HS2 - register your support.

[YorkshireBear]

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.

Add to that that the accident it did have was entirely man made no technical fault with the plane what so ever

 

[LE Greys]

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.

I agree completely. We can't make people stop travelling. We can tell them to, there was a whole campaign in WW2 about 'Is your journey really necessary', but that would cause a major public backlash because people don't like being ordered around. Really, the only argument should be about where to route the line. I reckon they got that wrong, but still support the line because it's better than any of the alternatives suggested above. It's a railway, and we should back it for that reason. But then I'm someone who does not care much about finances, I prefer to see things up and running, and even if they make huge losses, it's better to have them than to think what might have been. Just build the thing, it'll be magnificent when it's finished, especially if it goes all the way to Scotland (imagine zooming through the Lune Gorge at 200 mph).

 

[passmore]

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 was said on the tin.

If that is not the definition of a 'success' for you, then I don't know what is.

 

[anthony263]

Add to that that the accident it did have was entirely man made no technical fault with the plane what so ever

In my opinion if it wasnt for 9/11 and airbus saying that they were going to massivly increase costs for spares for concorde it would still be flying today.

Personally i think the management at BA should have shown a bit more courage against the french at the time and continued flying concorde , especially after spending so much money refubishing it.

If BA still had concorde, it would have given them an edge against the other airlines such as Virgin as a lot of celeb's etc would be using concorde, although it more expensive it not a lot of time off the journey from London to New York. seen it a few years ago as part of its farewell tour, it didnt seem any louder than say the new airbus A380.

There was a plan to have 1 concorde airbourne again in time for a flypast at the 2012 olympic's not sure whats going on with that and the plan to display a concorde alongside the theames in London.

I am a supporter of HS2 as i have said previously, what can we do if we dont have it, certainly it would bring more benefits and save taxypayers money compared to just upgrading the west coast mainline like some are suggesting (Havent they learned lessons from what happened before?)

I think HS1 has been a sucess and hopefully it will have more trains using it such as DB'S london - Frackfurt service, or that proposed service by Air France

 

[YorkshireBear]

I am a supporter of HS2 as i have said previously, what can we do if we dont have it, certainly it would bring more benefits and save taxypayers money compared to just upgrading the west coast mainline like some are suggesting (Havent they learned lessons from what happened before?)

I think HS1 has been a sucess and hopefully it will have more trains using it such as DB'S london - Frackfurt service, or that proposed service by Air France

proposed service by air france? i am intregued?

and you were agreeing with me when you quoted me then nto disagreeing werent you? i couldnt quite grasp what you meant

 

[jon0844]

I am sure the anti-HS1 people will try and forget HS1 exists. We have, however, had the argument that HS1 isn't very well used - citing the empty 395s. That is of course partly down to the high price (supplement) and the obvious point that off-peak most trains are usually pretty empty.

I can travel from Hatfield to Old Street at around 11am or 3pm and be pretty much the only person on the train. I bet even EC trains are fairly lightly loaded. Does that make the ECML a waste of time?

 

[Philip Elliott]

It delivered exactly what was said on the tin.

If that is not the definition of a 'success' for you, then I don't know what is.

Err, no it didn't! It was supposed to usher in a new era of cheap mass market supersonic flight. Nobody else has tried supersonic flight since - the concept failed.

 

[jon0844]

Unless you can hitch a ride in a fighter jet, I'd say it was a success as a cheap form of supersonic flight! It wasn't mass market though, that we can definitely agree on.

There is no other plane that can get you to New York in the same time as Concorde did, and I am not aware of any other plane design on the horizon that will.

 

[anthony263]

proposed service by air france? i am intregued?

and you were agreeing with me when you quoted me then nto disagreeing werent you? i couldnt quite grasp what you meant

I apoligise, perhaps i should have explained my views, better. What i meant was yes HS2 is a good thing as i think although it has a high cost it would bring a lot of economic benefits.

I did read 1 report on HS2 which said that by diverting a few services onto HS2 it would free up more paths on the west coast mainline which would allow more services to operate on that line thus boosting capacity. Once service qouted was the West Croydon - Milton Keynes service which could be increased to run every 30 minutes, along with a fast service area's such as Watford Junction to London Euston. It also mentioned that it would allow for a service from Reading to Milton Keynes as part of the east-west rail link.

1 mistake i think with HS2 is that it might not be going to glasgow etc personally i hope as it is built that a decision is made so that it will go to scotland as it will provide benefit not just to area's which it serves but other area's surrounding it.

As for Concorde, I do think that it was a very good plane and it was stupud of BA in my opinion to withdraw it after they spent millions, refubishing their aircraft, yes after 9/11 it did suffer a reduction in passenger unumbers but i am sure these would have recovered. too this day i still say it is 1 of the most safest aircraft to have ever flown, compared to say a DC10 which caused the concorde crash.

As for the air france proposal, i did read this online and on another forum, i will have to find it not sure if air france have dropped the idea now though.

Another idea i have read was to run a commutor service from London St Pancras international to Paris stopping at some places in kent along the way which ok sounds good, but might difficult because of passport controls etc.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I apoligise, perhaps i should have explained my views, better. What i meant was yes HS2 is a good thing as i think although it has a high cost it would bring a lot of economic benefits.

I did read 1 report on HS2 which said that by diverting a few services onto HS2 it would free up more paths on the west coast mainline which would allow more services to operate on that line thus boosting capacity. Once service qouted was the West Croydon - Milton Keynes service which could be increased to run every 30 minutes, along with a fast service area's such as Watford Junction to London Euston. It also mentioned that it would allow for a service from Reading to Milton Keynes as part of the east-west rail link.

1 mistake i think with HS2 is that it might not be going to glasgow etc personally i hope as it is built that a decision is made so that it will go to scotland as it will provide benefit not just to area's which it serves but other area's surrounding it.

As for Concorde, I do think that it was a very good plane and it was stupud of BA in my opinion to withdraw it after they spent millions, refubishing their aircraft, yes after 9/11 it did suffer a reduction in passenger unumbers but i am sure these would have recovered. too this day i still say it is 1 of the most safest aircraft to have ever flown, compared to say a DC10 which caused the concorde crash.

As for the air france proposal, i did read this online and on another forum, i will have to find it not sure if air france have dropped the idea now though.

Another idea i have read was to run a commutor service from London St Pancras international to Paris stopping at some places in kent along the way which ok sounds good, but might difficult because of passport controls etc.

I think sending ti to glasgow straight away would be difficult but completely agree that that is where it should end up.

Commuter services from london to paris now that is quite something!

 

[anthony263]

Here are some links to the Trans-manche metro idea:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/3235674/Cross-channel-commuter-service-plan.html

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=44558

here is an article on the air france proposal:

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/sep2008/gb2008099_061975.htm

 

[G123T]

HS2 will not happen. This is not the victorian age, we dont build we consult. There will be endless consultations and enquiries... The nimbys will win out. People are short sighted, interested in self gain and the cost they will have to pay (not that taxes will rise/or fall based on hs2) they are not interested in providing an infrastructure fit for the future of the country and which will benefit future generations more than the current one. Shame.

 

[jon0844]

NIMBY's don't always win. We're almost certainly going to be forced to have an incinerator on our doorstep, despite huge protests. The problem is most people protesting are not deemed very important.

I presume HS2 cuts through some affluent areas with people who have some real influence. This will be the problem.

 

[G123T]

NIMBY's don't always win. We're almost certainly going to be forced to have an incinerator on our doorstep, despite huge protests. The problem is most people protesting are not deemed very important.

I presume HS2 cuts through some affluent areas with people who have some real influence. This will be the problem.

Fair point! The affluence/connection of the nimby plays a major role.

 

[passmore]

NIMBY's don't always win. We're almost certainly going to be forced to have an incinerator on our doorstep, despite huge protests. The problem is most people protesting are not deemed very important.

I presume HS2 cuts through some affluent areas with people who have some real influence. This will be the problem.

Speaking as someone who knows at least one person who was interviewed in public on the BBC about this, the matter of supposed status of certain people and their influence wasn't the issue at all. The issue was the lack of proper public consultation which deals with individual concerns which doesn't treat these so-called NIMBYs as five year olds. I know the area concerned is quite affluent, but some of those that were interviewed were objecting to the way the consultation was being handled. They felt their concerns, well structured, hardly glib and quite comprehensive in dealing with some of the sticking points, were being brushed aside by those that were favouring the 'bigger picture' and the 'long-term prospects' for this part of the UK.
You can absolutely guarantee with such a poorly handled consultation that the NIMBYs will not win regarding HS2. At least with some of these consultations that concern environmental eye sores (and nose sores ) such as incinerators, they are handled with more competence.

 

[Zoe]

One issue is that if they go ahead and plough through the AONB you could end up with a return to the environemntal protests of the 1990s where people camp on the construction site and are removed by force. This could kill off the possibility of any further construction for some time. The road protests of the 1990s effectively killed off road construction leaving quite a few gaps in the network. The road protests could have been avoided had they not gone for routes that were so environmentally destructive.

 

[PinzaC55]

There's something I don't understand about HS2 and it would be great if the OP or anyone else could enlighten me. HS2 has a "campaign" and the OP asks for "support". There are very few things I would campaign for, and I would need to feel strongly motivated to do so; stuff like Ban The Bomb, Save The Whale etc. But I would know what my motivation was. I don't know what the motivation is for ordinary people to give up their time and money to campaign for HS2 to be built? If it was a disused railway which might once again link places long cut off from the system I would totally get that, say like reopening the Waverley Route. But what exactly is the deal with this line?

 

[YorkshireBear]

There's something I don't understand about HS2 and it would be great if the OP or anyone else could enlighten me. HS2 has a "campaign" and the OP asks for "support". There are very few things I would campaign for, and I would need to feel strongly motivated to do so; stuff like Ban The Bomb, Save The Whale etc. But I would know what my motivation was. I don't know what the motivation is for ordinary people to give up their time and money to campaign for HS2 to be built? If it was a disused railway which might once again link places long cut off from the system I would totally get that, say like reopening the Waverley Route. But what exactly is the deal with this line?

Providing the capacity that we need to allow our country to expand its rail network and allow freight to thrive more.

 

[G123T]

One issue is that if they go ahead and plough through the AONB you could end up with a return to the environemntal protests of the 1990s where people camp on the construction site and are removed by force. This could kill off the possibility of any further construction for some time. The road protests of the 1990s effectively killed off road construction leaving quite a few gaps in the network. The road protests could have been avoided had they not gone for routes that were so environmentally destructive.

The East Coast route goes through some stunning countryside, no doubt if it didn't exist today and was merely a proposal there would be massive objections...as is the case for numerous existing routes. Sometimes we need to look at the bigger picture.

 

[Zoe]

Providing the capacity that we need to allow our country to expand its rail network and allow freight to thrive more.

There are other ways to do this though than building a high speed passenger line through an AONB to Birmingham. Even with HS2 built the current lines will still be used extensively for passenger services so I'm not convinced there will be significant extra capacity for freight.

 

[YorkshireBear]

There are other ways to do this though than building a high speed passenger line through an AONB to Birmingham. Even with HS2 built the current lines will still be used extensively for passenger services so I'm not convinced there will be significant extra capacity for freight.

Well then extra capacity..... for whatever

 

[Zoe]

Well then extra capacity..... for whatever

So why are you so determined that this extra capacity should be created by ploughing a high speed line through an AONB?

 

[Howardh]

Living ooop north, my priority is to link to the Eurotunnel without having to get off at Euston and walk a bit. Trains to London from Manchester are around two hours, what difference would saving an extra 15/20' make?

