You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
But are our cities far enough apart to justify trains going that fast?
Not only that, but going around a corner takes up acres and acres of space if you want to go at 200mph in a train. I think the radius for non tilting trains doing those sorts of speeds is about 5km
they'd [I]like[/I]... you literally just said you can work from home... how is this not an unnecessary journey 🤔the company would like us
Of all the many, many things that the money could be better spend on - I didn't think of broadband but it's obvious! Give every home/office wired fibre or free 5G or a lifetime sub to Starlink.
Even pre-Covid I thought travelling into the office for routine work or meetings was becoming an anachronism... it just seems ****ing ridiculous now!
it just sounds **** ridiculous now!
There's plenty of folks who can't though...Doctors, lawyers, nurses, reception staff, none of us can really work from home.
HS2 isn’t really about facilitating travel to work though is it? I used to commute from Yorkshire to London, but was very much in the minority. So the number of people who can’t work from home who will be helped by HS2 is I would imagine tiny.
Is a nurse REALLY going to pay £2-300 per journey to travel from Manchester (or Crewe!) to work in London?
Reception staff are getting the train to go from Birmingham to London every day? 🤔There’s plenty of folks who can’t though…Doctors, lawyers, nurses, reception staff, none of us can really work from home.
I can't work from home... guess what... I live near my work. Crazy I know. Even if there are people who can't work from home but [I]must[/I] travel, every other person who can make a change helps free up existing capacity (be that train/road/whatever)
Is a nurse REALLY going to pay £2-300 per journey to travel from Manchester (or Crewe!) to work in London?
Thats my point really.
What percentage of this countries population will actually derive any conceivable benefit from a high speed rail line from Birmingham to London? It's absolutely miniscule. A vanishingly small number of people.
Yet for this tiny number of people we're seeing truly vast amounts of public money being hosed at it. All while local transport initiatives - which would have potentially hugely more impact on so many more peoples real lives - are being shelved and put on hold indefinitely, while the black hole of HS2 sucks in everything around it (in the case of the environment... literally!)
Its absolutely bonkers
Reception staff are getting the train to go from Birmingham to London every day?
No but a massive broadband infrastructure programme to allow them to work from home isn't going to help them overmuch either.
They'll be able to watch higher definition grot, though
See... everyone benefits 🙂
except for the obvious point that if it enables [I]other[/I] people to WFH then it frees up capacity on existing transport services.No but a massive broadband infrastructure programme to allow them to work from home isn’t going to help them overmuch either.
Not only that, but going around a corner takes up acres and acres of space if you want to go at 200mph in a train. I think the radius for non tilting trains doing those sorts of speeds is about 5km
I'm not sure I understand this, how does requiring a long radius curves take up more space than short radius curves. Sure on a curve by curve basis, which is a disingenuous comparison, but over a whole scheme length from point A to point B it's really not clear cut - it could be either.
It could easily be arguable that long radius curves result in a scheme using less land as you don't try to zig zag the smaller radius track around obstacles as often which would increase overall length and hence area. Obviously being less selective on alignment brings other disbenefits but it really isn't clear cut if you pick just one item to interrogate in isolation...
As I said above I’m actually all for infrastructure, including rail, but a vanity project is still a vanity project.
So just to check...
Investment in HS rail in France - not a vanity project
Investment in HS rail in Spain - not a vanity project
Investment in HS rail in China - not a vanity project
Investment in HS rail in Japan - not a vanity project
Investment in HS rail in UK - vanity project
??
What percentage of this countries population will actually derive any conceivable benefit from a high speed rail line from Birmingham to London? It’s absolutely miniscule. A vanishingly small number of people.
TGV in France has made it possible to live in places like Tours or Lyon and commute into Paris. Tours is under 2hrs. If you extrapolate that to HS2 times, it's still further afield than Manchester or Leeds. Opening up connectivity options is never a bad thing.
crazy-legs
Full MemberThis is the point that the anti folk don’t get. It’s not like cancelling HS2 frees up £100bn of money for other infra or hospitals or whatever. It just disappears.
That's... not how money works. Of course it doesn't "just disappear". A lot of sunk costs would be lost but the rest can be re-allocated to whatever you like. Ringfencing doesn't create money, and cancelling a project with ringfenced funds doesn't break the money.
Of course, the government might not reallocate it, or might allocate it to some other damn fool project or hand it all to the private sector for a failed covid boondoggle that kills people, but that's a different thing entirely.
asbrooks
Full MemberThat may well be true in your worlds. However, the company I work for is a manufacturer and by its very nature requires people to work in a factory.
Sure but reducing demand overall by reducing unnecessary journeys means the existing capacity is freed up for the necessary ones. It improves things for the people who still have to travel. And of course reducing unnecessary journeys doesn't just mean "working from home", it also includes "not having everything in London" and "conducting more of your business remotely even if you're in the office".
(aside; my mate has been told he has to return to the office in the square mile, even though they've been working from home effectively. They never meet clients face to face, that was all remote even before the pandemic. But they "have to have an office in London" to be taken seriously apparently. And also "to attract staff", even though literally nobody in his office is from London and half relocated from Edinburgh. Taking that out of the city wouldn't just mean that he wasn't wasting time and money on a commuter train from surrey, it'd also mean they wouldn't need cleaners, security/reception, less demand on services like food outlets... Lots of knock-ons)
The tgv was built at a fraction of the cost of HS2 per km and covers a country many times the size.
All for high speed rail myself but if I was in charge I'd have done the London but last. The London to Birmingham bit will only serve to further cement the London centric transport system we have as it starves the rest of the country for investment in transport.
The tgv was built at a fraction of the cost of HS2 per km and covers a country many times the size.
Pretty much every infrastructure project ever done anywhere else is done to twice the standard and half the cost of anything in the UK.
We just seem completely incapable of (a) aspiring to do any better and (b) actually doing any better.
That’s… not how money works. Of course it doesn’t “just disappear”. A lot of sunk costs would be lost but the rest can be re-allocated to whatever you like.
It's grant-in-aid funding. It's for HS2, it doesn't (and can't) be reallocated to other trains, NHS, deprived areas etc.
There's a wider conversation about how Government creates and spends money because it's obviously not like doing household finances or paying your credit card bill but grant-in-aid funding is specific.
they’d like… you literally just said you can work from home… how is this not an unnecessary journey 🤔
Yes logistically I can work from home and have been doing so since last March. I have a home office setup as it is at work. Plus I'm more productive working from. However, the senior management want us to go back to the office.
It has something to do with the factory workforce being unionised and complaining about the them and us culture and the senior management not being strong willed enough to front it out.
I agree it's a journey that's totally unnecessary
If you extrapolate that to HS2 times, it’s still further afield than Manchester or Leeds. Opening up connectivity options is never a bad thing.
Yes it is if it is hideously wasteful and done instead of other much more productive changes.
I'm pretty sure most people in Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Hull etc don't want to work in ****ing London. That's why they have chosen to live where they live. They don't want a fast train to London to take once a month or once a week or whatever. They want a ****ing train that takes them to their job in Manchester, Leeds, Hull or Liverpool.
Crazy legs has hit the nail on the head! HS2 is, and always was, about getting people to London faster…
It’s also not true to say that high speed rail in other countries is not driven by vanity. Spain only has high speed rail at all because the French had it! Finances of these lines are notoriously murky, but one thing is for sure - SNCF, DB and Renfe (France, Germany and Spain respectively) are all in seriously deep c**p with their finances and that predates Covid by a long time..
I have just been watching a video of the controversy surrounding Japans maglev line. That is costing half what HS2 will, will go twice as fast, and yet is still massively controversial..
Plus you can't really compare high speed rail in France like Crazy Legs keeps doing. It's just different in so many ways to the UK, the main difference of course being space versus population density.
They've got far more room to chuck stuff about.
We haven't. Therefore, other approaches need to happen, such as folks not having to travel hundreds of miles every week for things that could be done online/by phone.
crazy-legs
Full MemberThere’s a wider conversation about how Government creates and spends money because it’s obviously not like doing household finances or paying your credit card bill but grant-in-aid funding is specific.
That's purely accounting, there's nothing about grant-in-aid that prevents reallocation at the level that originally placed the grant.
How do governments create money? its a myth - they can't and don't. They can raise capital and investments, but that is not 'creating money' - those who are investing expect a return. They can print money, but even that is not creating money...its just cutting it up into smaller chunks, and the downsides of that are far more damaging in the long run...as we and our kids will find out over the coming decades after the money printing fetish the government has got itself into since 2008. Don't get too comfortable with that pension you've been building up. The Chickens have yet to come home to roost on that.
