High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[HSTEd]

Expand the WCML where possible.

We did.

The WCML is full.
Tiny sticking plasters can't escape that.

 

[jon0844]

Can you explain why Liverpool should suffer from having clapped out stock running on old lines just because London wants 15 minutes shaved off its commuter times at £20m+?

Clapped out stock? Now or then?

390s aren't clapped out. By then they may well have been replaced anyway.

 

[HSTEd]

Can you explain why Liverpool should suffer from having clapped out stock running on old lines just because London wants 15 minutes shaved off its commuter times at £20m+?

What?

This statement doesn't even make sense.
Liverpool is not going to have clapped out stock running on old lines. (Indeed they will have new stock long before HS2 opens as the acquisition is already moving forwards).
ICWC Services will likely not exist to Liverpool under HS2 since Runcorn, Liverpool and Crewe will pick up Classic Compatible trains that will render them pointless.

And I don't know any journey that HS2 will reduce any journey times by 15 minutes.
40 minutes to Birmingham and an hour to Manchester.

 

[Dave1987]

Treasury figures are within my range, see above.

I would spend small and focused. So £10m on five new stations, and then a controlled budget thereafter on focused areas across the network. I won't spend £80bn on a cross-fingered experiment.

I would spend money on new rolling stock. I would connect existing towns to the network. I won't spend money on a London-centric expressway.

Right then so you have no solution to the capacity problems on the WCML, and the fact you think you could build five new stations for £10m says that you don't really understand what you are going on about.

 

[jon0844]

We did.

The WCML is full.
Tiny sticking plasters can't escape that.

Even with major upgrade work, wouldn't we still probably need tilting trains to have any chance of increasing line speeds?

If so, I wonder how many people in the UK realise just how much smaller our trains already are interior wise to European gauge trains. Trains where you can have 3+2 seating and a wider aisle, or even 3+3 seating!

Maybe someone should build a mock up of a HS2 train and then put it alongside a recreated 390 interior (and to be fair, a non-tilting train) and let the public see what they could have, against what we currently have and always will have.

(Edit: I realise some trains will still need to be usable on the classic network, but once HS2 is completed and we may begin to upgrade other lines or build new ones to hook up, we might just be able to fully switch over on core routes).

 

[PR1Berske]

What?

This statement doesn't even make sense.
Liverpool is not going to have clapped out stock running on old lines. (Indeed they will have new stock long before HS2 opens as the acquisition is already moving forwards).

And I don't know any journey that HS2 will reduce any journey times by 15 minutes.
40 minutes to Birmingham and an hour to Manchester.

So £20m+ for 40 minutes? Or £20m+ to improve, say, lines into and out-of Birmingham ?

A total of £73bn (Treasury figures) to put a line avoiding some of the largest towns and cities in the country, or the same to invest in new stations and extended lines where required?

Liverpool is being left out of HS2, so whilst Manchester is given an hour bonus, Liverpool gets nothing, but tax payers still have to shell out thousands of pounds for it. So why should Liverpool suffer?

Why not - as I have suggested - put investment into east/west lines? Liverpool to Lincolnshire?

 

[trainplan1]

Can you explain why Liverpool should suffer from having clapped out stock running on old lines just because London wants 15 minutes shaved off its commuter times at £20m+?

Hey? Liverpool is currently proposed to get 2tph HS services when phase 1 opens. Knocks nearly 30 minutes off the current timing...

 

[Dave1987]

Oh please, having HS2 or not is not going to make us the laughing stock, having a £40bn version of Ciudad Real, will make us a laughing stock. We are a small country, with a high population, and population densities and distributions that are not ideal for high speed rail.

The optimised alternative costs £2.062bn, so even if it overspends by a factor of 20 it's still below the current estimated cost of HS2, with a BCR of 5.17.

I think you are missing the point of what a BCR is. Having a larger or smaller BCR does not mean the benefits are the same, its the ratio of benefits to costs.

One question whos 25 year passenger figures are right, DfT, Network Rail or HS2? and which one are you most inclined to believe? ok we won't know for 25 years and you may as well throw darts at paper on a dart board, but to turn your statement round, if you can't show the capacity step change is needed over and above what can be cost effectively got out of the current network, there is no argument for HS2.

Explain to us what the "optimised alternatives" are. If you are really serious about your objection you will know exactly how the alternatives can be built and what benefits they would provide and how they would be better value and provide just as much capacity enhancement as HS2....

 

[trainplan1]

Maybe someone should build a mock up of a HS2 train and then put it alongside a recreated 390 interior (and to be fair, a non-tilting train) and let the public see what they could have, against what we currently have and always will have.

Ask SNCF to send a Duplex to St Pancras to put on display

 

[Dave1987]

We can explore where and how to explore widening/exploring the WCML where possible.

OMG are you for real? Do you know how many houses would have to be demolished for that.

 

[jon0844]

A total of £73bn (Treasury figures) to put a line avoiding some of the largest towns and cities in the country, or the same to invest in new stations and extended lines where required?

Wow, that's £7bn just slashed from the budget right there!

Keep going... now I just know you'll come back with some plausible figures for the WCML improvements that will make HS2 unnecessary.

 

[PR1Berske]

Explain to us what the "optimised alternatives" are. If you are really serious about your objection you will know exactly how the alternatives can be built and what benefits they would provide and how they would be better value and provide bust as much capacity enhancement as HS2....

I have already suggested my alternatives.

I would look at focused, regional/hyper-regional expansion projects, rather than a national coin-toss. I would work on intelligent timetabling, for example, and as has been mentioned before by others, work on signalling to enable shorter distances between trains.

I would spend £10m on five new stations, and then use the same amount of money in another 5 or so years to do the same, helping to bring more people to connect with the train network (as HS2 disallows people to connect to the line they're paying for)

Liverpool IS being abandoned by HS2, because the focus is getting people from Manchester to London. It's not just or fair to do so, which is why I suspect Angela Eagle is using "north/south railway" rather than "HS2"

 

[Bonemaster]

I totally agree with more lines to go east and west. Isn't there one already in the works from MK to Cambridge - effectively creating a link that spans most, if not all, of the mainlines.

I'd like some form of link from St Albans through to Hertford (connecting the MML to the ECML to the WAML) and can think of many others.

I would hope and expect that in the next 50 years, a lot of these things will be considered separate projects and won't be held back by HS2.

If I was an investor, I'd be looking at HS2 as a pretty safe, solid, project to fund. I wouldn't, sadly, see a lot of other things that will help people but not guarantee a good return, as being worthwhile.

There are plenty of Transpennine journeys that are currently painfully slow, and even the Anglia - Birmingham journeys take three times longer than driving the same journey, when the West Midlands to Cambridge is quicker via London than on a direct train something is wrong with the existing infrastructure.

Investing in HS2 wont be pretty safe at all look at all those who lost money in Eurotunnel.

Thus, the money that will be given for HS2 probably wouldn't be there for the other stuff anyway. It's not all public money for HS2 is it?

It was the original plan that it wouldn't be public money, I believe the plan is now to borrow the money

 

[HSTEd]

So £20m+ for 40 minutes? Or £20m+ to improve, say, lines into and out-of Birmingham ?

Where is this £20m coming from?

A total of £73bn (Treasury figures)

I assume, to be fair, that all your alternatives have been priced in 2033 pounds, including capital interest payments?

to put a line avoiding some of the largest towns and cities in the country, or the same to invest in new stations and extended lines where required?

Running lines through city centres in this day and age is stupid.
They didn't even do this at the time they were built.
The lines were built on the edge of towns and the towns just enveloped them.
FOr this reason there is not acres of space beyond the fences to fit new stuff in.

Liverpool is being left out of HS2, so whilst Manchester is given an hour bonus, Liverpool gets nothing, but tax payers still have to shell out thousands of pounds for it. So why should Liverpool suffer?

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Liverpool got two trains per hour at 96 minute journey times?
In fact liverpool benefits to the tune of 32 minutes (plus 15 more minutes of average waiting time between trains), which while not what Manchester get is far from "nothing".

Why not - as I have suggested - put investment into east/west lines? Liverpool to Lincolnshire?

Because, as a yellowbelly myself, there is very little demand for such a route.
The current service could do with more, better, stock but that is about it.

 

[Dave1987]

I have already suggested my alternatives.

I would look at focused, regional/hyper-regional expansion projects, rather than a national coin-toss. I would work on intelligent timetabling, for example, and as has been mentioned before by others, work on signalling to enable shorter distances between trains.

I would spend £10m on five new stations, and then use the same amount of money in another 5 or so years to do the same, helping to bring more people to connect with the train network (as HS2 disallows people to connect to the line they're paying for)

Liverpool IS being abandoned by HS2, because the focus is getting people from Manchester to London. It's not just or fair to do so, which is why I suspect Angela Eagle is using "north/south railway" rather than "HS2"

Right then is presume you are talking about ERTMS signalling? Do you know how much that costs? Do you know the infrastructure that is required for it? Do you know how much benefit it will actually provide? Clearly not.......

You could not build 5 new stations for £10m. Considering the average bridge costs around £2m. Like I said you really don't understand what you are talking about.

 

[jon0844]

I have already suggested my alternatives.

I would look at focused, regional/hyper-regional expansion projects, rather than a national coin-toss. I would work on intelligent timetabling, for example, and as has been mentioned before by others, work on signalling to enable shorter distances between trains.

I would spend £10m on five new stations, and then use the same amount of money in another 5 or so years to do the same, helping to bring more people to connect with the train network (as HS2 disallows people to connect to the line they're paying for)

Liverpool IS being abandoned by HS2, because the focus is getting people from Manchester to London. It's not just or fair to do so, which is why I suspect Angela Eagle is using "north/south railway" rather than "HS2"

Is that how you counter HS2 by saying you'll just look at loads of other things, and then open five new stations every '5 or so years'. And that's assuming you can open five stations for £10m in the first place.

If you keep building new stations, you'll no doubt make those areas prime places for new build housing and offices (not a bad idea in itself) but how do you squeeze what will be a lot of NEW people onto the line, not just those now a few minutes closer to their station?

I don't wish to sound rude (by which I mean I am going to be), you need to do more than that to convince everyone that HS2 is unfeasible and you think it can be better spent elsewhere. Real examples and approximate costings please, or an admission that perhaps you haven't thought this through.

Finally how does HS2 stop people connecting to the line? I can leave my house right now, go to Hatfield station, get on a train and connect to any of the mainline routes from London. It's not some private network that you have to be on a guest list to use, reserved for people in suits and MPs.

 

[PR1Berske]

Right then is presume you are talking about ERTMS signalling? Do you know how much that costs? Do you know the infrastructure that is required for it? Do you know how much benefit it will actually provide? Clearly not.......

You could not build 5 new stations for £10m. Considering the average bridge costs around £2m. Like I said you really don't understand what you are talking about.

I understand that HS2 is a massive gamble, a poker game with the nation's finances. I understand that there is no justification, no need, no want, no reason, little support outside Westminster, for such an expensive coin-toss.

I understand that only rail enthusiasts seem to want it. I understand nobody can justify a multi-million expressway running from London to Birming....The West Midlands :roll::roll: - based on how commuters work NOW not in 30 years time. I understand that HS2 does not take into consideration the reduction in 9-5 office hours or the increase in at home working. I understand that you can't use HS2 unless you live in four or five arbitrarily chosen cities.

I understand that you can focus money into specific regional centres along both WC and EC lines, for far less disruption, with far less opposition.

 

[jon0844]

It was the original plan that it wouldn't be public money, I believe the plan is now to borrow the money

Well, that's one of the first genuine reasons for some concern about HS2.

I wish most of the opposition stuck to things like this, not made up nonsense or pie-in-the-sky alternatives.

I do wonder if businesses and investors are perhaps a little bit scared about offering money to a scheme that seems to be almost universally hated at the moment?

Even with Eurotunnel, it didn't go bust because it was in so much debt that the banks couldn't afford to let it happen!

 

[Dave1987]

I understand that HS2 is a massive gamble, a poker game with the nation's finances. I understand that there is no justification, no need, no want, no reason, little support outside Westminster, for such an expensive coin-toss.

I understand that only rail enthusiasts seem to want it. I understand nobody can justify a multi-million expressway running from London to Birming....The West Midlands :roll::roll: - based on how commuters work NOW not in 30 years time. I understand that HS2 does not take into consideration the reduction in 9-5 office hours or the increase in at home working. I understand that you can't use HS2 unless you live in four or five arbitrarily chosen cities.

I understand that you can focus money into specific regional centres along both WC and EC lines, for far less disruption, with far less opposition.

If we had people like you around 50 years ago man would never of stepped foot on the moon......

Can I ask you where you propose putting the extra freight from Felixstowe? Or does all that go onto the roads? You really need to look at the bigger picture buddy its not just about transporting business men and women to and from London quicker. Felixstowe port has just expanded, there are no more freight paths left on the WCML so without HS2 all that extra freight is pretty much guaranteed to go via road and the A14. Look at the bigger picture.......

 

[PR1Berske]

If we had people like you around 50 years ago man would never of stepped foot on the moon......

Can I ask you where you propose putting the extra freight from Felixstowe? Or does all that go onto the roads? You really need to look at the bigger picture buddy its not just about transporting business men and women to and from London quicker.

If it wasn't transporting business men and women to and from London, why is that the only thing that Ministers and SoS have been using as justification? Why is not the same amount of money spent on, say, Glasgow/Edinburgh to Birmingham instead?

I know - and you know - why this white elephant is being directed to stomp over the gap between London and Brum.

I just hope that sense and reason comes to someone in the short-term. This country does not want, need, or can afford, HS2, and I hope it comes to an end before it's too late. It's that simple. HS2 is just not needed.

 

[HSTEd]

I understand that HS2 is a massive gamble, a poker game with the nation's finances. I understand that there is no justification, no need, no want, no reason, little support outside Westminster, for such an expensive coin-toss.

When was the last time infrastructure in Britain actually turned out to be a white elephant?
I don't recall one, except for perhaps the Humber Bridge (although I doubt it).
When something has a hundred year lifespan it is very difficult to conceive of a way where it could fail completely.

I understand that only rail enthusiasts seem to want it. I understand nobody can justify a multi-million expressway running from London to Birming....The West Midlands :roll::roll: - based on how commuters work NOW not in 30 years time. I understand that HS2 does not take into consideration the reduction in 9-5 office hours or the increase in at home working.

The growth in home working appears to have stalled.
It turns out it turns personnel management into an absolute nightmare as goldbricking becomes almost impossible to prevent.

Many companies are trending back to working in offices simply because staff are easier to monitor.

I understand that you can't use HS2 unless you live in four or five arbitrarily chosen cities.

Cities that contain a very large fraction proportionally of the entire British economy.
London, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, Leeds, York, Edinburgh, Glasgow and the list goes on

I understand that you can focus money into specific regional centres along both WC and EC lines, for far less disruption, with far less opposition.

So you can do that with no disruption at all?
There will be almost no disruption to main lines from HS2 apart from the Euston rebuild, which will happen to have anyway.

 

[Dave1987]

If it wasn't transporting business men and women to and from London, why is that the only thing that Ministers and SoS have been using as justification? Why is not the same amount of money spent on, say, Glasgow/Edinburgh to Birmingham instead?

I know - and you know - why this white elephant is being directed to stomp over the gap between London and Brum.

I just hope that sense and reason comes to someone in the short-term. This country does not want, need, or can afford, HS2, and I hope it comes to an end before it's too late. It's that simple. HS2 is just not needed.

I see HS2 as one of the best projects this country has ever taken on. It's shows we are being proactive in stopping a problem before it happens and not just reacting to it when its too late.

Plus how do you proposed "upgrading" the WCML and ECML without causing massive disruption?

 

[HSTEd]

If it wasn't transporting business men and women to and from London, why is that the only thing that Ministers and SoS have been using as justification? Why is not the same amount of money spent on, say, Glasgow/Edinburgh to Birmingham instead?

Because you get Birmingham-Scotland improvements by proxy.
And it is an easier argument to make.
People just accuse you of trying to muddy the issue if you mention the other problems.

I know - and you know - why this white elephant is being directed to stomp over the gap between London and Brum.

Because that is the core of the railway network?

I just hope that sense and reason comes to someone in the short-term. This country does not want, need, or can afford, HS2, and I hope it comes to an end before it's too late. It's that simple. HS2 is just not needed.

It can afford it, and it does need it if it wants to break out of the traditional mould of simply struggling from one crisis to another.
People lionise the Victorian spirit while completely misunderstanding everything it stood for.

 

[jon0844]

If it wasn't transporting business men and women to and from London, why is that the only thing that Ministers and SoS have been using as justification? Why is not the same amount of money spent on, say, Glasgow/Edinburgh to Birmingham instead?

I know - and you know - why this white elephant is being directed to stomp over the gap between London and Brum.

