HS2

[Michael Hodgson]

On 06/10/2023 at 16:36, adb968008 said:

I once saw a documentary from the 60’s about nuclear power having the ultimate inention of providing electricity for free.

"too cheap to be worth metering" was how the long term future was seen when my father was working on Magnox reactor projects.  Electricity at the time was generally coal-fired; we didn't have oil-fired or gas-fired because north sea oil hadn't been discovered, and their raw materials had to be imported whereas coal was still mined on a significant scale domestically.  So changes in national/global energy economics had not really been foreseen.

[Michael Hodgson]

On 07/10/2023 at 12:59, martin_wynne said:

I don't understand about the "saved money" from HS2.

 

Speaking personally, I have saved myself £1 million pounds already this week by deciding not to borrow it.

 

Martin.

I've done better than you.  I saved £10m by not borrowing it.  Vote for me!

[Bernard Lamb]

26 minutes ago, Arun Sharma said:

I heard it today on BBC Sounds and agree that it went down well. The following speaker [68 year old lady from Warwick] appeared to believe that no further infrastructure projects of any kind should take place in this, our green and pleasant land....... Didn't we know that there was a climate emergency?.....  Well, it takes all sorts!

 

Rather interestingly, the point was made that Euston to Crewe was agreed by Parliament and presumably only Parliament can repeal the Act which authorises it - and certainly not merely by a whimsical diktat from the PM.

Quite so.

Primary legislation will be required.

That point seems to have been picked up on Wednesday.

Bernard

[C126]

29 minutes ago, Arun Sharma said:

I heard it today on BBC Sounds and agree that it went down well. The following speaker [68 year old lady from Warwick] appeared to believe that no further infrastructure projects of any kind should take place in this, our green and pleasant land....... Didn't we know that there was a climate emergency?.....  Well, it takes all sorts!

 

 

I smiled at how, if I heard and understood correctly, she wanted both a cessation of infrastructure investment, yet improving the current resources.  If only she read RMWeb, she would see how H.S.2 would assist such improvements of the W.C.M.L.  Sigh.  Gawd bless the Great British Public...

 

 

[melmerby]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

"too cheap to be worth metering" was how the long term future was seen when my father was working on Magnox reactor projects. 

The problem was the long term maintenance & eventual decommisioning don't seemed to have been factored into the costs.

[melmerby]

On 07/10/2023 at 09:15, DenysW said:

Starting in about 1860 we put in sewers to carry away the polluted water that was causing ever more severe outbreaks of cholera. The philosophy was to connect everything into one pipe and move it away from people's domestic water supply (a pump lifting up surface water a few feet). That gives you combined sewers and that's the problem.  We'd realised this by about 1950 in terms of building regulations, but there is a vast backlog and no appetite to dig up all city gardens to lay new surface water sewers to the back of houses to connect up the back roofs.

 

The USA mostly put in two sets of sewers - one for foul, one for surface water - from new. Germany has paid the money to try to separate its sewers, with varying success.

Our rainwater is fed via local pipework into the local stream, unfortunately the pipework connecting the houses is inadequate for today's rainfall events and backs up during a downpour.

 

The stream itself couldn't cope in May 2018 when we had 75mm in 2 hours (65mm in the first hour) and there was a fair bit of flooding, including my railway room, the floor of which is about 9" above it's base slab, which was done in case the garden ever did flood but it wasn't high enough.

 

There is no prospect of any remedial work being done to the system, so the houses are now blighted with flood risk for insurance.

[Mike_Walker]

On 07/10/2023 at 12:42, The Stationmaster said:

OOC looks to me to be an ideal place to do some trimming of HS2 expenditure.  I wholly understand the reason for a Liz Line interchange as it's about the only sensible interchange that could be made there.  Although a Central Line interchange wouldn't be too difficult a ptoposition if there was a new station where the formation passes under the GWML.

 

But all that is needed at Old Oak on the GWML is an island platform on the Relief Lines, no need for anything on the Mains.  So that part of the scheme could be taken out tomorrow and would save millions on something which is basically completely useless.  Line occupation on the Mains is running on 2-3 minute headways so unless trains are taken out of the timetable stops cannot be made on the Mains at Old Oak.  In some respects it is a similar argument - but far, far, worse - to the potential timetabling impact of providing a 'Chilterns Parkway' station on HS2  without extended high speed platform loops

 

The only logical reason for having a platform for the Mains is if the Reliefs are closed for any reason.  But if that did happen apart from the lack of paths for Liz Line trains they would not be able to get back onto the Reliefs westbound until Southall West Jcn so couldn't serve Acton ML. West Ealing, or Hanwell.  And there wouldn't be paths for them to call at Ealing Broadway or Southall unless the Liz Kine service is decimated.  So even if there were ML platforms they'd still be of almost no use for LIz Line trains.

 

So while the various luminaries continue their daft ideas abour saving millions long after they'r retired maybe they really ought to look at a practical one which would save real (borrowed) money.in the relatively short term.

AIUI from the most reputable of sources, ALL GWR services will call at OOC both in and outbound which is why platforms are being provided on all lines.

 

There will be a couple of major blockades for this work which will close Paddington completely.  Last week Mark Hopwood took colleagues from GWR, Avanti, SWR, NR and the DfT on a special train that ran from Maidenhead to Euston, Acton Yard, Waterloo, North Pole depot (using the connection off the WWL disused since Eurostar moved out) and finally back to Hayes & Harlington to look at the challenges that will be faced during these blockades when GWR services will be diverted into either Euston or Waterloo (not sure what the Liz Line will do, it doesn't concern us).  It is to facilitate the diversions into Euston that the Poplar Lines at Acton are being wired.

[Hibelroad]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

The problem was the long term maintenance & eventual decommisioning don't seemed to have been factored into the costs.

I worked the nuclear industry for a while  and believe that the too cheap to meter headline referred to fusion power, it was thought at the time that as fission had been mastered fusion was not far behind. Regarding decommissioning it was also assumed that technology would advance rapidly and it would be easy to pull a reactor apart in the future. The lesson to be learnt here is to never assume and to proceed with caution on any major project using the technology you know will work. Much has been learned about nuclear since then and new reactors are designed with ease of decommissioning in mind. Getting back to HS2 you would think that after 200 years we should also know how to build a railway but somehow it all seems to have gone wrong. 

[The Stationmaster]

53 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

AIUI from the most reputable of sources, ALL GWR services will call at OOC both in and outbound which is why platforms are being provided on all lines.

 

There will be a couple of major blockades for this work which will close Paddington completely.  Last week Mark Hopwood took colleagues from GWR, Avanti, SWR, NR and the DfT on a special train that ran from Maidenhead to Euston, Acton Yard, Waterloo, North Pole depot (using the connection off the WWL disused since Eurostar moved out) and finally back to Hayes & Harlington to look at the challenges that will be faced during these blockades when GWR services will be diverted into either Euston or Waterloo (not sure what the Liz Line will do, it doesn't concern us).  It is to facilitate the diversions into Euston that the Poplar Lines at Acton are being wired.

I'd love to now hw many trains they'll have to take out of the timetable or considerably  decelerate in order to call there.  But who on earth do they think is going to use Old Oak Common for a connection to anything?   Liz Lne connections at Paddington are simple and can be made quickly so there'll be little gain, if any, in changing at Old Oak apart from overall slightly extended journey time.  And westbound evening peak and any long distance passengers will inevitably continue to use Paddington in order to get a seat!.

 

And if any possession is longer than 72 hours (maybe 96 hours for ohle work added in?) - for connecting the slued track, the engineers involved need to go back to school and learn that the first principle of such jobs is yo minimum. disruption to booked train services (which also saves a pile of money).   Phillip Rees, the former WR Chief Civil Engineer, will be rotating in his grave.  The world is run by  those who clearly don't understand how to do that sort of job with minimum disruption..

 

Incidentally from what you've posted they didn't look at the most logical place of all which has been used twice in the past for diversions when genuine major engineering work meant that trains couldn't get to Paddington.  No need to electrify anything for long distance services although that's no use for the 387s of course.   PS the answer to that one will cost them if they're not bright enough to see it for themselves..

 

I presume that, just like the polished turds, the umpteen millions this is going to cost will be dumped onto the HS2 billl?

[62613]

3 hours ago, Arun Sharma said:

Rather interestingly, the point was made that Euston to Crewe was agreed by Parliament and presumably only Parliament can repeal the Act which authorises it - and certainly not merely by a whimsical diktat from the PM.

Didn't the The Midland bring forward a bill to abandon the Settle and Carlisle, after a running powers agreement with the LNWR, but the bill was later withdrawn; or am I confused.

 

There's been some eedjit on Faceache claiming that HS2 never gained parliamentary approval.

[APOLLO]

Sod ULEZ bring back The Westerners !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Brit15

[Mike_Walker]

56 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

I'd love to now hw many trains they'll have to take out of the timetable or considerably  decelerate in order to call there.  But who on earth do they think is going to use Old Oak Common for a connection to anything?   Liz Lne connections at Paddington are simple and can be made quickly so there'll be little gain, if any, in changing at Old Oak apart from overall slightly extended journey time.  And westbound evening peak and any long distance passengers will inevitably continue to use Paddington in order to get a seat!.

 

And if any possession is longer than 72 hours (maybe 96 hours for ohle work added in?) - for connecting the slued track, the engineers involved need to go back to school and learn that the first principle of such jobs is yo minimum. disruption to booked train services (which also saves a pile of money).   Phillip Rees, the former WR Chief Civil Engineer, will be rotating in his grave.  The world is run by  those who clearly don't understand how to do that sort of job with minimum disruption..

 

Incidentally from what you've posted they didn't look at the most logical place of all which has been used twice in the past for diversions when genuine major engineering work meant that trains couldn't get to Paddington.  No need to electrify anything for long distance services although that's no use for the 387s of course.   PS the answer to that one will cost them if they're not bright enough to see it for themselves..

 

I presume that, just like the polished turds, the umpteen millions this is going to cost will be dumped onto the HS2 billl?

Sadly, Mike, the railway today is a very different one to that you worked on.  Twenty years ago Mark ruefully showed me a diamond crossing at Wilmslow and remarked how many weekends it had taken to replace.  He said he commented to Railtrack that when he joined the railway they would have replaced it between trains.  The reply came back to the effect that you didn't have H&S back then.  Possessions today take longer to set up, conduct safety briefings etc., and take down than they do for actual work done.  But, the number of injuries and, worse, fatalities has fallen greatly.

 

OOC will provide interchange between HS2 and GWR services to the West.  It will also provide an easier interchange between GWR semi-fast services and the EL than at Paddington.  A simple platform change by the transfer deck, not having to navigate your way around the station then two lengthy escalators as you do at Paddington.  London Overground also have aspirations for two new stations to feed into OOC.  If they come to fruition then it will be a western equivalent of Stratford.

 

I presume the alternatives you have in mind for diversions are Olympia or Marylebone.  To access the former you still need to go via Willesden as you can't hang a right at OOC East anymore and in any case, if you could it would be in the middle of the worksite.  Euston, whilst not ideal, has better onward connectivity than Olympia.  Marylebone is not an option as it no longer has capacity and it couldn't handle 10 car IETs - and the Chiltern Line isn't currently cleared for them although that could be addressed.

 

I can assure you that everything will be done to keep disruption to a minimum.  When Reading was being rebuilt, NR wanted to operate a 2-track railway for TWO years through Reading.  This was totally unacceptable to GWR but NR said there was no alternative.  That was until GWR submitted a plan that involved keeping a 4 track railway with two massive blockades during which trains would run to Marylebone and Waterloo.  The former involved a bonus of signalling improvements at Banbury that improved operations there for "normal" GWR services and Chiltern.  And as a result, Reading was finished early and under budget!

[Dunsignalling]

2 hours ago, Hibelroad said:

I worked the nuclear industry for a while  and believe that the too cheap to meter headline referred to fusion power, it was thought at the time that as fission had been mastered fusion was not far behind. Regarding decommissioning it was also assumed that technology would advance rapidly and it would be easy to pull a reactor apart in the future. The lesson to be learnt here is to never assume and to proceed with caution on any major project using the technology you know will work. Much has been learned about nuclear since then and new reactors are designed with ease of decommissioning in mind. Getting back to HS2 you would think that after 200 years we should also know how to build a railway but somehow it all seems to have gone wrong. 

The modern world seems to have forgotten the Victorian adage.

 

"If in doubt, make it stout, out of stuff you know about." 

 

The old footbridge at my local station served for 150 years and would have easily made 200 had it been painted when it needed it. The new one (no lifts or ramps) is 15 years into a design life of forty, built 5 treads higher than necessary to accommodate OHLE that in no way will materialise within that timescale! The "design life" was probably just set to avoid budgeting to repaint it before the man with the gas axe comes for it.....

 

Recent construction bodgery in the headlines clearly indicates that far too much has been built using cheap, lightweight materials despite the people who "sold" the stuff  knowing that, unless intensively maintained, it had a "fall by" date of only about 30 years. I wonder what genius in the Treasury insisted on "budgetary prudence"? 

 

I went to a brand new primary school in the mid-1950s which still looks pretty much as good as it did on my first day there, and TTBOMK, has never needed "heavy repairs". A new classroom block is currently being added to one end of the original building. Any bets on which portion will need replacing first?

 

John

Edited October 8, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

26 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

Sadly, Mike, the railway today is a very different one to that you worked on.  Twenty years ago Mark ruefully showed me a diamond crossing at Wilmslow and remarked how many weekends it had taken to replace.  He said he commented to Railtrack that when he joined the railway they would have replaced it between trains.  The reply came back to the effect that you didn't have H&S back then.  Possessions today take longer to set up, conduct safety briefings etc., and take down than they do for actual work done.  But, the number of injuries and, worse, fatalities has fallen greatly.

 

OOC will provide interchange between HS2 and GWR services to the West.  It will also provide an easier interchange between GWR semi-fast services and the EL than at Paddington.  A simple platform change by the transfer deck, not having to navigate your way around the station then two lengthy escalators as you do at Paddington.  London Overground also have aspirations for two new stations to feed into OOC.  If they come to fruition then it will be a western equivalent of Stratford.

 

I presume the alternatives you have in mind for diversions are Olympia or Marylebone.  To access the former you still need to go via Willesden as you can't hang a right at OOC East anymore and in any case, if you could it would be in the middle of the worksite.  Euston, whilst not ideal, has better onward connectivity than Olympia.  Marylebone is not an option as it no longer has capacity and it couldn't handle 10 car IETs - and the Chiltern Line isn't currently cleared for them although that could be addressed.

 

I can assure you that everything will be done to keep disruption to a minimum.  When Reading was being rebuilt, NR wanted to operate a 2-track railway for TWO years through Reading.  This was totally unacceptable to GWR but NR said there was no alternative.  That was until GWR submitted a plan that involved keeping a 4 track railway with two massive blockades during which trains would run to Marylebone and Waterloo.  The former involved a bonus of signalling improvements at Banbury that improved operations there for "normal" GWR services and Chiltern.  And as a result, Reading was finished early and under budget!

 

Thing is, though, those wanting to travel from "down West" to Birmingham (and probably beyond) will still get there quicker using Cross Country via Bristol than GW/HS2 via OOC. 

[ess1uk]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/08/hs2-announced-transport-project-were-just-examples-says-minister

[62613]

17 minutes ago, ess1uk said:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/08/hs2-announced-transport-project-were-just-examples-says-minister

Can I come out of the rabbit hole now?

[Bernard Lamb]

5 hours ago, melmerby said:

The problem was the long term maintenance & eventual decommisioning don't seemed to have been factored into the costs.

Particularly so when it comes to cutting up nuclear submarines.

Just how many are hidden away waiting for a viable solution as to disposal?

Benard

[lmsforever]

5 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Can I come out of the rabbit hole now?

No think I will be joining you

[APOLLO]

3 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Particularly so when it comes to cutting up nuclear submarines.

Just how many are hidden away waiting for a viable solution as to disposal?

Benard

 

 

 

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/nuclear-submarines-left-rot-devonport-1043977

 

It's far more in Russia & USA.

 

Brit15

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

 

 

 

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/nuclear-submarines-left-rot-devonport-1043977

 

It's far more in Russia & USA.

 

Brit15

There's also about half that amount in the dock at Rosyth, I used to park next to three of them every morning nearly 30 years ago.

 

"Left to rot" is hyperbole though, they are under care and light maintenance, monitored very carefully and with no risk of a significant radiation leak as the fuel is all removed on withdrawal.  When I left the industry about ten years ago, the plans for scrapping and removing the reactor cores was  (I thought) well advanced; I'm surprised they seemingly haven't started implementing it yet.

Edited October 8, 2023 by Northmoor
typo

[4630]

6 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

When I left the industry about ten years ago, the plans for scrapping and removing the reactor cores was  (I thought) well advanced; I'm surprised they seemingly haven't started implementing it yet.

I’d be reasonably confident that, as you say, the plans were well advanced.

 

What probably wasn’t and I would hazard a guess isn’t is the available budget, either from the Defence budget, or elsewhere to fund the delivery of the plan.  

[MJI]

8 hours ago, C126 said:

 

D--n fine work, Sir!  https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001r7h8  Starts at 31.43 if anyone else wants to listen.

 

 

Need to register ,  what was said?

On phone so no email access

[martin_wynne]

 

 

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

"too cheap to be worth metering" was how the long term future was seen when my father was working on Magnox reactor projects.  Electricity at the time was generally coal-fired; we didn't have oil-fired or gas-fired because north sea oil hadn't been discovered, and their raw materials had to be imported whereas coal was still mined on a significant scale domestically.  So changes in national/global energy economics had not really been foreseen.

Fusion. It's the next big thing. In fact, it's been the next big thing for about as long as I've been alive. I'm now 67.

[billbedford]

10 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

"too cheap to be worth metering" was how the long term future was seen when my father was working on Magnox reactor projects.

 

The same line was used to persuade Highlanders that they needed a hydroelectric dam in their glen.