HS2 - Birmingham to Manchester scrapped.

stick 'em all together, job done.
That’s not as daft as it sounds. If they would have rolled out full ERTMS level 3 on the network then you can run trains much closer together. But as always they haven’t got there yet even though the tech to do it has been around for 10 yrs plus.
 
HS 1 in Kent and London has been a success.
As I've already stated freight capacity is full on both East and West cost main lines so the demand must be there admittedly probably not to and from Manchester but at the moment the west coast line as far as crewe is still at maximum capacity day and night
That's nearly all commuter passengers of people working in London
It's only made London more accessible

One of the main arguments in favour of Hs2 is that it would increase the wealth of the provinces, when in fact the study of high speed rail in France concluded the opposite
 
Wasn't all the money spent on the Castefield curve to connect Victoria and Piccadilly supposed to increase capacity and reduce travelling time from the north east. If so I can't see any improvement
 
High speed rail is a complete waste of money unless it's going to go long distances. I know it's got to start somewhere, but what's the point of paying a fortune and then stopping in Birmingham? Never mind Manchester, it should at least go up to Glasgow, otherwise what's the point? If the aim is to give a realistic alternative to flying, then there's no point in only doing it between places that people never fly between anyway. Who's flying from London to Birmingham?

As for overseas trains being better, it's often true but also massively overstated. I once tried to get a train from Barcelona to San Sebastien. What a fucking nightmare. Tried to pre-book, but they don't accept non-Spanish credit cards online. Went to the station, and they said pre-booking was closed because you can only pre-book 2 days in advance, but come back on the day and you can buy them. Turned up on the day and they said they'd sold out. Lovely trains if you can get on one. Still not as bad as going from Loughborough to Blackpool on a weekend though. I think it was about 6 or 7 hours in the end. Google says it's 2 hrs 26 in a car.
 
freight should be moved at night, same with the post airplanes.

freight should be moved at night, same with the post airplanes.
The vast majority of track repairs, infrastructure upgrades/repairs happens at night so as not to impact the running of passenger trains. This is why a number of freight need to be run in the day.
 
The airport-city centre connection is planned to go under my house and then the Mersey just down the end of my road, they'd have to tunnel at least 60ft underground to do it.

No chance of it happening imo, hope it gets binned and the money goes towards connecting northern cities.
 
High speed rail is a complete waste of money unless it's going to go long distances. I know it's got to start somewhere, but what's the point of paying a fortune and then stopping in Birmingham? Never mind Manchester, it should at least go up to Glasgow, otherwise what's the point? If the aim is to give a realistic alternative to flying, then there's no point in only doing it between places that people never fly between anyway. Who's flying from London to Birmingham?
As others have said, the main issue that HS2 addresses is capacity constraints on the WCML. The most capacity-constrained portion of the WCML is between Birmingham and London, so even if HS2 only ever goes as far as the West Midlands it would be a useful thing to have.

However, I doubt there is any substance in the OP's rumour. I'm on the RailUk forum every day and there's nothing on there about it on there (only videos of the tunnel boring machines now operating in the Chilterns).

I suspect the OP has mixed up HS2 with Northern Powerhouse Rail, which I understand is now more likely to amount to an incremental TransPennine Route upgrade between Manchester & Leeds.
 
If they were serious about levelling up, then they would have ensured the Northern part was done first. It would bring the jobs and much needed connectivity and no doubt other benefits. Then if it was going over budget there was no way the southern part wouldn't get done due to cost.
 
It makes a Ewe turn in Derby?
8ac706f7feb44054bda02ca322b2d54d.jpg
 
If they were serious about levelling up, then they would have ensured the Northern part was done first. It would bring the jobs and much needed connectivity and no doubt other benefits. Then if it was going over budget there was no way the southern part wouldn't get done due to cost.
The state of transport infrastructure outside London is a national disgrace. More than 55 million people live outside Greater London. We have been treated with contempt. It's not just a North-South divide because Eastern England, Western England, Scotland, Wales, the North East, and the Midlands have also been shafted. It's London v the rest.
They could spend hundreds of billions on transport and we would still be behind most of Europe and Asia. There needs to be huge sustained investment for 20 years just to scratch the surface.
 
Its about adding capacity, not just cutting journey times. We have 2bn rail journeys on a network designed for 730m
In the brave new world, there'll be a big drop off in commuting rail journeys. In the south east of course.
Smaller market taking in less money.

Should always have built the Manchester Leeds first then Leeds Sheffield. Expanded north to Newcastle and south to East Midlands and west to Liverpool before eventually Birmingham and London. That would have given the north the boost first instead of minutes off a meaningless route.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top