High Speed Rail link - what the...?
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11028431
BBC said:
The route would go from London's Euston Station, run just south of Aylesbury, between Coventry and Kenilworth, and then into a new station in the Eastside area of Birmingham.
The track would be designed to carry trains at up to 250mph, cutting the London to Birmingham journey time to 49 minutes - that's around half an hour less than at present.
Bill and Carolyn Hall The Halls hope they will be eligible for the scheme
Trains will be up to 400 metres long, and carry up to 1100 people. Initially there would be up to 14 trains an hour.
Erm, one every four minutes? Or, if they are talking about each way - one every eight minutes? That can't be right, surely. Since when would approximately 8000 people an hour want to travel between London and Birmingham?The track would be designed to carry trains at up to 250mph, cutting the London to Birmingham journey time to 49 minutes - that's around half an hour less than at present.
Bill and Carolyn Hall The Halls hope they will be eligible for the scheme
Trains will be up to 400 metres long, and carry up to 1100 people. Initially there would be up to 14 trains an hour.
Mrs Digga and I occasionally attend appointments/meetings in the city, and it's normally 2hrs door to door (Stafford).
With faster trains, the whole country will benefit from easier business travel - which will help the broader economy.
Now if they could only do this with the motorway network... Took me nearly and hour and a half to get from Worcester to my office in Rugeley at 4pm yesterday. No accidents or roadworks involved - just loads of traffic. That's not helping the Midlands or the UK to prosper.
With faster trains, the whole country will benefit from easier business travel - which will help the broader economy.
Now if they could only do this with the motorway network... Took me nearly and hour and a half to get from Worcester to my office in Rugeley at 4pm yesterday. No accidents or roadworks involved - just loads of traffic. That's not helping the Midlands or the UK to prosper.
There was a chap on the news this morning reporting from the Chilterns, an "area of outstanding natural beauty".
Now, if you live in Peckham it might look like outstanding natural beauty, but to everyone else its just fields. Drive 10 minutes out of any town or city in southern England and you're surrounded by them.
More anti-Tory BBC bias perhaps?
Now, if you live in Peckham it might look like outstanding natural beauty, but to everyone else its just fields. Drive 10 minutes out of any town or city in southern England and you're surrounded by them.
More anti-Tory BBC bias perhaps?
hornetrider said:
JB! said:
at peak times its one ever 2 minuites in one direction on the West Coast...
Ah. That is quite frequent isn't it. I think overall this is a good idea as we do winge about how s
t the railway is... I just wasn't sure on the numbers.thats just 1 line of 4.
sometimes it can eb quiet for 10 mins, other times its constant traffic.
CzechItOut said:
There was a chap on the news this morning reporting from the Chilterns, an "area of outstanding natural beauty".
Now, if you live in Peckham it might look like outstanding natural beauty, but to everyone else its just fields. Drive 10 minutes out of any town or city in southern England and you're surrounded by them.
More anti-Tory BBC bias perhaps?
Actually Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is an official status on par with the National Parks. The Chiltern Hills became an AONB in the 1960s.Now, if you live in Peckham it might look like outstanding natural beauty, but to everyone else its just fields. Drive 10 minutes out of any town or city in southern England and you're surrounded by them.
More anti-Tory BBC bias perhaps?
As for anti-tory bias - it was the last government that proposed the route through the Chilterns. The Tories aren't particularly happy with it as its mainly their constituencies that will be affected.
i might be wrong about this, but my take on it is that this is about stopping the business folk from the midlands driving to london. this is all well and good, but how many more people can the tube system handle at peak times? i can't see how capacity can be increased on the tube without billions more being spent.
if everyone had to go to euston/ kings cross, all well and good, but that isn't reality.
if everyone had to go to euston/ kings cross, all well and good, but that isn't reality.
JB! said:
Goochie said:
Does anyone know where I can find a map of the route?
bbc website, and its a proposed route, not the final route.http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/hs...
I dont think they'll go to far off the proposed route though. They will just make an effort to pretend they care what people think before going ahead.
tamore said:
i might be wrong about this, but my take on it is that this is about stopping the business folk from the midlands driving to london.
I think it's a bit more far-sighted than that. Our rail infrastructure is pretty rubbish in comparison to the continent; this is the first step in connecting the north to the south with a genuinely quick and efficient high speed rail network. Bodge jobs and updates on the east and west coast mainlines can only go so far.To my mind, the whole scheme is fundamentally flawed. It will pass within a couple of miles of me, which I do not mind that much- no real impact on us, (unlike what is probably one of the largest local employers who will have the line running through their offices) The thing is this: The trains will be very fast. To be fast, they go in a straight(ish) line and do not stop. So if you are in Birmingham and want to get to Lindon, great, you save half an hour. If you are between Birmingham and london- bad news- I would have to drive 30 miles up the road to get on a lovely fast (and I assume, more expensive) train, although I have probably 6 or more railway stations within 15 miles. So, to get a fast train, I have to travel further to access it, offsetting any advantage. I can imagine that the idea is modelled on something like the TGV in France- a much bigger country where centres of population are more spread out. What the UK really needs is easily accessible reliable rail links for everyone, not some big national willy waving exerscise which is impressive and high tech (and as a result, massively over budget and behind schediule), but actually benefits very few of us.
Remember that this scheme was launched by the last Government- there may be big changes before it gets off the ground, if it ever does- it was pointed out to me that it only goes through Conservative constituancies, for example, although it was a Conservative politician pointing this out to me, so I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the statement!
Personally, I believe that a lot of the opposition will simply be NIMBYism. If the country really needs big infrastructure projects, then they have to be built, and those affected should be fully compensated for their losses- the big issue here is do we really need this rail link in this form, rather than just ploughing the money, £17 billion, I think, into improving transport for everyone, not just the residents of 2 cities.
Remember that this scheme was launched by the last Government- there may be big changes before it gets off the ground, if it ever does- it was pointed out to me that it only goes through Conservative constituancies, for example, although it was a Conservative politician pointing this out to me, so I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the statement!
Personally, I believe that a lot of the opposition will simply be NIMBYism. If the country really needs big infrastructure projects, then they have to be built, and those affected should be fully compensated for their losses- the big issue here is do we really need this rail link in this form, rather than just ploughing the money, £17 billion, I think, into improving transport for everyone, not just the residents of 2 cities.
jon h said:
To my mind, the whole scheme is fundamentally flawed. It will pass within a couple of miles of me, which I do not mind that much- no real impact on us, (unlike what is probably one of the largest local employers who will have the line running through their offices) The thing is this: The trains will be very fast. To be fast, they go in a straight(ish) line and do not stop. So if you are in Birmingham and want to get to Lindon, great, you save half an hour. If you are between Birmingham and london- bad news- I would have to drive 30 miles up the road to get on a lovely fast (and I assume, more expensive) train, although I have probably 6 or more railway stations within 15 miles. So, to get a fast train, I have to travel further to access it, offsetting any advantage. I can imagine that the idea is modelled on something like the TGV in France- a much bigger country where centres of population are more spread out. What the UK really needs is easily accessible reliable rail links for everyone, not some big national willy waving exerscise which is impressive and high tech (and as a result, massively over budget and behind schediule), but actually benefits very few of us.
This scheme will allow the west coast mainline to become more of a local line; currently the same track carries both local services and express trains and they're not particularly compatible.It needs to be very, very fast to compensate for the usual problems with State run transport - you want to go from A to B now, and they go from C to D, leaving ten minutes ago and not arriving 'til late next week. Modern trains need either to be very commuter focussed, or belt up and down the country with very few stops. Otherwise, we're better off driving.
And, as I understand it, this does go through traditional Conservative areas purely to avoid pissing off Labour voters in the hope of re-election, rather like Lord Fat Clot's new homes on southern flood plains. I wouldn't be surprised if the new government revisits the plans. Hopefully they'll pick a route that is actually best for us as a nation, not just for them.
But the ability of politicians to disappoint seems limitless.
And, as I understand it, this does go through traditional Conservative areas purely to avoid pissing off Labour voters in the hope of re-election, rather like Lord Fat Clot's new homes on southern flood plains. I wouldn't be surprised if the new government revisits the plans. Hopefully they'll pick a route that is actually best for us as a nation, not just for them.
But the ability of politicians to disappoint seems limitless.
Edited by grumbledoak on Friday 20th August 13:46
tamore said:
i might be wrong about this, but my take on it is that this is about stopping the business folk from the midlands driving to london.
Transport strategy over the last twenty years - whether by design or hapless coincidence - has prevented large chunks of the country from being properly joined-up.The social and commercial effects of this have been very damaging. I think it has been a significant contributary factor to the magnitude of the north-south divide.
Birmingham, for example, is almost an island within a sea of traffic jams and is really struggling to attract investment and employment is suffering. other areas, the Northeast in particular, are just starting to get better road links, but getting at them - i.e. M1 between Leicester and Leeds - is a joke.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff