Scottyboi
Well-Known Member
Great news for near me cba with the roadworks it was going to generate.
There's plenty of capacity on existing linesIncrease in train capacity is needed. If you are doing that the argument has always been spend a bit more and get high speed.
I'm massively disappointed tbh. Linking the north west and Manchester with HS2 would have brought jobs and further investment to the City.
If we had anyone in any government providing the service before most of us are long in the ground. It would probably be a service that was still second rate to the improvements being developed in more forward looking countries. Governments anyway will be discouraging ordinary people from travel by pricing us out, so those able to afford travel won't be out off by spending a few minutes more on a train.Increase in train capacity is needed. If you are doing that the argument has always been spend a bit more and get high speed.
I'm massively disappointed tbh. Linking the north west and Manchester with HS2 would have brought jobs and further investment to the City.
It was never costed correctly from the start and even when the costs rose to an estimated £100B it still didn't include the fucking trainsWhat's the main reason for the cost overspend... The route through the home counties which is mostly in tunnels, because it was OK to demolish houses and construct viaducts in the North but far too unsightly in the South. The tunnel through the Chilterns was extended even further than was originally planned because of objections.
Secondly the whole system of letting contracts in the UK for infrastructure is fucked. Too much fragmentation with loads of contracts to manage, armies of lawyers, commercial managers, project managers and all the other hangers on that add no real engineering value.
You're not wrong, they should have rolled out ERTMS which allows trains to run much closer together. If they had implemented that on the West Coast Mainline and East Coast they could have increased capacity by a good 30% at much lower cost.There's plenty of capacity on existing lines
An example being that when the operators increase the costs for "rush hour" travel, the trains immediately before and after are jam packed, where as the "rush hour" trains have plenty of space
And as I said earlier, the government admits upgraded signalling and the technology surrounding that would increase capacity
Also, studies on french high speed rail show that the major benefactor of HSR is Paris
People move away and commute in. It brings very little economic benefit to the regions
The money should have been invested in modern technology, not 40 year old tech
But please feel free to tell me why getting from London to Manchester 45 minutes quicker would bring jobs and investment
You're not wrong, they should have rolled out ERTMS which allows trains to run much closer together. If they had implemented that on the West Coast Mainline and East Coast they could have increased capacity by a good 30% at much lower cost.
Unfortunately.....Won't change until the DFT get their finger out and sort a fair pay deal.The ball is very much in their court.
To be fair the trains are only around £2Bn including ops and maintenance. Im not sure what the arrangements are for ownership as most trains in the UK are owned by banking institutions and leased by train operating companies.It was never costed correctly from the start and even when the costs rose to an estimated £100B it still didn't include the fucking trains