This was a labour project!
Plus you have no idea of the true value of 30 minutes. Do you have any clue how much money is tuned over every 30 minutes in the capital?
why all the hate for hs2?
- Thread starter 233
- Start date
This was a labour project!
Plus you have no idea of the true value of 30 minutes. Do you have any clue how much money is tuned over every 30 minutes in the capital?
Soldato
It isn't just for speed. It will add extra much needed capacity.
I am all for HS2, our country is lagging behind the rest of Europe when it comes to high speed rail.
I am all for HS2, our country is lagging behind the rest of Europe when it comes to high speed rail.
Quite, the UK rail network is pretty much saturated. People are complaining of delays and lack of seating on their regular trains and want this issue resolved- well the only way to resolve those issues is to build new train lines like the HS2 and create new capacity!
The same people complaining are probably those that complain that the UK used to have the best rail network in the world, now we have a shameful network compared to France, Germany, China, japan. Well i=f we build new HS train lines than we might rise to the top again.
depends how much of the 30bn (which I'm not convinced is right) has been budgeted for compulsory purchase.
10 years to deliver 30bn of work is actually phenomenally fast for the railways.... just need to look at thameslink amongst others for evidence of that.
it's not just a case of getting some men in orange to chuck some track down and then go and drink a cuppa...
disregarding the regulatory approvals which are required for rail projects there will be a massive amount of design involved and there is a huuuuge skill shortage in this country right now for decent design engineers (largely thanks to apprenticeships being all but killed off not so long ago).
if our immigration laws remain as they are we'll have to spend even more "crazy" sums of money just to maintain things as they are to cope with the increased footfall... never mind delivering an improvement.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
I've skimmed the thread but not seen anyone point out the elephant in the room. England is ****** tiny!
Why are we comparing our rails services to Japan or Spain or other countries much larger than us where high speed rail actually makes a noticeable difference?
I'm also a firm believer that we should encourage more people to work closer to home, HS2 actively promotes the idea that people should live miles away from their workplaces and waste tons of carbon and their own time everyday 'commuting' many miles away when they should be encouraged to set up businesses in their own community or moving closer to where they want to work.
Why are we comparing our rails services to Japan or Spain or other countries much larger than us where high speed rail actually makes a noticeable difference?
I'm also a firm believer that we should encourage more people to work closer to home, HS2 actively promotes the idea that people should live miles away from their workplaces and waste tons of carbon and their own time everyday 'commuting' many miles away when they should be encouraged to set up businesses in their own community or moving closer to where they want to work.
Associate
It goes both ways.
When I worked from home I used to make the flight from Edinburgh to Heathrow every few months and while the flight was only an hour and 20 minutes or so, the faffing about often resulted in a wasted day.
Instead of that, if from central London you can be in Edinburgh in like 2 hours, you can get the early train, be there fairly early within the day spend a day within the city and go back home the same night.
Assuming it's not prohibitively expensive and the trains run at a resonably useful schedule this is going to make satellite sites and remote employees more interesting prospect. You still need a cultrual change but this'll only help.
Of course despite sounding like it's going to be largely publically funded, I'm expecting tickets to be on par with the eurostar which isn't exactly cheap in my opinion and the fact this isn't going to be ready for 20 years doesn't sound appealing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 7,963
Vanity project. Every government has to have one. It might be a bottomless money pit offering something no-one really needs, but hey its prestige. Something to be remembered for.
Blair had the Millenium Dome, Cameron has HS2.
Blair had the Millenium Dome, Cameron has HS2.
Last edited:
I understand where you are coming from but you are glossing over some I portent details. Londo.rovides so man jobs but not enough housing and what there is is too expensive, let alone the fact it is just overflowing and breached capacity. Therefore people have to be able to live further out and have an easier commute.
I would also like to see increases in remote working but the way I see HS2 would support that. People can live and work if there away from their jobs without a commute, but those few times a month (or 1-2 times a week) when so end must be in work for meetings and personal communication then the HS2 supports this concept. Live in Manchester and get an early rain into the London office.
Secondly you are ignoring the possibility that with the HS2 companies with HQs in London can now seriously consider setting up satellite office in outlying cities becaus wall key personal could commute easily for day visits.
The SE is overcrowded leading to difficulties with water etc. people need to spread out. At the same time efficient bussiness operations require close co-location. HS2 will let people spread out.
You just make it sound like people can pick and choose where they work and live, people have to work they have options. For any that means with London based companies. E..g, for some one like me the only realistic jobs I would apply for in the auK would be in and around The City, yet I would want to live far out of London because I hate cities!
Caporegime
I predict that the ticket prices for this will be so unreasonable that the vast majority of people will stick to the standard services we already have.
id love to see a Plymouth > Bristol > London and :
London > Birmingham > Liverpool > Manchester > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow
I suspect that 2nd route is a bit "curley"
id love to see a Plymouth > Bristol > London and :
London > Birmingham > Liverpool > Manchester > Newcastle > Edinburgh > Glasgow
I suspect that 2nd route is a bit "curley"
It would depend on the terrain, so i gather a lot of this is going through countryside, so you have massive cuttings with tens of thousands of tons of spoil to shift, bridges,tunnels to build and so on, this takes time and problems allways arise on massive projects
Indeed it's not that simple as people seem to think, it all takes time and lots of man power/plant.
I am flat out for the next few years on various rail infrastructure projects so i welcome this investment
Soldato
I remember watching a programme which showed old footage of people moaning about creating the M25 saying they didn't see the point and it was a waste of time and money.
I'm not sure that spending so much on what is an incremental upgrade, only really benefiting a small number of people is a wise choice of investment here. Better choices would be improving existing stations (lengthening platforms for longer trains, for example).
How much do you think a ticket will cost on HS2?
How much do you think a ticket will cost on HS2?
Of course where this will all fall down is that a Train that travels at the speed of an aircraft is going to be a lovely terror target!
(Trains have been targeted by terrorists before but they are not really spectacular enough, a 200MPH train however would certainly be too good to pass up!)
Any gains in travel time will be lost due to the requirement to check in an hour or more before the "Flight" in order to have your identity checked and your baggage scanned!
It would only take one "Shoe Bomb" and the entire scheme will be dead in the water!
(Oh and PS., Dont forget that one might alternatively blow up the track at any point along the route. so it isnt just suicide bombers one needs to worry about!)
(Trains have been targeted by terrorists before but they are not really spectacular enough, a 200MPH train however would certainly be too good to pass up!)
Any gains in travel time will be lost due to the requirement to check in an hour or more before the "Flight" in order to have your identity checked and your baggage scanned!
It would only take one "Shoe Bomb" and the entire scheme will be dead in the water!
(Oh and PS., Dont forget that one might alternatively blow up the track at any point along the route. so it isnt just suicide bombers one needs to worry about!)
Last edited:
Associate
I have no objections to HS2 itself but I don't see it reaching the levels of success it is projected to achieve. I see it be vastly under utilised and as such not particularly relieving the strain on the network. I'd rather see it split jointly between improving current infrastructure nationwide on the train network as well as the motorway network getting more investment. The reasons for my belief have been touched upon by many in here already. I lived in Kent and shall be returning shortly to work in London so it's a topic close to my heart. Do I use the train? Lol do be serious. I commute by coach as it is literally half the price once you factor in parking. And all I lose is an extra hour a day in commute times with a few more delays every now and then. Do I mind? nope because I've saved 200 quid by doing so but have a guaranteed seat and air con and sometimes wi-fi. If I had to use the train would I use High speed? Again no because the costs are so extortionate. So the driving factor behind mine and many others in my positions decision is cost not time. Similarly people often prefer to drive as it is cheaper even if it means they have to contend with traffic.
The government need to address many issues here. People will not use it if it is too costly and will default to cheaper means even if it costs them in time and effort. Glaucus has also hit the nail on the head with regards to public transport needing to be synced up, the amount of time I've lost waiting for trains/buses is monumental when not in London and parking is a killer. If the overall experience could be improved people may be more inclined to use public transport (though not if costs are too high to justify the experience). I personally would prefer to see better and cheaper cross London transport projects as well as similar in other large cities as well as a more joined up strategy to the countries transportation needs than is currently being implemented than seeing a High speed line lobbed up and hoping it'll help. I hope it helps but I don't see it myself.
The government need to address many issues here. People will not use it if it is too costly and will default to cheaper means even if it costs them in time and effort. Glaucus has also hit the nail on the head with regards to public transport needing to be synced up, the amount of time I've lost waiting for trains/buses is monumental when not in London and parking is a killer. If the overall experience could be improved people may be more inclined to use public transport (though not if costs are too high to justify the experience). I personally would prefer to see better and cheaper cross London transport projects as well as similar in other large cities as well as a more joined up strategy to the countries transportation needs than is currently being implemented than seeing a High speed line lobbed up and hoping it'll help. I hope it helps but I don't see it myself.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,597
This is what I've said before.
Given that the HS2 will basically compete with the same passengers who commute in and out of London/Birmingham via the West Coast Mainline, the ticket prices for London Midland and Virgin are already extremely pricey as it is and continue to rise each year.
As it stands, the cheapest option, and its by no means cheap, is London Midland. You can then pay more for the faster service of Virgin trains.
Those two operators aren't going to drop their prices and HS2 is guaranteed to be far more expensive than either. Given we live in a world where people are feeling the pinch, the HS2 is likely to command a much higher premium than the other two operators for its speed and modern amenities. However, the majority of people aren't likely to want to pay that premium, which will equate to thousands of pounds extra a year, just for a slightly quicker journey. Thats why I think its a somewhat pointless project, as the train effectively becomes transport for the business elite who work in the City but live out in Birmingham.
Those same commuters now will also have to put up with years of disruption at Euston while HS2 is built.
Last edited:
hs2 is high speed, which means you can't have freight on it.
supermarkets don't use rail that much (tesco does in scotland) because weather conditions can frequently means freights trains won't move to X area, and given that they typically transport perishable goods it's not a great idea. On the other hand, trucks always get there no matter what weather because roads are much better taken care of.
Soldato
Our regional hospitals were shrunk down, massive service cuts in preparation for a new "super" hospital to be built. That idea was canned by this government and now our emergency care in the region is awful.
What else could we spend the money on some of you ask? Please... priorities people
What else could we spend the money on some of you ask? Please... priorities people
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24040674
And the Government continues to try and shove it down everyones throat that it's going to be beneficial to us all...
For a project that will take over 20 years to build, this level of benefit is
a) very poor forecast, might as well draw a linear line and extrapolate the benefits whilst in the real world, unpredictable scenarios happens - e.g. another financial crisis
b) does not take into account for future technology - with a timescale in decades rather than within 5-10 years, the train implimented will lack behind anything worthy at that price tag.
c) It also does not look at other areas of tech improvement - e.g. High speed internet bringing forth better quality / 3D or even more far fetching 'Holographics' type of video conference. That will be cheaper than any 'need' to travel quickly in and out of London. Plus, because it's HS2, it's more likely to command a premium to use it vesus the already crazily expensive rail fares of the 'slower' trains currently linking Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester and York to London.
Why focus on a 1 hit grand project when you can invest better with many smaller projects and upgrades to current rail links? Just look at other countries such as Germany, they don't run before they can walk. They invest and improve smaller scale projects to build a more stable foundation for bigger improvements.
The HS2 project is basically trying to build a great pyramid on top of a half finished pyramid, a small base that's not completed having to prop up a bigger base for somehting 'great' and ultimately going to proof too costly to finish and left half finished yet again.
And the Government continues to try and shove it down everyones throat that it's going to be beneficial to us all...
BBC News said:
For a project that will take over 20 years to build, this level of benefit is
a) very poor forecast, might as well draw a linear line and extrapolate the benefits whilst in the real world, unpredictable scenarios happens - e.g. another financial crisis
b) does not take into account for future technology - with a timescale in decades rather than within 5-10 years, the train implimented will lack behind anything worthy at that price tag.
c) It also does not look at other areas of tech improvement - e.g. High speed internet bringing forth better quality / 3D or even more far fetching 'Holographics' type of video conference. That will be cheaper than any 'need' to travel quickly in and out of London. Plus, because it's HS2, it's more likely to command a premium to use it vesus the already crazily expensive rail fares of the 'slower' trains currently linking Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester and York to London.
Why focus on a 1 hit grand project when you can invest better with many smaller projects and upgrades to current rail links? Just look at other countries such as Germany, they don't run before they can walk. They invest and improve smaller scale projects to build a more stable foundation for bigger improvements.
The HS2 project is basically trying to build a great pyramid on top of a half finished pyramid, a small base that's not completed having to prop up a bigger base for somehting 'great' and ultimately going to proof too costly to finish and left half finished yet again.