why all the hate for hs2?

So at the outset it seemed like a project that would cost way more than they said, not do what they planned and not really provide any benefit.

Can't say I've heard anything that convinces me it would t have been better spending the money on upgrading existing lines.

You know silly little things like enabling electric trains not to have to switch to diesel north of York because of infra issues.

But no, let's hack down ancient woodland and waste billions getting people from London to Birmingham, perhaps, a little bit quicker. Maybe.
 
Last edited:
One of the upshots of all the cancellations of everything past Birmingham or to the East is just how London focused HS2 is now (it always was to some extent, but it would have still significantly benefited large parts of the country). I hope that one day it will be extended to Manchester and Leeds, but as it stands the benefits basically will be:
- 30 mins off journeys to London from Birmingham and Manchester. No benefit for East Midlands to Birmingham or North West to Birmingham etc.
- lots more London-bound commuter trains from towns on the WCML (due to capacity released by taking the intercity trains off it). No relieved capacity North or East of Birmingham.

Reducing the time savings for intercity flows by reducing the top speed is the cherry on the cake really.

If only English regions got Barnet consequentials for HS2 like Scotland does we could fund some really useful projects.
 
Last edited:
Lets build a high speed railway that cost a **** ton of money, but then run it at the same speed as great western railway


Whats going to happen is they will still charge a load of money per ticket to rake it in, then increase the price when they want to increase the speed


If your going to build a High speed rail, then run it at most of its speed capacity after it has been stress tested to ensure its fit for purpose at those speeds, why wouldnt you run it as what its intended to be run at if all the safety points have been checked and met and are successful?
 
Last edited:
DJMK4 said:
Lets build a high speed railway that cost a **** ton of money, but then run it at the same speed as great western railway


Whats going to happen is they will still charge a load of money per ticket to rake it in, then increase the price when they want to increase the speed
Click to expand...
It will go faster depending on how many passengers, as long as there isn't any leaves on the line....
 
could be worse

q6OA14V.png
 
DJMK4 said:
Lets build a high speed railway that cost a **** ton of money, but then run it at the same speed as great western railway


Whats going to happen is they will still charge a load of money per ticket to rake it in, then increase the price when they want to increase the speed


If your going to build a High speed rail, then run it at most of its speed capacity after it has been stress tested to ensure its fit for purpose at those speeds, why wouldnt you run it as what its intended to be run at if all the safety points have been checked and met and are successful?
Click to expand...
It should never have been about speed but about capacity and freight. Absolute morons in central gov. This is why I left that sector, they don't listen, then they spend £ms on consultants to tell them the same thing the industry experts have told them. It's a mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom