High Speed 2 - do we really need it?

[YesToHS2]

If locals are outraged a two track "concrete bomb" image the protests there would be for 4 track line. Not that it's a reason for not considering a 4 track line but these protesters are a fierce bunch.

I have just been sent a news letter published by Kenilworth Action Group and I am suitable disgusted at the content which is made of mainly blatant lies. More details to come

 

[tbtc]

If locals are outraged a two track "concrete bomb" image the protests there would be for 4 track line

True, but (whilst a four track line is twice as big for the railway) it isn't twice as disruptive or twice as expensive.

I just hope we built future lines (whether HS2 or any new lines/ stations etc elsewhere on the railways) with scope for future growth, rather than building the bare minimum.

 

[Kneedown]

HS2 will not come out of the existing rail budget, just like Crossrail, so cancelling it would not result in that money being spent on the rest of the network - its that simple.

So cancel it, and Crossrail, and put the money INTO the existing rail budget. It really doesn't get simpler!

We'd all love to see more money spent on the railways, but that kind of figure outside of ordinary department spending has to be justified by a far wider 'national interest' that piecemeal upgrades wont - just look at the debacle of the WCRM. Plus of course, even if that money wasnt spent on HS2 it still leaves the WCML running at capacity by 2020 - anyone who thinks spending money on upgrading secondary and branch lines at the expense of our main economic centres needs to reconsider our countries priorities

It is in the National interest that the maximum number of people in the country benefit from expenditure.
The WCML may indeed be at capacity by 2020. Equally it may not, and it doesn't really matter. Other parts of the country are already at capacity, or will be so soon.
As regards the Countries priorities, they are to improve the lives of ALL people, not just those who live in certain select parts of the Country. The impression i get from yours, and other posts, is that you don't think any other lines in the country are worth spending any money on, and you would gladly leave them to rust away, while London, Birmingham and the NW speed ahead with modernisation

I can understand why people might not think its 'fair' that London gets such a large share of spending, but there's a damn good reason for it - at least with HS2 that investment will directly benefit other areas of the country while laying down the beginnings of a new network... and those who think you shouldnt pay for something you'll rarely if ever use? Well goodbye most public spending!

But London and routes along the WCML always get the major investment. Shouldn't the whole country be advancing as one, rather than a few select areas advancing and advancing continuously, while the rest gets left behind?

In the real world there are few better uses of taxpayers money than investing in long-term infrastructure with a high cost:benefit ratio and which will require a large workforce and a new generation of skilled workers and engineers which will benefit the UK for decades afterwards.

Agreed, as long as it's spread around a bit.

Dont forget too that a Manc/Brum/Leeds/York network opens up more capacity and perhaps new services on existing lines, including potentially new direct services to London that will benefit people far beyond the planned line.

Chris

It won't open up capacity on existing lines. What i think you are getting at, and please correct me if i'm barking up the wrong tree, is that current intercity services will be reduced on the current WCML, to be replaced with more semi-fast services?
Once again though, that will only benefit those who live along the current WCML, which has already had pots of money thrown at it. No benefit at all to the commuter from Market Harborough, or Chesterfield, or wherever else.

 

[rb311]

What I am picking up from this thread is that despite HS2 being a high speed line, journeys times between London and the north are unlikely to any better than now.

In addition, that it is only protestors rightly trying to defend their position that postulate "lies". That's not a very constructive position from which to a)defend and b)sell the so called advantages.

In addition, that HS1 hasn't provided any further capacity improvements, but that there are plenty of justified reasons for that. Indeed if the advantages of running local services on this line were so marginal, why waste so much money on the new trains?

Finally, as i said earlier, if you let politicians make decisions like these, at best you will end up with a dog's breakfast, more likely a dog's deposit.

 

[tbtc]

Can someone clear something up for me?

People criticise VHF (and the Eureka plans) for concentrating on speeding up journeys like Glasgow/ Edinburgh/ Newcastle/ Manchester - London and losing links from places further north to the likes of Nuneaton/ Stevenage/ Tamworth/ Grantham etc...

...okay, fair enough, I can see that (to an extent)...

...but at the same time HS2 is criticised for slowing the ECML/ WCML down by introducing more stops in services like Manchester - London. Odd.

 

[Chris125]

Kneedown, our largest economic centres have the most impact on the countries prosperity so its common sense to spend the most money on them to ensure they remain competitive. I live on the Isle of Wight so im well aware of how little transport funding goes to the regions - but i also understand why we arent such a high priority.

People love to quote this 2020 (or 2016) figure but is there any evidence that is will be 'full' by that date? According to NR, the MML is already 'full' but I don't the money rushing to put back in all the missing track:roll:

Evidence? The lack of spare paths on the WCML at the moment should be a pretty big clue - when you calculate even a conservative growth estimate vs the proposed and funded capacity enhancements its not hard to work out when demand will outstrip supply. There are other routes with little remaining capacity, the BML for one, but you still need to offset the revenue from more passengers against the cost of new infrastructure.

The WCML has gone past that stage - we're had the WCRM followed by the VHF timetable. But now there are few cheap enhancements left, so more capacity becomes ever more expensive and so needs to attract even more growth.

You could perhaps think of HS2 as the next VHF - high capacity and high speed that not only caters for existing growth but is also very attractive in its own right, increasing passenger growth in its own right to help justify the high initial cost. Building HS2 as a classic line is like spending a little less on the WCRM to continue using 87's at 110mph - you might be able to cater for existing growth, but it wont generate enough new passengers to make the cost worthwhile. Neither does it have the long term strategic advantage of a new High-Speed network to the NE and Scotland, which is what jusitifies its budget being seperate from the rest of the railways.

Chris

 

[Kneedown]

Kneedown, our largest economic centres have the most impact on the countries prosperity so its common sense to spend the most money on them to ensure they remain competitive. I live on the Isle of Wight so im well aware of how little transport funding goes to the regions - but i also understand why we arent such a high priority.

Chris

The Country as a whole has the most impact on prosperity.
The work done by someone in Manchester or Birmingham is no more important than the work done by someone in Scunthorpe.
What makes the Country prosperous is the input from all over the country, not just the input from a few areas.

 

[Geezertronic]

What I am picking up from this thread is that despite HS2 being a high speed line, journeys times between London and the north are unlikely to any better than now.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/hs2ltd/technicalappendix/pdf/report.pdf

Page 35 onwards.

In addition, that it is only protestors rightly trying to defend their position that postulate "lies". That's not a very constructive position from which to a)defend and b)sell the so called advantages.

Please read http://stophs2.org/news/207-prepare-your-ark/ - I am yet to see anything that resembles this sort of crap from any of people for HS2. Also, spreading ridiculous rumours about peoples health being affected by HS2 does not help (as someone who had the WCML at the bottom of my garden for 20 years, I can safely say that is crap)

 

[vtiman]

I really dont understand some of the statements on here at all !

People complain that hs2 wont have the numbers and costs too much and doesnt benefit anyone. Then complain that it doesnt serve less highly populated areas. The last time I looked London was the largest city in england and birmingham and manchester the second and third. Also at least half of the population of the country lives in the south east.

also the last time I looked there were a lot of people on the m6 and m1 on this route and many trains are at capacity now !

as far as hs1 is concerned if you want it to have more traffic then join it to hs2 and the rest of the country ! and whilst we are at it exploit the full 140 mph speed of the javelins and run through services to other areas i.e. off the hs2 onto a reopened east west line then bicester banbury via a new flyover. and/or oxford and milton keynes. I also don't understand how anyone can state that hs1 hasn't provided any more capacity !

The classic lines were crammed with eurostars held back by local services and visa versa. it was only once the full hs1 link was opened that the services could be expanded. I can understand residents of the chilterns being concerned with their local environment and would hope that we do all we can to keep any impacts to the minimum.

Why shouldn't the north benefit from direct trains to europe and faster trains also within the uk ! and when the birmingham leg opens the journey timed will be halved by forty minutes and all trains which use this route and then run onto the classic lines will reach their destination 40 minutes faster then they do at the moment. and be even quicker when the full y front opens !

 

[Philip Elliott]

There are lots of examples of that in the UK though if you want to play that game. Is it ludicrous for people in Sheffield to go to Reading via Birmingham? Is it ludicrous for people in Scunthorpe to to to Lincoln via Sheffield? Is it ludicrous for people in Doncaster to go to Bradford via Pontefract and Brighouse? Is it...

Yes they are ludicrious especially when there were more direct options - XC services used to run via Nottingham, Leicester, Rugby to Banbury.

Here is another one - Wellingborough to Northampton. The quickest route is via London. A 120 mile round trip for a sub 15 mile journey. Rebuilding the closed route would be massively beneficial for many east-west links.

And what about passengers wishing to travel between Leeds and Birmingham: I imagine there is probably a bigger demand for travel between those two than there is between Leeds and, once again, Peterborough

Then you have a separate line from Leeds to Birmingham like....there is now. Traditionally London - Leeds trains went via Melton, Nottingham & Sheffield which is the most direct route.

I would have thought that the "Classic compatible" trains would be able to travel at 125mph on the WCML if they have tilt. If not, they'll presumably limited to the non-EPS speeds.

As for 390s, they can't actually do more than 125mph just now. Going at 140mph will require in-cab signalling and we all know what happened when Railtrack tried to implement that...

It was announced that the classic compatible trains will not tilt. In the next 30 years we should get a rollout of ERTMS in cab signalling.

The lack of spare paths on the WCML at the moment should be a pretty big clue - when you calculate even a conservative growth estimate vs the proposed and funded capacity enhancements its not hard to work out when demand will outstrip supply

There are still paths available - VHF will go to 10tph from the new franchise and in the peak there are already 11/12 tph. Enhancements in the Milton Keynes area would increase that further. VT currently carries a lot of empty seats and many filled seats are on £10 advance fares which are only possible because of the generous franchise deal and the cheaper VT only fares - you can leave New Street in the evening peak wedged but upon leaving Coventry there are less than 100 passengers onboard. The ECML, MML & GWML have far more issues with capacity.

People criticise VHF (and the Eureka plans) for concentrating on speeding up journeys like Glasgow/ Edinburgh/ Newcastle/ Manchester - London and losing links from places further north to the likes of Nuneaton/ Stevenage/ Tamworth/ Grantham etc...

...okay, fair enough, I can see that (to an extent)...

...but at the same time HS2 is criticised for slowing the ECML/ WCML down by introducing more stops in services like Manchester - London. Odd.

You can have both - by introducing a semi-fast service. A EUS-MKC-RUG-NUN-TAM-STA-CRE service would allow the intermediate stations access to all parts of the WCML.

Personally I'm not too worried about trains being slowed a little, it the reduction in frequency that is more worrying. You create demand running a turn up and go frequency - it is a massive steps backwards and the result of spending huge sums of money.

the high speed element is essential for HS2 to work and pay for itself. A low speed line may cost about £2bn less than a high speed line but there will be no time benefits, no modal shift therefore no economic benefits to the wider economy.

Critics bang on about cost and speed but don't realise that a conventional speed line will cost just as much, £2bn compared with the total cost of HS2 isn't very much at all. Either HS2 is quick and pays for it'self by improving connectivity to northern cities or we pay for and subsidies a conventional line that won't actually pay for itself and will be under used as business people continue to fly or just not trade between cities at all.

A slower service stopping at more stations will earn far more as it serves more people, it ain't difficult to work out. HS2 will not be competing with the airlines - there are no Brum - London flights or from Liverpool. Rail already has 85% of the Manchester market and there will always be those who prefer to fly. It is a red herring. You won't get modal shift if people can't get on it in the first place.

 

[imagination]

True, but (whilst a four track line is twice as big for the railway) it isn't twice as disruptive or twice as expensive.

I just hope we built future lines (whether HS2 or any new lines/ stations etc elsewhere on the railways) with scope for future growth, rather than building the bare minimum.

Of course, that could just mean building bridges with enough space for 4 tracks in the future, and protecting the area from being built on for other purposes.

 

[tbtc]

Of course, that could just mean building bridges with enough space for 4 tracks in the future, and protecting the area from being built on for other purposes.

New Towns like Cumbernauld/ Glenrothes were built with scope for single track roads to be turned into dual carriageways, all the infrastructure was built with (future) expansion in mind.

I'd be happy if that were the case with HS2, or other rail building. The problem we have is that we only build "just enough".

Its a lot harder to extend/ widen/ develop things once they are up and running, if you've not left scope for it

 

[rb311]

Please read http://stophs2.org/news/207-prepare-your-ark/ - I am yet to see anything that resembles this sort of crap from any of people for HS2. Also, spreading ridiculous rumours about peoples health being affected by HS2 does not help (as someone who had the WCML at the bottom of my garden for 20 years, I can safely say that is crap)

I just have. I can't see that it is "crap" at all, except in your opinion, which I would be happy to read.

 

[Metroland]

So cancel it, and Crossrail, and put the money INTO the existing rail budget. It really doesn't get simpler!

As explained earlier, that's not how transport expenditure works. Cancelling one scheme does not mean the money is made available for another.

There are many people very vocal about the seeming disparities about rail spending in the South. The fact of the matter is many northern cities and actually depopulating: Liverpool, Hull, Middlesbrough are examples. Rail demand is lower because people's work patterns are different, often driven by house prices. Although there are people commuting into Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow and Edinburgh and many improvements have been proposed.

Work in the North tends to be low paid retail and call-centre work (with some exceptions) and houses are affordable. This is rather than high value, high skill jobs that exist in the SE, parts of the south and Midlands, with much of the population locked out of the housing market.

With London's population due to rise by several million over the next few decades, and house prices climbing, transport capacity has to be met somehow, hence Crossrail.

I support HS2 because I would like to see more high value jobs shifted toward the post industrial northern cities, and that's only going to happen with fast transport improvements and associated agglomeration.

Some of the critics claims are laughable, some are sensible.

Many of the claims that are made do not reflect the real world situation: For example one common claim is it will be a white elephant, when we know that N-S rail demand is growing at such a rate it could double in a decade. People are attracted to faster journey times, and time savings are important to the economy. It's the difference between taking a job and not taking a job, of busines being developed in an area, and the overall quality of life.

Another claim is there is no environmental case. While it's true that if you don't take into account the freight and commuter paths that are freed up on classic route, it's roughly carbon neutral (again assuming current power supplies) that certainly isn't the case with the alternatives. Indeed, people should be careful above making such claims about we shouldn't be doing X because it has some effect, because the reality is almost all human development has environmental effects and paradoxically the people that live in the Chilterns tend to have some of the largest carbon footprints in the land, and use the most resources. It's not that we should concrete over the countryside, but I'm confident that a well engineered railway through the countryside is more preferable than a motorway or large airport, especially when the former will probably be behind sound barriers or in tunnels passing through sensitive areas.

 

[sprinterguy]

So cancel it, and Crossrail, and put the money INTO the existing rail budget. It really doesn't get simpler!

In an ideal world, yes. In reality, that isn’t what would happen.

Then you have a separate line from Leeds to Birmingham like....there is now.

Yes, limited to 125mph at best that won’t offer any additional benefits for Yorkshire-West Midlands travellers.

It won't open up capacity on existing lines. What I think you are getting at, and please correct me if i'm barking up the wrong tree, is that current intercity services will be reduced on the current WCML, to be replaced with more semi-fast services?
Once again though, that will only benefit those who live along the current WCML, which has already had pots of money thrown at it. No benefit at all to the commuter from Market Harborough, or Chesterfield, or wherever else.

Yes Intercity services on the WCML will be reduced and replaced by more semi-fast services, which creates more capacity as speed of trains on the route will be better standardised than at present.
And once the whole Y network is open, this is also what will happen on the MML and ECML, so will very much benefit commuters from the likes of Chesterfield and Market Harborough. But a project of this size has to be done in stages: Linking Britain’s biggest city with its’ second biggest seems a pretty good way to start.

The impression i get from yours, and other posts, is that you don't think any other lines in the country are worth spending any money on, and you would gladly leave them to rust away, while London, Birmingham and the NW speed ahead with modernisation

Hardly: Investment in the current network IS continuing: It’s not going to tail off because of HS2 as HS2 has a completely separate funding pot: There’s electrification to Oxford, new trains and increased frequencies on Thameslink and line speed improvements on the MML for a start.

 

[Kneedown]

In an ideal world, yes. In reality, that isn’t what would happen.

But there is absolutely no reason why it couldn't
If Cleggy can get away with doing a complete about face on tuition fee's then i don't see a slight diversion of funds raising many hackles.

Yes Intercity services on the WCML will be reduced and replaced by more semi-fast services, which creates more capacity as speed of trains on the route will be better standardised than at present.
And once the whole Y network is open, this is also what will happen on the MML and ECML, so will very much benefit commuters from the likes of Chesterfield and Market Harborough.

So places like Chesterfield and Mkt Harborough will effectively become a glorified extension of Thameslink, without the benefits of electric traction?
That hardly seems like progress to me.

Hardly: Investment in the current network IS continuing: It’s not going to tail off because of HS2 as HS2 has a completely separate funding pot: There’s electrification to Oxford, new trains and increased frequencies on Thameslink and line speed improvements on the MML for a start.

Once again, all benefits for London and the South. As regards the line speed improvements on the MML, they're hardly going to revolutionise the line. A few raises here and there with a bit of token 125mph running, all for a max time saving of 8mins between Sheffield and Pancras. Hardly revolutionary. They could more than likely get better journey times by wiring it all up and leaving the speeds as they are.

Please forgive me if i sound like i'm trying to put a dampener on the whole thing. That's not the case. I'm all for High Speed Rail, and new lines opening. I'm just dead against the idea of going ahead with it now when our current rail network is in dire need of bringing into the 21st century.
You wouldn't install a brand new bathroom in your house before you unblocked and repaired the drains would you? Lets get our existing house in order and THEN go for it.

 

[sprinterguy]

So places like Chesterfield and Mkt Harborough will effectively become a glorified extension of Thameslink, without the benefits of electric traction?
That hardly seems like progress to me.

Once again, all benefits for London and the South. As regards the line speed improvements on the MML, they're hardly going to revolutionise the line. A few raises here and there with a bit of token 125mph running, all for a max time saving of 8mins between Sheffield and Pancras. Hardly revolutionary. They could more than likely get better journey times by wiring it all up and leaving the speeds as they are.

Please forgive me if i sound like i'm trying to put a dampener on the whole thing. That's not the case. I'm all for High Speed Rail, and new lines opening. I'm just dead against the idea of going ahead with it now when our current rail network is in dire need of bringing into the 21st century.
You wouldn't install a brand new bathroom in your house before you unblocked and repaired the drains would you? Lets get our existing house in order and THEN go for it.

A number of well thought out points there. Regarding Chesterfield, I think it more likely that it’ll get an improved service of, say, Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds local services, though at this point in time I have no idea what could be proposed for the line following HS2 opening.

On the matter of current ongoing or planned network improvements benefitting London, then in many cases that is unavoidable as we have a network of London-centric radial trunk routes, so what benefits intermediate journeys on these routes is also ultimately likely to benefit London bound services. The North West electrification is a good example of one current improvement scheme that is not at all London centrered, and is looking to improve local services in the North West. I have to say, it would be nice to see some investment in local services in the north east once in a while.

