Suppose HS2 was cancelled
Discussion
Condi said:
Your objection is based on emotion, and not facts.
The facts are quite simple - the lines around London going North are at capacity, mainly because they run a mix of slow commuter traffic, fast long distance traffic, scheduled freight, and any other ad-hoc trains (engineering trains, special cargo etc). Due to the distances required between trains this means the lines are used inefficiently, slowing down both the fast trains and the slow trains. The whole point of HS2 is to take the fast trains which might not stop between London and Birmingham, or London and Manchester, off the existing track, essentially bypassing the congested sections. This then allows both the fast (HS2) and slow (existing) lines to be utilised more efficiently, increasing capacity for both longer distance and commuter/freight trains.
Yes, the destruction of any woodland is a regrettable thing, however, if you take your attitude that we should prioritise that ahead of any development then at best we are stuck with a railway system at capacity and built over 150 years ago, and at worst we wouldn't even have a railway system or motorway system at all, if builders throughout history had taken the same view.
You imply that the country is in a mess, but I would argue part of the reason for that is a lack of investment in infrastructure over the last 15/20 years, especially outside of London (so excluding HS1, Crossrail, Thames Sewer). HS2 will be used by your kids, their kids, and their kids kids - it's a long term strategic investment, the likes of which the UK has been very poor at delivering for quite a while.
As for the assertion that I can't live anywhere near the line, you couldn't be more wrong. It passes about a mile from my house and I cross the route about 4 times on my commute to work. What I also see is the huge investment in new roads, new junctions and all the ancillary infrastructure required to build the line, as well as the new village hall HS2 have paid for. The money being spent goes far beyond "just a railway line".
Thanks too for these additional comments Condi. The facts are quite simple - the lines around London going North are at capacity, mainly because they run a mix of slow commuter traffic, fast long distance traffic, scheduled freight, and any other ad-hoc trains (engineering trains, special cargo etc). Due to the distances required between trains this means the lines are used inefficiently, slowing down both the fast trains and the slow trains. The whole point of HS2 is to take the fast trains which might not stop between London and Birmingham, or London and Manchester, off the existing track, essentially bypassing the congested sections. This then allows both the fast (HS2) and slow (existing) lines to be utilised more efficiently, increasing capacity for both longer distance and commuter/freight trains.
Yes, the destruction of any woodland is a regrettable thing, however, if you take your attitude that we should prioritise that ahead of any development then at best we are stuck with a railway system at capacity and built over 150 years ago, and at worst we wouldn't even have a railway system or motorway system at all, if builders throughout history had taken the same view.
You imply that the country is in a mess, but I would argue part of the reason for that is a lack of investment in infrastructure over the last 15/20 years, especially outside of London (so excluding HS1, Crossrail, Thames Sewer). HS2 will be used by your kids, their kids, and their kids kids - it's a long term strategic investment, the likes of which the UK has been very poor at delivering for quite a while.
As for the assertion that I can't live anywhere near the line, you couldn't be more wrong. It passes about a mile from my house and I cross the route about 4 times on my commute to work. What I also see is the huge investment in new roads, new junctions and all the ancillary infrastructure required to build the line, as well as the new village hall HS2 have paid for. The money being spent goes far beyond "just a railway line".
As a resident of Bucks I guess your opening sentence is more than fair !
However your last paragraph I beg to differ with here in Bucks where there appears no trade off whatsoever other than just appalling road conditions and congestion caused by HS2 traffic.
I do get your points about fast traffic and relieving pressure on numbers but will state again that in my very humble opinion the business case used to attempt to justify the building of it was flawed from the get go and made worse by life post the pandemic.
I’m not sure people in Bucks will necessarily want to use a railway unless they decide to actually build a station somewhere in Bucks. Travelling to London by slow train to catch HS2 to then come past a mile from your house etc seems painful and rather defeats the object of say getting to Brum quicker.
I think they will actually build a station somewhere at some point now that the powers that be seem to be suggesting it won’t actually have trains running at 200mph or in fact anywhere close to that.
I’m not saying the country is in a mess because of HS2 obviously but financially it is in a mess and worse to come.
Having the biggest infrastructure project in slow progress with what seems like a budget that no one will ever quite know but currently estimated to be anywhere around the £100b - £150b currently at finality again I accept that it’s not in our lifetime that any value is realised but neither will any return be seen in my children or grandchildrens.
Anyway that’s enough “ emotion “ from me.We clearly will agree to disagree on the merits or otherwise but thanks for taking the time to expand on the comments made earlier.
Have a good evening - it’s lovely out there.
2xChevrons said:
alscar said:
I cannot comment on the passenger traffic numbers other than hearsay but with the companies now wfh I cannot believe that all lines are back to where they were 5 working days a week.
I didn't say that all routes were back to pre-pandemic levels - I specifically said that some aren't, and they are usually the traditional urban commuter networks. But overall, in terms of the numbers of people travelling by rail, the numbers are back where they were at the start of 2020. In fact slightly higher: https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-new...
The overall pattern the network is seeing is 'flattening of the curve' (to use a pandemic-era phrase). The peak times at the start and end of each weekday, are slightly less pronounced, and the quiet dip in the middle is slightly higher. There is also increased use of the railways for discretionary/private/tourist use between cities rather than the surburb->city centre work commute - exactly the sort of traffic that HS2 should be ideal for.
https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/usage/pas...
Passenger rail usage, January to March 2023
Date published: 08 Jun 2023
Date next published: 05 Oct 2023
Key results
Total passenger revenue in Great Britain (GB) in the latest quarter (1 January to 31 March 2023) was £2.2 billion. This is 70% of the £3.2 billion in the same quarter four years ago (pre-pandemic). In the latest year (April 2022 to March 2023), total revenue was £8.6 billion, this is 72% of the £12.0 billion in the same quarter four years ago.
Total GB estimates for passenger journeys and kilometres presented are subject to uncertainty due to issues in the data source. See pages 2 and 3 in the statistical release for more details. Provisionally, 389 million rail passenger journeys were recorded in GB in the latest quarter. This is 88% of the 443 million journeys in the same quarter four years ago. 1.4 billion rail passenger journeys were made in GB in the latest year. This is 83% of the 1.7 billion journeys three years ago.
Passenger kilometres were subject to the uncertainty as previously mentioned. Provisionally, a total of 13.4 billion passenger kilometres were recorded in GB in the latest quarter. This equates to 80% of the 16.7 billion kilometres in the same quarter four years ago. 53.3 billion passenger kilometres were recorded in the latest year. This equates to 80% of the 66.8 billion kilometres recorded three years ago.
alscar said:
I’m not sure people in Bucks will necessarily want to use a railway unless they decide to actually build a station somewhere in Bucks. Travelling to London by slow train to catch HS2 to then come past a mile from your house etc seems painful and rather defeats the object of say getting to Brum quicker.
I can understand the confusion for someone from the SE to see infrastructure spending which doesn't directly benefit you, but HS2 isn't really for use by people in Buckinghamshire! It's to take the fast trains off the local lines and allow them to bypass all the commuter trains from London which start/terminate at Watford Gap, Northampton, etc. For you, this means you can get more local/commuter trains on the existing tracks. For the fast trains, they can go faster and more frequently on the high speed line. Just think of it like someone building a bypass round your town - you might not use the bypass, but it will make your journey across town much less congested. This video I've posted before is an interview with a track engineer, and it explains why HS2 is needed, why it's actually very eco-friendly in terms of the trees and environment being lost, and why it should have happened 20 years ago!
Only criticism for me is not taking it further north to Newcastle, Edinburgh, Glasgow etc. What the latest with this? Will it just be the East Coast Mainline for us northern plebs? (West for Glasgow of course...)
Regarding the tree's and the environment... Its a tough one. I'd class myself as an environmentalist, you want to protect the natural environment, enhance it, protect and increase biodiversity etc, but how much infrastructure do we use every day that has come at the expense of nature that we don't think about? Ports, roads, motorways, airports, railways etc etc. I guess we have to make some small sacrifices for society to progress.
Regarding the tree's and the environment... Its a tough one. I'd class myself as an environmentalist, you want to protect the natural environment, enhance it, protect and increase biodiversity etc, but how much infrastructure do we use every day that has come at the expense of nature that we don't think about? Ports, roads, motorways, airports, railways etc etc. I guess we have to make some small sacrifices for society to progress.
NaePasaran said:
Only criticism for me is not taking it further north to Newcastle, Edinburgh, Glasgow etc. What the latest with this? Will it just be the East Coast Mainline for us northern plebs? (West for Glasgow of course...)
In the abstract I'd agree, but WCML and ECML between Scotland and the north of England are not near capacity, so construction of a high speed line would only achieve an improvement in train speed, exactly the criticism levelled at HS2 by the uninformed. Scottish railways need electrification between the central belt and Aberdeen and Inverness before they need a high speed line south, nice as it would be.hidetheelephants said:
NaePasaran said:
Only criticism for me is not taking it further north to Newcastle, Edinburgh, Glasgow etc. What the latest with this? Will it just be the East Coast Mainline for us northern plebs? (West for Glasgow of course...)
In the abstract I'd agree, but WCML and ECML between Scotland and the north of England are not near capacity, so construction of a high speed line would only achieve an improvement in train speed, exactly the criticism levelled at HS2 by the uninformed. Scottish railways need electrification between the central belt and Aberdeen and Inverness before they need a high speed line south, nice as it would be.Can't get much more green than that, as most of the rest of Europe realised many decades ago.
As it now stands, Brum central to London (sort of) and Manchester, the benefits are nowhere near what they could have been.
2xChevrons said:
A lot of the 'failings' of HS2 now being discussed are as a result of classic British stinginess and short-termism - cost-cutting and political timidity risks leaving the 'completed' project as a shadow of its proposed form, saving what are actually minimal amounts of money in return for a greatly degraded piece of infrastructure, which will then lead to all the sceptics and nay-sayers slapping themselves on the back because they knew it would be a white elephant all along.
This is so true. Every "cost cutting" measure simply adds delay and reduces vfm. EG a redesign at Euston for fewer platforms has resulted in *increased* overall costs and delays. Old Oak Common - Birmingham is a white elephant.Edited by 2xChevrons on Thursday 8th June 15:50
Amateurish said:
This is so true. Every "cost cutting" measure simply adds delay and reduces vfm. EG a redesign at Euston for fewer platforms has resulted in *increased* overall costs and delays. Old Oak Common - Birmingham is a white elephant.
The government's own plans show that it will cost more overall by delaying the completion of the line, but it does allow the government to say borrowing is coming down. Hammersia said:
As I say, my dream railway would have been to run HS2 to Glasgow and Edinburgh, say 3 hours, eliminating domestic air travel completely, and then the speed element becomes very significant and it's less critical to consider existing (slow) rail capacity, as the passengers will come from other transport modes.
Can't get much more green than that, as most of the rest of Europe realised many decades ago.
As it now stands, Brum central to London (sort of) and Manchester, the benefits are nowhere near what they could have been.
I keep forgetting to ask a bookies for odds on electrically propelled aircraft appearing on scheduled flights between Scotland and That London before HS2 is complete; once that happens there's not much reason for the high speed rail investment up here.Can't get much more green than that, as most of the rest of Europe realised many decades ago.
As it now stands, Brum central to London (sort of) and Manchester, the benefits are nowhere near what they could have been.
Chief Executive of HS2 has resigned:
https://news.sky.com/story/hs2-boss-resigns-amid-p...
"The chief executive of the HS2 high-speed rail project has resigned amid cost and political pressures on the delayed project.
Mark Thurston, 56, announced he will leave the job in September after six-and-a-half years, making him the longest-serving chief executive of the state-owned enterprise.
Another leader is needed for the project, Mr Thurston said, as HS2 moved to a "defining period" with the installation of railway track and signalling equipment."
https://news.sky.com/story/hs2-boss-resigns-amid-p...
"The chief executive of the HS2 high-speed rail project has resigned amid cost and political pressures on the delayed project.
Mark Thurston, 56, announced he will leave the job in September after six-and-a-half years, making him the longest-serving chief executive of the state-owned enterprise.
Another leader is needed for the project, Mr Thurston said, as HS2 moved to a "defining period" with the installation of railway track and signalling equipment."
Sheepshanks said:
You'd think that'd be the easy bit - lay some track, and a bit of wiring.
Perhaps he knows something?
How much of the groundwork’s are actually completed ready for track and power? From what I’ve seen it’s very little, there’s probably some more cost saving spending cut’s coming from UK Gov and he wants out sharpish…..Perhaps he knows something?
Essarell said:
Sheepshanks said:
You'd think that'd be the easy bit - lay some track, and a bit of wiring.
Perhaps he knows something?
How much of the groundwork’s are actually completed ready for track and power? From what I’ve seen it’s very little, there’s probably some more cost saving spending cut’s coming from UK Gov and he wants out sharpish…..Perhaps he knows something?
That's even if the track and power materials physically exist, if I was a supplier think I'd have been holding off making anything much given the timetable slippage and likely spec reductions.
Hammersia said:
Essarell said:
Sheepshanks said:
You'd think that'd be the easy bit - lay some track, and a bit of wiring.
Perhaps he knows something?
How much of the groundwork’s are actually completed ready for track and power? From what I’ve seen it’s very little, there’s probably some more cost saving spending cut’s coming from UK Gov and he wants out sharpish…..Perhaps he knows something?
aeropilot said:
Hammersia said:
Essarell said:
Sheepshanks said:
You'd think that'd be the easy bit - lay some track, and a bit of wiring.
Perhaps he knows something?
How much of the groundwork’s are actually completed ready for track and power? From what I’ve seen it’s very little, there’s probably some more cost saving spending cut’s coming from UK Gov and he wants out sharpish…..Perhaps he knows something?
hidetheelephants said:
I keep forgetting to ask a bookies for odds on electrically propelled aircraft appearing on scheduled flights between Scotland and That London before HS2 is complete; once that happens there's not much reason for the high speed rail investment up here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-66205965.ampPromising. But the cynic in me thinks in 2035 we'll have the same news story but for 2045.
Personally I'm very happy with Azuma on the east coast line, especially the trains around 4hr 25min. But I'm a leisure customer and I rather enjoy sipping a can gazing out the window. Some family members go down quite often for work and prefer flying but only to City. Doesn't make much sense for the other airports I don't think . (Sorry for going off topic slightly).
Not looking good for the project:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66352286
Will they carry on regardless or quietly cut their losses, sunk cost fallacy etc...?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66352286
Will they carry on regardless or quietly cut their losses, sunk cost fallacy etc...?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff