HS2

[RickH]

A different point of view,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf5avCUNP0M

I was just going to post a link to that video having just watched it.

If you've not clicked on the link it is titled "Should we build HS2 or Re-open old Railway lines?" and a lot of it is talking with a railway engineer called Gareth Dennis explaining the reasoning for building it (in terms that I've not heard before about increasing capacity. (The rest is more usual fare for the channel talking about features of abandoned lines around the country).

I knew we needed more capacity (I've spent enough time waiting for trains at Preston, Wigan & Warrington Bank Quay to appreciate just how full the West Coast mainline is) but hadn't heard figures on just how big the effect of moving the fast intercity trains off the current multi-purpose lines would be - basically a tripling of the capacity.

[horizon]

I knew we needed more capacity

I would really like to explore this more, especially of course also in relation to roads. Can you exlpain to a layman such as myself at what point we won't require more capacity and how that will come about?

[Cyril Haearn]

More roads = more traffic
More trains = more traffic
-1

[philg]

Pretty much my view here today in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... is-johnson

[Tangled Metal]

HS2 was only about politics? Perhaps true but I wonder if it's about the politics of north versus south.

Obviously going to change as they get more information on the parts of the more northern routes they've not surveyed but the new NAO report currently puts the cost benefit at £2.2 for every £1 spent. This is currently estimated at that figure but it will change. If course compare it with the figures for southern projects its significantly higher than jubilee line extension and the thameslink project. All that in a really massive infrastructure project. Obviously going to go the way of London's crossrail project. Anyone know if that's fully open yet?

As far as inequality across the country goes its obviously not north versus south. For example there's areas surrounding London that have some of the worst levels of inequality in development terms. Other areas in the north are doing rather ok considering. It's why I question the northern powerhouse rubbish.

[reohn2]

IMO we have a South East problem that needs changing,as long a London is seen as the destination all roads and railways will lead there.There's more to the country than London.

[Tangled Metal]

IMO we have a South East problem that needs changing,as long a London is seen as the destination all roads and railways will lead there.There's more to the country than London.

Well said but I just wish they hadn't found the lakes. Traffic is horrendous and old, traditional pubs have changed to expensive bistro pubs for the SUV driving towny to visit in their pattagucci outdoor outfits and annoying ways.

You know I've been up here so long that I still remember the first time I heard an Essex accent in Aside. It was about 9 years ago and marked the end of the old days up here where you didn't have winter traffic jams past windermere except in summer and bank holidays.

[reohn2]

IMO we have a South East problem that needs changing,as long a London is seen as the destination all roads and railways will lead there.There's more to the country than London.

Well said but I just wish they hadn't found the lakes. Traffic is horrendous and old, traditional pubs have changed to expensive bistro pubs for the SUV driving towny to visit in their pattagucci outdoor outfits and annoying ways.

You know I've been up here so long that I still remember the first time I heard an Essex accent in Aside. It was about 9 years ago and marked the end of the old days up here where you didn't have winter traffic jams past windermere except in summer and bank holidays.

Yep,it's a shame,but then time never stands still,though in some way I wish it did

[pwa]

HS2 was only about politics? Perhaps true but I wonder if it's about the politics of north versus south.

Obviously going to change as they get more information on the parts of the more northern routes they've not surveyed but the new NAO report currently puts the cost benefit at £2.2 for every £1 spent. This is currently estimated at that figure but it will change. If course compare it with the figures for southern projects its significantly higher than jubilee line extension and the thameslink project. All that in a really massive infrastructure project. Obviously going to go the way of London's crossrail project. Anyone know if that's fully open yet?

As far as inequality across the country goes its obviously not north versus south. For example there's areas surrounding London that have some of the worst levels of inequality in development terms. Other areas in the north are doing rather ok considering. It's why I question the northern powerhouse rubbish.

True. The problem is the relentless spending on London at the expense of the rest of the UK. Outside London we are all thinking "When will it be our turn?" and the answer seems to be "Never!" HS2 may or may not be a good way to spend on infrastructure for the part of the UK that is not London, but I think there is an expectation building that infrastructure spending will be focused less on London and more on the North and other parts of the UK.

[Cyril Haearn]

London is the problem, its size and dominance
Not many on these fora love London I suspect

Read several times that speedy trains benefit the places that were already doing better, hs trains might benefit Leeds, even Crewe or Rugby, but not Todmorden, Morley, Colwyn Bay

[RickH]

London is the problem, its size and dominance
Not many on these fora love London I suspect

Read several times that speedy trains benefit the places that were already doing better, hs trains might benefit Leeds, even Crewe or Rugby, but not Todmorden, Morley, Colwyn Bay

The guy on the video linked to said that the opposite is true. He used Aberystwyth as an example & he reckoned it was probably about as far away from HS2 as you can get on the network. The argument goes that moving express trains off the overcrowded lines through Birmingham New St will improve the services from Aberystwyth which are often unreliable as trains get stuck waiting for a platform at New St.

The current situation also means that services can't be improved by more trains on local routes because there isn't the capacity at the moment to feed them into the stations on the mainline network.

[Darkman]

Haven't read all 30-odd pages of this thread and not going to because.... well, time.

But I saw on the news this morning that the cost is now expected to exceed £100bn, from an original budget of ~£30bn.

If anybody in employment made such a colossal "miscalculation", they'd be fired on the spot.

Why the quotes around "miscalculation"? Well, I can't be the only one to think that they knew it was going to cost upwards of £100bn right from the start. But if they'd said that, then the project would never have got off the drawing board. Suggest a lower budget that you KNOW isn't feasible, get the project moving, then gradually increase the budget, on the basis that "oh well, we've spent all that public money now, we can't be seen to have wasted it. Let's just keep going".

And if phase 2 does get scrapped, well, at least London's got their new train track. Because, you know.... London. F#$% the north, as per.

[horizon]

The guy on the video linked to said . . .

The video was interesting (especially the capacity issue). AIUI he also said that HS2 would have very little environmental impact. But I also read this:

Another report collating data from local Wildlife Trusts last week disclosed that HS2 will destroy or irreparably damage five internationally protected wildlife sites, 693 local wildlife sites, 108 ancient woodlands and 33 legally protected sites of special scientific interest.

I don't think HS2 solves the problem of what to do about the demand for movement of goods and people. Nor do I know that the construction issues of HS2 (use of materials, disposal of waste) have been addressed. And AFAIK HS2 increases use of energy, even if that offsets other uses. And nor is the economic case (such as it is) fully made.

What really gets to me though is that there is a built-in assumption that laying down concrete in order to speed up human movement must always trump people's need for peace, quiet, the countryside and nature. The assumption in the video was that capacity must be increased. Why?

[RickH]

The guy on the video linked to said . . .

The video was interesting (especially the capacity issue). AIUI he also said that HS2 would have very little environmental impact. But I also read this:

Another report collating data from local Wildlife Trusts last week disclosed that HS2 will destroy or irreparably damage five internationally protected wildlife sites, 693 local wildlife sites, 108 ancient woodlands and 33 legally protected sites of special scientific interest.

I don't think HS2 solves the problem of what to do about the demand for movement of goods and people. Nor do I know that the construction issues of HS2 (use of materials, disposal of waste) have been addressed. And AFAIK HS2 increases use of energy, even if that offsets other uses. And nor is the economic case (such as it is) fully made.

What really gets to me though is that there is a built-in assumption that laying down concrete in order to speed up human movement must always trump people's need for peace, quiet, the countryside and nature. The assumption in the video was that capacity must be increased. Why?

The important thing, if we can't just stop people moving about, is modal shift. For long distance movement of people & goods get them on the railways. For urban areas get them walking & cycling for short trips & bus/train/tram for longer ones. And, of course, if people aren't travelling from one urban area to another by car they won't be adding to the the congestion & local pollution at their destination.

Whilst the headlines go on about HS2 cutting journey times between London & Birmingham the vastly increased potential for local & regional trains - more reliable & more frequent - that have to share the mainline track & stations (even if only briefly en route) with the intercity trains is almost never mentioned.

[horizon]

The important thing, if we can't just stop people moving about . . .

This would be my starting point, though the rest of your post I agreed with - the benefit of shifting fast trains off the current tracks onto HS2 isn't much talked about.

But we simply don't appear to have at present a mechanism for rationing movement. This to my mind is the fundamental problem: we cannot say to someone, I am sorry you cannot go by train from Euston on a Monday morning or drive to London on the M1 at 5.00 pm on a Friday evening. So we just keep building and building and building, whatever the cost. At what point do we stop?