locoholic

 

Turning a blind eye until someone dies is not the way safety is done these days, so this increase has to be taken in to account.

Except it is exactly how safety on the roads is done now, with potholes unfilled, and road markings allowed to become worn to the point of invisibility.

I'm not advocating this approach be tried on the railways, but it shows that road and rail do not compete on a level playing field.

The change in attitudes over time is fascinating. The Victorian railway companies built “extravagant” termini and today we revel in their exuberance. To take just London examples: Paddington, St Pancras, even austere King’s Cross - all are buildings of delight that add pleasure to our daily lives more than a century after all that (private) money was “wasted”.

When Michael Heseltine was Environment Secretary he proposed that local government should be forbidden from building anything except the lowest-cost building. It was pointed out to him that, if that regulation was introduced, every single public building from then onwards would be a Portakabin. He realised it was a stupid idea.

We should be taking pride in the public realm, celebrating great works. Even cash-strapped BR invested in Waterloo International. The contrast with the low-budget Stratford International is striking (surely one of the most unpleasant stations in modern Britain - though the Thameslink platforms at St Pancras might challenge for that title?).

New York is an amazing city, but as a demonstration of the philosophy of public austerity it is striking: a world of private wealth and public squalor. Is that what we want in the UK?

For a more local example, check out the contrast between the “extravagant” JLE stations and the austere Crossrail stations. These things are likely to last a century or more; that’s a long time for a mean building or an exuberant building to be in the public domain. I would argue these stations *should* be confident architectural statements of our belief in ourselves. The alternative is simply too mean-minded to contemplate.

Paul

I know what you mean. I just think it's interesting to compare the proposed Birmingham HS2 terminus with (say) the cramped four platforms that East Midlands Trains have to make do with at St Pancras.

Thanks for this - it is a pretty dense document to digest. I have to confess astonishment at the size of the project.  Naively I had assumed it far more compact; it has 7 platforms compared to New Street station’s 12 (compare its footprint to the NS station  2^nd rebuild).

 

HS£ curzon st.jpg

overlay of WSP design on HS2 information paper h4, May 2014

 

The WSP report on the Oct 2018 Design says

 

Rather than at first sight appearing a vanity project gift for Brum’s Mayor and his city regeneration aspiratons (incidentally what is an 'environmental mitigation zone'?) Is it not much more econonmical to build a more modest terminus station, Because surely it gets largely bypassed in the next HS phase.

I’d have thought it strategically far more sensible to build the Interhange station as a temporary terminal to the SE adjacent to the Coventry–New Street line and have a plush transfer shuttle to Curzon St/ New St./Moor St.

Once the trains to the north are ready to start running, the terminus becomes a much easier through station to work by removing the north end screen. You could have a spectacular "opening" as the first train from the north bursts through !

I suggest this is not 'unduly delaying or adding cost to the project'- quite the opposite.

 

At present it looks like poor old Nick Grimshaw could be in for his second HS 'White Elephant' with his appearance in these Curzon St credits. (though bizarrely his derelict Waterloo terminal has part-earned him the RIBA Gold Medal)

dh

The west end of the new Curzon Street station seems to be below ground level. Maybe in the future the line could carry on under Birmingham city centre towards Wolverhampton and/or Worcester? That's the only justification I can think of for what looks like a very extravagant station.

....

 

 

2. The design of the new station appears to allow for conversion to a through station in the future. Perhaps the lunacy of having a terminus in the middle of England has been recognised?

3. How comes older city-centre stations are ruined by having office blocks built over them, whilst a new station is all light and air?!

Well, I won't be popular on here, but I think some of the model is pretry poor compared to what we have come to expect from Bachmann and Hornby etc. Those rather lightweight springs under the cab are horrid, the over scale moulded cab rails, nowadays almost always represented by scale metal rails, the list goes on. Pretty poor show for a model 6 years in development.

I agree about the representation of the axlebox and springs under the cab - it reminded me of my Hornby Dublo A4. But otherwise I think it's a very handsome model.

I don’t need to ‘fantasise’ as you put it - if you can be bothered to do your research you will find lots of analysis, facts, figures and modelling present in the documentary evidence which led to HS2 being developed in the first place. If you disagree with such expert anylsis then you sholud say why and where they have got it wrong - it would greatly help your cause.

You cannot ignore facts - Buckingham, Brackley and Wilmslow are tiny in population terms compared to Mancheste, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham and London. As such the it’s only right that HS2 seeks to serve these major cities rather than what are small towns.

I note you still haven’t provided any evidence that the ‘massive’ development you fear will expand Buckingham Brackley or Wilmslow such that they come close to any of the aforementioned cities - and thus could reasonably be expected to generate a significant need for long distance travel.

Show me that their are serious plans for a Milton Keynes type new town to be dumped around Brackley say then you might have more of a point about HS2 connectivity being needed.

I make no apologies for taking people to task for peddling nonsense over HS2 - thus far the only legitimate concern you have been able to raise thus far is the energy consumption at very high speeds (which can easily be solved by dropping the maximum so it matches those used by the French).

Complaints that it spoils your view and will make your life a misery are no different to those expressed in the 1880s when the classic network was started and the evidence of the past two centuries shows that such fears are unfounded in the long term.

Part of living in a society is putting up with decisions that you personally disagree with but which those our elected representatives believe is in the best interests of the country. I personally am opposed to spending money on Trident, think that pulling out of the EU is a mistake of Titanic proportions and dislike the low tax regime which is causing such problems for local authorities. I am however prepared to accept that society as a whole seems to think differently and thus accept my personal views on these subjects are out of step with Governmrnt policy.

You are entitled to be opposed to HS2 - but if you want others to come round to your opinion then you need to be able to present a convincing case. I’m quite willing to present a case against Trident which will have nothing to do with ‘world peace’ type arguments and everything to do with a factual analysis of the types of missions the British military actually have been involved in over the past three decades. Objectors to HS2 need to do the same and not use NIMBY style arguments that it will ‘spoil my view’

There is also evidence over the last 150 years that rapid population growth happens at the edge of London. The area north of Aylesbury is now the front line for this.

You are an excellent case study in confirmation bias. You ignore what doesn't support your opinion and, most ridiculous, you feel free to insult anyone who holds a different opinion to you.

The WCML has not managed 'just fine' for the last 150 years without repeated major upgrading; Quadrupling, and south of Watford Jc sextupling, electrifying with both 3rd rail and overhead systems, resignalling and finally the WCRM project. HS2 is just the latest stage in that development.

 

And there may well be a big area north of Aylesbury with no access to rail service, but that is largely because not many people live there ! And in any case, Winslow will soon (eventually) be reconnected to the national rail network.

The need for upgrading work is a sign of success, but you're arguing it's a sign of failure. That is symptomatic of the blinkered thinking of many HS2 fans. Just like the idea that building a railway through an area but not taking the chance to actually serve that area is a good idea, especially when that area is close to one of the most densely populated areas in Europe, and almost certain to see rapid population growth over the next decade.

Except they haven't!

 

Stand on a bridge over the M1 during peak hours and you will find it heavily congested - similarly peak time trains arriving / departing from Euston to the Northwest are equally well loaded! Both the motorway and the WCML have been subjected to upgrade works (at different times) over the past two decades yet the problem persists. This is why tinkering is not enough two extra tracks are needed right from the heart of London to beyond Birmingham.

 

Yes the introduction of high quality Chiltern trains to Birmingham and before that completion of the M40 from Oxford to Warrick provided alternative ways of getting to Birmingham - but HS2 actually has nothing to do with Birmingham - its all about trains that start or finish the journeys further north.

 

 

 

 

They are separate because the two flows are different. Express trains to and from the North West of England are very different from commuter trains in the home counties - just look at how the 700s on Thameslink are slated by Home counties commuters because they have to try and behave like tube trains in the centre of London. Similarly on the GWML we have complaints that passengers are getting overgrown tube trains with longitudinal seats and no toilets so they can cope with the crowds in the centre of London.

 

One of the problems with our motorway network is the way the UK Government has allowed them to be used as by-passes for towns - compared to France where the tolled nature of most sections outside major cities means that local traffic gets its own by-pass and there is only a single motorway junction. Again mixing long distance flows and short 'junction hoppers' is a recipe for chaos and peak time congestion

 

 

 

 

 

I'm still waiting for info as to where this massive demand for travel in areas beyond Aylesbury is coming from. You say the Government are planning 'massive development' in the area yet have not given any details as to what that would involve. I repeat the only information I have is that areas around Wilmslow (to be served by the reopened Oxford / Aylesbury - Bletchley line) and ex MOD areas around Bicester (well served by Chiltern).

 

I fully agree that development needs to be accompanied by transport infrastructure - but that infrastructure must be appropriate for the needs of the inhabitants - which will include people wishing to access neighbouring towns for employment / shopping / leisure, not just commuting to London or Birmingham.

 

Its also worth noting that the opening of the Great Central through the area did nothing to instigate grater prosperity which still remained relatively undeveloped. Compare that to the effects of the WCML, MML or ECML where significant population centres emerged after they were built. I have yet to see any convincing case that the inhabitants of Brackley are going to need access to HS2 in future for example or that the residents of Aylesbury will be significant disadvantaged because they cannot quickly get to Birmingham

 

If you are able to show me where HM Government are planning to build a new Milton Keynes sized place then you might have a point - but I would suggest that if HS2 is opposed that much by locals then there is no chance that they will accept a massive 'new town' being plonked near them either.

 

 

 

 

 

Please show me where there is big demand for travel northward of Aylesbury! I acept that the Government have 'big plans' for development in some places but so far as I am awere they are all around areas where

You seem perfectly happy to fantasise about future demand for passengers on HS2 that will require double-deck trains, and yet the existence of towns like Buckingham, Brackley and Winslow has no significance to you at all. You are obviously one of those people who can't tell the difference between their opinion and facts. It's pointless trying to persuade you, especially since your responses are often so discourteous. Alternative, more "normal" behaviour patterns can be learnt, but either no-one has told you, or you can't be bothered.

Please don't confuse two separate issues.

 

(1) The lack of capacity on the WCML, M1 motorway etc to cater for long distance journeys

 

(2) Connectivity / Commuter provision for the Chilterns.

 

While on the surface HS2 looks like it could do both the reality is that in atempting to full fill both these functions it ends up being a jack of all trades but a master of none!

Two things:

The "jack of all trades" WCML has managed just fine for the last 150 years. If the problem is capacity, adding a new line of similar characteristics wouldn't be such a bad thing. Every motorway is a jack of all trades, too.

The "two separate issues" shouldn't be separate - that's my point. All the processes that are required to create a modern railway - the legal stuff, land acquisition, then all the engineering - could have been used to create a railway line for (say) 140 mph expresses, with provision along the section north of Aylesbury for ordinary trains to serve the big area that has no access to a rail service. Then the line could also have been used for diversions at weekends, and also freight. But instead, the usual silo thinking in the Dept of Transport means that all the disruption, all the construction plant, will only provide one thing, when there is actually a need for two.

 

 

 

 

Firstly, if you are going for high speeds then increased clearances save you energy due to the reduced need for trains to fight air pressure through tunnels - this is just as true for 40mph as it is for 200mph and is why the new Northern line extension tunnels to Battersea are significantly larger than those on the existing line. As such even if HS2 was being built as a 'conventional' 100mph line, it would still be large enough to take double deck stock.

 

Secondly double deck stock is not that much larger than single deck stock - it only needs the UK loading gauge to be a foot or so higher (and for us to get rid of high level platforms) for it to fit on the conventional network. The cost (way in excess of the HS2 budget) and potential disruption while this is undertaken is why its not viable for the classic network

 

Thirdly with HS2 the clearances deemed necessary for high speed operation through tunnels, etc double deck stock can be accommodated with no alterations necessary to the design.

This part of your argument really makes no sense. Larger tunnels decreases air resistance - yes, fine. But that also applies to double-deck trains, so are you saying that HS2 tunnels will be large enough for double-deck trains to pass through efficiently? If so, the tunnel dimensions will be massive, with much higher tunnelling costs. And a lot of the route is in tunnels.

I'm all in favour of a new rail route through the Home Counties, but the opportunity should have been taken to make the new route part of the national rail network, since it passes through an area of the UK earmarked for very significant population growth, but which has no rail lines at all. That is why the HS2 design brief is wrong. It is too narrow. By making the line speed so high, it would be very difficult to have it as a dual-purpose line. Instead, you have the absurd situation where a railway is built through an area which has no rail service, and when the line is complete, it still has no rail service! It therefore follows that the whole project represents poor value and a missed opportunity.

It might help of you actually answered the questions properly rather than talking b******ks

 

Let me have a go for you shall I?

 

Pro: HS2 isn't about getting to Birmingham a few minutes earlier

Anti: Then why does HS stand for High Speed?

Pro:- It's all about capacity Because compared to the current WCML which only just about manages 130mph in places, HS2 will have a design speed comparable with the best High speed lines in Europe (200mph approx). The point of HS2 is to remove fast express services starting or finishing in the North West from the WCML - not cater for slow moving freight or semi-fast / commuter services!

 

Anti: Then why are we paying for it to be be over-engineered so that trains can spend a few minutes going really fast?

Pro: It's essential because the WCML is full. We are not! Firstly from an engineering perspective there is practically zero difference between the land take, cost, minimum curvature, etc between a 250mph design spec or a 186mph design spec. Secondly the international convention is that brand new passenger only lines linking major cities are built with a 150mph plus design speed. Thirdly by adopting current best practice / international thinking then more 'off the shelf' kit can be used thus reducing costs over bespoke requirements.

 

Anti: OK, so just build a new normal railway line with a couple of extra stations to benefit the areas it traverses?

Pro: But we need it to be High Speed, because that's the future. What part of 'removing fast express trains to / from the North West (note they generally only stop at stations south of Crewe / Stafford because there is insufficient line capacity to provide enough services) from the existing WCML is so hard to understand? The deign brief is NOT how to improve connectivity to the Chilterns - nor is it actually about improving journeys between London & Birmingham. Birmingham only comes into the picture with HS2 as it happens to lie slap bang on the route to the North West so it makes economic sense to include it in the list of places served by HS2 even though it has no need for a shorter journey time to London.

 

Anti: But you just said it's all about capacity. Why bother building it to accomodate big trains that won't fit along normal lines, when the design has now been altered to include lots of links to normal railway lines?

Pro: Stop being a Nimby. Because in 30 years, if HS2 trains become full we can then use off the shelf double deck EU gauge trains to shift folk between the key destinations. Have a look at what the French did when their first TGV line became full and they couldn't add any more services - they went and double decked the trains. We already have a major problem where our current Victorian era network cannot accommodate double deck stock as a solution to overcrowding so why would any sane railway designer repeat that with a new build line?

 

Hmm, not so supportive of you attitude now that questions have been dealt with properly is it?

There goes your blood pressure again!

Some of what you say is total "b******cks" and comes nowhere near dealing with anything "properly".

The idea that HS2 gives the UK the fastest trains in Europe for free (which is the logical conclusion of your argument that it is not over-engineered), for a start. Everything from noise abatement to power supply is made much more expensive when the line speed is increased. That comes from the laws of physics. It's not some Nimby conspiracy.

Then there's the idea that future-proofing HS2 by building it to a big loading gauge is good value for money. You are spending money based on pure speculation. This isn't "magic money" - it's real.

The idea that by over-engineering to "international" standards we can make savings by buying off-the shelf trains is a joke. The current trend is for more and more incompatibility, both from physical things like couplings, and from computer control and signalling.

The design brief for HS2 is wrong for the UK, and it represents poor value for money and a massive missed opportunity. But hey, it provides something for tunnel vision HS2 worshippers to get triggered over.

There seem to be a series of rotating arguments against HS2 by those whose "facts" don't stand up to scrutiny.

 

Anti: HS2 isn't needed.

Pro: We need more capacity. The trains are already full.

Anti: Easy. Put on more trains then.

Pro: We can't, the tracks are full.

Anti: Easy. Put longer trains on.

Pro: We can't. The platforms aren't long enough.

Anti: Easy. Build Longer Platforms.

Pro: We can't without demolishing lots of properties

Anti: Build extra tracks alongside the current railway.

Pro: See previous answer. A new railway away from the more congested areas makes better business and environmental sense.

Anti: We don't need HS2....................

 

 

Keith

There's another version that goes:

Pro: HS2 isn't about getting to Birmingham a few minutes earlier

Anti: Then why does HS stand for High Speed?

Pro: It's all about capacity

Anti: Then why are we paying for it to be be over-engineered so that trains can spend a few minutes going really fast?

Pro: It's essential because the WCML is full.

Anti: OK, so just build a new normal railway line with a couple of extra stations to benefit the areas it traverses?

Pro: But we need it to be High Speed, because that's the future.

Anti: But you just said it's all about capacity. Why bother building it to accomodate big trains that won't fit along normal lines, when the design has now been altered to include lots of links to normal railway lines?

Pro: Stop being a Nimby.

I received an email earlier saying that stocks of version one are running low.

 

 

 

 

Just letting people know in case anyone is umming and ahhing.

 

 

 

 

Jason

Somehow I had missed the arrival of these. Thanks for the info.

Please show me documentary proof (NOT written by campaign groups by the way) that:-

 

(I) Existing trains will be massively slowed down to force folk onto HS2

(ii) Fares on HS2 will be significantly higher than on the conventional network

 

Suggestions that this will be the case are total speculation by those with an axe to grind and not backed up by any official proposals.

 

What we do know is that the removal of some London - Manchester / Liverpool / Scotland services from the WCML will allow for more semi-fast / suburban stops - however as Coventry & Wolverhampton will not be served by HS2, the need for some fast services will remain.

 

As regards fares, it is likely that a modest premium will be placed on HS2 fares - just as has been done with HS1 for domestic services from Kent. To suggest this premium will somehow make HS2 fares unaffordable to most is total scaremongering. Given the need to ensure the trains are as full as possible then its most likely that the model in use on the rest on the national rail network will be followed - discounts for early booking / off peak travel, etc)

 

Finally whilst we don't do politics on this forum (for very good reasons) it does not automatically follow that what a party says in opposition (or indeed the campaign trail) is not necessarily what will happen if it gains power. In any case I would wager that the consequences of Brexit will have far more effect on the prosperity of this country than anything a potential Labour Government might do.

One person's "modest premium" is another person's "significant increase".

And as for fast services for Wolverhampton and Coventry etc, won't all the extra semi-fast services on the WCML get in the way?

I had started to think that the supply of steam-era colour photos was drying up, as several recent offerings showed signs of barrel-scraping, with poor, blurry images.

However, Steam in the English Landscape is full of excellent, well-reproduced pictures. A few of them look familiar from other books, but most are new to me. They cover the whole of England, with main lines and branches. My only query is the liberal interpretation of what "landscape" is, as there are many shed and station scenes, but who cares when they're such lovely photos?

Author is Michael Welch, and publisher is Capital Transport.

So you seriously think that HM Government will move the money allocated to HS2 to top up the Revenue Support Grant it gives to all local authorities if HS2 is cancelled do you?

 

Get real HM Treasury will NEVR do that - certainly with a Conservative Government wedded to austerity and shrinking the state wherever possible.

 

If HS2 is cancelled the 'savings' will simply be banked and used to pay off the national debit. As far as the Treasuary are concerned any local council that is struggling to make ends meet has nobody other than itself to blame - and they will cite any number of reasons ('overspending' on new council offices, not outsourcing enough to bring in private sector efficiencies, not banding together with other local authorities to achieve savings in bulk buying, undertaking things that should be left to the private sector to provide etc.)

 

Its delusional to think that HS2 monies will be passed on to any other organisation if HS2 does not proceed, just as its delusional to think that the WCML corridor does not require significant additional capacity. As others have said while there are valid questions over the exact details of the HS2 scheme, the general principle that a brand new line is needed remains sounds.

Well, we shall see, won't we?! Considering all the recent negative rail-related news stories, I bet there aren't too many at the Tory conference who would admit to being train enthusiasts.

I wonder if the subject of HS2 will crop up at the Tory Party conference? There's a piece in today's Sunday Torygraph saying the Andrea Leadsom is the latest senior Tory to advocate scrapping HS2.

Then there is the fact that Chris Grayling supports HS2 - his support for anything usually guarantees it fails spectacularly.

Not the webcam - a few photos of the Autumn Steam Gala - visit if you can!

.

 

Looks very nice, it ALMOST makes me not want an ex-LBSCR K-class 2-6-0, but the K-class is still the more elegant.

 

.

I'm going to start work on my K's K class kit (!), which will hopefully result in an RTR announcement.

Just collected my Beachy Head from Hereford Model Centre. Very pleased - a lovely looking, smooth running model.

WCML problems delayed Jeremy Corbyn's return from his party conference in Liverpool yesterday, apparently. He reacted by saying that renationalising the railways would sort this kind of problem out. It seems that JC isn't aware that signalling is done by Network Rail, already owned by the government!

The weather was very busy at the SVR Autumn Gala today...  "Sunshine and showers" doesn't do it justice, somehow!

I counted thirty photographers waiting by the western end of the tunnel between Kidderminster and Bewdley. (Does that tunnel have a name?)

Lots and lots of folk on the trains. I dread to think how crowded it will be at the weekend proper. Lots of money for the SVR, though, which is excellent.

Stationmaster

Of the few bits I read/listened to agree the main culprits were those on the committee (made up of all interested groups) which was overseeing the implementation of the new time table, the chairman on the parliamentary select committee interview clearly stated in hindsight he should have taken more notice of the red flags rather than the claims from the train operating companies who as late as 3 weeks prior to change over day were stating they would be ready, though there would be minimal amount of cancellations

I was just replying to someone putting the blame on Chris Grayling and my observations that public servants never being held responsible for failings or being negligent. In this case it seemed train operators and public servants who were at fault by agreeing they would be ready

The current structure of the railway industry is a political creation. Chris Grayling is the senior politician responsible. It's his job to make sure that structure works properly. He failed to do his job and should resign.

Just heard Prof Stephen Glaister of the ORR being interviewed on Radio 4. What a timid and spineless chap he seems to be! I imagine that he received an email from the Dept for Transport saying "If you blame Grayling at all, we will abolish the ORR". So the May timetable fiasco was just a "systemic" failure - no-one to blame, everyone can carry on, despite the fact that Chris Grayling is responsible for Network Rail and the govt dept that oversees (a.k.a. micromanages) the franchises.

As a totally non-involved observer of this saga, you would be well-advised not to make untrue or exaggerated statements.

 

You posted :-

 

Yes we know where all stock is, and have a full stock record of all models delivered & collected.

 

All incorrectly delivered models are now collected so I have ask our fulfilment provider why they have contacted people.  

 

If anyone is still awaiting collection please PM and I will investigate straight away and records show all miss delivered have been collected.

 

If "you know where all stock is", and "all incorrectly delivered models are now collected", why would you go on to post "If anyone is still awaiting collection"?

 

You were almost immediately notified of a model that had not been collected, but still you post "The true whereabouts of all models is known" !!

 

This may be what you are telling your superiors, but it patently obviously is not true.

 

Perhaps you might be better occupied in getting on top of this issue, rather than digging yourself deeper and deeper by posting mis-information here?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Lay off the poor guy. It's blindingly obvious what a c0ck-up has occurred, and I expect stress and sleepless nights have resulted.

Some smug online bystander twisting the knife is no help at all.

I'm thinking of driving up to the shop from Bristol at the weekend. Can anyone tell me any more about the shop itself? Frankly is it worth a visit?

If you enjoy browsing, Hereford Model Centre will occupy you for much longer. Lots of 2nd hand stuff, too. Easily combined with a visit to Coleford and/or the Dean Forest Railway.