HS2, whats the current status ?
Discussion
dcb said:
MarshPhantom said:
Would you want HS2 at the bottom of your garden?
No, but if UK Gov bought my house at some 30% over the current market value,like the French do, then I'd be happy to move elsewhere to allow HS2 to be built.
The French got a lot of TGV network for not much aggro from the locals.
The Germans got their ICE network and the Spaniards got their AVE network as well.
Job's not impossible. Why do the Brits make such a mess of it ?
dcb said:
MarshPhantom said:
Would you want HS2 at the bottom of your garden?
No, but if UK Gov bought my house at some 30% over the current market value,like the French do, then I'd be happy to move elsewhere to allow HS2 to be built.
The French got a lot of TGV network for not much aggro from the locals.
The Germans got their ICE network and the Spaniards got their AVE network as well.
Job's not impossible. Why do the Brits make such a mess of it ?
sugerbear said:
dcb said:
MarshPhantom said:
Would you want HS2 at the bottom of your garden?
No, but if UK Gov bought my house at some 30% over the current market value,like the French do, then I'd be happy to move elsewhere to allow HS2 to be built.
The French got a lot of TGV network for not much aggro from the locals.
The Germans got their ICE network and the Spaniards got their AVE network as well.
Job's not impossible. Why do the Brits make such a mess of it ?
MarshPhantom said:
The problem with the UK rather than other countries is we don't have the space to do these massive infrastructure projects without the adversely affecting the lives of millions of people.
We have plenty of space, and steady on with the over-exaggerations - it won't adversely affect eh lives of millions at all. It "might" adversely affect the lives of a few thousand at best, if they choose to let it.Pwig said:
Don't forget it is being built to increase rail capacity, and if you are going to build a new railway you might as well make it a high speed one
High speed compared to what ? You've only got 125 miles between London and Birmingham. It's 2 and a bit hours by car or 1h 25m by train. Saving 15-20 mins will not make any difference, it's illogical to spend so much money on saving so little time which nobody complains about anyway. Add capacity but why not do it cheaply - we're not Australia where travel can take days.
Swervin_Mervin said:
MarshPhantom said:
The problem with the UK rather than other countries is we don't have the space to do these massive infrastructure projects without the adversely affecting the lives of millions of people.
We have plenty of space, and steady on with the over-exaggerations - it won't adversely affect eh lives of millions at all. It "might" adversely affect the lives of a few thousand at best, if they choose to let it.My figure will be much nearer the truth than yours. What about everyone in North London for starters? There's around 1000 live in my Dad's village, which is one of many along the route.
George111 said:
High speed compared to what ? You've only got 125 miles between London and Birmingham. It's 2 and a bit hours by car or 1h 25m by train.
Saving 15-20 mins will not make any difference, it's illogical to spend so much money on saving so little time which nobody complains about anyway. Add capacity but why not do it cheaply - we're not Australia where travel can take days.
I'm unconvinced by HS2 in terms of the journey time savings, but it does seem that capacity on the existing route is an issue. What I find surprising is the fact that it's be linked to HS1 - to me that would seem to be the first thing that needs to be built, so you could travel direct to Europe without having to change in London.Saving 15-20 mins will not make any difference, it's illogical to spend so much money on saving so little time which nobody complains about anyway. Add capacity but why not do it cheaply - we're not Australia where travel can take days.
MarshPhantom said:
Swervin_Mervin said:
MarshPhantom said:
The problem with the UK rather than other countries is we don't have the space to do these massive infrastructure projects without the adversely affecting the lives of millions of people.
We have plenty of space, and steady on with the over-exaggerations - it won't adversely affect eh lives of millions at all. It "might" adversely affect the lives of a few thousand at best, if they choose to let it.My figure will be much nearer the truth than yours. What about everyone in North London for starters? There's around 1000 live in my Dad's village, which is one of many along the route.
And is every single one of those thousand against it ? Have you asked them ? I imagine those in north London are used to building work and change. It won't be a game changer for them.
If it wasn't the village your dad lives in then it would be another. Unfortunately the answer isn't don't ever built anything anywhere incase somebody doesn't like it. Don't forget every house was just a field At some point.
If it wasn't the village your dad lives in then it would be another. Unfortunately the answer isn't don't ever built anything anywhere incase somebody doesn't like it. Don't forget every house was just a field At some point.
dav123a said:
And is every single one of those thousand against it ? Have you asked them ? I imagine those in north London are used to building work and change. It won't be a game changer for them.
If it wasn't the village your dad lives in then it would be another. Unfortunately the answer isn't don't ever built anything anywhere incase somebody doesn't like it. Don't forget every house was just a field At some point.
The area was also recently had to suffer the construction of the M6 toll road, so they know all about white elephants up that way.If it wasn't the village your dad lives in then it would be another. Unfortunately the answer isn't don't ever built anything anywhere incase somebody doesn't like it. Don't forget every house was just a field At some point.
Europa1 said:
George111 said:
High speed compared to what ? You've only got 125 miles between London and Birmingham. It's 2 and a bit hours by car or 1h 25m by train.
Saving 15-20 mins will not make any difference, it's illogical to spend so much money on saving so little time which nobody complains about anyway. Add capacity but why not do it cheaply - we're not Australia where travel can take days.
I'm unconvinced by HS2 in terms of the journey time savings, but it does seem that capacity on the existing route is an issue. What I find surprising is the fact that it's be linked to HS1 - to me that would seem to be the first thing that needs to be built, so you could travel direct to Europe without having to change in London.Saving 15-20 mins will not make any difference, it's illogical to spend so much money on saving so little time which nobody complains about anyway. Add capacity but why not do it cheaply - we're not Australia where travel can take days.
gothatway said:
I was surprised to see that it is planned to run through Old Oak Common. That being so, why isn't the terminus Paddington? Platform capacity? Presumably at some future it would run to Heathrow from there?
It'll have nothing to do with government ministers, their homes or marginal constituencies 
HS2 rail link 'over-priced' say transport experts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36376837
HS2 is an over-priced, gold-plated project and will fail in many of its objectives, a group of transport experts has warned.
The academics support high-speed rail overall, but say HS2 is five times more expensive than its French equivalent.
They argue that the benefits of HS2 can be achieved much more cheaply, with lower CO2 emissions, and they want their analysis examined by government.
A spokesman for HS2 said options for bringing down costs were being studied.
But the academics - including some leading lights in transport - list a series of complaints about the current version of HS2.
HS2 has been designed to increase capacity and connections, regenerate the North and reduce climate impacts change.
Yet the critics say it will only achieve one of these - capacity. Many key rail journeys, they say, would be worse, including to Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield.
Image caption HS2 will cost five times more per mile than the high speed TGV line currently being built in France
The academics are especially baffled by the decision to design HS2 to run ultra-fast at 240mph - that's much faster than the 190mph normal for continental high-speed trains covering much greater distances.
One of them, Professor James Croll of UCL, told BBC News: "It is just vanity for the UK to have faster trains than the usual high-speed trains.
"The UK is far too small geographically to need an ultra-high speed network - by the time the trains get up to speed it will be almost time to slow them down again.
"The decision to design for 240mph has led to a succession of needlessly expensive knock-on effects in construction which will be saddling taxpayers with huge bills for a generation."
And the article continues.
Told you so is I feel appropriate!! Can't wait for the governments response
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36376837
HS2 is an over-priced, gold-plated project and will fail in many of its objectives, a group of transport experts has warned.
The academics support high-speed rail overall, but say HS2 is five times more expensive than its French equivalent.
They argue that the benefits of HS2 can be achieved much more cheaply, with lower CO2 emissions, and they want their analysis examined by government.
A spokesman for HS2 said options for bringing down costs were being studied.
But the academics - including some leading lights in transport - list a series of complaints about the current version of HS2.
HS2 has been designed to increase capacity and connections, regenerate the North and reduce climate impacts change.
Yet the critics say it will only achieve one of these - capacity. Many key rail journeys, they say, would be worse, including to Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield.
Image caption HS2 will cost five times more per mile than the high speed TGV line currently being built in France
The academics are especially baffled by the decision to design HS2 to run ultra-fast at 240mph - that's much faster than the 190mph normal for continental high-speed trains covering much greater distances.
One of them, Professor James Croll of UCL, told BBC News: "It is just vanity for the UK to have faster trains than the usual high-speed trains.
"The UK is far too small geographically to need an ultra-high speed network - by the time the trains get up to speed it will be almost time to slow them down again.
"The decision to design for 240mph has led to a succession of needlessly expensive knock-on effects in construction which will be saddling taxpayers with huge bills for a generation."
And the article continues.
Told you so is I feel appropriate!! Can't wait for the governments response
robinessex said:
HS2 rail link 'over-priced' say transport experts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36376837
HS2 is an over-priced, gold-plated project and will fail in many of its objectives, a group of transport experts has warned.
The academics support high-speed rail overall, but say HS2 is five times more expensive than its French equivalent.
They argue that the benefits of HS2 can be achieved much more cheaply, with lower CO2 emissions, and they want their analysis examined by government.
A spokesman for HS2 said options for bringing down costs were being studied.
But the academics - including some leading lights in transport - list a series of complaints about the current version of HS2.
HS2 has been designed to increase capacity and connections, regenerate the North and reduce climate impacts change.
Yet the critics say it will only achieve one of these - capacity. Many key rail journeys, they say, would be worse, including to Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield.
Image caption HS2 will cost five times more per mile than the high speed TGV line currently being built in France
The academics are especially baffled by the decision to design HS2 to run ultra-fast at 240mph - that's much faster than the 190mph normal for continental high-speed trains covering much greater distances.
One of them, Professor James Croll of UCL, told BBC News: "It is just vanity for the UK to have faster trains than the usual high-speed trains.
"The UK is far too small geographically to need an ultra-high speed network - by the time the trains get up to speed it will be almost time to slow them down again.
"The decision to design for 240mph has led to a succession of needlessly expensive knock-on effects in construction which will be saddling taxpayers with huge bills for a generation."
And the article continues.
Told you so is I feel appropriate!! Can't wait for the governments response
No shttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36376837
HS2 is an over-priced, gold-plated project and will fail in many of its objectives, a group of transport experts has warned.
The academics support high-speed rail overall, but say HS2 is five times more expensive than its French equivalent.
They argue that the benefits of HS2 can be achieved much more cheaply, with lower CO2 emissions, and they want their analysis examined by government.
A spokesman for HS2 said options for bringing down costs were being studied.
But the academics - including some leading lights in transport - list a series of complaints about the current version of HS2.
HS2 has been designed to increase capacity and connections, regenerate the North and reduce climate impacts change.
Yet the critics say it will only achieve one of these - capacity. Many key rail journeys, they say, would be worse, including to Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield.
Image caption HS2 will cost five times more per mile than the high speed TGV line currently being built in France
The academics are especially baffled by the decision to design HS2 to run ultra-fast at 240mph - that's much faster than the 190mph normal for continental high-speed trains covering much greater distances.
One of them, Professor James Croll of UCL, told BBC News: "It is just vanity for the UK to have faster trains than the usual high-speed trains.
"The UK is far too small geographically to need an ultra-high speed network - by the time the trains get up to speed it will be almost time to slow them down again.
"The decision to design for 240mph has led to a succession of needlessly expensive knock-on effects in construction which will be saddling taxpayers with huge bills for a generation."
And the article continues.
Told you so is I feel appropriate!! Can't wait for the governments response
t, Sherlock.robinessex said:
HS2 rail link 'over-priced' say transport experts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36376837
HS2 is an over-priced, gold-plated project and will fail in many of its objectives, a group of transport experts has warned.
The academics support high-speed rail overall, but say HS2 is five times more expensive than its French equivalent.
They argue that the benefits of HS2 can be achieved much more cheaply, with lower CO2 emissions, and they want their analysis examined by government.
A spokesman for HS2 said options for bringing down costs were being studied.
But the academics - including some leading lights in transport - list a series of complaints about the current version of HS2.
HS2 has been designed to increase capacity and connections, regenerate the North and reduce climate impacts change.
Yet the critics say it will only achieve one of these - capacity. Many key rail journeys, they say, would be worse, including to Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield.
Image caption HS2 will cost five times more per mile than the high speed TGV line currently being built in France
The academics are especially baffled by the decision to design HS2 to run ultra-fast at 240mph - that's much faster than the 190mph normal for continental high-speed trains covering much greater distances.
One of them, Professor James Croll of UCL, told BBC News: "It is just vanity for the UK to have faster trains than the usual high-speed trains.
"The UK is far too small geographically to need an ultra-high speed network - by the time the trains get up to speed it will be almost time to slow them down again.
"The decision to design for 240mph has led to a succession of needlessly expensive knock-on effects in construction which will be saddling taxpayers with huge bills for a generation."
And the article continues.
Told you so is I feel appropriate!! Can't wait for the governments response
No shttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36376837
HS2 is an over-priced, gold-plated project and will fail in many of its objectives, a group of transport experts has warned.
The academics support high-speed rail overall, but say HS2 is five times more expensive than its French equivalent.
They argue that the benefits of HS2 can be achieved much more cheaply, with lower CO2 emissions, and they want their analysis examined by government.
A spokesman for HS2 said options for bringing down costs were being studied.
But the academics - including some leading lights in transport - list a series of complaints about the current version of HS2.
HS2 has been designed to increase capacity and connections, regenerate the North and reduce climate impacts change.
Yet the critics say it will only achieve one of these - capacity. Many key rail journeys, they say, would be worse, including to Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield.
Image caption HS2 will cost five times more per mile than the high speed TGV line currently being built in France
The academics are especially baffled by the decision to design HS2 to run ultra-fast at 240mph - that's much faster than the 190mph normal for continental high-speed trains covering much greater distances.
One of them, Professor James Croll of UCL, told BBC News: "It is just vanity for the UK to have faster trains than the usual high-speed trains.
"The UK is far too small geographically to need an ultra-high speed network - by the time the trains get up to speed it will be almost time to slow them down again.
"The decision to design for 240mph has led to a succession of needlessly expensive knock-on effects in construction which will be saddling taxpayers with huge bills for a generation."
And the article continues.
Told you so is I feel appropriate!! Can't wait for the governments response
t, Sherlock.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff