Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, jchinuk said:

Just to enter the discussion rather late, but the talk of HS2 is ironic as HS1 (the Channel Tunnel rail link) is struggling because of the decline in passengers on Eurostar, an article makes interesting reading.

 

Hopefully it's short term, but it illustrates the effect of "events, dear boy" (to misquote Macmillan).

 

jch

 

Hmm.  It actually illustrates the effects of a transient event.  It ought to be pretty obvious that Eurostar is struggling because of the virus. The virus period is not going to define travel patterns for all eternity and certainly should not be used as a basis for long term strategic planning.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to whats happenning on the ground  grave removal at Stoke Manderville continuing (6000 to move)  quite a large work camp being used at Wendover alongside Chiltern line .Worksites from Bishopstone to Stone all active with regular trucks using our roads .Going to be interesting watching the bridge built over Oxford Rd outside Aylesbury  wonder what the design will be, any ideas ? So work is ongoing when will making of the embankments start?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Back to whats happenning on the ground  grave removal at Stoke Manderville continuing (6000 to move)  quite a large work camp being used at Wendover alongside Chiltern line .Worksites from Bishopstone to Stone all active with regular trucks using our roads .Going to be interesting watching the bridge built over Oxford Rd outside Aylesbury  wonder what the design will be, any ideas ? So work is ongoing when will making of the embankments start?

Send us the piccies when they do, in the same vein as the East West Rail thread!

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Of course. Likewise all the HS2 projections. Almost nothing about 50 years time is fact.

 

We can probably be fairly sure about the time of high tide at Swansea. Which is why tidal power is the one predictable source of natural energy.

 

Martin.

 

All projections are just that but I would wager a large sum that the research done on HS2 goes into thousands and thousands of pages which has to count for something You are dismissing all the experts opinions with what ? Do you have 1000`s and 1000`s of pages to back up your opinions?

Thought not.

You can keep repeating an opinion as many times as you wish but it doesn`t make it right. Evidence is needed to back it up . Can you supply it ? If so, i will bow to you better judgement.

 

If we are not to do anything because we cannot be sure what will be in 50 years time then why are we so concerned about climate change, afterall it is not us so much that will feel the effects but our children and grandchildren. However, they will curse us if we do not take action NOW. Waiting until the severe effects of climate change is fully on us will be too late. So we HAVE to project into the future. 

 

I can`t imagine HS2 ever getting off the starting block being built if only a few cranks  thought it a good idea.  There is a huge volume of evidence to support it and even if the nay sayers can find a few flaws the basic idea that the line is required is inescapable. The concept will have been tested to destruction in committee after committee after committee to ensure the money is being spent well and that the project is necessary in the national interest. This isn`t a village bypass , it`s the largest infrastructure project for a century (or more)! 

Edited by class26
  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

A question has entered my mind; are the government financing the project directly, through bond issues, or out of direct taxation; or is HS2 Ltd., an arms length company able to raise finance on its own account, with the Treasury guaranteeing any such sums?

Edited by 62613
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

Hmm.  It actually illustrates the effects of a transient event.  It ought to be pretty obvious that Eurostar is struggling because of the virus. The virus period is not going to define travel patterns for all eternity and certainly should not be used as a basis for long term strategic planning.  

 

I suppose a "bonus" of the reduction in Eurostar services will allow extra Tunnel Shuttle trains to clear the queues in Kent and Northern France after B-Day?

 

jch

  • Like 3
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Back to whats happenning on the ground  grave removal at Stoke Manderville continuing (6000 to move)  quite a large work camp being used at Wendover alongside Chiltern line .Worksites from Bishopstone to Stone all active with regular trucks using our roads .Going to be interesting watching the bridge built over Oxford Rd outside Aylesbury  wonder what the design will be, any ideas ? So work is ongoing when will making of the embankments start?

From the discussions we are having with HS2, the bulk earthworks will begin in earnest next spring / summer. There will be a few years work but earthworks is seasonal and winds down for winter. The Aylesbury Oribital Link road & associated parts of Aylesbury Garden Town should also start next year and run in parallel through to 2023/24 (combined, these will create way more HGVs than HS2 does locally).

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, jchinuk said:

 

I suppose a "bonus" of the reduction in Eurostar services will allow extra Tunnel Shuttle trains to clear the queues in Kent and Northern France after B-Day?

 

jch

It won't make that much difference putting on more trains, as the limiting factor is the speed at which traffic clears tolls and border controls. I've known of cases where trains are running with space available, simply because the traffic's not coming through fast enough.

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
21 hours ago, 62613 said:

A question has entered my mind; are the government financing the project directly, through bond issues, or out of direct taxation; or is HS2 Ltd., an arms length company able to raise finance on its own account, with the Treasury guaranteeing any such sums?

 

There are two sources of government funding - CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) which is funded by issuing government stock, and OPEX (Operating Expenditure) which is the income and expenditure from taxation of all types.

 

My understanding is that HS2 is being funded from CAPEX by the issue of long term gilt stock. It will not be named specifically for HS2, unlike the funding for WW1 that was raised, but will be from stock issued for all projects. The current situation is that government borrowing from this source is incredibly cheap with some yields having turned negative which means that the government is effectively paid to borrow. It also means that there is no pool of money or account labelled HS2 that can be diverted elsewhere.

 

There is some confusion over this as one of the initial papers on HS2 refers to 'cost to the taxpayer'. This infers it will be paid for from OPEX but that is wrong. Indeed HS2 generates income through tax paid by suppliers, HS2 itself and, of course, there employees. And there is a small benefit to local areas where workers are spending their income in local shops, pubs etc.

 

A common misconception bandied about is that we should spend on the NHS instead but the NHS is funded from OPEX as it isn't a physical entity that generates income for the government.

 

As for uninformed comments being bandied about there are many, I've seen suggestions of a cost of as much as £250bn, that it is a military railway being paid for by the EU so that the EU Army can deploy rapidly to England through to it is Chinese funded so that they can take over the country. And on the ecological impact there are so many false claims out there it is amazing, with destruction, in many cases, being filmed that is nowhere near the route of the railway being blamed on the project.

Edited by Richard E
  • Informative/Useful 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Richard E said:

it is Chinese funded so that they can take over the country.

Perhaps a more understandable misconception for those who don't follow current affairs closely, given that there was an offer from the Chinese to build it in a much shorter timescale than planned which drew a lot of media attention. I don't recall the decision to reject this offer being so well publicised.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So,

3 minutes ago, Richard E said:

 

There are two sources of government funding - CAPEX (Capital Expenditure) which is funded by issuing government stock, and OPEX (Operating Expenditure) which is the income and expenditure from taxation of all types.

 

My understanding is that HS2 is being funded from CAPEX by the issue of long term gilt stock. It will not be named specifically for HS2, unlike the funding for WW1 that was raised, but will be from stock issued for all projects. The current situation is that government borrowing from this source is incredibly cheap with some yields having turned negative which means that the government is effectively paid to borrow. It also means that there is no pool of money or account labelled HS2 that can be diverted elsewhere.

 

There is some confusion over this as one of the initial papers on HS2 refers to 'cost to the taxpayer'. This infers it will be paid for from OPEX but that is wrong. Indeed HS2 generates income through tax paid by suppliers, HS2 itself and, of course, there employees. And there is a small benefit to local areas where workers are spending their income in local shops, pubs etc.

 

A common misconception bandied about is that we should spend on the NHS instead but the NHS is funded from OPEX as it isn't a physical entity that generates income for the government.

 

As for uninformed comments being bandied about there are many, I've seen suggestions of a cost of as much as £250bn, that it is a military railway being paid for by the EU so that the EU Army can deploy rapidly to England through to it is Chinese funded so that they can take over the country. And on the ecological impact there are so many false claims out there it is amazing, with destruction, in many cases, being filmed that is nowhere near the route of the railway being blamed on the project.

So,it's funded by bond issues. Do we know how long the term of the bonds is? As for the cost, we will probably never know exactly, especially after the accountants have had their fun. The other thing is, of course, once the project is complete, there will be an asset, with presumably some value. My experience of projects tells me that the spending will be spread over the lifetime of the project; so I take it that not all the gilts are issued in one lump.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
38 minutes ago, Richard E said:

 

on the ecological impact there are so many false claims out there it is amazing, with destruction, in many cases, being filmed that is nowhere near the route of the railway being blamed on the project.

No doubt this will be blamed on HS2:jester:

 

https://www.countryfile.com/news/riverluggdestroyed/

  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DK123GWR said:

there was an offer from the Chinese to build it in a much shorter timescale than planned which drew a lot of media attention.

 

It would be very interesting to know how the Chinese proposed to achieve this, while at the same time complying with all relevant UK laws and regulations, and also dealing with anti-HS2 protestors.....

 

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

It would be very interesting to know how the Chinese proposed to achieve this, while at the same time complying with all relevant UK laws and regulations, and also dealing with anti-HS2 protestors.....

 

They never really explained that part, which is part of the reason it isn't happening (alongside national security). However, I can imagine many people I know asking 'why can't we build it that quickly?' rather than realising that without an enourmous army of underpaid (or even unpaid) people working in very dangerous conditions, it simply isn't possible for anybody to undertake such a large project with the timescale and budget proposed by the Chinese.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, caradoc said:

 

It would be very interesting to know how the Chinese proposed to achieve this, while at the same time complying with all relevant UK laws and regulations, and also dealing with anti-HS2 protestors.....

 

The People's Army would manage quite well:D

  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Not a direct comparison, but there were reports earlier this week about a road tunnel (undersea) built in the Faeroe Islands. Assuming that it is not a hoax report, the figures quoted for the construction were remarkably low by comparison with what they would be in the UK.

 

So it's not just the Chinese. Somehow, here in Britain, we seem to manage to overpay for infrastructure projects.

 

More specific to HS2, the first LGV in France (Paris - Lyon) does not look a lot different to a conventional railway when it comes to widths of cuttings. Why does HS2 need the landtake of a motorway?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Not a direct comparison, but there were reports earlier this week about a road tunnel (undersea) built in the Faeroe Islands. Assuming that it is not a hoax report, the figures quoted for the construction were remarkably low by comparison with what they would be in the UK.

 

So it's not just the Chinese. Somehow, here in Britain, we seem to manage to overpay for infrastructure projects.

 

More specific to HS2, the first LGV in France (Paris - Lyon) does not look a lot different to a conventional railway when it comes to widths of cuttings. Why does HS2 need the landtake of a motorway?

From watching land-take on CTRL, it was much greater during the construction phase, due to parallel construction roads on both sides. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

 

It would be very interesting to know how the Chinese proposed to achieve this, while at the same time complying with all relevant UK laws and regulations, and also dealing with anti-HS2 protestors.....

 

I got the impression this was more of a propaganda stunt than a serious offer. I would expect a follow up when HS2 is finished along the lines of 'the Chinese could have built it in 2 weeks for a cost of £2.50, but the corrupt British Government gave the contract to their friends".   

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Inflated costs are a feature of any construction in the UK it seems a simple  railway station costs billions for a simple unit.Wages are not high  niether are materials land is sometimes high but not always so what is it that sends costs soaring .Do the various ministries invoved push the costs up or the wages paid to top management cause the high costs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

One reason costs go up so much, of course, is the length of time from a project first being proposed, to the first shovel hitting the ground - sometimes as much as 30 years, so inflation alone can double the costs, if not much more than that. Then throw in various alterations to the project to mollify 'interest groups' (who often won't be satisfied even with the alterations). 

 

I remember a Government project I was involved with nearly 20 years ago where I was told that if the plans need changing, it's often cheaper to build it wrong and correct it afterwards than to change the plans! Not really possible with something liken HS2 though.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Inflated costs are a feature of any construction in the UK it seems a simple  railway station costs billions for a simple unit.Wages are not high  niether are materials land is sometimes high but not always so what is it that sends costs soaring .Do the various ministries invoved push the costs up or the wages paid to top management cause the high costs?

 

My feeling its due to the vast army of consultants / outsourcing specialist which HMG love to employ these days rather than retaining the experience to do things in house.

 

Its part the reason we are getting some awful excuses for road schemes (or even just signpost replacement) coming through - back in the 70s there were Government owned Road construction units that dealt with the design of such things and cut out the middlemen. These days most councils and indeed Highways England (which seems to be far more obsessed with coming up with snazzy sounding names for itself) have precious little design experience and have no idea whether what comes back is actually sensible.

 

High speed rail is not some sort of magical thing which needs an army of consultants and financial gurus to prevaricate over - the Japanese and then the French demonstrated its a sound investment over 40 years ago! yet rather than accept that the UK political machine feels it needs to reinvent the wheel rather then tell the public to grow up when they start frothing over house prices etc.

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

My feeling its due to the vast army of consultants / outsourcing specialist which HMG love to employ these days rather than retaining the experience to do things in house.

In the case of the big engineering consultants most being US or Canadian owned and offshore as much work as they can to India to further reduce the skill set left in the UK.

Edited by The Great Bear
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Inflated costs are a feature of any construction in the UK it seems a simple  railway station costs billions for a simple unit.Wages are not high  niether are materials land is sometimes high but not always so what is it that sends costs soaring .Do the various ministries invoved push the costs up or the wages paid to top management cause the high costs?

I saw or read that the cost increases is partly down to contracts / contractors future proofing, I think it was after cross rail the government changed the contracts to get rid of claw backs for over runs, extra costs, inflation, redesigns etc. Contracts are now more fixed cost, so a contractor can't or shouldn't go back and ask for more, the result is that the initial cost is alot higher, as is potential profit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...