All governments can do is to create the environment and conditions for which business can thrive and its thriving businesses and the people that work for them that grows the economy and funds the government via taxation. And infrastructure that makes it easier and quicker for people to go about their daily lives and business is a big factor in that.
I've no idea about HS2, but seems to me if despite the rest of the nations rail network being in dire need of modernising...which it is...that doesn't mean we cant also improve the inter city network..it would be like saying "we're not going to do anything about climate change until we've solved the problem of world poverty".
But one thing I do know is that people who down talk the benefit of 20 minutes saving each way on a train journey clearly don't travel routinely. Air travellers will change airlines and airports to shave that much time off a flight. Airlines will build dedicated terminals at airports to offer such benefits to their customers. After 15 years of frequent flying on business I'd happily take 20 mins off my journey time if it was up for grabs. For those who don't value the benefit of that and the additional cost then there is always the existing rail links. If you're a handsomely paid Lawyer an extra 40 minutes in the office if you're popping down to HQ in London or visiting a client in Birmingham, is invaluable.
If they build it they will come. Thats for sure.
But one thing I do know is that people who down talk the benefit of 20 minutes saving each way on a train journey clearly don’t travel routinely.
...
After 15 years of frequent flying on business I’d happily take 20 mins off my journey time if it was up for grabs.
...
For those who don’t value the benefit of that and the additional cost then there is always the existing rail links. If you’re a handsomely paid Lawyer an extra 40 minutes in the office if you’re popping down to HQ in London or visiting a client in Birmingham, is invaluable
🤷♀️ Did you think you were arguing against everyone else there ?
Yes. It's for a privileged, expenses-saturated, largely London-based few - yet again being bolstered by the govt at taxpayers' expense. That's what ^ they virtually all said
After 15 years of frequent flying on business I’d happily take 20 mins off my journey time if it was up for grabs.
You're completely forgetting about the real costs of those precious 20 minutes that you'd grab.
As hard as it is to fathom an alternative, your continual growth is simply not sustainable.
We are really starting to pay what it really costs, more and more each year.
When you consider what it costs in real terms, not just monetary terms, as most people seem to struggle to look beyond, then your 20 minutes is going to look well,....I don't know how to put it to people concerned only with blindly maintaining the unsustainable.
Agreed - but even if you are pro growth & pro business HS2 was the wrong thing to build.
After 15 years of frequent flying on business I’d happily take 20 mins off my journey time if it was up for grabs.
I think you are missing the "we need to travel less. Full stop" part of the issue.
Agreed – but even if you are pro growth & pro business HS2 was the wrong thing to build.
What would be the right thing to build?
After 15 years of frequent flying on business I’d happily take 20 mins off my journey time if it was up for grabs.
You'd have loved pre-9/11 airline travel.
I use to be able to arrive at Heathrow by car, leave the keys with the Purple Parking folk and be on the (international) plane, all in under 30 mins.
I think you are missing the “we need to travel less. Full stop” part of the issue.
I don't think that is, or will be, accepted as a target. At least in the context of domestic travel. The best we can hope for is switching travel to the least environmentally damaging options, of which electrically powered trains rate pretty highly.
The best we can hope for is switching travel to the least environmentally damaging options, of which electrically powered trains rate pretty highly.
Indeed. Which is why its completely bonkers to be spending billions and billions on HS2, while simultaneously doing this...
Chris Grayling cancelled electrification to save money
As many people have repeatedly pointed out, there are a million more pressing projects that need funding ahead of this nonsense. HS2 is a financial black hole and whether they admit it or not, everything else is being sacrificed so the government can carry on pouring billions and billions into a project that will benefit a tiny number of people and make virtually no impact on the countries transport issues
It takes me twice as long to get from Sheffield to London by train than it does to get across Sheffield by bus. Shaving 20 minutes off getting to London is WAY down the list of public transport things that need improving.
whether they admit it or not, everything else is being sacrificed so the government can carry on pouring billions and billions into a project
I think that's the fundamental disagreement here. I don't think HS2 is really a factor in other (arguably more important) improvements not going ahead. If the government wanted to do them they could find the money. But as stated this country is very London-centric and anything North of Birmingham finds it hard to get a look-in. That doesn't mean HS2 isn't worth doing.
I don’t think HS2 is really a factor in other (arguably more important) improvements not going ahead.
HS2 is a factor in a lot of stuff actually going ahead!
Northern Powerhouse Rail depends on full completion of HS2 as it hooks into both eastern and western legs. Without HS2, the case for NPR becomes very flaky which then runs the risk of that being cancelled which then means no investment, development and regeneration across a vast swathe of the north of England.
There's development happening or planned in various Midlands and Northern towns and cities based entirely on the promise of HS2 (and to a slightly lesser extent, NPR)
I’m pretty sure most people in Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Hull etc don’t want to work in * London. That’s why they have chosen to live where they live. They don’t want a fast train to London to take once a month or once a week or whatever. They want a * train that takes them to their job in Manchester, Leeds, Hull or Liverpool.
That really.
.
I lived in the southeast for three years (Reading) and was amazed at the public transport there. Having come from rural Lincolnshire it was a massive eye-opener as to just how much public transport some parts of the country have.
Seems mad to be doing the southern bit first when they already have public transport and a lot of places don't have any at all.
Crazy legs - sort out the abomination that is Piccadilly for a start off! Everybody says it’s too expensive but it would be pennies compared to HS2. Transpennine route upgrade. Sort the capacity on the ECML which has now been delayed yet again. The list goes on. And of course, sort our woeful broadband. All of these will make a real difference to far more people than HS2 and in reality, rather than the rarefied atmosphere of KPMG derived business cases, they would have far more economic benefits…
Crazy legs – sort out the abomination that is Piccadilly for a start off! Everybody says it’s too expensive but it would be pennies compared to HS2. Transpennine route upgrade.
I don't disagree (especially because I have stood on the abomination that is Platforms 13/14 at Picc on any number of occasions. TRU is being done (slowly). There were some new bridges finished in Manchester a couple of days ago:
https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/major-16-day-railway-overhaul-completed-in-manchester-as-part-of-the-transpennine-route-upgrade.
Piccadilly is in a bit of a quandary. Depends a lot on HS2 since it's supposed to have a terminus there. Building Platforms 15/16 now could result in the whole lot being bulldozed again later to build in HS2/NPR. Much as Piccadilly does need sorting (ideally via a small nuclear device to flatten half of Manchester and start over), it needs certainty on HS2 and NPR before sorting the whole lot in one go.
Currently, most transport decisions are made using BCR (Benefit:Cost Ratios). Benefits is based on a whole load of stuff around opening up jobs, connectivity, "the economy", how many more people will be able to do X if Y is built and so on.
The cost is generally fairly fixed - it costs as much to work on a railway in London as it does to work on one in Newcastle (and Network Rail have a history of vastly inflating costs as well...). The benefits however are very heavily skewed towards the south / London. There are more people, more (and better paid) jobs, greater customer base (ie more people living near your potential new station) and so on so the benefits are huge.
Build CrossRail and X million people will use it per day/week/month/year
Build a Newcastle version of CrossRail and it'd cost basically the same give or take a few million. But you'd only have x hundred thousand using it per day/week/month/year so the benefits are lower.
I'm not saying that's right, that's just how it's done (although the Green Book which is used for transport planning and decisions is being re-written to hopefully balance that out a little).
So nothing gets done up north. The area gets more deprived which stymies any further investment so the area gets more deprived...
Good post crazy legs, very helpful. This is one of my frustrations with HS2 - so much seems to depend on this crazy leviathan that it stymies much needed developments. When it is cancelled, as it surely will be at least in part, then years will have been lost when development should have gone ahead to sort these issues out.
There is one benefit to the aborted scheme though - it will have resulted in the clearance of large parts of urban centres which needed redevelopment anyway, and leave developers with a much more attractive blank canvas than would otherwise have been the case…
Time will tell I guess, in the meantime I’ve seen and heard nothing to lessen my opposition…
Agreed – but even if you are pro growth & pro business HS2 was the wrong thing to build.
What would be the right thing to build
I would start up north. Better connections between Northern cities. Better transport within Northern cities. The UK needs a counter balance to London. Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester should have at least the same amount spent on transport infrastructure as London has had. (I'm thinking Crossrails £20 billion)
I live in South Wales & we are still in Pacers. Electrification was cancelled last time I heard.
I'd love to be able to get to Aberystwyth from Cardiff without going to Birmingham.
A big effort to get more freight on rails even if it means running the system at a loss.
Away from rail:
Masses more cycle paths (of course!)
Also I would be moving government departments up North- I'd move the the whole lot tbh. London will be fine without it and there are places that could really do with the extra jobs.
Following speculation over the last few days the FT has just started reporting that the Eastern leg is pretty much dead.
Looks like they’re finally going to confirm the scrapping of both Notthern Powerhouse Rail and the HS2 link to Leeds. If they ever had any intention of either of those things becoming anything more than meaningless slogans, which I seriously doubt
Wonder how long they’ll wait before they scrap the Birmingham to Manchester leg too?
https://twitter.com/angelarayner/status/1459963719962796038?s=21
This levelling up lark is going great, isn’t it?
Following speculation over the last few days the FT has just started reporting that the Eastern leg is pretty much dead.
The three people that believed it would get built must be gutted.
Are they going to give us a few pacer trains as consolation?
The long-delayed Integrated Rail Plan is supposed to be published on Thursday when we'll know for sure but yes, the fact that multiple papers are leaking more or less the same stuff is strongly suggestive that they're in the right ball park.
This from The Guardian yesterday:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/nov/14/government-to-finally-drop-plan-for-hs2-link-to-leeds-reports
The three people that believed it would get built must be gutted.
Not sure that people [b]believed[/b] it would be built but there were certainly a LOT of people [b]hoping[/b] it would be built. Boris was very positive about it all on a visit to the North not long after he was elected. Just goes to show how easily the sack of shit lies as he pleases.
I wish Angela Raynet would get off the fence and tell us how she feels.....
Still the paths we ride past Toton sidings and the bridleways and towpaths on my commute will be safe!
Still the paths we ride past Toton sidings and the bridleways and towpaths on my commute will be safe!
Does this mean they'll still build the bit to East Midlands Parkway, because it seems a waste to spend so much and cause such a large amount of damage for a railway to nowhere, as anyone that's been to parkway will know.
Not sure that people believed it would be built but there were certainly a LOT of people hoping it would be built.
True. I guess now that N Durham is blue, we can expect to see the Consett > Newcastle line get funded instead, which will cut around 10 minutes off that ever so tiresome 40 minute, frequent service to the Metro centre Gateshead. The re-knowned rail interchange that it is.
A project that ironically a lot hope won't go ahead, as it's unnecessary and they will tear up one of the best cycling routes in the NE, maybe even the UK to do it.
because it seems a waste to spend so much and cause such a large amount of damage for a railway to nowhere
You could just apply that to the entire HS2 project.
Any justification for it is now absolutely dead in the water. It’ll never get north of Birmingham and to fund this hideously expensive white elephant it looks like every other rail project, particularly the ones in the north that are desperately needed, will be sacrificed
The title ‘Integrated Rail Plan’ is clearly intended as some kind of joke as all the leaked plans shoe totally piecemeal and randomly disjointed schemes that it’s difficult to see the point of
Any justification for it is now absolutely dead in the water. It’ll never get north of Birmingham and to fund this hideously expensive white elephant it looks like every other rail project, particularly the ones in the north that are desperately needed, will be sacrificed
A lot of the ones in the North absolutely depend on HS2 being built in full.
New / heavily redesigned stations at Leeds and Manchester are desperately needed anyway but the benefits of developing them evaporate if HS2 isn't there. It's a catch-22.
Obviously this should have been done as part of a 30-year phased overhaul of the entire rail network. Electrification on every line, build HS2 in full and that then gives the impetus to be building all the other stuff in the middle like NPR (a lot of which can be done in sync with HS2).
In large part the rail industry only has itself to blame for this I’m afraid - too many piggy snouts in the trough (including some trades unions) have made it utterly impossible for the UK to deliver projects efficiently, on time and at a reasonable cost…
So many massive opportunities wasted - electrification has become a dirty word, even though it is desperately needed, because those tasked with delivering it are incompetent. Elizabeth line massively over budget and behind schedule. GWR electrification anybody? East Coast power upgrades? Yet the industry answer seems to be - ‘let’s increase budgets and give ourselves more time’…, rather than ‘how do we do it better’…
I'd be really interested to know the direct (direct delays, additional fencing, security etc.) and indirect costs (indirect delays, redesign, additional licensing, reviews, reports etc.) that the HS2 project has incurred as result of campaigning against it throughout its lifecycle to date, compared to the total project cost to date and predicted final costs.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not questioning the legitimacy of any action against HS2 or on the other had the business case for HS2 originally.
I’d be really interested to know the direct (direct delays, additional fencing, security etc.) and indirect costs (indirect delays, redesign, additional licensing, reviews, reports etc.) that the HS2 project has incurred as result of campaigning against it throughout its lifecycle to date, compared to the total project cost to date and predicted final costs.
A mate of mine works in the ready-mix industry, he sent me a picture of the temporary access roads for one of the HS2 works, it's even got kerbs on it...
Private industry has no problem whatsoever soaking up any money a Govt wants to spend.
I see the extent of the HS2 works at Euston every day, multiply that all the way to brum its mental
I'm not convinced the entire scheme isnt just a giant keynsian scheme to increase GDP, employment etc
I'm sure the government will sell scrapping Northern lef as allowifof more smaller projects, but we all knew it was going to go this way
Kimbers I think it largely is, and has been for some time. The business case, not the best in the first place, must now be well under water. I think it would have been scrapped a while ago if not for Covid, and boris trying to work out how to lessen the political damage.
The business case, not the best in the first place, must now be well under water.
The business case has been poorly explained throughout, especially concentrating on times - no-one really cares about 15 mins less to Birmingham!
It's also about capacity, future-proofing and expansion elsewhere.
Also, you reach a point in the construction where you can't really stop. Not without incurring very significant legal and compensation costs. You've told the companies involved you'll be giving them 10 years work at the following costs - if you then say "thanks for everything so far, we're cancelling it" they'll be after millions in compensation.
The armies of orange clad workers who’ve spent the last 2 years stood around in fields doing nothing probably don’t help. The slowest construction project I’ve ever seen. A ten year cash cow for the chosen few construction firm owners who’ve already retired off the back of it.
Crazy legs - I know you keep trying with rational explanations, which is appreciated, but the rationale for HS2 seems to change with the wind. The capacity argument has been completely blown out of the water by the pandemic. Even if passenger numbers are recovering (and they still have a huge way to go - what 65-70% now of pre pandemic volumes), the revenue is still massively adrift (not sure how much as the rail industry is, strangely enough, unwilling to say). This reflects the very different nature of rail travel post pandemic - commuting and business is out, leisure is in.
Again though, even if you accept there is some tenuous real case for doing it, the reality is that the execution of it is/ will be so utterly appalling that it will discredit big infra projects for decades - and that is exactly what is happening.
The cancellation point is actually what really gets my goat. It is quite clear that for some time HS2 has been intent on wasting as much money, and doing as much environmental damage as humanly possible in order that it can make exactly this point. It is utterly shocking. It may not be illegal but it really should be.
As for what the money should be spent on - thats easy - digital infrastructure - world class connectivity. Plus of course some more targeted transport interventions too!
Well, this is shit. Travelling south from Yorkshire on the trains keeps getting more difficult and more expensive. The lack of capacity is pushing people onto the roads… and then people make the claim that is proof that extra capacity is not needed. A short sighted decision that will help clog our roads here for generations to come. Levelling down.
I’d be really interested to know the direct (direct delays, additional fencing, security etc.)
No idea overall but the masses of security bods (24hr coverage), plus hire of crane thingy, use of police and partial road closure over the past month or two, just to clear the protesters at Wendover won't have come cheap.
Are they going to give us a few pacer trains as consolation?
Northern Rail got the ScotRail cast-offs. They're actually not too bad. Not sure why ScotRail threw them in the bin in the first place, though they are hellishly noisy if you live near the line.
Northern Rail got the ScotRail cast-offs. They’re actually not too bad. Not sure why ScotRail threw them in the bin in the first place, though they are hellishly noisy if you live near the line.
They fail on disability access and on safety grounds.
They are all now gone, Northern have actually got some quite nice new trains.
I’m not convinced the entire scheme isnt just a giant keynsian scheme to increase GDP, employment etc
Nothing wrong with that as a concept, as long as the resulting infrastructure is useful and the money gets spent in the UK as much as possible. And whilst the efficacy or not of the implementation, we do really need a proper high speed rail network. Which will ultimately need to include a London to Birmingham leg.
Birmingham is only just outside London. If the new lines don’t go any further than that, it’ll be a wasted opportunity to improve our north/south links. Levelling down.
A mate of mine works in the ready-mix industry, he sent me a picture of the temporary access roads for one of the HS2 works, it’s even got kerbs on it…
Compounds are going to be there for a while, so all the legislation around water runoff, silts/oils capture will be required the same as any permanent commercial/industrial estate. Best practice comes into it too as the Govt cant be seen to be using mud covered compounds and haul roads, dragging muck onto the highway as the 1000s of cars and trucks per day pull in and out. I would expect the haul roads and compounds/offices to have similar in depth design as the likes of a local out of town development where the likes of Currys, halfords, Burger King etc. all congregate. It would probably be a drastic underestimate to say £1m in groundworks per compound - add in design, supervision, utilities and offices on top...
Thought I had heard there were plans to redevelop some of the compound areas once all is complete to industrial/commercial hubs to bring some minor additional gains and reduce the waste/CO2 from demobilising the compounds, but I cant find anything with a very cursory google.
Northern Rail got the ScotRail cast-offs. They’re actually not too bad. Not sure why ScotRail threw them in the bin in the first place, though they are hellishly noisy if you live near the line.
They fail on disability access and on safety grounds.
They are all now gone, Northern have actually got some quite nice new trains.
And Scotrail still have 40 year old 125's...
It's sounding like the whole of HS2 and railway upgrades are driven by construction companies wanting to make money rather than a national plan to get people to use efficient, clean, quiet and reliable trains...
As for what the money should be spent on – thats easy – digital infrastructure – world class connectivity.
I'm sure there there was someone who suggested this...
get people to use efficient, clean, quiet and reliable trains
When it comes to long distance north/south journeys, what is the point, when in a normal year those lines are at capacity running over packed services? Without improved connectivity, it’s road and air that will expand for this kind of journey, not rail travel. Clogging our roads and increasing pollution from internal flights.
I’m sure there there was someone who suggested this…
And publicly owned communications infrastructure (tasked with delivering the coverage and performance for all that private companies have taken subsidies to provide but failed to finish delivering) wasn’t proposed as an alternative to better public transport infrastructure… both were proposed at the last election by “someone”. It’s not either or. The “regions” need both. Rather than neither. Levelling down.
The cancellation point is actually what really gets my goat. It is quite clear that for some time HS2 has been intent on wasting as much money, and doing as much environmental damage as humanly possible in order that it can make exactly this point. It is utterly shocking. It may not be illegal but it really should be
This is so true. I see the evidence for that all through Warwickshire.
Much of the initial large-scale clearing was also done at the height of Lockdowns when everyone who might GAS was busy trying not to catch the plague. Absolutely against much of the advice that the rest of us had to follow.
I’d be really interested to know the direct (direct delays, additional fencing, security etc.) and indirect costs (indirect delays, redesign, additional licensing, reviews, reports etc.) that the HS2 project has incurred as result of campaigning against it throughout its lifecycle to date, compared to the total project cost to date and predicted final costs
I imagine that anyone planning the project, looking at how they were going to destroy such a monumentally huge amount of areas of habitat, beautiful places, woodlands and force people off their land, might have had a tiny inkling that they had better budget for some opposition to that in the entire cost.
You don't just go ****ing up the countryside and not expect there to be anyone trying to stop you. I'm sure it would have formed part of the 'budgeting projections'....Lolz
Important to note this just isn’t about (not) improving routes between Yorkshire and London, it wrecks plans to better join cities up across the North of England. Levelling down.
The capacity argument has been completely blown out of the water by the pandemic.
I’m interested in this view. I’ve not seen any credible evidence that rail traffic is going to be permanently depressed. Happy to see some projections on this if you have it. I can see stuff forecasting the near future, but nothing yet that’s decades away taking into account some of the changes we may well face in the longer term.
WFH is one thing, tighter restrictions on driving in urban areas could counteract it. Pandemic is not going to last forever in a disruptive way.
best thing i i heared in weeks, the tories ditching this idiotic plan of wasting 80 billion to make it a bit quicker to get to london.
a few points.
us folk up here dont want to come to london.
we can get about just fine up here.
spend a fraction on upgrades.
give half the money, 40 billion to the health service.
Us up north would like to be able to do Manchester to Leeds quicker by train than by bike.
I can see stuff forecasting the near future, but nothing yet that’s decades away taking into account some of the changes we may well face in the longer term.
My local train operator in the North is forecasting to be back to 100% of pre-Covid numbers within 3 to 5 years at most. They’re already at 100% on most weekends and on some weekends the leisure travel demand is above pre-Covid now, such is the strength of the leisure and holiday demand.
So it is almost inevitable that rail demand will bounce back very soon at a regional level. Less certain for longer rail journeys (think Leeds or Sheffield to London) given the lower demand for business travel and remote meetings becoming the norm. But this just adds to the case for improved east west connectivity across the Pennines.
Well i'm disappointed the Northern section was cancelled. High speed rail in the UK would be nice.
Maybe I'm biased, but I always thought it would make more sense to start the project in Yorkshire/lancashire and work south and north from there.
I don't think anynone ever said, god, I wish I could get from leeds to kings cross 25mins faster, as you're still sat on a train for circa 2.5/3 hours. You could drive it in that, and if it's a short notice buisniess requirement/walk on fair your looking at over £100 for a ticket. It can be cheaper to drive or fly assuming you already have access to a car/local airport.
I used to fly from leeds to southampton on a semi regualr basis with work, as it generally worked out cheaper in terms of hours lost vs ticket price.
Maybe I’m biased, but I always thought it would make more sense to start the project in Yorkshire/lancashire and work south and north from there.
Actually Glasgow or Edinburgh and work south
Its always just been a vanity project and its been clear for years its not going past Birmingham
for what has been spent to save a few minutes and to open up birmingham as London commuter territory the rest of the UK could have had a decent set of upgrades
Capacity was the only valid argument for it. Journey time could be shortened much more cheaply by improving the local facilities. I used to take the train from Warrington to London. The 4 miles from my house to Bank Quay station, finding somewhere to park and walking the last bit took 45 min, the 165 miles to Euston took 90min. Relocating the station to be next to the M62, with a proper sized car park, would have made the journey much more attractive.
Actually Glasgow or Edinburgh and work south
Its always just been a vanity project and its been clear for years its not going past Birmingham
Yeh it needs to be more a 'peer to peer' network rather than hierachical 'spurs' from a london main hub.
for what has been spent to save a few minutes and to open up birmingham as London commuter territory the rest of the UK could have had a decent set of upgrades
Not without decades of disruption.
You can't add more trains onto the existing network, there isn't space. You can't add longer trains without upgrading every major station in the UK to accommodate them. You can't convert to electric running without massive disruption, probably over weekends/bank holidays, for the next 10-15 years and the travelling public would never go for that.
Failing to build a proper rail network locks in car dependency for the next generation and scuppers any attempt at "going green" or cutting emissions or whatever buzzphrase is being used this week.
I get all the stuff about woodlands and environment, I hate to see trees being cut down too. But RIS2 (Roads Investment Strategy, 2020 - 2025) destroys more green space and ancient woodland than all of HS2 - it's just less noticeable because it's a bypass here, a junction there, a dualling somewhere else - as well as tying in car use and the resulting emissions for the next 40 years.
Honestly, if this had been done properly (ie, if we'd have got China to build it!), it would genuinely be world class. However the only things world class that this Government can manage are incompetence and corruption.
Kings cross and euston are bonkers, so big they may aswell be the same mega-station.
But that's because so many passengers are forced to go through that pinch point/ bottle neck of logistics.
If you think ab
out it in IT networking terms, and I'm no expert on that, it's insane.
It's a bit like the Suez canal or the Panema canal. No redundancy, single point of fail.
Too expensive to build more.
Not without decades of disruption.
You can’t add more trains onto the existing network, there isn’t space. You can’t add longer trains without upgrading every major station in the UK to accommodate them. You can’t convert to electric running without massive disruption, probably over weekends/bank holidays, for the next 10-15 years and the travelling public would never go for that.
they could whack double-decker trains in on longer routes to increase capacity. It doesn't double capacity, but it would add around 50% with no changes to infrastructure needed at all.