HS2 under review

[bbishop]

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?

Don't want to seem pedantic and all that, but you should be using the subjunctive as "if she were an English graduate" Bill (a Grauniad reader)

[Horsetan]

....Lonodon ....

Just the kind of typo that The Grauniad was famous for....

[bbishop]

My previous post pins my Newspaper to the mast, so I was wondering why I hadn't read Bennett's appalling article in the Grauniad. That's because it actually appeared in the Observer. Whilst the two papers are in the same stable, I don't think that abysmal level of journalism would be permitted to appear in the Grauniad.

 

Bill

[Ashcombe]

My previous post pins my Newspaper to the mast, so I was wondering why I hadn't read Bennett's appalling article in the Grauniad. That's because it actually appeared in the Observer. Whilst the two papers are in the same stable, I don't think that abysmal level of journalism would be permitted to appear in the Grauniad.

 

Bill

 

You took the words right out of my fingers.....!

 

[jjb1970]

I used to read the Observer and found it a good Sunday paper, not perfect and as I say it does worry me that if the stories I'm familiar with tend to be badly reported it indicates the ones I don't know anything about may be badly reported too but it had some really excellent in depth articles and broad scope. Most importantly, if you ignored the odd bit of proprietorial interference from Tiny Rowland and his obsession with Harrods it was one of the more independent papers. After the Grauniad bought it I stopped reading it as it drifted into the right-on-o-sphere and lost its uniqueness.

[Tim H]

My previous post pins my Newspaper to the mast, so I was wondering why I hadn't read Bennett's appalling article in the Grauniad. That's because it actually appeared in the Observer. Whilst the two papers are in the same stable, I don't think that abysmal level of journalism would be permitted to appear in the Grauniad.

Number of times I've read pathetically weak music pieces on the Guardian website that turn out to be from the Observer, and it's always amusing to watch The Guardian's own writers disown them.

[Phil Bullock]

The thing that always worries me about newspapers and also the broadcast media is that invariably if you know anything about what they report on then the press stories are pretty poor and lacking in serious analysis. I've working in shipping, electricity generation and am on the fringe of naval procurement and in all three cases I've found the press reporting on these subjects(including from the more serious papers)dire. Yet I still rely on them for finding out what is happening in the world.

Absolutely! If you have ever been involved in interviews with the media which then get published as an article the end result often bears little resemblance to the original.

 

Phil

[mow]

Have been surprised by similarities in stories carried by several newspapers, particularly when compared with the original press release, they are not quite word for word, but Private Eye's Philip Space and Polly Filla are alive and well in The Street of Shame.

[Two_sugars]

Hislop picking up more converts?

[Ozexpatriate]

It's worth remembering that columnists become columnists because they are, in general, too crap or too lazy to be much good at proper journalism and have leapt at the opportunity to be paid good money for a couple of hours work each week pretending that their personal opinions are worth something.

That's not quite fair.

 

Columnists are usually people who earned their stripes as journalists and as their reward for all their hard work and previously established credibility are allowed to write op ed pieces devoid of all the journalistic integrity that they worked so hard over the years to establish, simply to be provocative for the sake of circulation.  Apparently this concept works. After all, here we are talking about a piece that is all bloviating opinion, and devoid of factual reporting.

 

Either that or they're a re-treaded celebrity.

[PatB]

I'm not very literate so I did learn some really useful new words..........................bathetic - excellent; assume it means one who is hopeless at having baths?

columnists become columnists because they are, in general, too crap or too lazy to be much good at proper journalism

Think that's a bit below the belt mate! What's proper journalism then?

Think I'll leave this thread alone now despite the temptation to mention that I'm a columnist (or sorry I meant to put Communist)

Quack

 

Proper journalism involves things like research, fact checking, objective reporting of facts as established by the previous two activities, and, depending upon the context of the finished piece, some logical and defensible analysis. Perhaps my jaundiced view on the matter stems from there being little evidence of any of those practices in the Australian media, it being far easier to publish press releases pretty much verbatim. Particularly disappointing is the fact that the local public broadcaster has just introduced, with some fanfare, a news segment called 'Fact Check', making a feature of something they should have been doing all along but, clearly, haven't.

 

Another disturbing feature of the media landscape here is that various columnists and their radio and TV equivalents, have somehow wormed into the public consciousness as deep and worthwhile thinkers on a variety of fairly significant topics, leading to much of the public being quite seriously, but also quite willingly, ill-informed.

[Mike Storey]

Many of you are completely missing her very valid point - the public case for HS2 has been appalling badly handled, and Pete W calling the IoD "prats" is not helping. Until somebody properly explains the true reasons why HS2 is necessary (CAPACITY), in a truly populist way that could be understood and hopefully obtain consensus, it will always be open to this kind of critique, and rightly so.

 

Those currently arguing for lots of "minor" works, instead of one big bang, are making ground despite the lunacy of that approach - have they all forgotten the 10 years of (passenger) misery of the  West Coast Main Line Upgrade? (which is now already nearly full). How do you make trains longer without massively re-building Euston (again), St Pancras (already full) and Kings Cross (pretty much full), as well as dozens of other key locations and massively upgrading total power supply? How do you "improve" signalling to handle more trains on lines already at capacity, without slowing every train down to a crawl or introducing ERTMS 3 nationally, when they can hardly make it work on one line in Wales? How do you run the ever-growing number of freight services on passenger lines that are close to saturation? How do you price people off the peaks, when, no matter how much fares go up, demand rises even faster and off-peak is already getting close to full on many services already? etc etc etc.

 

Ex-Programme Director, Network Rail Major Projects.

[Tim V]

Why, you're not thinking of stalking her until she finally agrees to join the Scalefour Society, are you?

 

Ha Ha, no does she live on the route of HS2? In which case she has a vested interest.

 

Since they can't seem to win the "No to HS2" argument, they have to use smear tactics.

[Captain Kernow]

Many of you are completely missing her very valid point - the public case for HS2 has been appalling badly handled, and Pete W calling the IoD "prats" is not helping. Until somebody properly explains the true reasons why HS2 is necessary (CAPACITY), in a truly populist way that could be understood and hopefully obtain consensus, it will always be open to this kind of critique, and rightly so.

 

Those currently arguing for lots of "minor" works, instead of one big bang, are making ground despite the lunacy of that approach - have they all forgotten the 10 years of (passenger) misery of the  West Coast Main Line Upgrade? (which is now already nearly full). How do you make trains longer without massively re-building Euston (again), St Pancras (already full) and Kings Cross (pretty much full), as well as dozens of other key locations and massively upgrading total power supply? How do you "improve" signalling to handle more trains on lines already at capacity, without slowing every train down to a crawl or introducing ERTMS 3 nationally, when they can hardly make it work on one line in Wales? How do you run the ever-growing number of freight services on passenger lines that are close to saturation? How do you price people off the peaks, when, no matter how much fares go up, demand rises even faster and off-peak is already getting close to full on many services already? etc etc etc.

 

Ex-Programme Director, Network Rail Major Projects.

Quite right, Mike. Pete Waterman probably didn't help by using language like that, but he's seen by many as a 'man of the people', so no doubt it was felt that, overall, he would be a net benefit to the cause of HS2.

 

At a time when NR is shaping up to meet the financial challenges of CP5, which include ensuring that the organisation is the right size and with the right level of competencies and experience etc., the last thing we need is a huge additional possession burden, going forward into future control periods as well. The philosophy of 'a little and often' may seem to offer the least disruption to passengers, but in reality, the more disruptive engineering possessions you have, the greater the risk to train service delivery and the greater the cost.

[The Stationmaster]

Many of you are completely missing her very valid point - the public case for HS2 has been appalling badly handled, and Pete W calling the IoD "prats" is not helping. Until somebody properly explains the true reasons why HS2 is necessary (CAPACITY), in a truly populist way that could be understood and hopefully obtain consensus, it will always be open to this kind of critique, and rightly so.

 

 

Ex-Programme Director, Network Rail Major Projects.

One thing which does cause total confusion - exploited by a journo in the Telegraph last Sunday - is the confusion of passenger numbers with line etc capacity.  Part of the problem is that most people find it easy to think in terms of overcrowded (or not overcrowded in many instances) trains rather than an overcrowded railway; the two are very different things and impact in different ways.

 

You are correct to say that little attention has been given to explaining this but equally we need perhaps to understand that there are plenty of folk within the rail industry, let alone in the wider population, who do not understand how line capacity works (or doesn't) and the factors which influence it and even then those factors need to be carefully presented to avoid them being thrown back in one's face with all the obvious remedies.  This sort of thing can be presented in relatively simple ways but to do so I think those presenting them must understand what they are trying to impart - back in the late 1980s I presented a short paper at an IMechE symposium on heavy haul locos sponsored jointly by BR, GM, and Yeomans and all was going swimmingly about higher horsepower, super creep and ever increasing trainloads until my turn came.  I concentrated on both loads and running times showing the impact on pathing that resulted from heavier loads and slower trains - which even alerted Roger Ford to something he had not considered before.

 

So don't debate about the number of people - the key is the number of trains and their speed profiles plus the capacity specified into the signalling system plus gradient profiles and all sorts of other things.  And watch out for holes because anyone who understands such things could find one in HS2 planning - and oddly it is exactly the same as the one that was in CTRL (HS1) planning and now bedevils part of its operation.

 

A past planner of trains and infrastructure.

[PaulRhB]

Much by columnists is 'pub chatter' informed only by rumour, opinion and Wikipedia. The only thing wrong with that is the air of respectability that a proportion of society give it without question or doing their own research into the subject. As many on here have demonstrated it is easy to question it and get the other side of the story if you're interested and can be bothered. It would be much better to make questioning and extending the research a major part of school curriculum so more recognise 'columns' for what they are, Opinion. I've had two great discussions recently, one with a niece of 16 and another yesterday with a friends daughter of 11 because they picked up on our questioning of such 'facts'. They had sensible questions and opinions on what they knew already but I was able to suggest another point of view that they then looked up on the net and it opened up a much wider debate. Recognising rhetoric is fairly easy and as soon as you smell it you can focus on the individual fact and research that.

On a similar note to CK's story about the sleeper fire I was asked by my manager to do an interview after an incident but politely refused as I had already seen the sensationalist element in the local evening news, suggesting an official statement of the facts was best. The chap from the garage next to the box, who assisted magnificently, did to it though and when he saw the story was appalled with how his words were twisted. Considering he was equally responsible for preventing a very nasty fire hurting anyone he got 'burnt' by the press. I was already deeply cautious of the press and now treat much of it with contempt. I do admire certain journalists though whose integrity is show by the knowledge clearly evident in their reports and choice of report. Paul Clifton, transport correspondent for BBC South, manages to report intelligent stories and will even hit back at rhetoric and support the railways saying this is what you asked for! He even turned up at a car on the line and as he was well regarded got clear facts and decided it required no more than reporting some idiot had driven badly and crashed into the line. It helps that his reputation with the staff and Police meant he got a clear authorised statement which he knew was all that they could give and didn't have to make ill informed speculation to make more of it than there was.

Private Eye earned my respect for the number of times it's been fined in court and then found to be right later. Ian Hislop has also made several tv programmes, including railways, which recognise the element of sentiment and hyperbole that influence history and modern media.

[SwissRailPassion]

She forgets the Chairman of HS2 is a woman.

 

Having heard Alison Munro's interview, on Radio 4 The Bottom Line last night, I can see why the project is in trouble. There were several own goals; her background is the DfT and it shows.

 

Roll on David Higgins, a big hitter, to shift the horizons.

Edited November 10, 2013 by SwissRailPassion

[Oldddudders]

Good to see the knowledgeable weighing in on behalf of HS2, which is a critically important scheme to my mind. Extra capacity invariably creates more "journey opportunities" - a horrid expression but very valid. An example is Trent Valley 4-tracking - a scheme I never expected to see in BR days. As a result of that work, I think the little stations between Stafford and Nuneaton now have some sort of half-decent service, which wasn't feasible when there was a 2-track section due to pathway constraints.

 

HS2 isn't just about faster journey times, nor is it just about better services from the north. It would allow most of the trains from B'ham and points north to be taken off existing metals, thus enabling enhanced services from places like Rugby, Northampton and Milton Keynes, which are currently constrained by the needs of the cities to the north - stopping more trains just can't be done due to headway/pathway issues, and they are mainly full, anyway.

 

Appealing to Sunday nimbies is what papers have to do in 2013 - they are a doomed species in the Internet age.

[Horsetan]

......Private Eye earned my respect for the number of times it's been fined in court and then found to be right later. ....

More to the point, it has brilliant front covers!

[The Bigbee Line]

When the French were building TGV routes, people were proud if it went by their house.  When we lived in Ashford there were years of protest against the building of the missing part of the M20.  I had to chuckle when some 'protesters' were then hemmed in by the CT route.

 

What happened to the 'good of the country' ethos

[brittannia]

Quite right ,what opponents of HS2 do not seem to grasp is that in a lot of Britain we are running on a near 200year old  rail layout system and that HS2 will free up some of the stations for other services.

[Horsetan]

..... HS2 will free up some of the stations for other services.

What, like car parks and shopping malls?

[Mike Storey]

One thing which does cause total confusion - exploited by a journo in the Telegraph last Sunday - is the confusion of passenger numbers with line etc capacity.  Part of the problem is that most people find it easy to think in terms of overcrowded (or not overcrowded in many instances) trains rather than an overcrowded railway; the two are very different things and impact in different ways.

 

You are correct to say that little attention has been given to explaining this but equally we need perhaps to understand that there are plenty of folk within the rail industry, let alone in the wider population, who do not understand how line capacity works (or doesn't) and the factors which influence it and even then those factors need to be carefully presented to avoid them being thrown back in one's face with all the obvious remedies.  This sort of thing can be presented in relatively simple ways but to do so I think those presenting them must understand what they are trying to impart - back in the late 1980s I presented a short paper at an IMechE symposium on heavy haul locos sponsored jointly by BR, GM, and Yeomans and all was going swimmingly about higher horsepower, super creep and ever increasing trainloads until my turn came.  I concentrated on both loads and running times showing the impact on pathing that resulted from heavier loads and slower trains - which even alerted Roger Ford to something he had not considered before.

 

So don't debate about the number of people - the key is the number of trains and their speed profiles plus the capacity specified into the signalling system plus gradient profiles and all sorts of other things.  And watch out for holes because anyone who understands such things could find one in HS2 planning - and oddly it is exactly the same as the one that was in CTRL (HS1) planning and now bedevils part of its operation.

 

A past planner of trains and infrastructure.

 

Of course I agree with most of what you say, but forecast passenger demand (and freight tonnage, and many other things) and thus future payback, drives the business case, not numbers of trains. There are still large pockets of objectors trotting out the same message as in the 1990's, that people will travel less in future because of video-conferencing, regional re-locations and so on. As they know not what they are talking about, they fail to see that those 30 year old predictions were pretty much 180 degrees wrong, and still fail to see it now - such activity has actually caused an increase in in business and thus an increase in travel . That is a different argument to the one now gaining ground that, if you accept that demand will continue to increase, that the same fiddling around the edges that has been done for the last 100 years, will be sufficient. That is a more dangerous argument that needs to be repelled, and SM rightly describes the repelling approach to that, as do others, But the argument for the actual  Business Case, where forecast demand and benefit is still strongly contested by anti-HS2 groups, needs to be won first.

 

As for HS1 problems, do you mean the gradients and signalling layout around Stratford Int?

 

Mike

[Mike Storey]

When the French were building TGV routes, people were proud if it went by their house.  When we lived in Ashford there were years of protest against the building of the missing part of the M20.  I had to chuckle when some 'protesters' were then hemmed in by the CT route.

 

What happened to the 'good of the country' ethos

 

Attitude is quickly changing here - many Cantons are seriously objecting to new LGV's because of the resulting detriment to existing services to Paris and elsewhere. An example - the (now deferred) LGV link to Limoges has very little support in the region around Limoges, because places like La Souterraine, a popular railhead for many people in Haute Vienne and Creuse, will probably lose many of its daily direct services to Paris and Limoges, which currently exist because of the Limoges - Paris service. If the TGV service denudes these of Limoges demand, then economics dictate that most of the classic services would terminate further north, at Orleans.

[Ozexpatriate]

Proper journalism involves things like research, fact checking, objective reporting of facts as established by the previous two activities, and, depending upon the context of the finished piece, some logical and defensible analysis. Perhaps my jaundiced view on the matter stems from there being little evidence of any of those practices in the Australian media, it being far easier to publish press releases pretty much verbatim. Particularly disappointing is the fact that the local public broadcaster has just introduced, with some fanfare, a news segment called 'Fact Check', making a feature of something they should have been doing all along but, clearly, haven't.

 

Another disturbing feature of the media landscape here is that various columnists and their radio and TV equivalents, have somehow wormed into the public consciousness as deep and worthwhile thinkers on a variety of fairly significant topics, leading to much of the public being quite seriously, but also quite willingly, ill-informed.

Pat,

 

It's not just in Australia, it is endemic in English speaking news markets across the world and in particular the United States. While it's probably not fair to say it's *all* his fault we do have one Australian to thank for the current climate - Rupert Murdoch. The reach this man has is incredible.

 

The US had grown out of the nasty yellow journalism of the late 19th century, but  thanks in large measure to Mr. Murdoch's influence, jaundiced 'journalism' is once more the norm - from all sides of the political spectrum.

 

The notion of 'fact check' segments is a routine part of contemporary reporting in the US, locally and nationally, in print and on TV.