HS2 and "Leveling-Up"

[Pendodave]

As you will see, our 109km of high speed railway line is well behind Spain, France, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Turkey. At the moment, some people fly between London and Manchester, because it's quicker.

We are a small densely populated country.
Most of the successful implementations of high speed rail are in large countries with dispersed population centres.
Switzerland has probably the best public transport system in the Europe. It manages perfectly well without 186mph trains.
It takes just over 2 hours to get from the centre of london to the centre of Manchester. I very much doubt that people fly because it's quicker.

[853]

As you will see, our 109km of high speed railway line is well behind Spain, France, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Turkey. At the moment, some people fly between London and Manchester, because it's quicker.

We are a small densely populated country.
Most of the successful implementations of high speed rail are in large countries with dispersed population centres.
Switzerland has probably the best public transport system in the Europe. It manages perfectly well without 186mph trains.
It takes just over 2 hours to get from the centre of london to the centre of Manchester. I very much doubt that people fly because it's quicker.

A five second search on Google revealed British Airways offer 7 flights from Heathrow between Monday and Thursday, 6 on Fridays and Saturdays, and 4 on Sundays. It's a one hour flight, and they wouldn't put on this number of flights if the demand wasn't there.

I don't know what car you drive, but the direct route up the M1, M6, A556 and A56 is 198 miles - so I'd like to see you do it in 2 hours

[ANTONISH]

How long does the fastest train journey from London to Manchester take?
And check in and check out at the airport - as opposed to getting on and off the train.

Also - is it cheaper to fly?.

I don't think I'd fancy the drive.

[Tangled Metal]

Next 2 trains from London to Manchester traits 2h12mm and 2h6m. Mostly it averages out at 2h34m. That's 163 miles

With waiting time at airports you're probably better taking the train.

Compare lancaster to Manchester 46 miles in average of 1h46m. It's a busy route but it gets old rail stock and often sits around waiting for longer distance trains that are running late to pass because they have priority.

Imho HS2 is needed to take strain off current WCML to allow other train routes to speed up. However, I think the current HS2 plan doesn't go close to where it needs to go. We need such a route to go to Leeds, Newcastle, Carlisle and to Glasgow and Edinburgh. We need ihigh speed train nfrastructure to replace our cutback Victorian infrastructure to allow for local trains to link in with these city hubs. We also need better and faster East West train routes too. You can get from London to many northern towns and cities quicker than you can get between northern towns and cities that are half the distance apart!

If course more important to get from London to Bristol or other southern town or city than between northern towns and cities. Second class citizens as far at the Westminster shower go.

[853]

Imho HS2 is needed to take strain off current WCML to allow other train routes to speed up. However, I think the current HS2 plan doesn't go close to where it needs to go. We need such a route to go to Leeds, Newcastle, Carlisle and to Glasgow and Edinburgh. We need ihigh speed train nfrastructure to replace our cutback Victorian infrastructure to allow for local trains to link in with these city hubs. We also need better and faster East West train routes too. You can get from London to many northern towns and cities quicker than you can get between northern towns and cities that are half the distance apart!

If course more important to get from London to Bristol or other southern town or city than between northern towns and cities. Second class citizens as far at the Westminster shower go.

Before Covid, it was said that the WCML was operating at full capacity so an increase in it was a major reason for HS2. In short, move the fast express trains onto HS2 and leave the WCML, built by the Victorians, for local trains and freight.

The concept of "levelling-Up" appears to be hot air to appease northern voters. It is noticeable that HS1, and the part of HS2 that will be built, both go to London. "If it doesn't benefit London, then it won't get built" seems to be the message from government. There have been several proposals for new rail, and road, links between Liverpool-Manchester-Bradford-Leeds-Hull which would benefit millions of people, but nothing has come of it.

London-Bristol is a slightly different case, as this railway line is the original HS0. Due to the foresight of Mr Brunel almost 200 years ago, the line was built very flat and fairly straight to enable high speed running.

[Tangled Metal]

Everything politicians do appeases some group or other. As to it being London to Manchester only i get your point but it still helps. Not as much as Continuing the one to Leeds and further but it's a long game. You'll always end up developing infrastructure like this out of the big economic centre of the UK. I reckon things are me economically divided north and southeast these days than when rail routes first developed and indeed motorways.

We live in the real world. If we say don't build something because n it mainly serves London then we'll get nowhere. Besides, I know many who would benefit from this who do use the WCML South of Manchester, through New Street. Jeez! Taking pressure off BNS will help in itself. What a bottleneck!

[Lance Dopestrong]

Yes, we live in the real world...where a massive infrastructure project is proposed, the government fails to control spiralling costs, the government twice reduces the scale or the project and then hits the brakes even if only temporarily, and the end result is billons of pounds are spent, the original objective remains unachieved, and what little benefit the newly neutered project does bring disproportionately favours London and the SE.

Either do it properly, or simply don't bother. This half arrissed messing around ends up probably costing more than the original project would have in full if managed by someone with a functioning braincell, but delivers little more than simply doing .nothing in the first place.

And the best bit? Even if used at maximum capacity it will take over a century to offset the carbon emissions the construction is responsible for, at a time when we have looming and legally binding emissions targets to meet.

It could have been brilliant, but the do it on the cheap attitude that prevails so heavily in the UK once again ends up costing more in the long run while delivering a fraction of the promise. Get serious, or don't bother, because the middle way is damaging the country, the environment, and the economy, with little chance of coming close to meeting its original objective.

[Tangled Metal]

Did it matter much now? Suspended 2 years but labour expected to be in power in 18 months. Starmer has already said he'd support it and I reckon in light of the influence of Manchester mayor and all the other Labour mayor's and councils in the North I would not very against him getting it done and more too.

Of course I will not bet on it as they're politicians afterall and you can never trust any of them to follow through.

[Jon in Sweden]

Yes, we live in the real world...where a massive infrastructure project is proposed, the government fails to control spiralling costs, the government twice reduces the scale or the project and then hits the brakes even if only temporarily, and the end result is billons of pounds are spent, the original objective remains unachieved, and what little benefit the newly neutered project does bring disproportionately favours London and the SE.

Either do it properly, or simply don't bother. This half arrissed messing around ends up probably costing more than the original project would have in full if managed by someone with a functioning braincell, but delivers little more than simply doing .nothing in the first place.

And the best bit? Even if used at maximum capacity it will take over a century to offset the carbon emissions the construction is responsible for, at a time when we have looming and legally binding emissions targets to meet.

It could have been brilliant, but the do it on the cheap attitude that prevails so heavily in the UK once again ends up costing more in the long run while delivering a fraction of the promise. Get serious, or don't bother, because the middle way is damaging the country, the environment, and the economy, with little chance of coming close to meeting its original objective.

I very much agree with every point you've made. A great post.

[Sweep]

Did it matter much now? Suspended 2 years but labour expected to be in power in 18 months. Starmer has already said he'd support it and I reckon in light of the influence of Manchester mayor and all the other Labour mayor's and councils in the North I would not very against him getting it done and more too.

Of course I will not bet on it as they're politicians afterall and you can never trust any of them to follow through.

wouldn't trust labour on this.
Labour could so easily have stopped rail privatisation in its tracks if they had clearly come out and said, not too long before a general election, that they would reverse the privatisation planned by Major.
But they decided not to.
Then once in power did not a lot apart from that vaguely titled body Prescott was allowed to head to shuffle papers and conduct surveys - on a first class business trip Nottingham to London I was once handed one of their meaningless surveys about what I would like from rail travel. That "survey/ consultant <i>[inappropriate word removed]</i> elicited some rewlevant comments from mel.
I well remember as a Labour supporter having to do a Mr Angry phone call to Labour HQ press office to tell them what I thought of their endless waffle just after I had heard about the St Paddington flamefest - they hadn't heard of it.
This was just weeks after I had been rattled to near death on trip Nottingham to London/coffees spilled everywhere and a mail to the operator received a reply that all was well. Not too longer after I received that waffle reply vast parts of the rail network had tiny tiny speed restrictions imposed ed which made bus travel Nottingham to London far safer and more reliable.
Labour government.

[Stevek76]

And the best bit? Even if used at maximum capacity it will take over a century to offset the carbon emissions the construction is responsible for, at a time when we have looming and legally binding emissions targets to meet.

This is incorrect, improvements in construction tech mean that even on the formal forecasts which are unrealistically pessimistic on aviation shift, do not even consider local car shift from exploited released capacity nor weekends generally that's negative before 60 years. Realistically it's far sooner, last year hs2 set out a course to be neutral by 2035.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the total carbon cost of construction is the equivalent of only a few days of uk motor vehicle emissions.

[Sweep]

Kinda relevant I think.

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/th ... dium=email

Liz line now busiest in UK.

I went on it in its earliest days and it was very quiet - have noticed the increase even though I generally avoid rush-hour (am often with a bike) - as Ian says, build it and they will come.

If it's good enough for Londoners ...

Plenty of other examples of megabucks spent on transport in London - London Bridge station total rebuild for instance.

And meanwhile, more news of bus cuts in the north.

Or buses moved to other operators (with reduced ferquency) which mean a massive boost in the fares for some journeys as single company passes can no longer be used. As of course there is little integration of transport up north. Unlike London.

Levelling up my ... (forum robot censor please insert appropriate obscenity)

[Tangled Metal]

Moratorium on all infrastructure spending in the South East until the North has levelled up!

[Tangled Metal]

Or move parliament to Kendal! Let's see MPs walk to oxenholme to catch a mainline train back to their constituencies. Or Dunsop Bridge. That's the geographical centre of the UK. No real public transport.

Not serious but I do think moving parliament away from the financial powerhouse up to the north where there's an infrastructure imbalance might be worth the cost, especially with the cost to make Westminster fit for purpose and structurally sound. Let the current parliament building collapse after a new, modern and forward looking one is built nearer the centre of the country. Political and economic power should be separated.

[Jdsk]

It's a two year delay on the construction between Birmingham and Manchester.

Which will cause a vast waste of time and money on rescheduling and reprocurement. What would Macbeth have said?

NAO: "High Speed Two: Euston":
https://www.nao.org.uk/reports/high-speed-two-euston/
includes:
However, the deferral of spending to manage inflationary pressures will lead to additional costs and potentially to higher spend overall for the project that will need to be managed closely.

Jonathan

PS: But no Shakespearean quote AFAICT.