dmustu Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Also it would give time to rethink the London end and connect HS2 to HS1, a bit silly having separate terminal. HS2 will be connected to HS1, using 400m of the north london line, which will be gauge enhanced to allow continental size trains access from HS1 to HS2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 And why would you want to terminate at Marylebone - Euston really is the only choice in terms of a linked up transport policy as it allows for the easy transfer to Eurostar and europe. The poster was telling us that reinstating the whole GC route would be so much cheaper and easier - I guess as you're tunnelling from West Hampstead anyhow you might as well tunnel to Euston... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 well done Government for passing a Railway project like this. All the Nimbys banging on about how loud the trains will be there will be sonic booms when they emerge from tunnels. next they will be saying if you ride on the train your eyes will explode, Victorian opposition coming around again. Dont these people realise how High speed has revolutionised travel not just in Europe but all over the world including morocco ( which has commited to more mileage that we have) & the argument that the WCML could be up graded to except the capacity and to upgrade line speed to any where near HS2 have obviously no clue about Railways. Its just a pity it is going to take so long m not picking on any one person but the people who are so against this are in the wealthier areas and as usual have a louder voice. Im just glad the Consrvatives didnt listen. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 10, 2012 HS2 will be connected to HS1, using 400m of the north london line, which will be gauge enhanced to allow continental size trains access from HS1 to HS2. I read BH's comment in a different way and assumed that they were considering passengers transferring between the 2 rather than trains using the 2 lines. Putting in the 400m link is a must though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) Why do such things in the UK take so looong to produce? Modern construction equipment can work quite fast. Too many lawyers all wanting their slice? Edited January 10, 2012 by Kris 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Nonsense. HS2 will cost a similar amount per year to what we are currently spending on Crossrail during a recession - is that tieing up all rail investment during its construction? Absolutely it's nonsense - this is on top of (not instead of!) not insignificant schemes like Crossrail, Thameslink 2000, GWML electrification, Trans-Pennine electrification - it's on top of a new Intercity rolling stock programme, major station/junction rebuilds like Reading, plus on a smaller/rolling scale more gauge-enhancement, capacity enhancement and chords largely for freight..... And that's just stuff that's already announced as on the go... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 10, 2012 Hmm just realised that the NIMBY's have had some effect on me. I thought that the £33 billion cost was just from London to Birmingham, but having read further this cost also included the Manchester and Leeds lines. I wonder how many others were mislead? 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 You'll be telling us our eyes will explode at such speeds next... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivercider Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I think, yes it might/will get delayed, it might go over budget and cause difficulties to some people. But, if we don't start now. then when? Because we surely will have to at some point, other tinkering will not be enough. Is it just me thinking that Rail Industry/ATOC/CBI? or whowever need to get a PR team up and briefed, ready to start knocking over some of the spurious and farcical objections as they arise on national media? Sure there are genuine objections to details, these must be addressed, but Joe Public must not be allowed to start taking some of the anti-campaign nonsense as the truth. cheers 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I'm not picking on any one person but the people who are so against this are in the wealthier areas and as usual have a louder voice. Im just glad the Consrvatives didnt listen. What does it matter if it's a wealthy area or a poor area? Nobody wants something like this imposed on them, potentially much reducing their quality of home life, blighting their property or even having their home taken away (thankfully there aren't large numbers involved in the last of those). How would any of us feel if the powers that be, announced a new major trunk road was going to be built within a few hundred metres of our front door? That sort of thing would have the poor victim clinging on to any argument against, no matter how tenuous or flawed. . 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 10, 2012 I'll just say this - Hurray for HS2 and the continuing Renaissance of our railways. I just spent the morning at the opposite end of the spectrum, helping and encouraging the development of a new, small local user group on my patch, there are loads of good folk out there who want our railways to succeed and grow. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted January 10, 2012 there are loads of good folk out there who want our railways to succeed and grow. What grow back to the proper 7 foot 0 1/4 inch? Coat collected Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phatbob Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 10, 2012 Inconvenient truth for the NIMBYs in the Chilterns: the Midlands, the North and Scotland need better links to London, The WCML is full, the ECML will be full soon and further motorway building to try and meet demand has been shown to be unsutainable. UK plc NEEDS this new line and the sooner it's bult the better. Change brings winners and losers. There will be far more winners than losers and we do live in a democracy where the majority rules, so sorry Chiltern NIMBYS, stop living in denial, stop deluding yourselves with your own propaganda and grow-up. It's going to happen, so stop wasting everybod elses' time and money by trying to stop it. Why not do something positive like campaign to get something benefitial out of it, like a "Chiltern Parkway" station on the new route? Then you get some kind of win and don't just lose. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dilbert Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Inconvenient truth for the NIMBYs in the Chilterns: the Midlands, the North and Scotland need better links to London, The WCML is full, the ECML will be full soon and further motorway building to try and meet demand has been shown to be unsutainable. UK plc NEEDS this new line and the sooner it's bult the better. Change brings winners and losers. There will be far more winners than losers and we do live in a democracy where the majority rules, so sorry Chiltern NIMBYS, stop living in denial, stop deluding yourselves with your own propaganda and grow-up. It's going to happen, so stop wasting everybod elses' time and money by trying to stop it. Why not do something positive like campaign to get something benefitial out of it, like a "Chiltern Parkway" station on the new route? Then you get some kind of win and don't just lose. Given that the term NIMBY (which is pejorative as well) is being bandied around by the pro lobby, there is still no (from what I can make out) tangible business case for the HS2 project - cutting journey times and alleviating capacity issues is not ultimately tangible - regeneration of the industrial heartlands of the Midlands and the North should be, but there appears to little information on how this will apparently be done. What will happen is that problems will get displaced - the South West England and Wales being the premier candidates for a downturn. House prices will soar in the Birmingham area because it will be easier to commute to the square mile than doing local journeys in London. House prices in London will remain static or dip a little - nothing significant because the demand will remain. What did surprise me is a Heathrow link up is not an immediate priority. The gateway to Europe is via Dover despite Cameron giving his two fingers to Europe recently. The whole project is quintessentially so British (quaint)... dilbert 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fay Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 What does it matter if it's a wealthy area or a poor area? Nobody wants something like this imposed on them, potentially much reducing their quality of home life, blighting their property or even having their home taken away (thankfully there aren't large numbers involved in the last of those). How would any of us feel if the powers that be, announced a new major trunk road was going to be built within a few hundred metres of our front door? That sort of thing would have the poor victim clinging on to any argument against, no matter how tenuous or flawed. . It matters because if it was a poor area it wouldnt be getting the news coverage as compared to the more well off. Im glad its not a road as the government has realised that more roads wont solve the traffic problem. The UK is far behind Europe in High speed rail Im sorry for the people directly affected but in listening to some of the arguments on the news. sonic booms coming out of tunnels. yes can happen but the right tunnel design stops this all together. the line will pass a school and houses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how many thousands of houses and schools are along side railways. How many towns have been built up Because of Railways. As for the Chilterns. Railways pass through many areas of out standing natural bueaty. The scottish highlands for example. and have only enhanced them in my opinion any way. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The old GC main line was built to continental loading gauge, easy gradients and high speed (for 1900 !!) curvature. Lets face it, a reinstated GC / new route HS2 in any urban area will be mega-expensive. Why is Birmingham to London so important (especially if the corresponding airport links are not included) - wasn't a couple of billion £ or so recently spent on a WC main line upgrade south of Rugby ? Why travel London to Leeds via Birmingham anyway ? Why will it take so long - 2030 or so before it gets to Manchester. Anyway, if Scotland devolves (nearly wrote dissolves !!) then a high speed line up there won't be needed. I'm 100% FOR rail investment - but any availiable money needs to go where the need is greatest, mainly the urban areas / commuter lines & cross country (Like Oxford to Cambridge - wow, they've built a guided busway on part of that route that has yet to open, and is disintergrating as I write). Freight investment is very much needed to. Like it or lump it, oil is getting ever more expensive, and won't last for ever (BP stats give us 65 years, then it's all over) I bought some old (1950's) O.S. maps the other day, £1 each from oxfam. A selection of areas of the UK. Strange thing - the country was absolutley littered with railways back then, all with red circles on the stations - station open. What idiots we have had for many, many years running this once great country. No forward thinking. Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdseyecircus Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 When construction finally starts will we have class 14's running trains like HS1? Or will DBS have a pool of departmental 60's!! Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced that it's neccessary. I don't know the full ins and outs of the case, but it seems to be way too late for the UK rail network. Everything is getting very expensive, very quickly. There's bound to be a cost overun (the voice of experience talking here...). According to Britain’s Transport Infrastructure High Speed Two, "....Among these strategic corridors, the London to the North-West corridor is the single most important and heavily used , presenting both the greatest challenges in terms of future capacity and the greatest opportunities to promote a shift of passenger and freight traffic from road to rail." Promote. Not ensure, or guarantee. Back to good ol' 'market forces' as an energy source.... and look where that got us. Elevator going down. The building of this link is no sinecure to it being successful, efficient or cost-effective. Personally, I can't see the likes of the retail giants sending their stuff by rail - it doesn't happen now, so why should it change in the future? The rail network in the South West doesn't seem to be overloaded to me, so why isn't more being made of it? Why isn't money being invested in ensuring that people who use the trains now for business can be guaranteed a WiFi signal throughout their journey? I know people who live less than 10 minutes from Bristol TM, but refuse to take the train because to London (and how long has that line been going?) because rail transport impinges on their freedom to move at a time that they want to. So they go by car. And they're younger than me. I'm not convinced that this is the best way. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Why is Birmingham to London so important (especially if the corresponding airport links are not included) - wasn't a couple of billion £ or so recently spent on a WC main line upgrade south of Rugby ? Why travel London to Leeds via Birmingham anyway ? Because it's en route to the north..? Anyway, if Scotland devolves (nearly wrote dissolves !!) then a high speed line up there won't be needed. Er, Scotland already has devolved government you know - the SNP is pushing for independence. But never let facts get in the way of a rant. Surely decent transport connections to your neighbours is a good thing..? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 96701 Posted January 10, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 10, 2012 No forward thinking. Brit15 So what is planning a new railway in order tor release capacity on existing lines if it isn't forward planning? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dilbert Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 tacticstictacs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
(The) Youth Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Hoping for some cl142s to be used on it Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 The old GC main line was built to continental loading gauge, easy gradients and high speed (for 1900 !!) curvature. Lets face it, a reinstated GC / new route HS2 in any urban area will be mega-expensive. Which is why the proposed route, unlike re-using the old GC route, manages to make good use of spare space on existing rail corridors in and out of London and Birmingham maybe - and otherwise avoids going through the middle of towns and villages? Why is Birmingham to London so important (especially if the corresponding airport links are not included) The urgent needs in terms of capacity are Birmingham-Rugby and the Southern end of the WCML. Building a line to relieve anything else does not solve that fundamental problem. Tweaking the WCML and other routes for capacity may help in the short term but does not solve that fundamental problem in the medium to long term. And getting that way is the southern end of the ECML, by the time it gets to that stage this new route will also help by diverting the Leeds traffic... wasn't a couple of billion £ or so recently spent on a WC main line upgrade south of Rugby ? The whole thing was upgraded......wouldn't it have been so much better if we'd started building this in 1995 when they were saying that it needed modernising but would struggle to cope with capacity....but still we have folk saying it's not needed! Why travel London to Leeds via Birmingham anyway ? Firstly they are expensive things, so you don't want to build one to Birmingham, and one to Manchester, and one to Leeds, and one to York and on and on and on....you want to try and do as much as possible with the infrastructure to make the most use of it you can, that way it costs less and does more. *Just* London to Birmingham would be a waste. Connecting (at least) London, Birmingham, Nottingham, Leeds and Manchester is a lot more useful. And minor extra distance doesn't matter much to travellers at the speeds being talked about. Leeds-London as the crow flies is 170 miles Leeds-Birmingham is 92 miles Birmingham-London is 101 miles So you do 23 miles extra going via Birmingham - but even at 180mph that's costing you less than 8 minutes... (And it doesn't actually go through Birmingham either, but anhow....) Freight investment is very much needed to. And this should give a boost for freight by allowing for plenty more space on the existing routes... 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher125 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) ...there is still no (from what I can make out) tangible business case for the HS2 project - cutting journey times and alleviating capacity issues is not ultimately tangible Shorter journey times, less overcrowding and more services arent tangible? If thats the case, what on earth is? Providing more capacity while reducing journey times are the most compelling reasons for investing in any transport infrastructure. The old GC main line was built to continental loading gauge, easy gradients and high speed (for 1900 !!) curvature. Lets face it, a reinstated GC / new route HS2 in any urban area will be mega-expensive. The GCR is not suitable for any kind of HSL - while it was built to a generous loading gauge like the GWR it certainly wasnt to any 'continental' standard which at the time simply didnt exist; even if it was, any new route would have to straighten out, divert round or tunnel over so many areas that it would be cheaper, easier and less controversial to build an entirely new route from scratch.... and if you did that, there's a far better business case for mirroring the WCML, not the MML. Which gives you HS2. Chris Edited January 10, 2012 by Christopher125 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 For those thinking about the Great Central, it is largely intact as far as the southern edge of Leicester but has pretty much disappeared through Leicester itself and from the Trent crossing northwards. Central Railway were planning to use it to link to the Birmingham-Leicester line thence the Midland slow lines through Leicester as far as the Beighton area before rejoining the GC over Woodhead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts