HS2, whats the current status ?

[Digga]

amgmcqueen said:

A sickening waste of taxpayers money. Then again the fat charlatan likes pissing our money up the wall!

tt.

Watched the video yet?

Thought not.

[anonymous-user]

Digga said:

The elephant in the room for infrastructure is the growth in population.

Well stop immigration!

[borcy]

Digga said:

borcy said:

RicksAlfas said:

TeaNoSugar said:

Absolutely. Anyone who’s has to commute across the Pennines Will know how badly better connectivity is needed.
Sheffield to Manchester takes a minimum of 50mins by train (which is about 35 miles). Sheffield to Leeds 45 mins.
Leeds to Manchester 50 mins minimum.
Those journey times (for 3 major cities each about 35 miles apart) are an embarrassment in such a wealthy nation.

Overall it’s a generally positive step IMO - but the local connections and the east-west trans-pennine issue will be the real game changer up here, if they ever get done...

Exactly. And you'd be standing up for most of those trips. If they were serious about the Northern Powerhouse they would start the investment there and then work down. As it is they will work up, complete a section and then call it a day.

That's my only worry about it, the london-brum section will be built and then due to blah they'll just be a few crumbs left over to re paint a couple of stations and then that'll be it.

The only way to make sure that the whole bit would be built is, as you say, to do the sections in the north first.

Very good point made at this section of the video linked by PRTVR earlier, as to why HS2 needs to come first: https://youtu.be/Nf5avCUNP0M?t=1340

I had a look from the last couple of minutes you linked to, perhaps I missed why I'll watch the whole thing later on.

I'll assume that there are perfectly good reasons as to why it's that way, however that wasn't my point. I'm taking about the political angle, different thing altogether. What's to stop a government from stopping at HS2a rather than going on to do HS2b?

[Digga]

borcy said:

Digga said:

borcy said:

RicksAlfas said:

TeaNoSugar said:

Absolutely. Anyone who’s has to commute across the Pennines Will know how badly better connectivity is needed.
Sheffield to Manchester takes a minimum of 50mins by train (which is about 35 miles). Sheffield to Leeds 45 mins.
Leeds to Manchester 50 mins minimum.
Those journey times (for 3 major cities each about 35 miles apart) are an embarrassment in such a wealthy nation.

Overall it’s a generally positive step IMO - but the local connections and the east-west trans-pennine issue will be the real game changer up here, if they ever get done...

Exactly. And you'd be standing up for most of those trips. If they were serious about the Northern Powerhouse they would start the investment there and then work down. As it is they will work up, complete a section and then call it a day.

That's my only worry about it, the london-brum section will be built and then due to blah they'll just be a few crumbs left over to re paint a couple of stations and then that'll be it.

The only way to make sure that the whole bit would be built is, as you say, to do the sections in the north first.

Very good point made at this section of the video linked by PRTVR earlier, as to why HS2 needs to come first: https://youtu.be/Nf5avCUNP0M?t=1340

I had a look from the last couple of minutes you linked to, perhaps I missed why I'll watch the whole thing later on.

I'll assume that there are perfectly good reasons as to why it's that way, however that wasn't my point. I'm taking about the political angle, different thing altogether. What's to stop a government from stopping at HS2a rather than going on to do HS2b?

HS2 has to come, before they can make additions to other services and/or opening new lines or re-opening old lines. The removal of high speed trains from the extant line gives them the ability to increase density of traffic for local passenger and also longer freight trains - so then connecting additional routes or services.

Boris saying HS2 and Northern Powerhouse is not either or.

[borcy]

For some lines i guess for others i don't quite see how, but I'll accept that it's the case for all lines.

Anyway back to my original point, the political angle? Is there any reason it's impossible to keep the second part of HS2 into the long grass by a future government?

[Digga]

borcy said:

For some lines i guess for others i don't quite see how, but I'll accept that it's the case for all lines.

Anyway back to my original point, the political angle? Is there any reason it's impossible to keep the second part of HS2 into the long grass by a future government?

Dunno.

But this is interesting in terms of today's annoucement: https://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/j...

Seems there is total commitment to both Northern Powerhouse and also Midlands Engine projects progressing in parallel, to link all the 10 largest UK cities.

[borcy]

Digga said:

Dunno.

Precisely my concern but we see I suppose at some 5-10 years down the line.

[Digga]

borcy said:

Digga said:

Dunno.

Precisely my concern but we see I suppose at some 5-10 years down the line.

It's a bit the like 2035 "end of ICE sales" promise.

[valiant]

Good piece from Nigel Harris from Rail magazine who knows his onions


https://twitter.com/RAIL/status/122713534248819097...

[Digga]

valiant said:

Good piece from Nigel Harris from Rail magazine who knows his onions


https://twitter.com/RAIL/status/122713534248819097...

Superb, echoes many of the points from that video too, about costs and also use of ancient woodland.

[jamoor]

Seeing how long it will take hs2 to get up and running it may well be that the product is obslete by the time it has been constructed and operational as anyone in tech predicts self driving cars will become commonplace which will take you from a to b,

[Digga]

jamoor said:

Seeing how long it will take hs2 to get up and running it may well be that the product is obslete by the time it has been constructed and operational as anyone in tech predicts self driving cars will become commonplace which will take you from a to b,

In which case the huge increase in rail freight capacity will still be useful then?

[Not-The-Messiah]

Digga said:

HS2 has to come, before they can make additions to other services and/or opening new lines or re-opening old lines. The removal of high speed trains from the extant line gives them the ability to increase density of traffic for local passenger and also longer freight trains - so then connecting additional routes or services.

Boris saying HS2 and Northern Powerhouse is not either or.

I understand the argument but why does it need to be high speed? Why couldn't it be a normal line that took yes a slower and longer route but a cheaper one missing the hard to build areas and expensive areas?
You would still get the capacity but at half the cost.

[powerstroke]

Digga said:

jamoor said:

Seeing how long it will take hs2 to get up and running it may well be that the product is obslete by the time it has been constructed and operational as anyone in tech predicts self driving cars will become commonplace which will take you from a to b,

In which case the huge increase in rail freight capacity will still be useful then?

Yes , they will be building railway sidings outside all the businesses and homes as well then !!!!
oh and the teens of today will be A , traveling to an office or B, working from home or local coffee shop on a device in twenty years
time....

[Digga]

Not-The-Messiah said:

I understand the argument but why does it need to be high speed? Why couldn't it be a normal line that took yes a slower and longer route but a cheaper one missing the hard to build areas and expensive areas?
You would still get the capacity but at half the cost.

Why not? If you are going to build a whole new line (and the alternative, to get the same capacity would be to upgrade four others which, if you look at what's built alongside these extant lines, you will see is no simple task) why on earth build it to 20th century spec?

powerstroke said:

Yes , they will be building railway sidings outside all the businesses and homes as well then !!!!
oh and the teens of today will be A , traveling to an office or B, working from home or local coffee shop on a device in twenty years
time....

So nothing you consume at all has ever moved by road and no road you've ever used has been affected by HGV congestion? I'd love to have such a simple, sheltered worldview.

[anonymous-user]

Not-The-Messiah said:

I understand the argument but why does it need to be high speed? Why couldn't it be a normal line that took yes a slower and longer route but a cheaper one missing the hard to build areas and expensive areas?
You would still get the capacity but at half the cost.

LS2?

[powerstroke]

Condi said:

Joey Deacon said:

I suspect there are a lot of contractors who will be thinking this will be their last every job and pay for their retirement.

As you say, once the chequebook is opened it won't be closed until the end, budgets and cost estimates will be irrelevant.

But as has been said above, the reasons for that are more around the length of time they are responsible for the work for than any price gouging now.

If you had to do a piece of work, and in 29 years time be prepared to fix whatever had gone wrong with it, what would you charge now?

And how do you think the government will make these contractors sit around waiting to make repairs after the contract is paid up ?
will they have to work on the basis of not getting all the money until the end of the warranty period ??

[powerstroke]

Digga said:

o nothing you consume at all has ever moved by road and no road you've ever used has been affected by HGV congestion? I'd love to have such a simple, sheltered worldview.

maybe you're right!! however people don't need to travel in private cars if we are going to invest in rail it should be
geared to moving people the roads should then be prioritised for goods , services , and public transport ...

[Digga]

powerstroke said:

Digga said:

o nothing you consume at all has ever moved by road and no road you've ever used has been affected by HGV congestion? I'd love to have such a simple, sheltered worldview.

maybe you're right!! however people don't need to travel in private cars if we are going to invest in rail it should be
geared to moving people the roads should then be prioritised for goods , services , and public transport ...

Why, you can shift literally tonnes more freight by rail and, indeed, that's been the trend for some time now. we get shipping containers direct into the Midlands from Felixstowe by rail.

There are container freight terminals all over the place - Daventry DIRFT and Hams Hall to name just two - which remove huge chunks of freight, very efficiently, from the road network.

[anonymous-user]

powerstroke said:

Digga said:

o nothing you consume at all has ever moved by road and no road you've ever used has been affected by HGV congestion? I'd love to have such a simple, sheltered worldview.

maybe you're right!! however people don't need to travel in private cars if we are going to invest in rail it should be
geared to moving people the roads should then be prioritised for goods , services , and public transport ...

After watching that video it’s clear that HS2 will open up much capacity for goods trains which is much better than filling the roads with more artics. Better for the environment too.