HS2

[adb968008]

26 minutes ago, DenysW said:

Viewed from Birmingham, yes, probably. Viewed from Wolverhampton, Coventry, Rugby, Milton Keynes, no. And given the prospect of changing stations in Birmingham or Manchester (chose your poison), probably points north of Manchester as well.

Its gonna suck to be in those places if your only train to London is an all shacks class 350 inbetween freights.

[phil-b259]

Just now, adb968008 said:

Wait…

 

some tory donor, who gives a few quid to the tories gets to define UK spending and debt for the next 30 years ?

 

 

Yup - but influential businessmen dictating Tory policy is hardly a new new concept is it. If you look at virtually every single Conservative Government (and a fair few labour ones to) you will find that is EXACTLY what happens....

 

 

 

 

[adb968008]

3 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Yup - but influential businessmen dictating Tory policy is hardly a new new concept is it. If you look at virtually every single Conservative Government (and a fair few labour ones to) you will find that is EXACTLY what happens....

 

 

 

 

Yes but its usually cornershop investments, a few £mn here, a few grand there.

 

not £100bn (c£50bn-300bn depending which newspaper your reading today)… because aside of 2008’s bank bailouts the UKs never had a creditcard with that amount to spend.

 

 

Heathrow expansion has gone very quiet these days.

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by adb968008

[Ron Ron Ron]

11 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

....Heathrow expansion has gone very quiet these days.

 

 

An entirely different subject, involving mostly private investment for a private business.

Aviation is busy, slowly clawing back the 2 years of huge losses incurred due to the Pandemic and its outfall.

Let's stick to HS2 please.

 

 

.

[adb968008]

10 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

An entirely different subject, involving mostly private investment for a private business.

Aviation is busy, slowly clawing back the 2 years of huge losses incurred due to the Pandemic and its outfall.

Let's stick to HS2 please.

 

 

.

Yes.. HS2 should have gone via LHR.

 

buts its relevent because if its in the long grass those donors need other areas of the uk to leech contracts out of government.

 

Put different, if they can HS2, there is going to be a lot of idle builders who may need to do an Auf Wiedersehn Pet to get another job, because theres not many other big jobs in our small country… LHR was the next big job in town, and conveniently just down the road.

 

it was HS2 that caused Crossrail to fail, the big money boys quit Crossrail and joined HS2 overnight leaving it incomplete, out of budget and struggle to hire people to finish it… these guys are gold diggers.. if HS2 goes skint, the next bling job will take the talent and they’ll just drop tools and leave them abandoned in the tunnels.

 

i’d imagine HS2 has made more progress this week than it has in months, those contractors will be wanting to stuff in as many invoices as they can before the taps get turned off.

Edited September 25, 2023 by adb968008

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

Yes but its usually cornershop investments, a few £mn here, a few grand there.

 

not £100bn (c£50bn-300bn depending which newspaper your reading today)… because aside of 2008’s bank bailouts the UKs never had a creditcard with that amount to spend.

 

 

Heathrow expansion has gone very quiet these days.

 

 

Give it time, give it time.

 

One of the curious things about aviation is that contrary to predictions the demand for travel never disappeared!

 

Thats because although people were prevented from flying their confidence in flying was never dented by the pandemic - unlike after 9/11 say where the downturn was longer lasting because it was confidence in flying which took a major hit

 

As soon as the various pandemic restrictions were eased passengers were eager to travel. Airlines which had enough financial resources to keep hold of key staff (e.g. pilots, engineers, etc) and didn't sell / hand back the leases on their aircraft have done exceedingly well over the past months or so as a result - (and are pretty pissed off at airports and Government agencies who scaled back their capacity / workforce in the assumption that passengers would be slow to return).

 

So although things are still difficult in the airline world the major constraints are actually all about capacity - and as such once airlines / aviation suppliers have had a few years to rebuild what they hastily got rid of then a lack of runway capacity at Heathrow will once again become an issue.

 

Have a look at these videos from an industry insider which explores things in more detail

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by phil-b259

[corneliuslundie]

And Gatwick now cancelling flights because of shortage of staff.

J

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

An entirely different subject, involving mostly private investment for a private business.

Aviation is busy, slowly clawing back the 2 years of huge losses incurred due to the Pandemic and its outfall.

Let's stick to HS2 please.

 

 

.

 

But in some ways there are still linkages....

 

The Pandemic had a similar effect on the rail industry as 9/11 did on the airline industry... I will explain.

 

After 9/11 passenger confidence in air travel plummeted and that led to a huge reduction in the number of people flying (even though their was no actual restriction preventing them from doing so) which persisted for a good few years before people gradually started to return to the skies. That is a behavioural change - its not something which was enforced on the industry and as such it took a long time to recover.

 

By contrast the Pandemic did nothing to dent peoples confidence in flying as such (ie.e there was no behavioural change, just an artificial barrier to acting on what people desired to do) - so when the various lockdown restrictions were lifted demand has rapidly increased and is in fact significantly outstripping supply - whats holding things back is thus infrastructure restrictions not peoples behaviour.

 

However with rail, the pandemic has had the opposite effect.

 

Thats because the need for commuting has significantly reduced due to the explosive take up of WfH during the Pandemic. in other words its a behavioural change, much as was the case after 9/11 people have decided they don't want to commute 5 days a week and THAT is what has wrecked the railways outlook in the short term and that sort of behavioural change ' we don't want to use the train because we don't need to' is not going to change for years.

 

As with 9/11 and the aviation sector the railway industry is now in a position where it has to actually start working on peoples hearts and minds seeking to change their behaviours and make them want to start using the trains again (albut most likely for different reasons than before) if it wants to win people back after the pandemic.

 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, corneliuslundie said:

And Gatwick now cancelling flights because of shortage of staff.

J

 

Exactly - its a lack infrastructure (be it people or physical things), not the lack of demand which is the problem in the airline sector.

 

Very different from rail where it is lack of demand that is the issue, not a lack of infrastructure (at pressent) which is the bar to growth

Edited September 25, 2023 by phil-b259

[pete_mcfarlane]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66909732

 

A cynic would say that a small amount of public wavering over HS2 is a ploy to generate cross party support for keeping the current plan.

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

As with 9/11 and the aviation sector the railway industry is now in a position where it has to actually start working on peoples hearts and minds seeking to change their behaviours and make them want to start using the trains again (albut most likely for different reasons than before) if it wants to win people back after the pandemic.

 

But i dont think winning passengers back is the current policy. Indeed it feels quite the opposite, theres a desire to shrink railways.

 

After-all the govt is broke for a decade, high interest rates are here to stay. Replacing stock is going to be exceptionally expensive… far better to reduce the need and sweat existing assets. Lets face it weve had a gold plated railway for 2 decades, and most of it is new passenger stock.. much of it can go another 20 years, and if they pair down demand the existing can survive by attrition.. 1970’s all over again.

 

The other problem is what to buy… Battery isnt ready. Electrification is the answer, but it takes time. Rushing out spending billions on DMUs is no different to BR building 1000 Types 2’s in the early 1960’s when much better type 3’s were just around the corner.

Edited September 25, 2023 by adb968008

[rockershovel]

Another thing about rail travel - the cost.

 

I went to London for a day recently, managed to spend over £75 in fares. I went, because it was on exes but otherwise I'd have driven

 

Next weekend I'm going to Wembley and again, I'm driving. Rail cost over £70 which is just too much. No 2 Son is driving from Coventry to Leamington to save on the rail fare. 

 

And that's setting aside the whole issue of the strikes, so that actual services on the day can't be predicted with confidence. 

 

Last time I went to Aberdeen, the First Class rail fare was comparable to the flight PLUS the 80 mile taxi transfer to East Midlands, both ways. None of this is calculated to attract custom, is it? 

 

 

[phil-b259]

32 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

But i dont think winning passengers back is the current policy. Indeed it feels quite the opposite, theres a desire to shrink railways.

 

After-all the govt is broke for a decade, high interest rates are here to stay. Replacing stock is going to be exceptionally expensive… far better to reduce the need and sweat existing assets. Lets face it weve had a gold plated railway for 2 decades, and most of it is new passenger stock.. much of it can go another 20 years, and if they pair down demand the existing can survive by attrition.. 1970’s all over again.

 

The other problem is what to buy… Battery isnt ready. Electrification is the answer, but it takes time. Rushing out spending billions on DMUs is no different to BR building 1000 Types 2’s in the early 1960’s when much better type 3’s were just around the corner.

Indeed - but according to Roger Ford the penny finally seems to be dropping in Whiehall that they simply cannot ‘cut’ the railways to profitability - increasing passenger numbers is the only way they are ever going to reduce the burden on the taxpayer.

 

Obviously that doesn’t go as far as ‘giving in’ to the unions - particularly as a whole raft of folk from Nurses to Network Rail employees have settled for far less than they were originally wanting but ‘recognising the problem’ (low passenger numbers instead of bleeding on about high costs) is still an important part of the process of turning things around.

 

However given the frankly incompetent Government we have been subjected to over the past few years and the mess they leave behind it’s going to be many years before the good times return so to speak.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by phil-b259

[Mark Saunders]

1 hour ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66909732

 

A cynic would say that a small amount of public wavering over HS2 is a ploy to generate cross party support for keeping the current plan.

An even bigger cynic would say its pantomime party conference season !

[adb968008]

7 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Indeed - but according to Roger Ford the penny finally seems to be dropping in Whiehall that they simply cannot ‘cut’ the railways to profitability - increasing passenger numbers is the only way they are ever going to reduce the burden on the taxpayer.

 

Obviously that doesn’t go as far as ‘giving in’ to the unions - particularly as a whole raft of folk from Nurses to Network Rail employees have settled for far less than they were originally wanting but ‘recognising the problem’ (low passenger numbers instead of bleeding on about high costs) is still an important part of the process of turning things around.

 

Its not the only way, selling it wholesale, just retaining network rail is another, with the added benefit of reducing the debt.

 

Freight has done very well since 1994….making rail fully OA has some potential.

 

My bets is HS2 will end up sold private (at a loss naturally) , with a carrot for necessary supports for extending it built in.

its an attractive private proposition, just like HS1, but without international bureacracy and crazy tunnel restrictions.

Edited September 25, 2023 by adb968008

[APOLLO]

Interesting article

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/25/sunak-may-seek-to-limit-hs2-fallout-with-new-transport-projects-in-north

 

 

Sunak may seek to limit HS2 fallout with new transport projects in north

Sources suggest PM could announce new spending on bus, tram and train schemes if he decides to axe part of HS2

 

Senior rail industry insiders said it would be “madness” to cancel the multibillion-pound HS2 scheme. One told the Guardian that NPR would be “buggered” because it relied on the Manchester link of HS2, and claimed there was “nothing ready” in the government’s integrated rail review that could replace it.

 

Brit15

[phil-b259]

2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Its not the only way, selling it wholesale is another, with the added benefit of reducing the debt.

Yes but generally speaking that means completing a viable railway. A set of half dug tunnels, a few excavations, bridges etc is not going to attract that much interest! It should also be noted that attempts to sell the CTRL / HS1 before it was finished didn’t work out too welll either…..

 

Now selling a functional railway on the other hand….

[adb968008]

6 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Yes but generally speaking that means completing a viable railway. A set of half dug tunnels, a few excavations, bridges etc is not going to attract that much interest! It should also be noted that attempts to sell the CTRL / HS1 before it was finished didn’t work out too welll either…..

 

Now selling a functional railway on the other hand….

I think you caught me mid edit, buy yes agreed.

 

Though why they havent considered floating HS2 is also a missed oppy… it could have been one of those “dont tell sid” adverts. It could have coalesced the population around it once and for all.

 

indeed given the amount of post covid savings in the economy and so little to invest it, its surprising more government projects havent sought private capital, especially as borrowing isnt getting cheaper.

Edited September 25, 2023 by adb968008

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Interesting article

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/25/sunak-may-seek-to-limit-hs2-fallout-with-new-transport-projects-in-north

 

 

Sunak may seek to limit HS2 fallout with new transport projects in north

Sources suggest PM could announce new spending on bus, tram and train schemes if he decides to axe part of HS2

 

Senior rail industry insiders said it would be “madness” to cancel the multibillion-pound HS2 scheme. One told the Guardian that NPR would be “buggered” because it relied on the Manchester link of HS2, and claimed there was “nothing ready” in the government’s integrated rail review that could replace it.

 

Brit15

reminds me of the whole story of closing the s&c due to the costs of Ribblehead viaduct… I think that was £100bn to repair at one point. Mental health of sheep was a big factor, as was the risk of falling masonry landing in the lake district.

Everyday a politician emerged to save it, yet everyday a new closure notice emerged.

 

I travelled at least 6 times on the last railtour down the s&c…. Woodhead wasnt much different but they didnt have Andy Ranti Burnham to come and  whinge about it.

 

Quote

Sunak may seek to limit HS2 fallout with new transport projects in north
 

 

so no HS2 to Manchester, but Rawtenstall might see some 150’s in rush hour.

 

Central Mexico is seeing a similar scheme with second hand HSTs… Tren Maya cant afford to go all the way either so some old tracks are being upcycled with BRELs finest.

 

 

Rishi Sunak is todays host on…

 

 

Tonight’s contestant is Andy Burnham, who just picked the booby prize  of a vote losing secondhand bus to Crewe, but first lets open box number 2 and see what you could have won…

https://www.hs2.org.uk

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by adb968008

[RichardT]

33 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

Next weekend I'm going to Wembley and again, I'm driving. Rail cost over £70 which is just too much. No 2 Son is driving from Coventry to Leamington to save on the rail fare. 

Where did you and your son get your free cars?

 

Richard

[GoingUnderground]

22 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Says some bloke who makes model locomotives ?

.

Ron, pot & kettle?

 

The same could be said about your, mine, and almost everyone else's comments on here about HS2. 

 

And he is local to that area, living in Stafford, which is not a million miles away from Rugeley in case you hadn't noticed. For him it's local and he takes an interest in railways as evidenced by his interest in serious model engineering. 

 

Stopping work, or pausing or rescheduling or postponing or whatever other words the politicos want to use to spin their decision, is cancellation by another name. 

 

If you pause or postpone it then reinstatement costs are avoided. The uncompleted works just need to be made safe which I would have thought would be a lot cheaper than reinstatement because you leave everything in situ, untouched, on the excuse that work will eventually be resarting.

 

So, for me, the cry "it's cheaper to complete than cancel" argument just doesn't stand up. 

 

Whatever slight hope I had that HS2 was an indication of a renaissance for modern railways in the UK has gone. Defeated by the nimbyism that insisted on so much expensive earthworks to hide the line and politicos that have no interest in public transport. 

 

And I'm not anti-car, in fact I'm about to spend several thousand on restoring a 26 year old car that's been off the road for 13+ years to full running order. But as I get older, I increasingly realise that I will have to stop driving eventually, and I'd like to think that public transport will be there to meet my needs when the time comes. And I see rail as a very important part of that mix. 

Edited September 25, 2023 by GoingUnderground

[adb968008]

57 minutes ago, GoingUnderground said:

 

 

If you pause or postpone it then reinstatement costs are avoided. The uncompleted works just need to be made safe which I would have thought would be a lot cheaper than reinstatement because you leave everything in situ, untouched, on the excuse that work will eventually be resarting.

I hope they hurry up and build junctions 1 to 6 of the M23, this bridge has been waiting a very long time since the worker gave up and went home in 1973..

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M23_motorway

https://maps.app.goo.gl/h7uwpzESN9Z2rLa68?g_st=ic 

[monkeysarefun]

7 hours ago, rockershovel said:

Another thing about rail travel - the cost.

 

I went to London for a day recently, managed to spend over £75 in fares. I went, because it was on exes but otherwise I'd have driven

 

Next weekend I'm going to Wembley and again, I'm driving. Rail cost over £70 which is just too much. No 2 Son is driving from Coventry to Leamington to save on the rail fare. 

 

And that's setting aside the whole issue of the strikes, so that actual services on the day can't be predicted with confidence. 

 

Last time I went to Aberdeen, the First Class rail fare was comparable to the flight PLUS the 80 mile taxi transfer to East Midlands, both ways. None of this is calculated to attract custom, is it? 

 

 

 

 

As a matter of comparison -  in NSW  you'll never pay more than the capped  $16.80 ( £8.84 ) in total fares per day during  weekday peaktime,   taking as  many trips as you like in the inter-urban  area that spreads 200km north of Sydneys Central station, 160km west, 170km southwest  and 125km south. During the off peak and on weekends and public holidays its capped at    £4.50 per day.

 

This capped limit applies to NSW government trains, buses and  Sydney ferries so  you can combine any number of trips per day on any combination of  these transport types and still pay only up to  that capped amount in total.

 

Once you reach £25.00 spend in a week, any remaining travel for the rest of that week is free.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[BachelorBoy]

13 hours ago, adb968008 said:

not £100bn (c£50bn-300bn depending which newspaper your reading today)… because aside of 2008’s bank bailouts the UKs never had a creditcard with that amount to spend.

 

 

 

The credit card analogy doesn't really work in the case of the 2008 bank bailouts. The government lent emergency cash to banks, or bought shares in them to recapitalise them, or both. The loans are being repaid, and the shares are slowly being sold. The Treasury may well have surplus cash at the end of it all.

 

I don't think you could say the same with any confidence on government spending on HS2

[BachelorBoy]

3 hours ago, monkeysarefun said:

 

 

As a matter of comparison -  in NSW  you'll never pay more than the capped  $16.80 ( £8.84 ) in total fares per day during  weekday peaktime,   taking as  many trips as you like in the inter-urban  area that spreads 200km north of Sydneys Central station, 160km west, 170km southwest  and 125km south. During the off peak and on weekends and public holidays its capped at    £4.50 per day.

 

This capped limit applies to NSW government trains, buses and  Sydney ferries so  you can combine any number of trips per day on any combination of  these transport types and still pay only up to  that capped amount in total.

 

Once you reach £25.00 spend in a week, any remaining travel for the rest of that week is free.

 

 

Does the NSW government lose money on this?