HS2 under review

[jamie92208]

According to a You Tube video I watched last night £9bn has already been spent and some major works are already underway. I suspect that a lot more has already been committed. I presume that the TBM's are under construction and a lot of other such works. I can understand the review to some extent but with the cross party support in parliament I can't see the project being cancelled.

 

Jamie

[jjb1970]

21 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

According to a You Tube video I watched last night £9bn has already been spent and some major works are already underway. I suspect that a lot more has already been committed. I presume that the TBM's are under construction and a lot of other such works. I can understand the review to some extent but with the cross party support in parliament I can't see the project being cancelled.

 

Jamie

 

Fear not, we now live in a post parliamentary democracy world, we can't have pesky MP's getting in the way of what government wants.

[Ian Hargrave]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

 

Fear not, we now live in a post parliamentary democracy world, we can't have pesky MP's getting in the way of what government wants.

 

Timely words....and we’re about to find out the extent of this condition I think.

 

 

[APOLLO]

I think it will go ahead at least to Birmingham & Crewe, perhaps pared closer to the bone. We will see.

 

Brit15

[John Tomlinson]

13 hours ago, Andrea506 said:

You call my views "rubbish", well I call you rude! I still believe with all my heart that HS2 is a total waste of money, typical white elephant!

Andrea, I for one think you're onto something in terms of travel, and the pressing need to reduce it.

 

My own experience in a global business trying to control people flying round the world - in vain as it turned out - was that much of it is not of necessity, but rather all or any of;

 

A few days away from the office - perhaps less helpful now with mobiles, my experience was in the '90's

 

A few days away from the spouse and kids, possibly even with someone else's spouse

 

The trip scheduled to give them a free or low cost weekend somewhere nice

 

The ability it gave them or their spouse to brag to their chums about flying in the front of the plane, and staying in expensive hotels

 

The general kudos of being a global business person.

 

What we do need to accept is that we in general need to travel less, also consume and waste less. Business and personal activity needs to adopt to this, pronto, if it doesn't the nutters referred to by Ravenser and others might just in the end triumph and take us back to the Dark Ages.

 

John.

 

 

[letterspider]

2 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

According to a You Tube video I watched last night £9bn has already been spent and some major works are already underway. I suspect that a lot more has already been committed. I presume that the TBM's are under construction and a lot of other such works. I can understand the review to some extent but with the cross party support in parliament I can't see the project being cancelled.

 

Jamie

 

Having watched the A40 widening in Acton, over the course of 20 years, many, many houses were compulsorily purchased (with public money) and demolished in order (I assume) to widen the road where it bottlenecks from 3 to 2 then back to 3 lanes.

In the end that section was not widened. The land (I assume) was sold off to property developers and now has garish flats being built.

What I don't understand is whether the public money spent was recouped from the land sale or has been 'lost'

 

Similarily I am sure the land liberated from the initial HS2 demolition works will not be left idle in the event of the project being cancelled.

 

 

 

 

[caradoc]

11 hours ago, brack said:

What time of day are those tickets and how many of them are available at that price?

My experience is that even booking several months in advance there are precious few cheap tickets around unless you wish to arrive at half past midnight. Whereas in italy or france the cheaper prices were available at normal times of day, even if booked the day before.

Besides which pricing out casual travellers, or those who are unable to schedule everything months in advance is rather stupid, it reinforces the idea that taking the train is a major event like planning a holiday or booking flights, rather than an everyday thing. Thus making people take the car instead unless it's something they can plan for 3 months in advance.

 

Perhaps if we had more capacity on our trains or lines the prices might become more reasonable? Any ideas out there for how we could increase capacity?

(And back to the topic...)

 

Booking 3 months in advance (ie March for travel in June) I was able to get my Mum from Birmingham to Glasgow and back for around £50 each way, First Class (albeit with a Senior Railcard). The trains we used were 1115 from Birmingham and 0800 from Glasgow, so certainly not at anti-social hours !

 

It would be wonderful if train fares could be reduced (as indeed it would be if other things were cheaper too, such as food, fuel, and, dare I say it, model trains !) However, if fares were lower, and passenger numbers increased as a result, how would this be accomodated, given that (according to the media) trains are already overcrowded as it is, and lower fares would mean less income to be spent on operating and improving the railway ? The Government of the day would have to be ready and able to increase financial support to the railways, and to invest in massive schemes to improve capacity.......such as HS2 !!!

 

[Mark Saunders]

All the old arguments being dug out and used again, just that another politician is trying to get a few more political miles and votes; then come the result he can claim it was an impartial review!

 

Mark Saunders

[John Tomlinson]

15 hours ago, Ravenser said:

 

I'm afraid you are being naïve about how far the eco-warriors will go. Yesterday a House of Commons  Select Committee recommended that private cars - whether electric or not - will need to be abolished by 2050 "to meet climate change targets"   MPs call for cars to be banned  Extinction Rebellion want it to happen inside 6 years, and suggest that democratic government probably needs to go to make that happen...

 

Certainly climate change campaigners are targeting air travel aggressively and the more militant do want civil aviation largely shut down. People are already suggesting domestic air services should be banned - so no more Glasgow/London flights. International flights are next on the hit-list. Certainly substitution of shorthaul air by high-speed rail for reasons of climate change is very much on the left- liberal technocrat agenda . I suspect that in 10 years time it will be seriously suggested air travel should be rationed and tightly restricted and people will have to get a permit to fly - say 1 short haul return flight every 2 years , if you keep your nose clean, and long-haul flight permits will only be for the lucky few who have earned special priviliges

 

Deep sea shipping is also being aggressively targeted by eco-campaigners who want to reduce container shipping as far as possible. The simple eco-solution to Toyota Burnaston is simply to ban cars and close the place down...

 

If you think I'm joking about a "retreat to conurbation redoubts" just look at the Guardian which has a separate category under world news of "Cities" and a whole satellite planning/ demographics website "CityMetric"

 

Islington near Stoke Newington is quintessential hipster country now. You can rely on the tube and buses , hop to Paris or Brussels by Eurostar, other European cities by cheap flights - you don't need to venture outside the M25 , so you don't need a car. From that perspective , Norfolk or Lincolnshire (or Rutland) is history and needs to be swept into the dustbin as fast as possible "to save the planet"

 

As for

 

 

You're advocating deliberately taxing out of existence viable businesses to fund subsidies to set up unviable businesses in preferred parts of the country . That won't be revenue neutral - as the "unwanted" businesses fold the tax revenues dry up leaving the subsidies... There is no housing in the rest of the country  to take 2-3 million economic refugees from London and deliberately destroying the regional economy will not make the lives of those who lose their jobs as a result better. The end of coal mining and rationalisation of steel may have been necessary, but nobody - not even Norman Tebbit being controversial - ever claimed that it made S Yorkshire " a better place to live, and also by reducing pressure on housing make it more affordable and socially just."

 

If we destroy the economy and reduce everyone to an 18th century existence we won't need extra high-speed rail capacity. But policies that replicate the effects of a limited nuclear war on Britain aren't the way to go.

Thanks for the reply.

 

As for the extreme agenda you list in the start of your piece, maybe I am naive but I really can't see any of this happening. As far as the countryside goes, well the cities need feeding, and I can't see the farming communities in the likes of Rutland, who we might remember have a disproportionate number of firearms to the general population, taking Armageddon lying down. I don't give much for the chances of a hipster with his new 'phone against one of our farmers with a shotgun!

 

As for the taxation and subsidy issue, you seem to have taken this to an extreme, I'm not advocating taxing viable businesses out of existence at all, simply giving marginal ones both a carrot and stick to move out, the same carrot and stick applying to new enterprises as well. When the mining and steel industries to which you refer closed down, many of them were in "one horse" towns were the town died as a result, moreover nothing was put in their place to help. The southeast has significant diversity, and I'm simply looking to take out some of the overheating that is there for all to see, and indeed the reason for this thread. As for housing, well in large parts of my native Lancashire you can still buy a terraced house for under £100K, most of the towns have areas of wasteland that could easily be built on. The problem is that such sites don't suit the profit maximisation of our big developers, who can make a lot more dosh by erecting executive homes in the countryside, with zero benefit to the poorer people in society who desperately need affordable social housing.

 

John.

 

John.

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, Andrea506 said:

Well I did put "the cat among the pidgeons" didn't I. I still say it isn't needed, not wanted and a colossal waste of money! Has it occured to anyone that with the advance of technology in 20 years time face to face business meetings will be a thing of the past? We already have Skype. Office accommodation in London is hideously expensive, far more people will work from home. I call it "Camerons Folly". If a high speed railway is so necessary put it in the middle of the M1 and remove the outside lane, after all we won't want cars when we can use a fancy train! 

 

Doesn't work.  My son uses Skype frequently to talk to business colleagues in various parts of Europe but that has not stopped the need for him to attend face-to-face meetings.  Next week he is off to Madrid for a week (by air), he has had to visit Paris several times already this year (by train), his boss is based at the company HQ in Geneva so my son has had to go there several times this year (by air).  He had a meeting in Graz a while back and because of the complexity of the subjec t he had to be there (by air/rail).  Any thought that business, or indeed leisure, travel will evaporate, because of contemporary and emerging comms is largely little more than whistling for a wind or carrying out a rain dance.

 

I have seen proper video conferencing at a past employer's London offices - it was used for weekly intercontinental meetings and the wall high array of screens made Skype look silly.  But still face-to-face meetings are sometimes necessary.  The work I did in Australia earlier this century could only be done by direct contact with local people.

 

And alas you still miss the entire point of what is rather stupidly called HS2 - it is about capacity, pathing capacity, and has not very much to do with anything else (including the fact that some long distance trains on the WCML have empty seats - that is a very different sort of capacity which has only been introduced to muddy the issue or has been raised by those who don't have the first idea what they are talking about).  And as for a 'fancy train' I remain to see anything at all about it which is 'fancy' - but then I travel on trains elsewhere in Europe and the UK.

[locoholic]

12 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Remember what I said earlier - HS2 is not a religion!

 

Any physical project must be judged on FACTS - not what you imagine to be true. The lack of capacity on the WCML has been proven many times over and HS2 has been judged as the optimum way of fixing it.

 

If you 'believe HS2 is a waste of money then it is your duty to tell us how you intend to solve the problem. There are those that believe HS2 is too fast - which is absolutely fine, because unlike you the people advocating this can point to scientific research which backs up their stance.

 

Your proposed solution could include measure to suppress the demand for travel - but things like video conferencing, e-mail, smartphones, computers and virtual reality have made sod all difference so far and cannot be relied upon to do so in the future.

 

Much like 'believing the fires ravaging the Amazon at the moment will somehow go away of their own accord, or 'believing  the extreme weather the UK has been suffering from for a number of years will simply disappear because you want it too, 'Believing that the problem of WCML capacity will go away if you ignore it is total rubbish.

1. Some people definitely treat HS2 (& railways in general) as a religion.

2. You are assuming that the capacity issue on the WCML is a problem that deserves a solution. Given that only 3% of passenger journeys are made on trains, and that the rail network seems to grow ever more unreliable and inflexible, adding another, very expensive, line to the network does not seem to the general public and the politicians who represent them to be a sensible use of many billions of pounds of public money. Regarding projections of future demand and the costs of doing nothing as "facts" is also disingenuous, especially since many of these "facts" come from the vested interests.

[The Stationmaster]

12 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

IIRC the French do NOT routinely run at 205mph as it is very costly in energy terms - the laws physics do not change depending on which country you are in and the French have enough high speed experience to know what they are talking about!

 

TGV services on the LGV est are I believe actually scheduled to travel at 186mph - the extra 20mph only being used to make up time after delays have occurred.

 

I have said in a previous post that 200mph would be advantageous where it does not add significantly to the cost (e.g the line is straight enough with no tunnels) but only use it as the French do, a means to make up time rather than the regular cruising speed.

SNCF run at =186mph for some very good reasons.  firstly it has been found to be sufficiently commercially atractive but more importantly even running 10 mph faster produces a geometric increase in energy consumption and cost - they've tried it and they know the impact of faster running.

 

Presumably either somebody thinks the French version of Ohm's Law will not apply on HS2 or perhaps they consider the technology advances beyond the TGV and Germany's various marks of ICE will allow much faster running for the same amount of power input.  Personally , and I am not an engineer, I think we'll still be seeing steel wheels running on steel rails with similar factors of adhesion and electric motor and transformer etc design has not advanced to the extent that you will get more than 25% more speed, and obviously better acceleration, over that sort of development timescale.

[caradoc]

9 minutes ago, locoholic said:

1. Some people definitely treat HS2 (& railways in general) as a religion.

2. You are assuming that the capacity issue on the WCML is a problem that deserves a solution. Given that only 3% of passenger journeys are made on trains, and that the rail network seems to grow ever more unreliable and inflexible, adding another, very expensive, line to the network does not seem to the general public and the politicians who represent them to be a sensible use of many billions of pounds of public money. Regarding projections of future demand and the costs of doing nothing as "facts" is also disingenuous, especially since many of these "facts" come from the vested interests.

 

So not only do we not need to build HS2, we don't need to bother spending any money to increase capacity on existing lines either ?

 

[royaloak]

11 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

While the French may be hopeless away from their TGV network in frequency terms, the Germans are supposed to be pretty reasonable and gone with a BR style frequent service operation. They also seem to have adopted the BR / airline pricing model as well. I suspect there may be a link between the two.....

Indeed, a frequent/fast service is expensive due to all the other bits that need to be in place, track maintenance (more and or/faster trains require more track maintenance, plus the problems of allowing access to the line to carry out the maintenance), high speed signalling (2 aspect signalling wont allow both so the signalling needs to be upgraded to 3 or 4 aspect which is more expensive to install/maintain), plus the increased stock and staff required to run the service etc etc.

 

I dont think there is a way of having a fast, frequent and cheap service without highish fares (if fares are so expensive why are most of the trains full?) or massive subsidy unless someone can come up with a way?

[black and decker boy]

So 

10 minutes ago, locoholic said:

1. Some people definitely treat HS2 (& railways in general) as a religion.

2. You are assuming that the capacity issue on the WCML is a problem that deserves a solution. Given that only 3% of passenger journeys are made on trains, and that the rail network seems to grow ever more unreliable and inflexible, adding another, very expensive, line to the network does not seem to the general public and the politicians who represent them to be a sensible use of many billions of pounds of public money. Regarding projections of future demand and the costs of doing nothing as "facts" is also disingenuous, especially since many of these "facts" come from the vested interests.

So if we rule out HS2, our growing population and it’s expectations of easy mobility, we end up needing new motorways.

 

do we think the good people of Aylesbury vale or Warwickshire will appreciate a new 6 land motorway being ploughed through heir back yard? Do we think the people who enjoy the Peak District will want a new 6 land motorway.

 

i can tell you the LMSForever and his band are already mobilising against the Oxford to Cambridge expressway, a much needed East West link in the northern Home Counties.

 

remember Newbury bypass? Can you imagine the depth of protest against any proposals for major road building, in the north or south?

 

Doing nothing isn’t an option. For once we have a plan to add low carbon mobility to the economy.

[caradoc]

Having had to drive through Aylesbury recently one thing it lacks is a proper bypass, and who cares how many homes, farms, or irreplaceable ancient woodlands have to be sacrificed to provide it.

 

[royaloak]

2 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

According to a You Tube video I watched last night £9bn has already been spent and some major works are already underway. I suspect that a lot more has already been committed. I presume that the TBM's are under construction and a lot of other such works. I can understand the review to some extent but with the cross party support in parliament I can't see the project being cancelled.

 

Jamie

De-scoped to a more sensible top speed so-as to reduce some building costs and be seen to be doing something would be my thinking.

[The Stationmaster]

10 minutes ago, locoholic said:

1. Some people definitely treat HS2 (& railways in general) as a religion.

2. You are assuming that the capacity issue on the WCML is a problem that deserves a solution. Given that only 3% of passenger journeys are made on trains, and that the rail network seems to grow ever more unreliable and inflexible, adding another, very expensive, line to the network does not seem to the general public and the politicians who represent them to be a sensible use of many billions of pounds of public money. Regarding projections of future demand and the costs of doing nothing as "facts" is also disingenuous, especially since many of these "facts" come from the vested interests.

Having worked on some assessments of WCML infrastructure degradation and maintenance/replacement matters in the past the first thing we noticed was that all the estimates of growth in the number of trains using the route were turning out to be fairly substantial under estimates when compared with what was actually happening.   Growth figures can be difficult things to estimate but 'full up' figures are bald facts which stare you in the face and already at certain times and on certain stretches of the WCML 'full up' has been reached - well ahead of even the most optimistic numbers we were given.

 

So the simple fact is that parts of the WCML are full at certain times.  A very valid comparison then becomes the London- Brighton route where, on a very different sort of railway which is largely uniform traffic, Phil 259 has often been telling us how difficult it is to get in to maintain it.   And maintaining the Brighton Line is child's play compared with the WCML which sees the worst mix of the lot for track deterioration - high speed passenger trains and heavy axleload freight trains.

