HS2

[Grovenor]

HS2 is many years away yet, it should not be stopped for a temporary blip. Covid will not have much of a permanent effect its against human nature.

[Tricky-CRS]

Covid is a red herring in all this, The world did not stop or dramatically change after the Spanish flue in 1918-1920. Social distancing was introduced in the UK in 1918 and did not last once troops came home from the front and certainly did not change factories, mills and offices long into the 1920s. Once the new normal is established or a vaccine is available alot will want to return to normal working. Humans are generally social creatures that need regular social interactions, I do not want to work from home long term for an employer. Mine is reopening our office next week due to demand from staff to do so. 

 

That artical was flawed in that it kept saying post covid, for a project that was started well before, was not required. Using that argument the Victorians shouldn't have built any canals, railways or roads because spanish flu / covid would make them obsolete. Add in it said it would be powered by fossil fuels when we are rapidly stopping the use of them. Add in Chris lives in a big house in rural England, driving around telling the rest of us who live in tiny houses or apartments in towns and cities that we should not travel, use electric but watch him do it. These environmental groups are also apposed to all development including green alternatives like tidal and wave power, I think we should de-carbon but unfortunately you have to break some eggs to make a cake. 

[Mark Saunders]

22 minutes ago, Legend said:

 

So with all the above . Hasn't a massive amount of capacity just been put back into the system . Do we really need HS2 or can the WCML cope with the sudden drop in demand . Shouldn't we perhaps pause to see which way this horrid virus goes . If it repeats each winter , I can see people being very reluctant to use public transport at all.  It might be we need investment in transport infrastructure of HS2 proportions  but it could be radically different from just 5 months ago.

 

 

Given that logic then nothing would have changed after Spanish Flu in 1918.

[pete_mcfarlane]

1 hour ago, Legend said:

- people and employers have realised they can work from home and indeed could be more productive . Dramatically reducing commuting or travelling within the country for business meetings

I'm less productive. I spend more time on Rmweb. 

[62613]

1 hour ago, Tricky-CRS said:

Covid is a red herring in all this, The world did not stop or dramatically change after the Spanish flue in 1918-1920. Social distancing was introduced in the UK in 1918 and did not last once troops came home from the front and certainly did not change factories, mills and offices long into the 1920s. Once the new normal is established or a vaccine is available alot will want to return to normal working. Humans are generally social creatures that need regular social interactions, I do not want to work from home long term for an employer. Mine is reopening our office next week due to demand from staff to do so. 

 

That artical was flawed in that it kept saying post covid, for a project that was started well before, was not required. Using that argument the Victorians shouldn't have built any canals, railways or roads because spanish flu / covid would make them obsolete. Add in it said it would be powered by fossil fuels when we are rapidly stopping the use of them. Add in Chris lives in a big house in rural England, driving around telling the rest of us who live in tiny houses or apartments in towns and cities that we should not travel, use electric but watch him do it. These environmental groups are also apposed to all development including green alternatives like tidal and wave power, I think we should de-carbon but unfortunately you have to break some eggs to make a cake. 

If a tidal power scheme destroyed a natural habitat, I can quite see why. For what it's worth, here's one who is fairly environmentally aware. We aren't the only creatures on the planet, after all. I would say that, if you could at the very least mitigate its environmental effects, I wouldn't have built a bridge across the Severn Estuary, I would have built a tidal barrage

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, Legend said:

people and employers have realised they can work from home and indeed could be more productive . Dramatically reducing commuting or travelling within the country for business meetings

 

My son currently works from home - my home ! As a short term measure it has kept him in a job, but in no way is it a lasting solution, because of the effect on the rest of the household; A room has had to be set aside for him and while he is on duty, the entire upper fllor of the house is effectively out of bounds. So I am not convinced that, once the pandemic crisis is over, working from home will become so common as to seriously reduce commuting. More of a concern for me is the entire railway industry sternly instructing would-be passengers to not even dare consider going anywhere by train.

 

 

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, Grovenor said:

HS2 is many years away yet, it should not be stopped for a temporary blip. Covid will not have much of a permanent effect its against human nature.

We've been working from home for 16 weeks.  The requirement for HS2 was identified more than 16 YEARS ago.

 

No-one should fall for "The World has Changed for ever" just yet.  Wait and see what happens once the virus has passed the "harvesting" stage or a reliable vaccine is available and people go back to work.  Most people are NOT desperate to work in their living room for the rest of their careers.  I hear a huge amount of self-congratulation from firms saying how productive they are being, when what I believe they mean is that they are still being surprisingly productive DESPITE working remotely.   However when everyone returns to their offices, productivity will skyrocket.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

 

 

 I hear a huge amount of self-congratulation from firms saying how productive they are being, when what I believe they mean is that they are still being surprisingly productive DESPITE working remotely.   However when everyone returns to their offices, productivity will skyrocket.

What they mean is they are getting all this work done without the cost of heating/lighting/broadband use etc.

[lmsforever]

5 hours ago, Legend said:

Does no one else thank that Covid has dramatically changed the requirement for trains and indeed any form of  travel in the Country?

 

I have always been a train enthusiast and have  supported  investment in the railways .  However I think the effect of Covid is quite dramatic . This may not be (I still hope a cure will be found) a temporary state of affairs but rather a radical change which will affect how people live their lives . I do think the world has changed.

 

- people and employers have realised they can work from home and indeed could be more productive . Dramatically reducing commuting or travelling within the country for business meetings

-the need to socially distance makes public transport inherently more risky in terms of infection than the cocoon which is your motor car . Might not you be more tempted to drive on holiday/ for business rather than take train?

- people have been buying on line which is a challenge for the High Street . The need to wear masks I suspect will further make people reluctant to travel into big cities for shopping or recreational uses . I used to love going into Glasgow for drinks and a meal , but I cant imagine the atmosphere will be the same having to keep at least 1m apart in bars / restaurants , so I think I'll stay with carry outs for a while . But again this reduces the need for public transport

- mass gatherings like the Edinburgh festival that generate demand for train travel will surely be reduced/ restricted until cure found.

 

So with all the above . Hasn't a massive amount of capacity just been put back into the system . Do we really need HS2 or can the WCML cope with the sudden drop in demand . Shouldn't we perhaps pause to see which way this horrid virus goes . If it repeats each winter , I can see people being very reluctant to use public transport at all.  It might be we need investment in transport infrastructure of HS2 proportions  but it could be radically different from just 5 months ago.

I am inclined to agree things are changing quickly I for one am extremely nervious about going into shops etc and when I have been in a couple recently I have been extremely worried.Working from home will stay but as my neighbour says she misses the comarderie and cant wait to return.The thought of sitting in a train for my annual trip to Glasgow frightens me and the thought of an exhibition no way.I think that we have a long way to go and many people who think its all over will get a shock.

[Ron Ron Ron]

On 16/06/2020 at 10:14, Ron Ron Ron said:

[Includes an Edit: 15th July.]

 

Here is an aerial view of the first M42 bridge, construction site, close to the NEC car parks (seen to the right).

This bridge will carry a new dual carriageway across the M42, as part of a new layout of major roads in the vicinity of the new HS2 Interchange station.

The bridge piers are almost complete and the bridge span can be seen being assembled, adjacent to the motorway.
The site of the Birmingham Interchange HS2 station lies beyond and the HS2 rail bridge will be built just off to the bottom left.

 

Video taken a couple of days ago.

 

 

 

It appears that the bridge being constructed across the M42, next to the new Birmingham Interchange Station site, is a road bridge that will carry the diverted A452.

The present route is being moved to make way for construction of the HS2 rail bridge, which will cross the motorway where the A452 currently crosses the M42 as a roundabout (it looks like a motorway junction without the slip roads or any sort of road connection to the motorway).

 

The bridge span is due to be lifted into place over the 2nd weekend in August, if completed in time and weather permits.

 

CGI image looking north, towards the M6 junction in the distance (not represented)

 

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

What they mean is they are getting all this work done without the cost of heating/lighting/broadband use etc.

Actually for many large employers, they are still paying for all of this; skeleton/support staff may be remaining and they need the broadband connection.  You also can't just turn off the HVAC systems in offices or all sorts of bacteria start to grow (including legionnella which is much deadlier than Covid-19).  A lot of offices could be uninhabitable for some time if the tenants are not careful.  I once worked in an office which after we vacated the building, was empty but still fully lit two years later.

[Mike Storey]

51 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

I am inclined to agree things are changing quickly I for one am extremely nervious about going into shops etc and when I have been in a couple recently I have been extremely worried.Working from home will stay but as my neighbour says she misses the comarderie and cant wait to return.The thought of sitting in a train for my annual trip to Glasgow frightens me and the thought of an exhibition no way.I think that we have a long way to go and many people who think its all over will get a shock.

 

I entirely sympathise, and to some extent, empathise. But HS2 is some eight to ten years away from operation.

 

As others have said, there have been previous pandemics, of various types and sizes, the Spanish Flu being the most notable. But SARS, Ebola, AIDS and others have occasionally presented a threat. There is also the prediction that such pandemics will become more frequent and more challenging, given environmental changes, although that prediction has form.....

 

There is no precedent to Covid-19, in the global reaction. Life has become more precious, than it was after WW1. It would appear that society generally just shrugged off the Spanish Flu, to an extent we would find intolerable today. So the measures taken have become more draconian, whatever certain autocratic regimes would have us believe, or wish to believe. The fact that the UK's record is far poorer than most, is not just a reflection of the political regime, but also of the fragile nature of our society. But it is that fragility, and its ability to adapt to a "new normal", that is very likely to lead to a "situation normal", wherever the virus takes us. Bournemouth Beach is but one example - there are many others.

 

So the likelihood is that previous work and leisure patterns will return - it is more a question of time than on any miracle cure - and public transport demand will return with it. The pandemic has just given a bit of, short to medium term relief to the overcrowding problems. So HS2 will be needed, and probably within the timescale now likely.

 

More unsettling is the dramatic decline in the birth rate, as just identified in a report issued today. It predicts an ultimate decline in populations of developed countries across the world, certainly by the end of this century, but possibly earlier. That may make HS2 and other transport schemes seem extravagant, but then, who plans for 80 years' time?

[corneliuslundie]

A big difference between the current situation and the Spanish Flu epidemic (which my wife tells me started in the USA, not Spain) is the means of communication available. It would have been completely impossible to make frequent changes to rules in 1918 because all there was was the post, telegrams and telephones, as well of course as newspapers. And relatively few private individuals had telephones. So it was almost impossible to do anything much other than grin and bear it.

I flagged up the birth rate issue some time ago on RMWeb (I can't remember the context) as some figures appeared then suggesting that the UK was close to its peak population despite current levels of immigration. I already knew that some countries have had declining populations for some time. But at the time no-one seemed to take any notice of the report. (My wife also suggests that all those couples being closeted at home for the last four months will probably lead to a news spike at the end of the year, making the maternity hospitals busy. But that will be a short term issue, and probably nothing like the spike at the end of the Second World War when all the troops returned home.

I am interested in Mike Storey's analysis as I have felt the same, that our rather poor performance is related in part to our attitude to democracy and government.

Anyway, back to HS2. Thanks for the videos which have been posted recently. Taken from drones I assume. Something else they could not have done in 1918 (other than using balloons and rather large cine cameras.

Jonathan

[Zomboid]

9 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

big difference between the current situation and the Spanish Flu epidemic (which my wife tells me started in the USA, not Spain)

Apparently it was so named because it killed the king of Spain

 

Edit: except apparently that's incorrect.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Zomboid

[Mike Storey]

40 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

A big difference between the current situation and the Spanish Flu epidemic (which my wife tells me started in the USA, not Spain) is the means of communication available. It would have been completely impossible to make frequent changes to rules in 1918 because all there was was the post, telegrams and telephones, as well of course as newspapers. And relatively few private individuals had telephones. So it was almost impossible to do anything much other than grin and bear it.

 

 

It was completely possible to make rapid changes to "rules", by post, which was same day, and most definitely by telegraph and phone. Isolation and quarantine were implemented quite rapidly, once the pandemic was better understood. What it lacked was any sense of urgency, and more a sense of inevitability.

 

Not something we would accept now.

[Edwin_m]

59 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

More unsettling is the dramatic decline in the birth rate, as just identified in a report issued today. It predicts an ultimate decline in populations of developed countries across the world, certainly by the end of this century, but possibly earlier. That may make HS2 and other transport schemes seem extravagant, but then, who plans for 80 years' time?

It would also mean more older people relative to young ones, meaning that those people will have to work longer when they may be less keen on driving.  And if 10% of drivers decided to use the train instead, for this reason or some other such as climate change, it would roughly double rail use.  So I think it's overwhelmingly likely we're still going to need a high capacity rail network.  

[Ron Ron Ron]

27 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

.... if 10% of drivers decided to use the train instead, for this reason or some other such as climate change, it would roughly double rail use. ....

 

There was a lot of research done on this about 10 years ago or so and IIRC the figure was around 8% of car journeys being switched from road to rail, would mean rail capacity would have to more than double.

In other words, the rail system has no way of coping with those sort of figures.

 

 

.

[Ron Ron Ron]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

.....More unsettling is the dramatic decline in the birth rate, as just identified in a report issued today.

It predicts an ultimate decline in populations of developed countries across the world, certainly by the end of this century, but possibly earlier. That may make HS2 and other transport schemes seem extravagant, but then, who plans for 80 years' time?

 

Taken from the BBC online report on this story....

 

"The UK is predicted to peak at 75 million in 2063, and fall to 71 million by 2100."

 

I can't see any relief for the nation's future transport requirements from those sort of figures Mike.

With the current UK population thought to be now above 67 million, with all its attendant problems, those figures still predict a significant rise over today's.

 

 

.

 

 

.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Euston HS2 redevelopment enters the next phase.

 

https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2020/07/13/mace-dragados-kicks-off-1-3bn-hs2-euston-station-build/

 

https://www.globalrailwayreview.com/news/104128/hs2-euston-station-construction-forward/

 

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/hs2-contractors-begin-work-on-euston-station-site-

 

 

.

[Northmoor]

6 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

There was a lot of research done on this about 10 years ago or so and IIRC the figure was around 8% of car journeys being switched from road to rail, would mean rail capacity would have to more than double.

In other words, the rail system has no way of coping with those sort of figures.

 

Like all similar studies though, the weakness is the use of a single average figure for the whole UK.

 

Commuting into central London is dominated by the train, so doubling the passengers carried on existing services (unless they all commuted during the off-peak) would obviously be impossible.  But in some parts of the country, rail carries a much smaller proportion of passenger traffic.  Plenty of regional routes are served by 2/3-car DMUs once an hour or less, although the infrastructure could already cope, or could with minor improvements, with 4/6-car DMUs running half-hourly.  Cross-Country has been a great success since privatisation and increasing service frequency has been a large part of this.  Further services may not be possible but actually running sensible length trains would enable it to provide increased capacity with little impact on the infrastructure.

[bimble]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

Apparently it was so named because it killed the king of Spain

 

No, it got the moniker because at the initial outbreak the press of most of the major countries were being heavily censored due to the Great War, so outbreaks weren't being reported, but the Spanish press were free to report the flu outbreak because Spain were neutral.

 

So it ended up being known as the Spanish Flu because that was where it was first openly reported.

 

That and the then king of Spain (Alfonso XIII) from 1886 to 1931 was wasn't killed in that pandemic.

[Ron Ron Ron]

5 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Like all similar studies though, the weakness is the use of a single average figure for the whole UK.

 

Commuting into central London is dominated by the train, so doubling the passengers carried on existing services (unless they all commuted during the off-peak) would obviously be impossible.  But in some parts of the country, rail carries a much smaller proportion of passenger traffic.  Plenty of regional routes are served by 2/3-car DMUs once an hour or less, although the infrastructure could already cope, or could with minor improvements, with 4/6-car DMUs running half-hourly.  Cross-Country has been a great success since privatisation and increasing service frequency has been a large part of this.  Further services may not be possible but actually running sensible length trains would enable it to provide increased capacity with little impact on the infrastructure.

 

Indeed, but I seem to remember that the capacity that they thought could be squeezed out of the system, with the sort of improvements that you suggest, would only cope with taking 2 to 3% of journeys from road use.

 

 

.

[black and decker boy]

On 15/07/2020 at 21:23, Mike Storey said:

More unsettling is the dramatic decline in the birth rate, as just identified in a report issued today. It predicts an ultimate decline in populations of developed countries across the world, certainly by the end of this century, but possibly earlier. That may make HS2 and other transport schemes seem extravagant, but then, who plans for 80 years' time?

But within that report, it still shows the population of the UK growing (I think peak was 78m in mid century) and only then falling away slowly (still 71m at end of century) so thats still alot more people in the short and medium term. Major Road building is gone for now, upgrades to A Roads is the best we will get (sMART motorways not withstanding), our cities cannot handle traffic so HS2 and other rail schemes such as EW Rail will still be needed to provide the connectivity and mobility that a thriving economy needs.

[Mike Storey]

On 16/07/2020 at 00:09, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Taken from the BBC online report on this story....

 

"The UK is predicted to peak at 75 million in 2063, and fall to 71 million by 2100."

 

I can't see any relief for the nation's future transport requirements from those sort of figures Mike.

With the current UK population thought to be now above 67 million, with all its attendant problems, those figures still predict a significant rise over today's.

 

 

.

 

 

.

 

Yes, I saw that Ron. But hard to believe with the UK birth rate declining, immigrants leaving (and a sign of more emigration generally) and supposedly a more restrictive immigration policy. We shall see.

 

Whatever, the average age of the population will increase in any forecast scenario, if Covid or another virus does not wipe many of them out. That almost certainly means significant modal shift, to rail and bus, but it also means public transport must get much better at catering for the older generation. HS2 is one way of doing that too, but it does not solve the access problem from local lines.

 

On the other hand, automated car travel may skew all this, of course, but that seems to have hit a cliff-edge at the moment - I suspect it may prove suitable only for motorway journeys in the medium term, still leaving the poor old boys and girls to navigate their way out of town - the most hazardous part. Hard to know what to do for the long term. I am just glad this govt has decided to do something.

[John Tomlinson]

23 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Yes, I saw that Ron. But hard to believe with the UK birth rate declining, immigrants leaving (and a sign of more emigration generally) and supposedly a more restrictive immigration policy. We shall see.

 

Whatever, the average age of the population will increase in any forecast scenario, if Covid or another virus does not wipe many of them out. That almost certainly means significant modal shift, to rail and bus, but it also means public transport must get much better at catering for the older generation. HS2 is one way of doing that too, but it does not solve the access problem from local lines.

 

On the other hand, automated car travel may skew all this, of course, but that seems to have hit a cliff-edge at the moment - I suspect it may prove suitable only for motorway journeys in the medium term, still leaving the poor old boys and girls to navigate their way out of town - the most hazardous part. Hard to know what to do for the long term. I am just glad this govt has decided to do something.

I too saw this rather amazing set of forecasts for global population.

 

Both Japan and Italy were forecast to have around 50% falls from their present level to 2100, with China not far behind, which does rather make you wonder why the UK holds fairly constant. I suspect as you say it is something to do with predictions on net inward immigration, which may well prove completely wrong over such a long period. Worth mentioning that the major growth area is Africa, tripling from now to around 3 billion in 2100 - without this the total global number would be contracting.

 

The ageing problem isn't one that will affect me particularly, looking at the stats. I expect to be gone sometime in the 2040's - could of course be sooner! But it's pretty rough on today's young people, say under 25, that not only will they have had a rubbish economic environment for their youth, struggles on housing, the Crash, Covid, no pensions etc., but as they age will find less and less people to look after them. Other than high levels of immigration, which effectively steals the younger able bodied from other places, one answer may be Robotics combined with AI, something I'll be quite glad not to be around to see.

 

The high levels of unpredictablility in either the short term re. working practices after Covid, nor long term in the face of possible population fall, don't seem to me to give an adequate reason to change our transport policies, what we do need however are governments capable of forming rational judgements and acting quickly as circumstances change, which may be a rather forlorn hope.

 

John.