HS2 under review

[mdvle]

6 hours ago, lmsforever said:

I am sorry to say that with the debacle in Westminster there are going to be many many problems to come and a new railway will be at the bottom of the pile.The survival of GB is the main thing for us to consider there is a good chance of certain countries becoming independent and that is going to be a real danger for us.So be prepared for this railway to be put on the back burner as I think investment in all railways and roads to be cut back and the money spent on social,defense projects.

 

There is still a lot of time between now and whenever (and if) the review is delivered.

 

Whoever is in power come December may have a more immediate problem if the current signs of a possible recession come true, in which case HS2 as a ready source of immediate jobs could be a very attractive way to spend money compared to other initiatives that would likely have a 6 to 18 month lag between announcement and meaningful employment.

[melmerby]

1 minute ago, mdvle said:

 

There is still a lot of time between now and whenever (and if) the review is delivered.

 

Whoever is in power come December may have a more immediate problem if the current signs of a possible recession come true, in which case HS2 as a ready source of immediate jobs could be a very attractive way to spend money compared to other initiatives that would likely have a 6 to 18 month lag between announcement and meaningful employment.

HS2 is already employing a lot of people, if it's scrapped they will add to the jobless figures.

[Dava]

7 hours ago, lmsforever said:

I am sorry to say that with the debacle in Westminster there are going to be many many problems to come and a new railway will be at the bottom of the pile.The survival of GB is the main thing for us to consider there is a good chance of certain countries becoming independent and that is going to be a real danger for us.So be prepared for this railway to be put on the back burner as I think investment in all railways and roads to be cut back and the money spent on social,defense projects.

 

How will cancelling HS2 help keep Scotland in the UK? HS2 will give faster rail connections to Scotland. Currently Scots see fewer reasons to remain ruled by the Govt of Maniacs.

 

Dava

[runs as required]

 

News in Brief from Private Eye

Edited September 5, 2019 by runs as required

[pete_mcfarlane]

10 hours ago, Dava said:

 

How will cancelling HS2 help keep Scotland in the UK? HS2 will give faster rail connections to Scotland. Currently Scots see fewer reasons to remain ruled by the Govt of Maniacs.

 

Dava

But that's not stopped the SNP moaning about how HS2 doesn't go to Scotland, and so doesn't benefit them. 

[caradoc]

1 hour ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

But that's not stopped the SNP moaning about how HS2 doesn't go to Scotland, and so doesn't benefit them. 

 

Also quite a few pundits on rail-related Facebook Groups, who don't seem to understand how the WCML actually works !

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

But that's not stopped the SNP moaning about how HS2 doesn't go to Scotland, and so doesn't benefit them. 

If they want it they can fund an extension to Scotland.

Simples.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On ‎04‎/‎09‎/‎2019 at 13:55, melmerby said:

Naysayers constantly opposing a project so that is eventually dropped as a white elephant is completely disingenuous...

That's rude. Tell me please what is disingenuous about 'no thank you'.

 

On ‎04‎/‎09‎/‎2019 at 13:55, melmerby said:

I do feel it will unfortunately now be dropped but that still leaves the problem of the WCML which cannot be solved without extra capacity.

So come on you antis, let's have some some constructive instead of destructive input.

Bear in mind there is little or no scope for more trains, There is little or no scope for lengthening trains, the only logical solution is more tracks.

So antis, where should they go?

Starting from the wrong question, which has led to the wrong answer.

 

How do we reduce demand is the right question. We (collectively, all humanity) are in a runaway exploitation of a broad spread of finite resources, and the limits of how much longer we can continue with that are now evident. Past time to look at ways of managing on less. Very unpopular idea.

 

[runs as required]

On 04/09/2019 at 13:55, melmerby said:

 I do feel it will unfortunately now be dropped but that still leaves the problem of the WCML which cannot be solved without extra capacity.

So come on you antis, let's have some some constructive instead of destructive input.

Bear in mind there is little or no scope for more trains, There is little or no scope for lengthening trains, the only logical solution is more tracks.

So antis, where should they go?

I'm still thinking through the modal-adaptability flexibility advantages of the 'way leave' approach I posted about earlier being applied to the UK. 

But I have a question about gradients:

I've always noticed how TGVs seem undaunted in running 'uphill and down dale" whereas HS2 appears to be less willing to follow the terrain. 

So would paralleling or converting existing Motorway lanes in the UK to - say rail - require regrading?

Consider the M62 for example.

dh

Edited September 5, 2019 by runs as required

[melmerby]

 

2 hours ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

That's rude. Tell me please what is disingenuous about 'no thank you'.

 

Starting from the wrong question, which has led to the wrong answer.

 

How do we reduce demand is the right question. We (collectively, all humanity) are in a runaway exploitation of a broad spread of finite resources, and the limits of how much longer we can continue with that are now evident. Past time to look at ways of managing on less. Very unpopular idea.

 

Sorry you think it's rude, it wasn't intended to be.

It seems there is a constant anti-everything lobby which stifles development, leaving this country lagging behind other more progressive nations.

(Not just HS2 but lots of things in the UK, we have a constant "Not over my dead body" attitude to things which don't even affect the people protesting.)

 

I agree about reducing demand but a big contributor is a substantial population increase over the last 20 (?) years or so (which IMHO no politician currently would dare to try and reduce) adding to demand.

Cars pollute more than trains, which do we reduce first? A lot of recent railway demand must be because too much road traffic is putting off people from using cars.

At one time I would have driven to London and parked at a suitable outer London tube station for the journey into the centre.

I haven't done that for donkey's years and would always go by train now as my nearest motorway (M40) is now crammed. (I gave up on the M6/M1 route long before that.)

 

I was actually looking forward to trying HS2 when it was originally going to open.

Even if it gets built, the nearest I will get is probably as infill for an embankment, as I will likely be pushing up the daisies by then.

 

[Siberian Snooper]

I believe that HS1 has gradients of around 1 in 40 and uses regenerative braking of trains descending to help push trains up the gradients.

 

 

[melmerby]

 

2 hours ago, runs as required said:

 

But I have a question about gradients:

I've always noticed how TGVs seem undaunted in running 'uphill and down dale" whereas HS2 appears to be less willing to follow the terrain. 

 

So would paralleling or converting existing Motorway lanes in the UK to - say rail - require regrading?

 

dh

 

9 minutes ago, Siberian Snooper said:

I believe that HS1 has gradients of around 1 in 40 and uses regenerative braking of trains descending to help push trains up the gradients.

 

 

I thought it was built to a similar spec as LGVs, look at the dip as the trains cross the Medway.

 

 

The problem with stealing motorway lanes is the amount of width needed.

Andrea's suggestion of the outside lanes of the M1 is fine for just the tracks, but you then need the OHLE, along with all the ancillary kit, which would steal the next lane as well.

 

A complete left field suggestion: built a railway on stilts over a motorway? Is it feasible?

 

[Siberian Snooper]

4 minutes ago, melmerby said:

 

 

I thought it was built to a similar spec as LGVs, look at the dip as the trains cross the Medway.

 

 

The problem with stealing motorway lanes is the amount of width needed.

Andrea's suggestion of the outside lanes of the M1 is fine for just the tracks, but you then need the OHLE, along with all the ancillary kit, which would steal the next lane as well.

 

A complete left field suggestion: built a railway on stilts over a motorway? Is it feasible?

 

 

A problem with using motorway lanes is virtually every over bridge would need to be raised to allow for the OHLE.

 

 

[brack]

You know that roads have much steeper gradients and sharper curves than railways, especially high speed ones?

 

This is because rubber/tarmac has many many times the friction of steel wheel on steel rail, part of why rail transport is much more energy efficient than road.

[black and decker boy]

Let’s be honest here, the great British public is NEVER going to vote for any MP or party that proposes digging up motorways to build a railway.

 

aside from the shear engineering required, how do you cope with the massive loss of capacity during the conversion works? How do you re-locate all of the established businesses and homes that suit a short distance road network not a limited stop high speed line aimed at long distance flows?

 

bear in mind that our government ie DfT) is also currently planning a new east -west expressway road in the Home Counties, in the Peak District and in the north Pennines (A66 upgrade) and currently finishing off the A14  upgrade in the midlands.

 

the smart motorway programme is also continuing its steady March with another £3bn+ ready to be committed to complete the jigsaw. Once smart motorways reach capacity (next 10 years) then widening or new raids will be a necessity.

 

HS2 May die, rail may stagnate but transport mobility will, through necessity, continue to rise.

i fear for HS3 if they do kill HS2. It will then have to pick up all of the costs that HS2 would have borne, it will also be min 10 years before work could start on the ground and probably 20 years before trains could run. 

 

ill leave it to you to decide which is better. More road capacity or  more rail capacity through HS2 & a linked HS3

Edited September 5, 2019 by black and decker boy
Added HS3 thoughts

[Coryton]

Interesting article in the Independent making the point that HS2 is about capacity, not speed.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/hs2-high-speed-rail-london-birmingham-manchester-delay-cost-brexit-a9093506.html

[runs as required]

3 hours ago, Siberian Snooper said:

A problem with using motorway lanes is virtually every over bridge would need to be raised to allow for the OHLE.

I can't see that two more tracks added here is going to cause dire probs. Lightweight military type modular bridge construction in steel (or timber?) as a replacement would be far cheaper than an elevated trackway and could be installed over a weekend night..

2 hours ago, brack said:

You know that roads have much steeper gradients and sharper curves than railways, especially high speed ones?

This is because rubber/tarmac has many many times the friction of steel wheel on steel rail, part of why rail transport is much more energy efficient than road.

2

But perhaps the future may turn out to be we are needing the additional lanes to be automated zero headway robotic trucks (or whatever?)

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

• Let’s be honest here, the great British public is NEVER going to vote for any MP or party that proposes digging up motorways to build a railway.
• aside from the sheer engineering required, how do you cope with the massive loss of capacity during the conversion works? How do you re-locate all of the established businesses and homes that suit a short distance road network not a limited stop high speed line aimed at long distance flows?
• bear in mind that our government ie DfT) is also currently planning a new east -west expressway road in the Home Counties, in the Peak District and in the north Pennines (A66 upgrade) and currently finishing off the A14  upgrade in the midlands.
• the smart motorway programme is also continuing its steady March with another £3bn+ ready to be committed to complete the jigsaw. Once smart motorways reach capacity (next 10 years) then widening or new raids will be a necessity.
• HS2 May die, rail may stagnate but transport mobility will, through necessity, continue to rise.
• i fear for HS3 if they do kill HS2. It will then have to pick up all of the costs that HS2 would have borne, it will also be min 10 years before work could start on the ground and probably 20 years before trains could run. 
• ill leave it to you to decide which is better. More road capacity or  more rail capacity through HS2 & a linked HS3

3

I think this will arrive gradually (not through a show-down vote) -We are already in the process of changing our last half century's mobility habits

As regards your last point the way-leave concept (which incidentally I'd argue includes Stainmore/A66) allows for adaptability between emerging preferred modes  without the political stresses of totally new routes having to be negotiated through the landscape.

dh

[melmerby]

4 hours ago, Siberian Snooper said:

 

A problem with using motorway lanes is virtually every over bridge would need to be raised to allow for the OHLE.

 

 

I mentioned that when Andrea was contributing to the discussion.

 

36 minutes ago, runs as required said:

I can't see that two more tracks added here is going to cause dire probs. Lightweight military type modular bridge construction in steel (or timber?) as a replacement would be far cheaper than an elevated trackway and could be installed over a weekend night..

 

dh

Except that is a farm crossing field - field and many bridges carry much more substantial roads

[Fat Controller]

16 hours ago, runs as required said:

I'm still thinking through the modal-adaptability flexibility advantages of the 'way leave' approach I posted about earlier being applied to the UK. 

But I have a question about gradients:

I've always noticed how TGVs seem undaunted in running 'uphill and down dale" whereas HS2 appears to be less willing to follow the terrain. 

So would paralleling or converting existing Motorway lanes in the UK to - say rail - require regrading?

Consider the M62 for example.

dh

Whilst many LGVs have apparently very steep gradients, this is often due to there being nothing to compare it with. One parallel section of road and rail is that between Macon and Cluny, where the incline is easily climbable in 5th gear, even with a bootfull of local produce, suggesting it's not that steep. 

Much of the use of earthworks and tunnels on HS2 would seem to be directly attributable to the need to placate local property owners.

[PhilH]

One thing that I feel has been overlooked in this thread is the fact that the modern railway is seemingly not for family trips....by that I mean it's hugely expensive. I am looking into a trip to York for myself, daughter and family. My eyes are still watering from the results! 

I can understand that for a solo traveller taking the train is a good option, but for groups not so much. I also understand that there are discounted fares available although it's difficult to see how it would be reduced to a figure that's affordable by most.

I think that my point is twofold, one is that I'm not going to be persuaded to give up my car anywhen soon, secondly I was questioned in an earlier post about not wanting to pay for HS2, someone quoting 'the greater good'. It's difficult to see how something is for the greater good when rail travel itself is perhaps starting to become financially out of reach for a lot of people.

Anyway this should perhaps show the problem!

Edited September 6, 2019 by PhilH

[AY Mod]

6 minutes ago, PhilH said:

I am looking into a trip to York for myself, daughter and family

 

 

You shouldn't all travel together anyway. 

[PhilH]

I'm third from the right in the blue hat

[david.hill64]

Wow! Why would anybody use Trainline?

[PhilH]

9 minutes ago, david.hill64 said:

Wow! Why would anybody use Trainline?

 

That took a little longer than I anticipated...

 

As I said, difficult to see how it could get down to affordable levels, remember we're talking 3 adults plus 2 children. Highlighted fare x 3 is £400 plus, and thats without the childrens' fares. So we're probably talking ~£500. If you think that's good your life must be somewhat different to mine!

Edited September 6, 2019 by PhilH

[david.hill64]

1 minute ago, PhilH said:

 

That took a little longer than I anticipated...

 

As I said, difficult to see how it could get down to affordable levels, remember we're talking 3 adults plus 2 children. Highlighted fare x 3 is £400 plus, and thats without the childrens' fares. So we're probably talking ~£500. If you think that's good you're life must be somewhat different to mine!

Sorry I missed the trainline fare being for the family..........thought it was singles and couldn't believe the cost. Railcards?