HS2 - register your support.

[Nonsense]

Vanity project is exactly what HS2 is.

Also an extortionately expensive one.

Governments never learn from past oversights and mistakes.

They just want HS2 so that they can be seen to be keeping up with the best of what the continent has got to offer. But there is one fundamental difference - some of our European neighbours have always treated their railways like something to invest in and address as a matter of priority - having had the good sense to develop and improve them over time. Unlike this country, where successive governments have had no coherent [master]plan whatsoever and spend much of the past three decades procrastinating and dithering, alternately promising much needed funding, then backing down again and again - finding something else to allocate the funding on (such as London's Olympic bid - no scrub that - everything London-centric is a priority of course)......it's excuses excuses excuses..... and in the meantime our railway infrastructure has become an international laughing stock. So they pour all their efforts into one last desperate throw of the dice which is HS2...... and once again they get it wrong! Great progress eh?

Oh my God, you're right. How could we not see it before. Europe invests in its railways like HSR and its a massive success. If we do the same its a waste of money.

And if we use the money instead, for example, to electrify the Trans Pennine routes and replace all of the pacer fleet, the congestion on the Southern WCML just won't be a problem anymore.

Its all so obvious now.

 

[Barrett M95]

Oh my God, you're right. How could we not see it before. Europe invests in its railways like HSR and its a massive success. If we do the same its a waste of money.

And if we use the money instead, for example, to electrify the Trans Pennine routes and replace all of the pacer fleet, the congestion on the Southern WCML just won't be a problem anymore.

Its all so obvious now.

Pretty much what I was saying immediately before you, but without the benefit of your sarcastic humour. Well played.

 

[Boppawombat]

Oh my God, you're right. How could we not see it before. Europe invests in its railways like HSR and its a massive success. If we do the same its a waste of money.

And if we use the money instead, for example, to electrify the Trans Pennine routes and replace all of the pacer fleet, the congestion on the Southern WCML just won't be a problem anymore.

Its all so obvious now.

Pretty much what I was saying immediately before you, but without the benefit of your sarcastic humour. Well played.

I don't see why you both should be quite so self righteous about this. After all, it's true isn't it? What's wrong with somebody telling it like it is? Are you both so intelligent and frankly above everybody else new to this forum - and one of you only joined the day before I did - that you feel the need to frown on other people's contributions by employing sarcasm to make yourselves feel good? Have some dignity and respect will you!


BTW, Nonsense, do you live in the south?

 

[trainofhope]

It does not matter if we have the money or not, this is our industry and when offered the chance we have to take it because like it or not there is a good chance a member of the family may get the good fortune to follow in your/our footstep

 

[Boppawombat]

It does not matter if we have the money or not, this is our industry and when offered the chance we have to take it because like it or not there is a good chance a member of the family may get the good fortune to follow in your/our footstep

What's that supposed to mean? Why hasn't your contribution to this discussion been shot down by the king of all knowledge that calls itself Nonsense?

 

[Barrett M95]

I don't see why you both should be quite so self righteous about this. After all, it's true isn't it? What's wrong with somebody telling it like it is? Are you both so intelligent and frankly above everybody else new to this forum - and one of you only joined the day before I did - that you feel the need to frown on other people's contributions by employing sarcasm to make yourselves feel good? Have some dignity and respect will you!


BTW, Nonsense, do you live in the south?

I have also told it exactly like it is. The length of time served on this forum has what to do with this exactly? I don't follow your point. I have many years of high speed rail industry experience from mainland Europe, but is it more important that I have been on this forum longer than someone else before my opinion is valid?

You do not know who I am, so do not judge me. I have shown no lack of respect to anyone, only complimenting another poster on his use of humor which I think illustrates the point well. Not the way I personally would have said it, but nevertheless, it does not invalidate his or her stance. Where have I been sarcastic - can you please point that out?

 

[trainofhope]

What's that supposed to mean? Why hasn't your contribution to this discussion been shot down by the king of all knowledge that calls itself Nonsense?

Might be because they know where to find me and can tell me to my face?

I will say what I post to anyone face to face,

a very rare comodity you will find on social websites and forums.

Joined for one reason and we are aware of why.

nice post though

 

[Nonsense]

What's that supposed to mean? Why hasn't your contribution to this discussion been shot down by the king of all knowledge that calls itself Nonsense?

Finally some recognition.

I live in the North West by the way, if that matters to you. Its nice here.

I can afford a little sarcasm to your reactionary post because it ranged from 'knee jerk' to hysterical.

The route from Birmingham to London is over subscribed. The solution? Build a new route? Its been proven to work in Europe, are we not in Europe?

I can get the nimbyism, and I can get that another route might have merit, but that its not needed is just a lie.

 

[trainofhope]

around of applause from this corner

be careful which sites you post on!

 

[notoemt]

And if high speed rail was on your route, you would only spend 1 hour a day travelling and would see the benefit I'm sure.

Yes it would be very nice to have faster trains (although I doubt they would be that fast in the rush hour) but what is the point what is the point when the rest of the network is not being linked in. What is the point if it takes someone from a city not on a fast line an hour to travel 40 miles to get to this high speed thing?

How is this helping commuters who are standing NOW? It isn't. It won't for another 15 years. And knowing government building projects it is likely to go over budget and over time.

I've seen HS1 trains coming into Stp in the rush hour, they always look half empty. What is to say the same thing isn't going to happen with the great white hope?

You seem to think that non electrified lines will have "nothing" done with them and be "left to rot"? I doubt this and have seen no evidence to support the theory.

Where's your evidence to support that they are having a similar level of improvements?

Additionally, having been involved in European high speed rail projects for many years, I can tell you that calling them vanity projects shows a massive lack of understanding and respect for what has been achieved in more forward thinking nations.

I'm not calling what they do on the continent vanity projects. I'm calling what will be done in the UK a vanity project. What are they doing to make sure the rest of the network and the buses etc is linked in? What are they doing to improve speeds on other lines so that it will make connecting with it a viable option?

 

[Barrett M95]

It seems to me that you have not done much research of your own. Perhaps listened to a few too many NIMBYS.

I do not have time to do your research for you but I suggest you start here where most if not all of your questions have been considered. If you think the answers are too brief then there are many other sources that go into far greater detail. Just depends how much you want to know but I suggest starting here:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/high-speed-rail-faqs

 

[DarloRich]

My MP in MK is looking for your views on HS2:

http://ias4mks.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=1

 

[NSEFAN]

Yes it would be very nice to have faster trains (although I doubt they would be that fast in the rush hour) but what is the point what is the point when the rest of the network is not being linked in. What is the point if it takes someone from a city not on a fast line an hour to travel 40 miles to get to this high speed thing?

As has been mentioned, there is no room to send the trains into New Street, so an additional station needs to be built. The idea that HS2 is self contained could equally be applied to the WCML. Afterall, some people will have to travel some distance in order to use it. Of course they will! That's why there will be a station in the centre of Birmingham, so that people can use the existing connections in order to get to HS2.

How is this helping commuters who are standing NOW? It isn't. It won't for another 15 years.

Do you know what future proofing is? Do you know how long it takes to build a fully operational railway of that scale? Furthermore, money spent on HS2 won't take money away from existing projects, nor will cancelling HS2 mean more money for other projects.

I've seen HS1 trains coming into Stp in the rush hour, they always look half empty. What is to say the same thing isn't going to happen with the great white hope?

How long has Southeastern been running on HS1 been running for? Only about 2 years. The fact the line is there means that there is now room for expansion. Given that the WCML is the busiest intercity route in the UK, it is going to need additional capacity at some point.

There will come a time when no more trains can physically fit on the WCML without major engineering work, which would potentially drag on for years and cause continued disruption (much like the WCML upgrade a few years ago). By building a new line, the current WCML can keep running as normal whilst improvements to the route as a whole are made.

You seem to think that non electrified lines will have "nothing" done with them and be "left to rot"? I doubt this and have seen no evidence to support the theory.

Where's your evidence to support that they are having a similar level of improvements?

Is the Great Western scheme good enough for you? Have a look at this if you have time. I will admit that there are not many schemes proposed for the north of England. The north should get more investment for its railways, as it is currently having to make do with tired rolling stock and limited capacity. That doesn't mean, however, that HS2 is a complete waste of time and money, nor does it mean that everywhere is simply being 'left to rot' as you put it.

What are they doing to make sure the rest of the network and the buses etc is linked in? What are they doing to improve speeds on other lines so that it will make connecting with it a viable option?

The trains will start from Euston, which already has many connections. As I mentioned before, the trains will use new station in Birmingham. This is in the city centre, and if you look at the location on a map you can see that it is not far from the other major stations. They could have built a parkway station outside of the city, which would have arguably allowed faster running, but they instead chose to run into the city centre. The eventual plan is that some trains will bypass Birmingham Curzon Street anyway, providing Manchester and Leeds with faster trains to London. Perhaps there would then be scope for a "West Midlands parkway" type station near the motorway junctions aroung Birmingham?

 

[sprinterguy]

The trains will start from Euston, which already has many connections. As I mentioned before, the trains will use new station in Birmingham. This is in the city centre, and if you look at the location on a map you can see that it is not far from the other major stations. They could have built a parkway station outside of the city, which would have arguably allowed faster running, but they instead chose to run into the city centre. The eventual plan is that some trains will bypass Birmingham Curzon Street anyway, providing Manchester and Leeds with faster trains to London. Perhaps there would then be scope for a "West Midlands parkway" type station near the motorway junctions aroung Birmingham?

There is going to be such an out of town station on HS2 in the West Midlands, located near Birmingham Airport and the NEC.

 

[jon0844]

Yes it would be very nice to have faster trains (although I doubt they would be that fast in the rush hour) but what is the point what is the point when the rest of the network is not being linked in. What is the point if it takes someone from a city not on a fast line an hour to travel 40 miles to get to this high speed thing?

How is this helping commuters who are standing NOW? It isn't. It won't for another 15 years. And knowing government building projects it is likely to go over budget and over time.

I've seen HS1 trains coming into Stp in the rush hour, they always look half empty. What is to say the same thing isn't going to happen with the great white hope?

Why would they be much slower in rush hour? With limited stops, the increased dwell times for loading lots of people shouldn't add more than a few minutes to the total journey time tops.

Clearly this isn't helping people now, but it will take the same amount of time to build whenever construction starts, so maybe it needs to start sooner rather than later?

I do agree about trains on HS1 but there is a good reason; the supplement everyone must pay. A colleague lives in Gillingham. St Pancras is better for Old Street, but he would have to pay nearly £1k more a year for a season with +HS1. So he upgrades every now and then, usually if he oversleeps, and pays £6 a day. On top of his existing ticket.

Until SET gets rid of this, the trains will always be underutilised. Arguably this is something to consider with HS2, but that's a ticketing issue and not a reason not to build the line. A ticketing issue can be fixed in a matter of minutes, not years.

 

[NSEFAN]

There is going to be such an out of town station on HS2 in the West Midlands, located near Birmingham Airport and the NEC.

Good to see that this is going to happen. Presumalby the station would be very close to the current Birmingham International near the M42/M6? It is a little far from the airport to walk, so hopefully there will be a bus connection.

 

[BlythPower]

It's going to be north of the NEC with a monorail (!) linking it to the airport.

 

[LE Greys]

It's going to be north of the NEC with a monorail (!) linking it to the airport.

Presumably an extension of the cable-haulage system rather than converting the thing back to a maglev. I'd much prefer the maglev, but it was a unique system, so would be very expensive to run and maintain.

 

[trainofhope]

please show your support for our industry

 

[Philip Elliott]

Personally I wish they would spend the money on installing ATO, never known a computer to be an LLC

 

[sprinterguy]

Presumably an extension of the cable-haulage system rather than converting the thing back to a maglev. I'd much prefer the maglev, but it was a unique system, so would be very expensive to run and maintain.

There hasn't been any hard and fast decision on what form the new people mover from the HS2 station to the NEC and the Airport is going to take as far as I am aware, though of course it's tentatively marked as both "Monorail" and the more general term "People Mover" on the HS2 sectional map.

There's been some cursive looks over PRT technology at Centro but there's no knowing if that's the option that'll be taken up. Bear in mind that by the time HS2 is in place the current cable-haulage system will be quite aged.

 

[exile]

I'm not optimistic. Whilst I support the project there are 2 strong counter-arguments -
(a) the nimby argument - OK it's not an edifying one but it has to be taken into account.
(b) the "green" benefits of high speed rail in the UK will only become really apparent when we have a high speed route to Scotland as this will reduce domestic air travel. Trains have already more or less eliminated air travel to the Midlands and the North West - the main competitor to rail on these routes is the car (which is still dominating this market) - and will shaving 1/2 hour off the journey really persuade the Jeremy Clarksons out of their motors?
In other words, England isn't France, the main nodes of population are much closer together.
So, my main reasons for saying yes are I'm afraid just as selfish as those of the nimbys for saying no - that is, I'll be able to get to London (and south thereof) quicker. Not sure that's very persuasive.

 

[Barrett M95]

England is not the UK though. The main centres of population (London, Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle, Edinburgh and Glasgow for example) are a very comparable distance apart as Major French and northern European destinations. Paris to Lyon (the largest two French cities) is LESS distance than London to Glasgow. Paris to Lille or Tours is less than London to Manchester.

 

[jon0844]

The anti-HS2 'camp' is getting some press today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14198290

IEA deputy editorial director Dr Richard Wellings, one of the report's authors, said: "HS2 is another political vanity project - like Concorde and the Millennium Dome - being ploughed ahead with complete disregard for properly thought through commercial prospects or the mounting opposition to it.

I quoted the above because this shows how backward thinking some people can be.

Concorde was a huge success, but a few circumstances sealed its fate (rather unfairly in my opinion). It was perhaps one of the safest planes in existence and with 9/11, it lost custom that would have come back.

Meanwhile, the Dome has gone on to be a huge success, so while the politics behind its construction, the cost and the content can be debated - the structure and the development of the area (transport links etc) has done untold good. It's a great location and is still being developed now, no doubt improving the local economy, housing and so on. While the Olympics weren't mentioned (yet?), I hope this will also do good for east London and other locations after the event - certainly a hell of a lot of transport upgrades and new rolling stock in the area can be attributed to the Olympics, so I wonder if that's another vanity project?

Thus, HS2 may have some teething problems but they can be ironed out. You can't simply not build it because you think some politician is doing it as a vanity project. It's a project that will take 20+ years to fully build, and every day delayed today is added on at the end. The next generation or two will be so happy to find that most people are making incredibly bizarre claims to justify not building it.

at 225mph, the trains will be the fastest in Europe and will consume disproportionate levels of power via the National Grid.

So let's slow the trains down and get more people to drive, on their own, up the M1 and M40. That will relieve pressure on the National Grid (unless they're electric cars that is).

 

[Philip Elliott]

Concorde was a huge success,

Such a huge success that no airlines in the world bought any other than from the countries that developed it?

Concorde was never intended as a premium product - it was designed as a mass market competitor to the Boeing 7X7 series.

Success? Dream on

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I see that there are only now 10 days left for those still undecided to make their opinions known.

 

[passmore]

I'm not particularly optimistic about HS2 to be honest, knowing some of the NIMBYs that were interviewed on the BBC article a couple of months ago probably doesn't help.

The problem we have in this country with our current rail system is that it is too expensive and too overcrowded. If HS2 was purposefully designed to relieve those two problems, and such a solution both in the long-term and short-term route design was apparent, then I'd be registering my support immediately. It seems like a white elephant, designed to relieve only one line which is nearing capacity, a line which is local to me and I know for a fact gets overcrowded all too easily. What about the other lines that serve both Birmingham and London? What are the benefits to them? What will the benefits be to someone local to MK still having to use the WCML simply because HS2 doesn't serve the town?
I could go on but it seems only designed to serve businesses who want a faster connection between the 2 largest cities in England with no apparent guarantee of any other benefit apart from relieving capacity on the WCML, which, IMO, is insufficient in the long-term as the problem of overcrowding on other lines will remain.

