HS2 - Cancel it now

[inbetween]

You can only run so many trains per hour on each line. It's true you can increase capacity on some routes by lengthening trains. But on intercity routes most trains are already 11 carriages long and there is limited scope for extra trains to be run during the day.

Basically we need to build now so we have enough capacity from 2030 onwards.

Even if we didn't use high speed trains we'd still need to build additional capacity on the WCML. I suppose upgrading WCML to use double-decker might be an option, but that would involve rebuilding I don't know how many bridges and tunnels on route and years of disruption on the existing lines. It wouldn't be cheap either...

Nothing to do with railways is cheap. I think the recent electrification projects have averaged around £6m per kilometre.

A recent project to double up a single line track near where I live cost £45m for about 5 miles of track and went nearly 50% over budget, despite it being both straight and on the flat.

Why don't they utilise the motorway network to reduce costs?

Build the line above or next to the motorway as we already own the land.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Yep

Blimey. That would be interesting to see. HS2 doesn't go to Heathrow, and half an hour sounds on the short side to me.

 

[NeilYoungIsBack]

Why don't they utilise the motorway network to reduce costs?

Build the line above or next to the motorway as we already own the land.

I guess it might be feasible to build it above the motorway but you'd have to close the road while you did it which would probably annoy a few people. Plus the rails still have to get near the centre of cities and that is the most expensive part to build not where it runs through farmland or other countryside.

I think some opposers have the idea that the Government has a pile of money sitting around waiting for something to do with it. Along the lines of "why not spend the money on the NHS instead".

In reality, transport infrastructure is paid for by the by the economic benefits the projects create. Unless you build the infrastructure you don't create the benefits and you don't generate the funds to pay back the costs of construction.

 

[aguero93:20]

He'll have served the maximum term by the time work is due to start on the Phase 2B parts, so depends on the appetite at that point, which is why its better to start now.

I have to say, I think "Grands Projet" - particularly for infrastructure, tend to be an overall boost to the economy, so I think they should build the Northern Ireland bridge too while they're at it, although a tunnel is a better option in my mind. 50 mile tunnel from the M55 in Blackpool to Isle of Man, come up for air, then another 30 miles to somewhere in County Down.

The Irish Sea between NI and Scotland is more than four times as deep as the deepest point in the channel tunnel and it drops extremely sharply to that depth. A tunnel just isn't a feasible option. That's before factoring in all the munitions dumped there by the UK government after WW2. Plus nobody wants to blow up the channel tunnel.

 

[andyhinch]

The Irish Sea between NI and Scotland is more than four times as deep as the deepest point in the channel tunnel and it drops extremely sharply to that depth. A tunnel just isn't a feasible option. That's before factoring in all the munitions dumped there by the UK government after WW2. Plus nobody wants to blow up the channel tunnel.

Some people make might think the err dumping is still going on.

 

[Blue Maverick]

The Irish Sea between NI and Scotland is more than four times as deep as the deepest point in the channel tunnel and it drops extremely sharply to that depth. A tunnel just isn't a feasible option. That's before factoring in all the munitions dumped there by the UK government after WW2. Plus nobody wants to blow up the channel tunnel.

Go look at the Brexit thread there might be a few ;)

 

[inbetween]

I guess it might be feasible to build it above the motorway but you'd have to close the road while you did it which would probably annoy a few people. Plus the rails still have to get near the centre of cities and that is the most expensive part to build not where it runs through farmland or other countryside.

I think some opposers have the idea that the Government has a pile of money sitting around waiting for something to do with it. Along the lines of "why not spend the money on the NHS instead".

In reality, transport infrastructure is paid for by the by the economic benefits the projects create. Unless you build the infrastructure you don't create the benefits and you don't generate the funds to pay back the costs of construction.

I don't have a problem personally spending the money, I just think it is being spent on the wrong thing.

99% of people don't have any need to travel to London regularly or even semi-regularly. I also seriously doubt that anyone in London has any need to travel North unless we are going to see some diversification of London's service sectors which I seriously doubt.

Major US cities are largely connected only by air links yet the US has some of the strongest regional economies in the world. States like California are larger by their own right than most countries.

Imagine if those cities said they were redirecting money that could be used for local transport to invest in a high speed railway line to connect the east coast with the west, it would be almost laughable.

The government and previous governments have got this one completely wrong I'm afraid.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

I’ve said it before plié the money into super duper broadband for everyone, meetings can take place face to face over the internet, I noticed Boris mentioned people could get from Birmingham to Heathrow in 34 mins, so yet more people travelling down south, why not run more routes from northern airports? For me your taking people away from the north to London with high speed rail.

plié the money into super duper broadband for everyone,


Stealing Socialist Policies? ..... how dare you propose something that would actually benefit everyone!!

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

I don't have a problem personally spending the money, I just think it is being spent on the wrong thing.

99% of people don't have any need to travel to London regularly or even semi-regularly. I also seriously doubt that anyone in London has any need to travel North unless we are going to see some diversification of London's service sectors which I seriously doubt.

Major US cities are largely connected only by air links yet the US has some of the strongest regional economies in the world. States like California are larger by their own right than most countries.

Imagine if those cities said they were redirecting money that could be used for local transport to invest in a high speed railway line to connect the east coast with the west, it would be almost laughable.

The government and previous governments have got this one completely wrong I'm afraid.

Property prices in London are beyond most people ... the Tories simply want to set up a quick system of getting cheap labour into the City. .... it'll never be expanded beyond Birmingham ....


Because ........ Conservatives.

 

[NeilYoungIsBack]

I don't have a problem personally spending the money, I just think it is being spent on the wrong thing.

99% of people don't have any need to travel to London regularly or even semi-regularly. I also seriously doubt that anyone in London has any need to travel North unless we are going to see some diversification of London's service sectors which I seriously doubt.

Major US cities are largely connected only by air links yet the US has some of the strongest regional economies in the world. States like California are larger by their own right than most countries.

Imagine if those cities said they were redirecting money that could be used for local transport to invest in a high speed railway line to connect the east coast with the west, it would be almost laughable.

The government and previous governments have got this one completely wrong I'm afraid.

Actually they are building a high speed rail system between LA and San Francisco as we speak...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail

Also, as I said earlier rail traffic between the North West and London has grown 70% over the past decade so plenty of people do have a reason to travel.

I accept though that as the Rags form has dipped maybe fewer Londoners have an incentive to travel to Manchester ;)