might be a "NIMBY whinger" to one person, or a "person with valid concerns" to another.....

For clarification I do on the whole support HS2.

 

[fishwomp]

You are not talking a demographic here that will use local trains apart from commuting into London. Certainly not Northern's inferior service of rotting 40 year old 2 car DMUs

I understand the point your making but actually the product isn't that bad today..

How many services into Manchester are two car these days? Not so many... About 1 in 4 from a brief look at Manchester Vic and 1 in 5 at Pic. That doesn't mean they are not rammed though..

Largely not 40 years old. 195s, 323s, and yes some 150s. Although the 195s will be by the time a Phase 2 or NPR happens...!!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I understand the point your making but actually the product isn't that bad today..

It's dire. It's infrequent, often delayed or cancelled, and there are a lot of older units i.e. 15x and 323s about most of which are not air conditioned. I don't blame people for refusing to use it.

Sure, 195s and 331s are decent, but the operation as a whole is absolutely shocking and totally unfit for purpose in a large city in 2026.

You aren't going to get the Range Rover brigade using it, I'm afraid. Metrolink they might, but Northern, no chance. About the only even vaguely acceptable heavy rail commuter service in Manchester is the Hadfield/Glossop and the Blackpools, but even that isn't ideal.

 

[nw1]

I understand the point your making but actually the product isn't that bad today..

How many services into Manchester are two car these days? Not so many... About 1 in 4 from a brief look at Manchester Vic and 1 in 5 at Pic. That doesn't mean they are not rammed though..

Largely not 40 years old. 195s, 323s, and yes some 150s. Although the 195s will be by the time a Phase 2 or NPR happens...!!

Ah , the "Northern Powerhouse", Mr Osborne's big and still unimplemented idea. Sounds more like a 90s dance act. "Northern Powerhouse featuring George Osborne". Sorry to be flippant. Meanwhile the "Anglo-Continental Powerhouse", aka the Channel Tunnel, got built in a few years...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 May 2026 ==

It's dire. It's infrequent, often delayed or cancelled, and there are a lot of older units i.e. 15x and 323s about most of which are not air conditioned. I don't blame people for refusing to use it.

Sure, 195s and 331s are decent, but the operation as a whole is absolutely shocking and totally unfit for purpose in a large city in 2026.

You aren't going to get the Range Rover brigade using it, I'm afraid. Metrolink they might, but Northern, no chance. About the only even vaguely acceptable heavy rail commuter service in Manchester is the Hadfield/Glossop and the Blackpools, but even that isn't ideal.

Are 15x and 323s that bad? Certainly for the local services they are employed on?
I have used both types in my time, especially 150s, though I also grew up with VEPs and never had any problems with those either. And if we're talking about 15x in general, that includes 158s which are of course express units and still appropriate IMO for that use. Not sure if you see them round Manchester, though.

 

[The exile]

Are you really arguing NIMBYs are worse in the UK than elsewhere?

Probably not - but their clout is often a lot lower (short of Swampy-like direct action) because planning rules are different.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 May 2026 ==

No, it isn't. NIMBYism is rooted in resenting changes which spoil a person's life. NIMBYs do not object to changes that enhance their lives, not do they dislike changes which don't affect them. No NIMBY has ever objected to major changes to contemporary life such the Internet, on-line shopping, hybrid cars or mobile phones.

You can’t be a NIMBY unless something is going to happen in your back yard - on-line shopping is fine - but the distribution centre (for that online shopping) on the field behind your house is not. Neither is the death of the High Street ( caused by that online shopping).

 

[Zomboid]

15x and 323s that bad? Certainly for the local services they are employed on?

I don't know about 323s, but a 150 falls a long way short of what you'd expect from a modern transportation option. They're functional, but if you want people to choose rail rather than be forced into it, you need better trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are 15x and 323s that bad? Certainly for the local services they are employed on?

Yes. Very bad. Not to modern standards at all.

The Range Rover brigade at whom these Parkway stations are aimed will certainly not be willing to use 15x (bar 158) and the lack of aircon in a 323 is also an off putter. Witness the significant growth the Birmingham Cross City seems to be experiencing with the coming of the 730/0.

The aircon fitted 165 is probably your bare minimum, but there's certainly a strong preference for 168s in Chilternland! But realistically people still aren't going to connect onto HS2 from rich "Metrolaend" - they will want to reach a station by car and so such a Parkway would be a big attraction.

 

[Farigiraf]

I don't agree. I would say they need to equally aim for that and convenience of access by car, because that maximises ridership and thus minimises the use of cars on journeys into urban areas where they cause most harm. (Remember most journeys are suburb to city centre, not city centre to city centre, something which most railway enthusiasts and the railway itself often seem to disregard).

High Speed Rail isn't a solution to that though. You could get the same benefits improving P&R facilities at Zone 6 tube stations or on the West Midlands Metro, and making suburb/satellite town to city centre rail links better (which hs2 capacity release will help with on the London-MK-Northampton corridor).

What an M25 Parkway should be designed for is long-distance travel, after all airports have plenty of parking too, but that's because we don't build them in city centres. However, for the reasons I outlined in my last post, whether it's the best solution is debatable.

Unfortunately the ground underneath London is pretty much full. Crossrail 2 would provide some relief to Liverpool Street, Kings Cross and Waterloo but there's nothing in the pipeline for relieving Euston and I don't believe that there is a remaining clear route under the centre other than the one earmarked for XR2.

How come Paris has significantly more space for tunneling? It's got a metro network denser than the tube yet there's plenty of space for numerous RERs.

Manchester Airport HS2 is irrelevant to the airport. People aren't going to go there from London to fly somewhere, and it supposedly won't carry Manchester<->Airport passengers at all so as not to block seats for longer reservations. It is a parkway station that happens to be located near (but not at) the airport, and in some ways perhaps should just be called Manchester South Parkway!

For travel to London you're right, but it's also planned to be on NPR, and high-speed airport links to other locations in Northern England are actually useful in order to reduce the strain on local, fairly poorly placed airports such as LBA, DSA and Newcastle. Plus there's a lot of jobs at the airport - not many jobs in greenfield land off the M25. Sure, many of these commuters will be taking local transport, but the LMR makes living in Liverpool/Warrington and working at MAN feasible too.

Yes, this function is provided for at the Northern and Midlands cities but not in London. It's almost like the only basis on which it was designed is getting people *from* the regions *to* London and all other use cases have been disregarded, though Birmingham Interchange will at least allow for journeys north.

London itself has low car usage even in the outer suburbs and it should stay that way. Commuter rail into London from the Home Counties is also significantly better than in the WM and North. A Chiltern Mainline upgrade + the freed up capacity on the southern WCML post HS2 would adequately serve most people who'd use M25 parkway without adding more traffic to the M25.

It's dire. It's infrequent, often delayed or cancelled, and there are a lot of older units i.e. 15x and 323s about most of which are not air conditioned. I don't blame people for refusing to use it.

Sure, 195s and 331s are decent, but the operation as a whole is absolutely shocking and totally unfit for purpose in a large city in 2026.

You aren't going to get the Range Rover brigade using it, I'm afraid. Metrolink they might, but Northern, no chance. About the only even vaguely acceptable heavy rail commuter service in Manchester is the Hadfield/Glossop and the Blackpools, but even that isn't ideal.

All the older units will be long-gone by the time HS2 reaches Manchester. By the time the rail network will have enough capacity to make winning over the range rover brigade worthwhile, commuter trains on Northern will be all EMUs and BEMUs with level boarding, aircon, decent parking at outer stations and ample capacity. Given the prospect of numerous years of GBR with a subsidy-cutting goverment at the helm, we may not see any Metrolink tunnels, Leeds metros or any Crossrail-style projects, but it'll be significantly more pleasant. Meanwhile, the roads get more congested and covered in potholes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

London itself has low car usage even in the outer suburbs and it should stay that way. Commuter rail into London from the Home Counties is also significantly better than in the WM and North. A Chiltern Mainline upgrade + the freed up capacity on the southern WCML post HS2 would adequately serve most people who'd use M25 parkway without adding more traffic to the M25.

Questionable. MKC is too far north, Watford isn't likely even post HS2 to get everything, and the rump WCML won't have the prestige of HS2. And these are not people who will change trains even if Chiltern is electrified and gets new units.

High Speed Rail isn't a solution to that though. You could get the same benefits improving P&R facilities at Zone 6 tube stations or on the West Midlands Metro, and making suburb/satellite town to city centre rail links better (which hs2 capacity release will help with on the London-MK-Northampton corridor).

You're again making Londoncentric assumptions i.e. that every journey is from the regions to London. I am talking about suburb to city centre journeys from rich "Metrolaend" to Manchester, Scotland etc - the sort of journeys where driving to Heathrow will be preferred over any kind of connectional rail journey. I am not proposing an HS1 like commuter service, indeed I wouldn't expect HS2 to carry M25 Parkway-London journeys at all, I'm proposing making it easier for the Range Roverati to go north by rail which means providing them somewhere convenient to park and a direct rail journey.

 

[nw1]

Yes. Very bad. Not to modern standards at all.

The Range Rover brigade at whom these Parkway stations are aimed will certainly not be willing to use 15x (bar 158) and the lack of aircon in a 323 is also an off putter. Witness the significant growth the Birmingham Cross City seems to be experiencing with the coming of the 730/0.

The aircon fitted 165 is probably your bare minimum, but there's certainly a strong preference for 168s in Chilternland! But realistically people still aren't going to connect onto HS2 from rich "Metrolaend" - they will want to reach a station by car and so such a Parkway would be a big attraction.

I guess they never grew up with and got used to older units then.... some of my journeys home from school were in units built in the late 50s !

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 May 2026 ==

You're again making Londoncentric assumptions i.e. that every journey is from the regions to London. I am talking about suburb to city centre journeys from rich "Metrolaend" to Manchester, Scotland etc - the sort of journeys where driving to Heathrow will be preferred over any kind of connectional rail journey. I am not proposing an HS1 like commuter service, indeed I wouldn't expect HS2 to carry M25 Parkway-London journeys at all, I'm proposing making it easier for the Range Roverati to go north by rail which means providing them somewhere convenient to park and a direct rail journey.

It's a different slant but to me the obvious place for a "Buckinghamshire Parkway" would be the intersection of HS2 and EWR (as it would allow Oxford and Milton Keynes to use HS2 with just one change), however I recognise that capacity issues probably wouldn't allow such a station to be built, from the discussion up-thread.

 

[Farigiraf]

You're again making Londoncentric assumptions i.e. that every journey is from the regions to London. I am talking about suburb to city centre journeys from rich "Metrolaend" to Manchester, Scotland etc - the sort of journeys where driving to Heathrow will be preferred over any kind of connectional rail journey. I am not proposing an HS1 like commuter service, indeed I wouldn't expect HS2 to carry M25 Parkway-London journeys at all, I'm proposing making it easier for the Range Roverati to go north by rail which means providing them somewhere convenient to park and a direct rail journey.

Metroland has great rail links into central London, and it'll only get better with Chiltern to OOC etc. From there, it's an easy transfer to HS2.

Alternatively, from Aylesbury/MK/Banbury, where the double back is indeed long, you can either take a standard train and change at New St or Moor St (not prestige, but still good quality - certainly more prestige than the average low-end SUV). Or you could drive to Birmingham Interchange.

The niche category of people who won't tolerate a regional EMU/BEMU, won't change trains, but may tolerate high-speed rail are not worth pandering to.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Metroland has great rail links into central London, and it'll only get better with Chiltern to OOC etc. From there, it's an easy transfer to HS2.

Once again, the Range Roverati will not change trains. They will drive to Heathrow in preference. Not even at OOC, and not even if Chiltern is sorted out and has nice new EMUs.

Alternatively, from Aylesbury/MK/Banbury, where the double back is indeed long, you can either take a standard train and change at New St or Moor St (not prestige, but still good quality - certainly more prestige than the average low-end SUV). Or you could drive to Birmingham Interchange.

See above.

The niche category of people who won't tolerate a regional EMU/BEMU, won't change trains, but may tolerate high-speed rail are not worth pandering to.

These are the people who will pay First Anytime fares and are a core income source. It is important that they are pandered to - and they are in Manchester and Birmingham, just not London for some inexplicable reason!

At the Manchester end, a lot of them are already driving to Wilmslow, Macclesfield and Stockport, for example. There are lots of them around the Chalfonts etc, some of the most expensive places in the country.

 

[cle]

It's too late now, but I suppose that if we'd known the HS2 potential would be chipped away at, in 1000 cuts - then maybe a single parkway station could have worked - either big parkway and interchange with EWR (between Bicester and Winslow) - or yes, something closer to Aylesbury. But not both.

Aylesbury is a high growth place, even if a bit sad - with a lot of homebuilding. And I suspect if you could get to both London in 20 and Birmingham in 30 mins or so, it could be popular. Ebbsfleet-style! But no connection to the Chiltern lines at Aylesbury which would probably become even more obselete - arguably you could un-serve the Aylesbury-Amersham route and simplify the railway a great deal. AVP to go via High Wycombe only.

EWR/Interchange option has more network appeal - not least being an alt route from the likes of Greater MK, Bicester and Oxford. If you had longer distance service (Cambridge and Bedford) - it would definitely see faster journeys to Birmingham. But it doesn't do much for placemaking - it would really be a station and a huge car park. And it would render Winslow quite redundant in the process.

Aylesbury is maybe better on balance, even if the EWR link looks great on a map!

But this fantastical station would I'm sure have no calls on anything going beyond a Euston/OOC-Curzon St shuttle.

 

[Zomboid]

a different slant but to me the obvious place for a "Buckinghamshire Parkway" would be the intersection of HS2 and EWR (as it would allow Oxford and Milton Keynes to use HS2 with just one change), however I recognise that capacity issues probably wouldn't allow such a station to be built, from the discussion up-thread.

It wouldn't work at all as a parkway - the nearest road of any significance is the M40/A34 at Bicester, 9 miles away. Or 10 miles north at Brackley where HS2 intersects the A43. Calvert is just where the HS2 and EWR happen to intersect, but there's nothing much else going for it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It wouldn't work at all as a parkway - the nearest road of any significance is the M40/A34 at Bicester, 9 miles away. Or 10 miles north at Brackley where HS2 intersects the A43. Calvert is just where the HS2 and EWR happen to intersect, but there's nothing much else going for it.

A more sensible thing to do around there is another MK-esque (but designed for public transport and cycling) New City.

 

[Sorcerer]

Okay so I'm a bit late to the thread, but I am definitely on the side that no, HS2 should not stop at more stations in the Chilterns because high-speed rail and HS2 are simply not designed for that kind of work, and I think some people overestimate how much a local station would talk people around on the project. I can get behind the idea of an urban parkway, especially ones like Manchester Airport, but not a rural intermediate station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Okay so I'm a bit late to the thread, but I am definitely on the side that no, HS2 should not stop at more stations in the Chilterns because high-speed rail and HS2 are simply not designed for that kind of work, and I think some people overestimate how much a local station would talk people around on the project. I can get behind the idea of an urban parkway, especially ones like Manchester Airport, but not a rural intermediate station.

An intermediate around the M25 would be an urban parkway similar to Manchester Airport.

 

[Sorcerer]

An intermediate around the M25 would be an urban parkway similar to Manchester Airport.

That'd probably have to be a long-term extension plan because for an urban parkway station to work it would have to be a genuine urban hub for onward connections. Watford Junction works for this reason given it connects the WCML, Lioness Line and St Alban's Abby branch. I think this is probably why Old Oak Common despite not being relatively far out works better because it would connect HS2 to the Elizabeth Line and Great Western.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That'd probably have to be a long-term extension plan because for an urban parkway station to work it would have to be a genuine urban hub for onward connections. Watford Junction works for this reason given it connects the WCML, Lioness Line and St Alban's Abby branch. I think this is probably why Old Oak Common despite not being relatively far out works better because it would connect HS2 to the Elizabeth Line and Great Western.

Manchester Airport won't be. It is not at the current airport station location, it is a few miles away. It is primarily a Parkway station to be reached by car (and secondarily bus). Just like an M25 parkway would be; it'll have the tram too though. It is not a regional rail interchange and isn't really intended to be one.

OOC serves a different purpose i.e. interchange primarily with the Liz. It is not a parkway station and in my understanding will have no dedicated car parking at all.

 

[Brubulus]

The big issue with any of these parkways is that you would generate a huge amount of inward commuting to London from this station, plus the local traffic in that area would become horrific. If you left it as a rail led site, the usage probably wouldn't be high enough to justify (at least at the HS2 EWR interchange). I think the only sensible site for such a station is where HS2 meets the Aylesbury to Princes Risborough line, or at Wendover but really, I don't think it's that necessary/useful as it will likely slow down London-Birmingham by 3-5mins for limited benefit.

 

[mike57]

either big parkway and interchange with EWR (between Bicester and Winslow) - or yes, something closer to Aylesbury. But not both.

I am not sure if the route North of Aylesbury Vale Parkway to Calvert and EWR has been retained, I know at one time there was talk of re-opening and linking into East West Rail. If that were to happen then a station at the junction might have made sense, with EWR trains calling, together with some HS2 services and an extended service from Aylesbury VP terminating there. Its many years since I visited that area however, and my memory is road access was poor, so making it into a parkway station as well may be a problem.

I think its fair to say that finacially it isn't going to be viable unlless there are some major changes in the way major project are funded and delivered. The other problem is that as soon as you ask passengers to change trains they quite rightly get jittery as the current 'siloed' rail network arrangements dont handle connections well, either when things go wrong, or from a ticketing point of view.