Further public consultations need to be considered before such a proposal is brought to the design phase. If it has already, then I really can't see who is going to use the line apart from business commuters.

 

[jon0844]

Such a huge success that no airlines in the world bought any other than from the countries that developed it?

Concorde was never intended as a premium product - it was designed as a mass market competitor to the Boeing 7X7 series.

Success? Dream on

The oil crisis affected it at the start, just as 9/11 did at the end, but I am not talking about its success in terms of sales of aircraft - but engineering.

I am not sure why a plane with such a small capacity was ever going to compete with a 747, but I am sure that it could have been used successfully elsewhere. After all, a lot of people still argue that speed is more important than anything else and there are always going to be people who can afford the hefty premium.

I'd have expected to see both types of plane being used, just as was the case with Concorde only being a tiny part of the BA and Air France services.

I never got to fly on it (I had a free flight as part of a press trip put on by Philips but couldn't make it) but I think the circumstances for its withdrawal were premature - but hey ho, it's gone now and life goes on. I am glad it was made and I am sure that loads of technical knowledge went on to other planes made since, and any future high-speed planes in the future.

But, back to HS2; I can see the anti-HS2 mob making a big deal of it only going to Birmingham. Yes, we know it will go on - but as that isn't happening at the start, it gives ammunition to the argument that it's an expensive line that only goes to one place and misses half of the country.

I know people like Old Timer will explain why we haven't got the manpower to do the whole thing in one go, but I do think that if HS2 was being sold as the full package to be open at roughly the same time, as against in phases, it would be easier to sell to the public. The NIMBY's will be against it no matter what, but it would be harder for them to latch on to easy arguments to cover the simple fact that they don't want the line going through their towns/villages/gardens.

 

[Metroland]

The anti-HS2 'camp' is getting some press today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14198290



I quoted the above because this shows how backward thinking some people can be.

Concorde was a huge success, but a few circumstances sealed its fate (rather unfairly in my opinion). It was perhaps one of the safest planes in existence and with 9/11, it lost custom that would have come back.

Meanwhile, the Dome has gone on to be a huge success, so while the politics behind its construction, the cost and the content can be debated - the structure and the development of the area (transport links etc) has done untold good. It's a great location and is still being developed now, no doubt improving the local economy, housing and so on. While the Olympics weren't mentioned (yet?), I hope this will also do good for east London and other locations after the event - certainly a hell of a lot of transport upgrades and new rolling stock in the area can be attributed to the Olympics, so I wonder if that's another vanity project?

Thus, HS2 may have some teething problems but they can be ironed out. You can't simply not build it because you think some politician is doing it as a vanity project. It's a project that will take 20+ years to fully build, and every day delayed today is added on at the end. The next generation or two will be so happy to find that most people are making incredibly bizarre claims to justify not building it.



So let's slow the trains down and get more people to drive, on their own, up the M1 and M40. That will relieve pressure on the National Grid (unless they're electric cars that is).

The trouble with these sorts of reports is they don't offer alternatives.

Air travel is irrelevant south of Preston, and further expansion of airports means the UK will have difficulty meeting its climate objectives - and anyway the price of fuel is rising.

More motorways would cause even more problems (more noise, more land take) and expanded motorways encourages people to travel by car, and add to further congestion around cities where most the the congestion occurs. There are also problems with encouraging more road freight/car travel with rising fuel prices and the current climate obligations.

You could improve the Chiltern line and WCML, for a while to soak up capacity, but it's hardly a revolution in travel.

The answer seems to be price people out of travelling/stop at home at best, or more accurately no answer at all.

 

[LE Greys]

Such a huge success that no airlines in the world bought any other than from the countries that developed it?

Concorde was never intended as a premium product - it was designed as a mass market competitor to the Boeing 7X7 series.

Success? Dream on

It delivered exactly what the engineers said it would. Mach 2, range of 4,000 miles, carried 100 people, fuel consumption exactly what it was supposed to be. It also had a remarkable safety record up with one major accident in nearly thirty years of operation - which was longer than intended. Engineering-wise, it was a complete success. BA also made it profitable.