I just hope that sense and reason comes to someone in the short-term. This country does not want, need, or can afford, HS2, and I hope it comes to an end before it's too late. It's that simple. HS2 is just not needed.

You're still saying £80bn, even after getting the adjusted-for-2033 figure and being shown how the £80bn figure is nonsense.

You're still saying 'white elephant'.

You're still talking about London-Birmingham as if HS2 is only to there.

You're now arguing about people in Liverpool losing out, when they aren't - they're gaining quite a lot (more than people to Birmingham it seems).

You're not coming up with properly thought out alternatives, and the small things you have said (like 5 stations for £10m, then 5 new stations every year) don't make sense.

And you still think I was out of order to say you were trolling?

 

[PR1Berske]

You're still saying £80bn, even after getting the adjusted-for-2033 figure and being shown how the £80bn figure is nonsense.

You're still saying 'white elephant'.

You're still talking about London-Birmingham as if HS2 is only to there.

You're now arguing about people in Liverpool losing out, when they aren't - they're gaining quite a lot (more than people to Birmingham it seems).

You're not coming up with properly thought out alternatives, and the small things you have said (like 5 stations for £10m, then 5 new stations every year) don't make sense.

And you still think I was out of order to say you were trolling?

So I can only not "troll" if I agree with you?

 

[jon0844]

I see HS2 as one of the best projects this country has ever taken on. It's shows we are being proactive in stopping a problem before it happens and not just reacting to it when its too late.

Plus how do you proposed "upgrading" the WCML and ECML without causing massive disruption?

Indeed, we left it way too late with Crossrail and the TL2K projects. Of course, HS2 may still have years of delays ahead of it.

So I can only not "troll" if I agree with you?

You don't have to agree with me, but you're not countering anything we're saying - you're just repeating mistruths. Okay, lies.

You're totally unable to come up with alternatives, but must just repeat stuff that you've repeatedly been told isn't true.

At least I've discovered a possible concern about where the funding will come from, which seems to more than you've conceded.

Frankly, trolling is the perfect word. You're winding people up by repeating the same thing over and over again, which must be done only to annoy people or think it's funny to take this thread another 20 or 30 pages further without actually bringing anything new to the table.

 

[PR1Berske]

You're still saying £80bn, even after getting the adjusted-for-2033 figure and being shown how the £80bn figure is nonsense.

You're still saying 'white elephant'.

You're still talking about London-Birmingham as if HS2 is only to there.

You're now arguing about people in Liverpool losing out, when they aren't - they're gaining quite a lot (more than people to Birmingham it seems).

You're not coming up with properly thought out alternatives, and the small things you have said (like 5 stations for £10m, then 5 new stations every year) don't make sense.

And you still think I was out of order to say you were trolling?

We're never going to agree. I'm not going to blow out or strop or flounce, but clearly nothing good will come from an anti-HS2 arguing with a cheerleader. You're looking at my answers and choosing to keep storming through with your own blinkered opinions - wonder what that's called?

 

[YorkshireBear]

This thread has turned into a bit of a joke. The same things are repeated on both sides and I am afraid PR1berske you are using figures in a way that confuses simpletons but not peiple on here. So lets use the HS2. 2033 price of 73 billion. Considering a little station near exmouth will cost about 2 million. How do you propose to construct 5 new stations on the WCML (although the line is irrelevant) for 10 million in 2033 prices?

Thats a small point but important as it proves your lack of understanding and knowledge of what you are talking about. Or your lying and trying to be purposely deceitful. Either way you dont come out looking good.

 

[jon0844]

We're never going to agree. I'm not going to blow out or strop or flounce, but clearly nothing good will come from an anti-HS2 arguing with a cheerleader. You're looking at my answers and choosing to keep storming through with your own blinkered opinions - wonder what that's called?

A lot of what I say is opinion, sure.

You're entitled to an opinion, but you're not really giving one - you're using other facts and figures that have been debunked to 'prove' that HS2 is a disaster, and totally ignoring what anyone else says.

I'm willing to hear about problems, or where the route could be improved. And if someone came up with a rock solid case to prove the WCML could be upgraded without problems, and for less money, I'd be the first to listen and say 'ah, you might have a point after all'.

 

[YorkshireBear]

And apologies for spelling on a pacer on my mobile its not easy!!!