Spend some of the money linking the West Coast lines to HS1, and the rest upgrading the as much of our dilapidated rail system as possible.

Or I'll end up voting for Top gear's idea of putting train wheels on old caravans and pulling them along with a Trabant...

 

[Nonsense]

There are other ways to do this though than building a high speed passenger line through an AONB to Birmingham. Even with HS2 built the current lines will still be used extensively for passenger services so I'm not convinced there will be significant extra capacity for freight.

No there are aren't. The trouble with Britain is that, apart from the major cities, which have their own particular charm, it is a marvelously beautiful country. Wherever you try and build something, you can guarantee it will hit a beauty spot. In comparison to the rest of the UK though, the Chilterns are a bit bland. There are worse places to build a railway, and humanity has as much right to the land as the trees.

The only alternative is to do nothing and our national competitiveness, and therefore quality of life fall beyond more progressive nations.

As you say, even when the express traffic is removed from the WCML, it will still be used extensively. Doesn't that reinforce the need for this route to you?

 

[Zoe]

No there are aren't. The trouble with Britain is that, apart from the major cities, which have their own particular charm, it is a marvelously beautiful country. Wherever you try and build something, you can guarantee it will hit a beauty spot. In comparison to the rest of the UK though, the Chilterns are a bit bland. There are worse places to build a railway, and humanity has as much right to the land as the trees.

The only alternative is to do nothing and our national competitiveness, and therefore quality of life fall beyond more progressive nations.

As you say, even when the express traffic is removed from the WCML, it will still be used extensively. Doesn't that reinforce the need for this route to you?

No it does not and there are other ways of providing more capacity without building through the AONB. If you do not believe this then look at a map, a new line does not have to take such an environmentally destructive route. The other issues is as I said in another thread, you can't build your way out of congestion and in the long term demand management may be the only option.

 

[LE Greys]

Err, no it didn't! It was supposed to usher in a new era of cheap mass market supersonic flight. Nobody else has tried supersonic flight since - the concept failed.

The best answer there was that it was ahead of its time. That's happened many times. Take Brunel's Great Eastern. She was a magnificent ship, but beset with problems and technical faults, simply because nobody had any experience of shipbuilding on that scale before. When she finally went into service, it was incredibly difficult to find enough passengers to make her profitable. It took 41 years to surpass her in length and 43 years to surpass her in tonnage, yet the hull form was incredibly similar (but with an enormous superstructure on top, giving much more passenger space). Inside the hull, technology had caught up with ambition, providing engines with sufficient power and economy to move something that big efficiently. A decade later, they were building ships with twice the tonnage.

How soon before technology catches up with Concorde? Again, it depends on engines. Thing is, there is no incentive to work on variable-cycle turbojets, there is currently nothing to use them. One day, something will, it's just a question of when.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No it does not and there are other ways of providing more capacity without building through the AONB. If you do not believe this then look at a map, a new line does not have to take such an environmentally destructive route. The other issues is as I said in another thread, you can't build your way out of congestion and in the long term demand management may be the only option.

Well, other than the fact that this is an AONB with a motorway running right through it (just like the Lune Gorge, where the eventual line beyond Manchester will have to go) there are a limited number of routes north from London. The easiest, which I would have used for a direct Birmingham line, would be to run it through Watford Gap alongside the WCML and the M1. The problem there is getting it through the London suburbs, unless we follow the Midland's Luton route and swing west around Harlington to pass east of Milton Keynes and join the WCML somewhere near Roade, then pass through Watford Gap, skirt round Rugby and join a quadrupled route through Coventry and Birmingham, with a second branch to link into the Trent Valley. Thing is, that adds distance, although it might provide a better route to the East Midlands by branching off at Luton, Milton Keynes or Rugby. It also doesn't provide a Birmingham approach, just crams the traffic into New Street.

My answer would not be to move the route, but to provide a station at Brackley so that a Javelin-style suburban service can use the route. Javelin has not been all that well-used, but that is a result of the expensive fare. Cut the fares, and it will get just as many passengers as the line to Charing Cross, which will actually make it more profitable. A station at Brackley with some form of connection to Banbury would allow trains from Warwick, Stratford-on-Avon or even Birmingham Snow Hill to use the route, and provide an access point from the south as an alternative route to Heathrow via Oxford and Reading. Aylesbury might get a station (or rather a diversion via the existing station) as well. All this depends on having capacity, so there ought to be enough room set aside for a four-track route, in case we ever need one.

Show people the benefits of having a railway in the area, and they are more likely to support its construction. It's unfortunate they screwed up with the Javelin, but that's fixable. Just make it affordable, and people will use it.

 

[Zoe]

The best answer there was that it was ahead of its time. That's happened many times. Take Brunel's Great Eastern. She was a magnificent ship, but beset with problems and technical faults, simply because nobody had any experience of shipbuilding on that scale before. When she finally went into service, it was incredibly difficult to find enough passengers to make her profitable. It took 41 years to surpass her in length and 43 years to surpass her in tonnage, yet the hull form was incredibly similar (but with an enormous superstructure on top, giving much more passenger space). Inside the hull, technology had caught up with ambition, providing engines with sufficient power and economy to move something that big efficiently. A decade later, they were building ships with twice the tonnage.

How soon before technology catches up with Concorde? Again, it depends on engines. Thing is, there is no incentive to work on variable-cycle turbojets, there is currently nothing to use them. One day, something will, it's just a question of when.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Well, other than the fact that this is an AONB with a motorway running right through it (just like the Lune Gorge, where the eventual line beyond Manchester will have to go) there are a limited number of routes north from London. The easiest, which I would have used for a direct Birmingham line, would be to run it through Watford Gap alongside the WCML and the M1. The problem there is getting it through the London suburbs, unless we follow the Midland's Luton route and swing west around Harlington to pass east of Milton Keynes and join the WCML somewhere near Roade, then pass through Watford Gap, skirt round Rugby and join a quadrupled route through Coventry and Birmingham, with a second branch to link into the Trent Valley. Thing is, that adds distance, although it might provide a better route to the East Midlands by branching off at Luton, Milton Keynes or Rugby. It also doesn't provide a Birmingham approach, just crams the traffic into New Street.

The M40 would most likely never have been built in the current climate. Why does the line have to go to directly Birmingham? There are already three trains per hour from London to Birmingham and the journey takes less than 90 minutes. Why not head directly to Leeds/Manchester then you could follow a WCML/MML corridor and would allow the possibility of a station near Milton Keynes. A link from Birmingham to this line could then be built.

 

[Philip Elliott]

My answer would not be to move the route, but to provide a station at Brackley so that a Javelin-style suburban service can use the route.

Alas it is isn't technically possible to put an intermediate station with the number of trains planned to run on a 2-track railway.:roll:

 

[LE Greys]

Alas it is isn't technically possible to put an intermediate station with the number of trains planned to run on a 2-track railway.:roll:

Perhaps someone can provide a final answer. How many trains are planned to run over the line per hour? I can't really see it being more than currently use the WCML fast lines (twelve) which see stops at Milton Keynes on a regular basis. I know the stopping distance is greater, but if there were intermediate stations, I'd imagine them being on loops off the main line. Certainly with Brackley, where anything stopping there would leave via a different route anyway. Brackley Central is currently a tyre business, and the trackbed is almost unobstructed.

 

[G123T]

The M40 would most likely never have been built in the current climate. Why does the line have to go to directly Birmingham? There are already three trains per hour from London to Birmingham and the journey takes less than 90 minutes. Why not head directly to Leeds/Manchester then you could follow a WCML/MML corridor and would allow the possibility of a station near Milton Keynes. A link from Birmingham to this line could then be built.

No major infrasture would have ever been built if "spoiling" the countryside was put first - although I'm all for bypassing brum and going straight up to the northern cities!