Over the next 12 or so years before even the first section of HS2 opens, there are likely to be a number of capacity improvement works on the existing network across the country, and taking off the fastest Intercity services and putting them onto HS2 immediately provides more space for everything else anyway.

 

[j0hn0]

I don't think that our network is in too much of a dire need to be updated. We have one of the most modern fleets in Europe and trains are used very heavily every day.

I do agree that electrification and overcrowding needs to be solved, but this is a job for Network Rail and ORR.

Like HS1, the Jubilee line extension and Crossrail, HS2 will be a project that is run completely seperately from NR expenditure.

It is a completely seperate government programme of building appreciating assets that they can sell the leases for to the highest bidder. As proved by pensions companies buying the 30 yr lease to HS1 recently.

This not only ensures the UK has a strong infrastructure, but also stimulates market growth and creates jobs.

I think your questions Kneedown, relate to the gross inefficiency of Network Rail. That is what needs to be tackled to satisfy your questions and demands which are well founded and understandable.

I really don't think that there is a case of either / or, it's a case of build stuff without Network Rail so that they can be at their most profitable.

 

[YesToHS2]

Official YesToHS2 Poster for supporters to download. There is also a link to the independent HS2 supporters poster which is beginning to appear all over.

http://yestohs2.blogspot.com.

YesToHS2 will soon be getting a national boost so look out for references to YesToHS. PLease show you support for HS2 and the YesTo campaign. Supporters should no longer be the silent majority. Experience tells me that there are usually more supporters than protesters but supporters as a rule don't shout as loud as critics.

 

[MCR247]

I used to be on the fence about HS2, but recently I thought about it and I am now for *a* HS2, not the current proposed one...

 

[Greenback]

I used to be on the fence about HS2, but recently I thought about it and I am now for *a* HS2, not the current proposed one...

I think that sums up my position rather well too!

 

[Geezertronic]

Out of interest, how would your HS2's differ from the current config?

 

[Kneedown]

I don't think that our network is in too much of a dire need to be updated. We have one of the most modern fleets in Europe and trains are used very heavily every day.

I disagree. Several main lines need electrifying, and few secondary and commuter networks could do with it as well. Remember that our Sprinter and Pacer fleets will be nearing the end of their design lives in around 10 years time and consideration must be given as to how to replace them. It would be complete folly to jusr carry on building diesel units in the numbers required as well as false economy. IMO we should be embarking on a strategy of rolling electrification, gradually cascading newer DMU's to replace older ones until such time as the wires reach that area. That will also have the added benefit of maintaining employment for the highly skilled OHLE staff. In the long run it will also be cost effective.

I think your questions Kneedown, relate to the gross inefficiency of Network Rail. That is what needs to be tackled to satisfy your questions and demands which are well founded and understandable.

I really don't think that there is a case of either / or, it's a case of build stuff without Network Rail so that they can be at their most profitable.

The bottom line is: It's the Dft that decides and also has the hands on the purse strings. But they need to get their priorities right or rail travel in general will get a whole lot worse.

 

[MCR247]

Out of interest, how would your HS2's differ from the current config?

On my phone right now using tapatalk so it's awkward to make long posts, so I'll tell you when I'm on my PC!

 

[Squaddie]

In an ideal world, one in which money were no object, then of course I would be in favour of a high speed rail network. And not just from London to the Midlands but from Penzance to Inverness, allowing passengers to travel effortlessly and quickly between all major population centres.

But this is not that world. Money most definitely is an issue, and the past week has shown that our existing rail infrastructure is not fit for purpose. Before blowing billions on a new rail line, we should be replacing the Victorian third-rail system in the south with overhead power and electrifying other lines right across the country.

In any case, I think we all know what the reality of the high speed line will turn out to be. Standard accommodation will be cramped and claustrophobic, first class unaffordable. The trains will be garish and the train manager will be shouting through the tannoy the entire time. There'll be delays and cancellations at the first hint of snow. And how long before we see the first rail replacement bus crawling up the M40 because of engineering works?

Britain's existing rail network is not fit for purpose, and the billions that is earmarked for this project could go a long way towards giving us a service we can rely upon and even be proud of.

 

[grey_man]

Official YesToHS2 Poster for supporters to download. There is also a link to the independent HS2 supporters poster which is beginning to appear all over.

http://yestohs2.blogspot.com.

YesToHS2 will soon be getting a national boost so look out for references to YesToHS. PLease show you support for HS2 and the YesTo campaign. Supporters should no longer be the silent majority. Experience tells me that there are usually more supporters than protesters but supporters as a rule don't shout as loud as critics.

Well that's not true in your case because you won't even answer basic questions about the case you keep putting having disable that function on your website.

So here again:

When will I be able to access the HS services you have been telling people will be coming to Warrington?

How much will it cost to build?

How often will the trains run?

What will the HS line do in terms of dealing with overcrowding?

What will its impact be on fares?

Remember. I want the facts, not possibles, probables, projecteds and potentials. You're the one telling us it's coming to Warrington

How long should I wait? It's already been nearly a week.

If you can't answer, it just starts to look like a £17 billion train service between London and Birmingham for 2026 not what you are campaigning for.

 

[TGV]

Nobody knows the answer to any of those questions with facts. And I suspect you know that.

 

[tbtc]

When will I be able to access the HS services you have been telling people will be coming to Warrington?
...
How long should I wait? It's already been nearly a week

I wouldn't expect it to be built that soon

 

[Squaddie]

Official YesToHS2 Poster for supporters to download. There is also a link to the independent HS2 supporters poster which is beginning to appear all over.

http://yestohs2.blogspot.com.

YesToHS2 will soon be getting a national boost so look out for references to YesToHS. PLease show you support for HS2 and the YesTo campaign. Supporters should no longer be the silent majority. Experience tells me that there are usually more supporters than protesters but supporters as a rule don't shout as loud as critics.

It does your case no good whatsoever when your only answer to those who question the need for the high speed rail route is to dismiss their arguments as "misleading", "fiction" or "emotive scaremongering".

You even write, without obvious irony,

It is hard to know what to believe when some critics are being so emotive and claiming that their own views are facts.

while at the same time declaring your own views to be facts.

There are two very valid sides to this argument, and both deserve a full and fair hearing.

You would also strengthen your case by correcting the many mistakes in spelling, punctuation and grammar on your website. It looks like it's been thrown together by a couple of lower-stream teenagers, and is hardly professional.

 

[imagination]

I will try to answer some of them. Bear in mind that I might make mistakes, in which case I am sure someone will correct me.

When will I be able to access the HS services you have been telling people will be coming to Warrington?

Assuming that the train which I believe is planned to run to Glasgow using the HS line between London and Birmingham stops at Warrington Bank Quay, it should be as soon as the line opens. Noone can be 100% sure that it will actually stop there though - it could simply not stop at Warrington. Current estimates say that the line will be open in 2025/6.

How much will it cost to build?

You gave the figure of £17bn yourself.

How often will the trains run?

The ASSUMED service frequency (in http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/hs2ltd/technicalappendix/pdf/report.pdf) is 9 tph along the HS line during the off peak - 3 terminating at Birmingham, 3 to Manchester, 2 to Liverpool and 1 to Glasgow. During the peak there would be 1 more service to Birmingham and 1 more to Preston.

What will the HS line do in terms of dealing with overcrowding?

What do you mean by this? Overcrowding on the existing network or overcrowding on its own network? And overcrowding on the line or on the trains?

What will its impact be on fares?

On services operating along the WCML it is unlikely to have any impact. However the HS2 services themselves may be more expensive than traditional train services (as is the case with HS1)

Remember. I want the facts, not possibles, probables, projecteds and potentials.

What's wrong with projections, probables and potentials? After all, we can't KNOW anything yet. Plans can change. The entire world operates based on projections, and that's how it will continue. And it's a good thing too - the only alternatives being to use random number generators or similar stupid things.