 

So simple answer - jack up the fares to restrain demand (just as BR was forced to do for many years) and gradually let the infrastructure get bashed to pieces, oh and increase commuter fares south of Northampton by about 100% (every couple of years) to discourage them from using the line as well.  Sorry but a lot of the 'facts' really are, or are rapidly becoming, not some conjured up numbers from 'vested interests' but everyday reality on an increasingly overloaded part of the national rail network.

 

 And isn't it strange how we all go on about Govt not thinking more than the next election ahead but when one actually looks further ahead hordes turn on them for doing so - that strikes me as really weird

[Mark Saunders]

18 minutes ago, locoholic said:

 Given that only 3% of passenger journeys are made on trains, and that the rail network seems to grow ever more unreliable and inflexible,

 

Increase capacity and it will soon be filled!

 

Build a new Motorway and it does not remain empty for long, I remember the M40 being almost empty when I first used it but a year later it was full!

 

Mark Saunders

[royaloak]

12 hours ago, PhilH said:

If 'leisure travellers and those for whom time is not important' are taken out of the equation will there be enough business travellers, who seem to be the target customers for HS2, to warrant spending 56 or whatever billion quid on? 

Why remove the 'leisure travellers and those for whom time is not important' from the equation?

They are just as likely to use it as everyone else, or is it simply a way to make your invalid point valid?

 

The whole point which you and your lot are deliberately ignoring is that HS2 is about capacity for passenger AND FREIGHT which is lacking at the bottom end of the WCML (there isnt much spare in the middle either), by building HS2 and putting all the non stop (fast) trains on there means the WCML will have the capacity for the slower stopping passenger trains and the even slower freight trains, why cant people get that!

[melmerby]

1 minute ago, royaloak said:

 by building HS2 and putting all the non stop (fast) trains on there means the WCML will have the capacity for the slower stopping passenger trains and the even slower freight trains, why cant people get that!

Because it's logical and If you accept that, the arguments against vapourise

Can't have logical argument from the naysayers

[Mark Saunders]

10 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

So 

So if we rule out HS2, our growing population and it’s expectations of easy mobility, we end up needing new motorways.

 

do we think the good people of Aylesbury vale or Warwickshire will appreciate a new 6 land motorway being ploughed through heir back yard? Do we think the people who enjoy the Peak District will want a new 6 land motorway.

 

i can tell you the LMSForever and his band are already mobilising against the Oxford to Cambridge expressway, a much needed East West link in the northern Home Counties.

 

remember Newbury bypass? Can you imagine the depth of protest against any proposals for major road building, in the north or south?

 

Doing nothing isn’t an option. For once we have a plan to add low carbon mobility to the economy.

 

British Government policy has been and always will be the following :-

 

Procrastination and delay for a few years till another Government has to do it!

 

Complain about the cost, demand reductions!

 

Build a cheap inferior version that needs replacing in ten years time!

 

For those that have never watched "Yes Minister" it explains more about the workings of the Government and Civil Service!

 

Mark Saunders

 

 

[royaloak]

2 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

For those that have never watched "Yes Minister" it explains more about the workings of the Government and Civil Service!

 

Mark Saunders

 

 

I do enjoy a good factual documentary!

[phil-b259]

4 hours ago, Fenman said:

 

That’s fantastic news! Please do tell me where to look to get these cheap advance tickets on my local Great Northern services from West Norfolk to King’s Cross. Because I can tell you there aren’t any, and there never have been. All tickets are priced at the same “walk up” fare, making these, on average, some of the most expensive tickets in Europe. 

 

 

I admit I neglected to induce the word "average" in my post and naturally 'advance purchase tickets are not available on all routes. Nevertheless it is statistically wrong to claim the UK has the highest train fares in Europe as those advance purchase fares bring the avenge cost down considerably

 

I did also acknowledge that local / season tickets were consistently more expensive.

 

 

Edited August 24, 2019 by phil-b259

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, locoholic said:

1. Some people definitely treat HS2 (& railways in general) as a religion.

 

Yes, I did ask you for some facts to back up your stated beliefs a couple of days ago. You didn't come back to me with any so I'm left assuming it was a blind belief. Beliefs which cannot be backed with facts or a disregard for factual evidence to the contrary is why we all have to experience a political mess right now . Of which HS2 is just a small and low cost fallout compared to what the future potentially holds.