HS2 under review

[Nedrahn]

So why is he any more reliable, truthful or anything other than biased than anyone else?

 

Everybody from both sides is peddling half truths, over exaggerations, unfounded projections in this whole sorry affair - just how do you sort the wheat from the chaff?

Well said.

 

I don't think one should hold up Rail as an unblemished example of objective reporting. Over my lifetime I've watched the magazine go from Rail Enthusiast, which did what it said on the cover, to Rail, which appeared to believe it was Modern Railways Mk2. Then came Privatisation and Rail mutated into the cheerleader for the privateers, at times reading like an ATOC press release. Some might like that. Some might like Nigel Harris' style and agree with his opinions. However, they are just that - opinions, often expressed. His opinion on HS2 doesn't make him right, any more than the opinions of the opponents are automatically right. It's ridiculous to hold up estimations as 'facts'. Short of a trip in the TARDIS, no-one truly knows if HS2 is a worthwhile project or not.

 

I think HS2 could be of benefit, or it could be a ridiculous use of our money. We simply haven't had a proper, reasoned and national debate on the issue. It's become a vanity project for the politicians, who seem more afraid of losing face than acting in the best interests of the nation. I say it should be put on hold until we've had that inclusive debate and, possibly, a referendum. I know there's the problem of having an adult discussion in Tabloid Britain, but shouldn't we try? At the very least I would like to see some commitment to making the project British - British construction, British stock completely built here, and British materials as far as possible. And by British I don't mean David Cameron's definition - built in Japan and fitted out here, cue PR op.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Nedrahn

[Coombe Barton]

MPs approve by 350 votes to 34 the bill to enable spending to begin on preparations for HS2 high speed rail project

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24753394

[Kris]

That's a positive bit of news John.

[roythebus]

To answer Nedrahn, we don't NEED any more consultations, opinion polls or associated crap to waste yet more money, TV airtime or paper. Let's get the bloody thing BUILT and running. Everywhere else has FINISHED their High Speed rail networks while we're still arguing about our second line.

 

Question Time on BBC1 was interesting this week with MP from the 3 major parties actually AGREEING to support the building of the line. FFS stop yapping and BUILD!

[The Stationmaster]

To answer Nedrahn, we don't NEED any more consultations, opinion polls or associated crap to waste yet more money, TV airtime or paper. Let's get the bloody thing BUILT and running. Everywhere else has FINISHED their High Speed rail networks while we're still arguing about our second line.

 

Question Time on BBC1 was interesting this week with MP from the 3 major parties actually AGREEING to support the building of the line. FFS stop yapping and BUILD!

This country simply exasperates me when it comes to major infrastructure projects.  I've no doubt at all that we can build them and usually complete them on time and within budget - but it's all the nonsense that precedes the spades in the ground.  We were talking about Crossrail years before the French even thought of RER lines under Paris, I applied for a Crossrail job back in 1994 - just before the project was ditched, it's now in hand but won't be ffinished for several years - by then Paris will probably have got to RER Line Z!

 

Back about 16 years ago I was involved with various works and schemes that were overlapping with a Project called Thameslink 2000, then it became Thameslink 2010 - it is likely in reality to be Thameslink 2020 by the time work is complete but most of the delay has been prevarication and searching about excuses to avoid someone or other paying for it.  

 

It feels as if talk about a third runway at Heathrow, and definitely about a brand new London airport, was going on long before the French conjured up the iidea of Paris Charles De Gaulle - which has been operational for over 20 years.

 

As Roy has said - let's cut the cackle and get on with the job, HS2 should be more than capable of being fully operational by 2020 but teh way things are going I'm sure it won't be opened until long after there's a high speed line up and running in Ireland (and they haven't even thought about one as far as I know).

[melmerby]

And this also helps the case for HS2:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24766765

 

Keith

[Fat Controller]

Much has been written about the rapidity with which the French have built their new lines; I 've done a little digging and discovered this isn't quite the case. Here are two chronologies which suggest that things aren't always as they seem:-

LGV 1 (Paris- Lyon)

26/03/1971    French government announces a new high-speed line from Paris to Lyon.

23/03/1976    'Declaration d'Utilitie Publique'- formal approval of plans

07/12/1976    Construction starts.

22/09/1982    Official opening of first section, from St-Florentin (172 km east of Paris) to Sathonay (about 15 km north of Lyon)

25/09/1983    Northern end extended to Combs-la-Ville (28 km east of Paris)

02/06/1996    Northern end extended further towards Paris, partially using LGV-Interconnexion, the link between LGV Nord and LGV1, and then a new link to Villeneuve St-Georges, where it joins the 'Classic' line.

2001              Southern end extended to Avignon and Marseilles- the line from Avignon westwards towards Montpellier thence to Spain is still 'en projet', as is that from Marseilles eastwards.

This gives a thirty-year timescale for the line already completed- the first section would be the equivalent of HS2 starting somewhere near Rugby. There were few objections, and few settlements affected, on the section north of Lyon; this would change when the route south of there was announced, with much heated discussion, and several changes of plan.

 

LGV-Atlantique

1975/6          First studies for a new line

1977             Ministerial announcement of new line

22/09/1981   Mitterand announces construction of the new line.

15/09/1983   Mitterand announces construction of the new line...again

25/05/1984   'Declaration d'Utilitie Publique'- formal start of project.

15/02/1985   Construction starts.

24/09/1989   Completion of Northern section, from Montrouge (just west of Gare Montparnasse) to Connerre, where the line joined the classic route to Le Mans

25/09/1990   Completion of Southern branch from Courtelain to St Pierre-de-Corps; this line then joined the classic route towards Bordeaux.

2012             Construction of the continuation of the southern branch towards Bordeaux started.

In this case, from initial announcement to trains running only took 13 years (albeit to junctions far from their ultimate aims), but opposition was much stronger, with pitched battles between the CRS and farmers in some places.

I hope that this gives lie to the idea that the French LGVs were built overnight; all have been long-term projects, built in stages, allowing some gain in the (relatively) short-term.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Fat Controller

[Fat Controller]

Mickey,

You've forgotten:-

2015- Great-Crested Newts found in several locations on the proposed route..

2017- Guardian reveals several members of special police unit admit having improper relationships with Great-Crested Newts during surveillance operations..

[pete_mcfarlane]

Much has been written about the rapidity with which the French have built their new lines; I 've done a little digging and discovered this isn't quite the case. Here are two chronologies which suggest that things aren't always as they seem:-

 

 

Because French politics are really only of interest to the French, we don't see those years of political debate before the first sod is cut. We just see the construction period, and then compare it to the overall times for the British schemes.

 

It's also worth remembering the endless wrangles that surrounded most of the Victorian railway projects before work actually started. These never get mentioned when people talk about how quickly those lines were built.

Edited November 1, 2013 by pete_mcfarlane

[martin_wynne]

HS2 discussion on "This Week" last night included filming at Keen House (home of The Model Railway Club) with several layouts shown:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03glqq0/This_Week_31_10_2013/

[The Stationmaster]

Much has been written about the rapidity with which the French have built their new lines; I 've done a little digging and discovered this isn't quite the case. Here are two chronologies which suggest that things aren't always as they seem:-

LGV 1 (Paris- Lyon)

26/03/1971    French government announces a new high-speed line from Paris to Lyon.

23/03/1976    'Declaration d'Utilitie Publique'- formal approval of plans

07/12/1976    Construction starts.

22/09/1983    Official opening of first section, from St-Florentin (172 km east of Paris) to Sathonay (about 15 km north of Lyon)

25/09/1983    Northern end extended to Combs-la-Ville (28 km east of Paris)

02/06/1996    Northern end extended further towards Paris, partially using LGV-Interconnexion, the link between LGV Nord and LGV1, and then a new link to Villeneuve St-Georges, where it joins the 'Classic' line.

2001              Southern end extended to Avignon and Marseilles- the line from Avignon westwards towards Montpellier thence to Spain is still 'en projet', as is that from Marseilles eastwards.

This gives a thirty-year timescale for the line already completed- the first section would be the equivalent of HS2 starting somewhere near Rugby. There were few objections, and few settlements affected, on the section north of Lyon; this would change when the route south of there was announced, with much heated discussion, and several changes of plan.

 

LGV-Atlantique

1975/6          First studies for a new line

1977             Ministerial announcement of new line

22/09/1981   Mitterand announces construction of the new line.

15/09/1983   Mitterand announces construction of the new line...again

25/05/1984   'Declaration d'Utilitie Publique'- formal start of project.

15/02/1985   Construction starts.

24/09/1989   Completion of Northern section, from Montrouge (just west of Gare Montparnasse) to Connerre, where the line joined the classic route to Le Mans

25/09/1990   Completion of Southern branch from Courtelain to St Pierre-de-Corps; this line then joined the classic route towards Bordeaux.

2012             Construction of the continuation of the southern branch towards Bordeaux started.

In this case, from initial announcement to trains running only took 13 years (albeit to junctions far from their ultimate aims), but opposition was much stronger, with pitched battles between the CRS and farmers in some places.

I hope that this gives lie to the idea that the French LGVs were built overnight; all have been long-term projects, built in stages, allowing some gain in the (relatively) short-term.

But the Sud Est was in use before 1983 of course Brian or did I imagine travelling on it in 1982?  (and yes, I agree it has been extended at both ends since then).

 

And I know the TGV Atlantique has had a very rocky ride politically with a lot of doubt that it would ever be built or was worth the money  (but it does make a very nice cab ride on a TGV

[Fat Controller]

But the Sud Est was in use before 1983 of course Brian or did I imagine travelling on it in 1982?  (and yes, I agree it has been extended at both ends since then).

 

And I know the TGV Atlantique has had a very rocky ride politically with a lot of doubt that it would ever be built or was worth the money  (but it does make a very nice cab ride on a TGV

My error, Mike; I had written '1982' in my notes, but transcribed it as '1983'. In my defence, I would like to say that I'd just finished my second night shift. I contrived to travel through Gare de Lyon on the 21st of September; they'd already started stabling the new trains on platform for the morrow.

I didn't manage to get a cab ride on LGV Atlantique. In 1992, Eurotunnel sent Lynne to Montparnasse to get some training on signalling and operations on high-speed lines; as part of the package, she was given a cab ride to Le Mans. I happened to be there that day, but we arrived too late for her to ask the driver if I could tag along. I installed myself in the first coach, and sat back for the ride. When we got to Le Mans, I went to meet her, and was introduced to the driver who said 'you should have just got in'..

A lot of the opposition to LGV Atlantique came from the viticulteurs of Vouvray; at least one of their number worked in the 'box at Montparnasse..

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I really don't know whether HS2 is worth it. Maybe it is, maybe not.

 

Looking at the latest business case, it reads rather like an undergraduate thesis. Plenty of coloured charts and diagrams, but where's the meat?

 

Can the data be trusted? Simply looking at the chart showing current vs HS2 journey times, there are errors in it. If I can spot these in a quick glance, what other hidden mistakes are there?

 

For example, London - Edinburgh journey times. These are given as currently being 4h23m - is this the average (whatever that means)or the quickest? The 11.00 down is scheduled to do the journey in 4h21m with four stops. Have the writers of the report forgotten that one can currently get from Edinburgh - London in exacly 4h by the 05.40 up (with one stop)?

 

Basic errors like this do not fill me with any confidence in either the report or the facts about the project as a whole.

 

And I love railways.....

Edited November 1, 2013 by Western Sunset

[jamie92208]

HS 2 ...edinburgh?

 

its not going there is it?

No but HS2 part 2 finishes at Church fenton with a nice high speed connection into the ECML.   The residents are getting hot under the collar about 60' high viaducts (as reported on Look North.  

 

Jamie

[ess1uk]

And this also helps the case for HS2:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24766765

 

Keith

start in Scotland then and head south

[GoingUnderground]

I saw in one press report a quote from an opponent of HS2 reaching Scotland that over 90% of rail passenger journeys in Scotland start and end in Scotland and that alone proved that high speed rail connections were not needed to England. What the person quoted did not take into account was that perhaps there was so little cross border passenger traffic because of the time it took to get by rail to the more popular destinations in England. If journey times come down significantly with HS2 from Glasgow and Edinburgh to Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham and London, then judging by the experience between London and Paris and Brussels then the share taken by rail can only go up.

 

The 90% statistic far from showing that high speed rail connections are not needed actually, to my mind, proves that they are long overdue.

[Edwin_m]

I wouldn't be surprised if a similar 90% figure was also the case for many of the English regions, but there is still enough demand to justify inter-regional services. 

[Guest Celticwardog]

Some of this may have been said before but can't be a&^%ed to read the whole thing. Not sure what i think about this, so my points will range from yes it's good to no it aint! Won't really affect me directly as I don't have any reason to go where it is going (and I don't get out much anyway). I would say as many others have it is embarrassing considering we invented the thing that our current infrastructure is woefully behind so many other countries so would suggest the whole thing needs a major upgrade rather than this one line.

 

The arguments that so many other countries though have high speed rail I think don't really apply in the same way here as this country is so much smaller than the ones usually spoken about (specifically France where if you cut out the UK on map you could fit it in several times in France). My point being as these countries are so much bigger the spaces between the major centres are therefore also bigger so high speed does make more sense.

 

Whereas in the country unless it doesn't make many stops it just doesn't seem worth it. Will it mean businesses move away from London and the South east? Probably not.

 

Ok there wasn't much for it there....erm...it will be all shiny and new! I expect most people are for it on this forum, but for all the wrong reasons (shiny new train, who cares about economics, shiny new train)

 

Oh I don't care.....where's me pills.

[PhilH]

start in Scotland then and head south

 

start in Scotland then and head south  north.....

[pete_mcfarlane]

I wouldn't be surprised if a similar 90% figure was also the case for many of the English regions, but there is still enough demand to justify inter-regional services. 

I'd guess a lot of that 90% are commuters heading in to Glasgow and Edinburgh. And percentages are of course pretty meaningless in this context - the 10% of rail travellers heading out of Scotland is still going to be a huge number of people.

 

But the figures don't really matter. It's another of those 'down with this sort of thing' pressure groups scouting around for any figures that back up their case.

Edited November 2, 2013 by pete_mcfarlane

[Joseph_Pestell]

But the Sud Est was in use before 1983 of course Brian or did I imagine travelling on it in 1982?  (and yes, I agree it has been extended at both ends since then).

 

And I know the TGV Atlantique has had a very rocky ride politically with a lot of doubt that it would ever be built or was worth the money  (but it does make a very nice cab ride on a TGV

 

I can't remember if it was in late 1981 or early 1982 that my then boss travelled on PSE and reported back. At that stage there was only a short stretch to the point where the line branches off to Dijon.

 

His main comment, apart from the speed, was that the train was too quiet so that one could hear all the other passengers (he put it less politely than that!).

[Captain Kernow]

Looks like the author of this article has had her attempt at clever, cheap jibes rebound on her, judging by some of the comments attached to the article..

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/02/hs2-big-boys-toy

 

Apologies if this has been aired already, was circulated around DRAG members this evening.

 

 

[mow]

Was wondering if she was an English graduate, with little or no idea of engineering, or project management. The comments were fun to read...

 

Is there a special limited edition printed on perforated, soft, absorbent, pastel coloured rolls?

Edited November 9, 2013 by mow

[Jongudmund]

Whatever she was, she was boring. I read three paragraphs and then closed the window down.

 

It always bugs me when people talk about the 'Pete Watermans and Roger Daltreys of this world' (insert any other name instead of Pete and Roger). Are there more than one of either of them? A clone gang of Pete Watermans successfully marketing records and building massive model railway lay-outs?

 

It's writing the way a pub bore talks. Got better things to read, sorry.

[Purley Oaks]

All Catherine Bennett is saying is that HS2 needs a good argument in its favour - get the science behind it, prove its worth and so on.