HS2, whats the current status ?
Discussion
Vaud said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Quite... elderly, inform, hand baggage, faffing. What's the turnaround time of an island hopper - 30 mins? Regulations will mandate visual aircraft checks, even with autonomous or partially autonomous flight.What are the requirements of an island hopper and how big is the market?
I'd suggest that rapid turnaround isn't one of them as Ryanair can turn a 737 around in that time, secondly there isn't the market to force any innovation.
As explained earlier our challenge is can we board a 20 seat unpressurised aircraft in 5 minutes?
I think all the points you raise are totally addressable:
1: Old and infirm - I know they are coming because they booked via an app, their profile tells me what their needs are. Solutions range from, allowing longer because I'm dynamically scheduling anyway, to designing the aircraft with 1 door per 4-6 people, or in extremis sitting the passenger down in a seat before flight and having a robot load them and the seat.
2: Hand baggage - anying unacceptable to simply hold in your hands goes in a basket, a robot loads the basket or as this is a 20 seat aircraft simply line the passengers up in seat order so they can board in order.
3: Faffing - see previous point we can cycle roller coasters in 90 seconds with teenagers running them. If we want to we can do a rapid turnaround, it just has to be designed in.
4: Regulations - How do you think aviation regulations are made, they are made at a high level by the regulator defining goals which do not stipulate a technical solution because that impedes innovation. These are then translated into specific regulations once industry has proposed a technical solution, if the solution changes new rules are made.
As an example a visual inspection could be carried out much more effectively by a GOM scanner than a person, the reason that this hasn't happened yet is because there currently isn't the time pressure to force this change.
rs1952 said:
No.
The problem there was that the building of the tunnel more or less coincided with a huge increase in short-haul flights as the industry was deregulated and the budget carriers came on the scene. It was an idea that would have worked, and indeed happened, if it hadn't been overtaken by events.
You could perhaps draw an analogy with Concorde. Introduced at a time when generally only the hyper-rich could afford to fly. The aviation market changed at much the same time making Concorde something of an anachronism from the outset.
Having said that, there are plenty of trains that come through the Channel Tunnel and go on beyond London to places elsewhere in the UK, but a lot of people don't know or con't care about them because they are all freight trains. I am not sure how these flying batteries would shift 3000 tonnes of stuff from London to Brum or vice versa - perhaps Talksteer could tell us
An excellent example of a complex long term rail project being significantly affected by the relentless compound growth of flying.The problem there was that the building of the tunnel more or less coincided with a huge increase in short-haul flights as the industry was deregulated and the budget carriers came on the scene. It was an idea that would have worked, and indeed happened, if it hadn't been overtaken by events.
You could perhaps draw an analogy with Concorde. Introduced at a time when generally only the hyper-rich could afford to fly. The aviation market changed at much the same time making Concorde something of an anachronism from the outset.
Having said that, there are plenty of trains that come through the Channel Tunnel and go on beyond London to places elsewhere in the UK, but a lot of people don't know or con't care about them because they are all freight trains. I am not sure how these flying batteries would shift 3000 tonnes of stuff from London to Brum or vice versa - perhaps Talksteer could tell us
If only they had gone with the option prefered by the public the "Euro Route" we would now have a road across the channel, the trucks could just drive across and the whole thing is future proofed in that it can handle, autonomous cars/trucks, super buses etc.
I confidently predict that in 2100 that trains will be common, they will be moving freight, their original purpose for which they are really sized. Technology tends to be inversely senescent, the longer it has been around the longer it is likely to be around.
As an aside the Boring Company claim that their test tunnel cost $10 million per mile, that is the diameter required for a Hyperloop.
Talksteer said:
If only they had gone with the option prefered by the public the "Euro Route" we would now have a road across the channel, the trucks could just drive across and the whole thing is future proofed in that it can handle, autonomous cars/trucks, super buses etc.
The public are not always the best judge of what makes good infrastructure. Long tunnels can be catastrophic in the event of fires. Better to have rapid shuttle of well maintained trains carrying cars switched off than 100s of vehicles with variable levels of maintenance driving.
Talksteer said:
Heathrow manages 90 movements per hour off two runways with conventional ATC.
We are talking about a computer controlled system landing VTOL aircraft.
Once the aircraft lands on the pad it will immediately taxi off the pad or the pad itself will shuffle the aircraft out the way. The passengers can disembark on a much more leisurely pace while the eVTOL charges.
I knew you'd jump on the timing, so some points:
1: eVTOL or regional eVTOL don'[t need to achieve such high space utilisation on day one, there is plenty of time to develop solutions capable of dealing with whatever the demand is.
2: Electric air mobility can be tested at reasonably small scale, there is no time anyone has to commit £10 billion and freeze all aspects of the design. That is why private companies are proceeding with eVTOL quickly and governments are plodding along with HS2.
3: It wouldn't matter is my numbers were 200% or 300% the basic point that a regional eVTOL station could handle high capacity and be located in existing urban spaces stand, so I have to find two sites of 4 hectares, or build a station with multiple tiers.
4: What you have provided is lots of examples of why some existing solutions can't do something they weren't designed to do. If something in future tech is a requirement the correct lense to look through is a first principles one.
It isn't a requirement that we get everyone to board in 2 minutes, but is it possible, yes, we could have one door per 4 passengers in our unpressurised aircraft and we could use something akin to the techniques used on roller coasters to line everyone up in advance.
So if the evtol is taxiing off the oaf did your area calcs take that into account or do we need double the size? We are talking about a computer controlled system landing VTOL aircraft.
Once the aircraft lands on the pad it will immediately taxi off the pad or the pad itself will shuffle the aircraft out the way. The passengers can disembark on a much more leisurely pace while the eVTOL charges.
I knew you'd jump on the timing, so some points:
1: eVTOL or regional eVTOL don'[t need to achieve such high space utilisation on day one, there is plenty of time to develop solutions capable of dealing with whatever the demand is.
2: Electric air mobility can be tested at reasonably small scale, there is no time anyone has to commit £10 billion and freeze all aspects of the design. That is why private companies are proceeding with eVTOL quickly and governments are plodding along with HS2.
3: It wouldn't matter is my numbers were 200% or 300% the basic point that a regional eVTOL station could handle high capacity and be located in existing urban spaces stand, so I have to find two sites of 4 hectares, or build a station with multiple tiers.
4: What you have provided is lots of examples of why some existing solutions can't do something they weren't designed to do. If something in future tech is a requirement the correct lense to look through is a first principles one.
It isn't a requirement that we get everyone to board in 2 minutes, but is it possible, yes, we could have one door per 4 passengers in our unpressurised aircraft and we could use something akin to the techniques used on roller coasters to line everyone up in advance.
Edited by Talksteer on Wednesday 19th December 19:41
I'd suggest not multi-tiered facilities unless the things can fly through the floor, or they move through a floor, one side to the other.
Talksteer said:
An excellent example of a complex long term rail project being significantly affected by the relentless compound growth of flying.
I also drew an analogy with Concorde, as a complex long term aviation project that was significantly overtaken by events. What have you got to say about that?as with a lot of initiatives the initial estimates are woefully under estimated......London 2012, wembley stadium (how much again?), cross rail, humber bridge and yes Hs2.
inviting private companies to bid and tender on such a big project leads to spiralling costs for a myriad of reasons - poor estimating, project and programme management, and other factors.
imho HS2 is a bad idea from the start.
inviting private companies to bid and tender on such a big project leads to spiralling costs for a myriad of reasons - poor estimating, project and programme management, and other factors.
imho HS2 is a bad idea from the start.
Picking up on the VTOL disucssion
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Trains are much more drone-proof.
In the flying world of VTOLS, drones could cause chaos.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Trains are much more drone-proof.
In the flying world of VTOLS, drones could cause chaos.
Talksteer said:
An excellent example of a complex long term rail project being significantly affected by the relentless compound growth of flying.
Rail passenger transport continues to grow year on year worldwide (up 40% in the last 10 years). In the UK, numbers have doubled since the 90s. rs1952 said:
Talksteer said:
An excellent example of a complex long term rail project being significantly affected by the relentless compound growth of flying.
I also drew an analogy with Concorde, as a complex long term aviation project that was significantly overtaken by events. What have you got to say about that?https://www.facebook.com/cnet/videos/1015637564365...
I have just seen this, and it reminded me of this thread. Possible, but is it viable?
I have just seen this, and it reminded me of this thread. Possible, but is it viable?
Amateurish said:
Rail passenger transport continues to grow year on year worldwide (up 40% in the last 10 years). In the UK, numbers have doubled since the 90s.
And you really think that will continue? Try looking at the numbers here. We are approaching "peak railway" here. At least from a passenger perspective. A period of decline will come.Vaud said:
Talksteer said:
If only they had gone with the option prefered by the public the "Euro Route" we would now have a road across the channel, the trucks could just drive across and the whole thing is future proofed in that it can handle, autonomous cars/trucks, super buses etc.
The public are not always the best judge of what makes good infrastructure. Long tunnels can be catastrophic in the event of fires. Better to have rapid shuttle of well maintained trains carrying cars switched off than 100s of vehicles with variable levels of maintenance driving.
The Euro Route tunnel section would have been 21km in length, the St Gothard tunnel was the longest road tunnel at the time and was 17km long, the longest at the moment is 24km long.
The Euro Route tunnel was thus not unprecedented, compared to the various Alpine Tunnels it would have also been safer as it had two bores.
It is clear that the cost estimates for HS2 are woefully inadequate. I wouldn't be surprised if the final bill was over triple the initial £31billion.
Unfortunately public sector contracts are seen as cash cows for the big consultants and contractors, and they know all the tricks in the book to extract as much money as possible out of the government as ultimately they know that they will be paid from the public purse. See crossrail for a recent example of a project overrun and the taxpayer picking up the bill. Coupled with what appears to be woeful cost planning from the start and a MD with his head in the sand (see panorama program); the overall price will continue to rise.
Ultimately, too many companies have invested too much money for it not to go ahead. I have heard of one contractor who has bought 100+ brand new dump trucks in anticipation of the works, and I know another large consultancy has taken on a whole office of staff for this project only. I suspect that the first phase to Birmingham will be built, at massive overspend and the subsequent phases will be cancelled. Thereby turning Birmingham into a commuter town for London with no benefit to those areas in the north.
All that being said, high speed rail as a concept is great, and should be standard to which all new railways in this country should be built. And work is clearly needed to modernise our creaking and full to capacity rail network. However I am yet to be convinced that HS2 in its current form is the answer.
Unfortunately public sector contracts are seen as cash cows for the big consultants and contractors, and they know all the tricks in the book to extract as much money as possible out of the government as ultimately they know that they will be paid from the public purse. See crossrail for a recent example of a project overrun and the taxpayer picking up the bill. Coupled with what appears to be woeful cost planning from the start and a MD with his head in the sand (see panorama program); the overall price will continue to rise.
Ultimately, too many companies have invested too much money for it not to go ahead. I have heard of one contractor who has bought 100+ brand new dump trucks in anticipation of the works, and I know another large consultancy has taken on a whole office of staff for this project only. I suspect that the first phase to Birmingham will be built, at massive overspend and the subsequent phases will be cancelled. Thereby turning Birmingham into a commuter town for London with no benefit to those areas in the north.
All that being said, high speed rail as a concept is great, and should be standard to which all new railways in this country should be built. And work is clearly needed to modernise our creaking and full to capacity rail network. However I am yet to be convinced that HS2 in its current form is the answer.
monkfish1 said:
Amateurish said:
Rail passenger transport continues to grow year on year worldwide (up 40% in the last 10 years). In the UK, numbers have doubled since the 90s.
And you really think that will continue? Try looking at the numbers here. We are approaching "peak railway" here. At least from a passenger perspective. A period of decline will come.fuzzyyo said:
It is clear that the cost estimates for HS2 are woefully inadequate. I wouldn't be surprised if the final bill was over triple the initial £31billion.
Is anyone (other than opponents to it) actually claiming it is the definitive cost of building HS2?The figures I've seen published are estimated costs using 2011 prices (i.e. known amounts). The actual cost will have to be increased to allow for price inflation between when it was priced and when it will actually be built. As far as I am aware, HS2 don't control the timetable for construction, the Government does.
Amateurish said:
monkfish1 said:
Amateurish said:
Rail passenger transport continues to grow year on year worldwide (up 40% in the last 10 years). In the UK, numbers have doubled since the 90s.
And you really think that will continue? Try looking at the numbers here. We are approaching "peak railway" here. At least from a passenger perspective. A period of decline will come.New Efficient trains.
The Chinese could show the world how to build tracks and stations.
Most of their new CRH stuff runs at around 380 km/h 220 mph without breaking down, on time, and very well appointed carriages.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff