HS2

[phil-b259]

On 21/11/2023 at 08:30, Ron Ron Ron said:

This idea of saving money by changing the design so that HS2 connects to the slow lines, rather than the fasts, is just compounding the insanity of decisions that have already been made.

What next, descope the HS2 train fleet, so they only run at 75 mph ???

 

 

.

It’s worth remembering that change to feed into the slow lines ONLY came about because the Government of the day decided they would bring forward phase 2A!

 

With phase 2A open only connecting to the slow lines makes perfect sense as only a small proportion of HS2 services would be using the connection - most trains rejoining the WCML at Crewe.

 

Of course like many other things the Government have done / announced recently, Sunks decision to axe as much of HS2 as he can is very much a knee jerk / last minute decision all geared around short term political needs.

 

As such it’s not at all surprising that nobody has thought to check whether the plans for Handsacre are suitable - doing that would require some serious prep work before going public with the decision to axe all further phases and ‘serious work’ is most certainly NOT what the abrupt u turn permitted.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2023 by phil-b259

[corneliuslundie]

I like your new name for the PM (first version). I think we should all adopt it.

Jonathan

[jamie92208]

This quite long Podcast explains the Handsacre problem very well. 

It's fascinating to hear some one who actually knows what he's talking about explaining things.when Professor McNaughton appears. 

 

Jamie

 

 

Edited November 21, 2023 by jamie92208

[adb968008]

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Councils are just plain unskilled and to busy with "woke" agendas.

 

All the capable and skilled staff left years ago.

 

Brit15

Are they now working for contractors by any chance ?

[APOLLO]

9 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Are they now working for contractors by any chance ?

 

I would imagine some are.

 

Brit15

[corneliuslundie]

Or as consultants.

J

[bimble]

11 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

This idea of saving money by changing the design so that HS2 connects to the slow lines, rather than the fasts, is just compounding the insanity of decisions that have already been made.

What next, descope the HS2 train fleet, so they only run at 75 mph ???

.

 

They could run freight on it then... that'll open up a bit of capacity on the West Coast mainline 😂

[62613]

9 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

This quite long Podcast explains the Handsacre problem very well. 

It's fascinating to hear some one who actually knows what he's talking about explaining things.when Professor McNaughton appears. 

 

Jamie

 

 

Ouch! a very good summary

[Northmoor]

10 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

It’s worth remembering that change to feed into the slow lines ONLY came about because the Government of the day decided they would bring forward phase 2A!

 

With phase 2A open only connecting to the slow lines makes perfect sense as only a small proportion of HS2 services would be using the connection - most trains rejoining the WCML at Crewe.

 

Of course like many other things the Government have done / announced recently, Sunks decision to axe as much of HS2 as he can is very much a knee jerk / last minute decision all geared around trying to save his and the Tory party’s skin when they face voters next time around.

 

As such it’s not at all surprising that nobody has thought to check whether the plans for Handsacre are suitable - doing that would require some serious prep work before going public with the decision to axe all further phases and ‘serious work’ is most certainly NOT what Sunsks  decision represented on any level. It was simply a short termist decision designed to pacify the Tory party at large (who hated the scheme and want big tax cuts NOW) while simultaneously trying to convince voters that the Government cares by ‘diverting’ the money into things the Government should have been doing anyway!

@phil-b259; can you please, please, PLEASE when posting on this thread, before hitting "Submit Reply", go back and remove all the paragraphs where it stops being about HS2 and becomes yet another anti-Tory party rant?

 

I find the subject under discussion interesting and this thread has been very informative, so would rather it didn't get locked for a third time, probably permanently.......

[Ron Ron Ron]

A Bromford tunnel update today.

 

TBM "Mary Anne" - launched on 14 August 2023

 

Distance travelled so far:   934m

Approximate distance remaining:   4,342m

Launch location: Bromford tunnel, South Portal

Destination: Bromford tunnel, North Portal

Last updated 21 November 2023.

 

 

.

[phil-b259]

12 hours ago, Northmoor said:

@phil-b259; can you please, please, PLEASE when posting on this thread, before hitting "Submit Reply", go back and remove all the paragraphs where it stops being about HS2 and becomes yet another anti-Tory party rant?

 

I find the subject under discussion interesting and this thread has been very informative, so would rather it didn't get locked for a third time, probably permanently.......

Post duly amended.

 

However thete is a big difference between a well throughout out change of plan (even one driven by a change in financial circumstances) and blatant electioneering.

 

The former I can accept - the later is a disgusting tactic which should be called out for what it is.

[APOLLO]

On 21/11/2023 at 11:52, jamie92208 said:

This quite long Podcast explains the Handsacre problem very well. 

It's fascinating to hear some one who actually knows what he's talking about explaining things.when Professor McNaughton appears. 

Jamie

 

Just finished listening this to the very end. VERY informative by those who are in the know. I don't usually subscribe to Youtube channels but I have to this.

 

What a state this country is in. Still the smiling assasin didn't put beer duty up today, whoopee !!!!!!

 

Brit15 

 

 

[mikejames]

Apollo said

I don't usually subscribe to Youtube channels but I have to this.

 

If you dont like youtube

I put green signals podcast into the search area

and it offered me several alternatives (to listen - no video) including spotify

 

as several have said material very interesting

the earlier one on hs2 myths also

 

regards

mike james

 

 

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

A Chilterns Tunnel cross passage.....

 

 

 

HS2 Ltd say they have so far completed 19 out of the 38 cross passages between the twin Chilterns Tunnels.

 

The cross passage below, also has access to the adjacent Chalfont St. Peter vent shaft.......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[corneliuslundie]

If only they could do it that fast they would have reached Manchester before anyone could think about changes to the project.

Jonathan

[jamie92208]

This video is an update to one I posted earlier about Handsacre and builds on what Prof McNaughton said in the podcast.  I'll not comment further. 

However it is good that such cogent arguments are being made. 

 

Jamie

[jjb1970]

Britain will get a few filled in pot holes (which will need filling again next year), China got this. What I find depressing is the decision to build a second Fuzhou-Xiamen HSR was made in 2015, construction started in 2017 and it is now open. And looking at the over water stretches and tunnels it wasn't a cheap and easy alignment for construction. Never mind, all that borrowing will pay for a few pot holes to be filled which the grand kids will pay for, it makes me weep🙁

 

 

[DenysW]

9 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

Britain will get a few filled in pot holes (which will need filling again next year),

Just for clarity, what was asserted was that:

 

-   The country will not borrow a huge pile of money well after the next election to fund HS2 parts 2A and 2B

-   Instead the country will borrow the same huge pile of money on the same timescale to fund a larger number of smaller capital projects to do with transport

-   One of these will reduce the number of potholes by long-lasting road reconstruction and resurfacing, instead of short-term fiddling-around filling-in of the immediate holes. Thus really capital spend, not something that automatically should come out of revenue.

 

What the truth will be is immaterial at present as all of this is too far into the future to predict - i.e. after the next election. It will also be implementation dependent, possibly making @jjb1970's summary accurate.

[62613]

1 hour ago, DenysW said:

Just for clarity, what was asserted was that:

 

-   The country will not borrow a huge pile of money well after the next election to fund HS2 parts 2A and 2B

-   Instead the country will borrow the same huge pile of money on the same timescale to fund a larger number of smaller capital projects to do with transport

-   One of these will reduce the number of potholes by long-lasting road reconstruction and resurfacing, instead of short-term fiddling-around filling-in of the immediate holes. Thus really capital spend, not something that automatically should come out of revenue.

 

What the truth will be is immaterial at present as all of this is too far into the future to predict - i.e. after the next election. It will also be implementation dependent, possibly making @jjb1970's summary accurate.

But if you watch the Green Signals podcast mentioned earlier you discover that, after the binned Golborne - Crewe leg, part 2A unlocked the most benefits in terms of increased capacity, because it bypasses the significant bottlenecks on the Colwich - Stafford - Basford Hall stretch of the WCML. It's 36 miles, over very easy terrain, and any normal government would have ensured that it was built. 

 

Their equation of HS2 doing for the railway what the motorway network has done for road travel was insightful

 

 

[Northmoor]

21 hours ago, DenysW said:

Just for clarity, what was asserted was that:

 

-   The country will not borrow a huge pile of money well after the next election to fund HS2 parts 2A and 2B

-   Instead the country will borrow the same huge pile of money on the same timescale to fund a larger number of smaller capital projects to do with transport

-   One of these will reduce the number of potholes by long-lasting road reconstruction and resurfacing, instead of short-term fiddling-around filling-in of the immediate holes. Thus really capital spend, not something that automatically should come out of revenue.

 

What the truth will be is immaterial at present as all of this is too far into the future to predict - i.e. after the next election. It will also be implementation dependent, possibly making @jjb1970's summary accurate.

Sorry but unless the road is on a new alignment, that's planned maintenance so comes under the Opex budget.  Nice try HM Government but I'm not falling for another attempt to repackage normal "spending" - which sounds like a bad thing - as "investment", which sounds like a good thing.

[martin_wynne]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

attempt to repackage normal "spending" - which sounds like a bad thing

 

Why does spending sound like a bad thing? How do we expect to get anything worth having if we don't pay for it?

 

Martin.

[PhilH]

20 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Why does spending sound like a bad thing? How do we expect to get anything worth having if we don't pay for it?

 

Martin.

Would that not depend on a) if you have the money and b) where that money comes from, whether borrowed or taken from other, arguably more important, budgets?

 

[jamie92208]

38 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Why does spending sound like a bad thing? How do we expect to get anything worth having if we don't pay for it?

 

Martin.

 

14 minutes ago, PhilH said:

Would that not depend on a) if you have the money and b) where that money comes from, whether borrowed or taken from other, arguably more important, budgets?

 

We seem to be in danger of straying back to politics and economic theory again.  I know it's difficult but can we please stick to reporting HS2.  No one wants the thread locked again. 

 

Jamie

[martin_wynne]

1 hour ago, PhilH said:

Would that not depend on a) if you have the money and b) where that money comes from, whether borrowed or taken from other, arguably more important, budgets?

 

 

Obviously spending money has to be planned according to needs. That doesn't make "spending" a bad thing, which was my objection to the original post.

 

Martin.