why all the hate for hs2?

[daver]

Probably prompted by it being on question time, but nonetheless I am bumping this.

Was thinking about this recently and on the face of it I am fairly sceptical, I live in the centre of manchester and I can get a train to go see my sister in London that takes 2 hours and I don't find this unreasonable. However I remember when I was first at uni in London c2000-2003 and the time was 3hrs if you were lucky. Now in between it got even worse as they worked on the line especially at weekends to improve it. A lot of the opposition to HS2 and the financial aspect are arguing we would be better of upgrading existing lines but they don't seem to take into account the hit that the economy would take due to the disruption for extensive work on existing lines. AFAIK if HS2 goes ahead then WCML will operate as normal until it comes online. The less rail replacement buses the better for me I guess

 

[Mr Jones]

India managed to sent a rocket to Mars, at £42Million. Mean while in the UK, we are thinking a budget 1000x more is required to build HS2, over 20 years. Hmmm...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24729073

I know this is comparing 2 entirely different scenario but I am finding it hard to wrap my head around this... Plus, it's not like the HS2 will be any cheaper than current rail price, in fact, it'll likely carry a premium beause you get from A to B a little quicker.

Does this really sound worth while to you?

 

[doodah]

Did not realise India did that for £42m, bargain!

The goal posts keep changing with HS2; economic benefit (revised albeit only a little), speed (some journey times have been slashed a fair bit and they ranted about this near the start) and capacity (no changes on this yet). Has it not already costs tens of millions so far and we still don't have a consensus?

I remember a minister saying the other day, it won't come at premium. Highly unlikely! HS1 is around 1/3 higher and they made other trains slower to make it look better.

The price will probably increase and in 5-10 years time, the Government will say they have renegotiated contracts to ensure the tax payer doesn't incur any further price rises.....where have I seen that before?

I am not against the idea but have no faith it will be executed well, sloppily at best!

Can we not do this?

The new Government form of contract in Ireland requires all public contracting authorities to enter into fixed price lump sum contracts for public works, tendered on a competitive basis, with appropriate risk transferred to contractors

I understand big projects like this aren't easy and costs of supplies change but I get the impression negotiating a sound contract in the first place and design changes are something we can't do very well.

 

[iamtheoneneo]

India managed to sent a rocket to Mars, at £42Million. Mean while in the UK, we are thinking a budget 1000x more is required to build HS2, over 20 years. Hmmm...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24729073

I know this is comparing 2 entirely different scenario but I am finding it hard to wrap my head around this... Plus, it's not like the HS2 will be any cheaper than current rail price, in fact, it'll likely carry a premium beause you get from A to B a little quicker.

Does this really sound worth while to you?

Well a rocket is a rocket, its proven tech that once you have the right people behind and parts in place is relatively easy to produce and get up there, especially unmanned and on a space route that has been done before.

Its a bit different to a rail network where they have to account for the entire stretch of the line, its impact on the environment, where the bridges are being built, where the tunnels are etc, thats a lot of people, a lot of talk and a lot of infrastructure that needs to be thought about before you think about getting a track laid down.

I dont think the HS2 is value for money though, Our rail network is something most countries would be proud of and expanision is great but not at this cost and this environmental damage. Its just simple not worth it.
We should be looking more to the distant future and the technology around that (ie hyperloop etc) , this just eeks of a quick fix that will have little impact.

 

[Judgeneo]

Isn't the Birmingham station on the outskirts of the city? Are there any estimates to how long it would take to get to the center (where the train currently stops)?


We do need the extra capacity though, and we've probably waited too long to consider any other plans...

 

[FoxEye]

India managed to sent a rocket to Mars, at £42Million. Mean while in the UK, we are thinking a budget 1000x more is required to build HS2, over 20 years. Hmmm...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24729073

I know this is comparing 2 entirely different scenario but I am finding it hard to wrap my head around this... Plus, it's not like the HS2 will be any cheaper than current rail price, in fact, it'll likely carry a premium beause you get from A to B a little quicker.

Does this really sound worth while to you?

Probably likely little opposition to a Mars rocket from the Indian populace, or the government just doesn't listen to the vocal protestors

Here in the UK, we have to bend over backwards to all the NIMBYS and opposition groups, spending billions on lawyers, so that a state project can go ahead...

I still think HS2 is a waste of money tho. Would rather they reverse some of the closures Beeching made.

 

[Jonnybmac]

pretty waste of time, and considering the prices train companies charge at the moment it would be pretty useless and expensive too!

i dont know much on the subject but why should the tax payer pay for something that got privatised? surely the big network companies/network rail should/could pay for this..

 

[v0n]

i dont know much on the subject but why should the tax payer pay for something that got privatised? surely the big network companies/network rail should/could pay for this..

We own cars privately, we expect them to build the roads, private companies fly planes, they expect Boris to build them an airport and so on, so forth.

 

[Werewolf]

I still think HS2 is a waste of money tho. Would rather they reverse some of the closures Beeching made.

Unfortunately a lot of those closures would probably be incredibly expensive to reverse, iirc a lot of the lines closed under the Beeching report now have housing or other stuff built along parts of the route so you would have to sort that out before they could even look at getting new (and up to modern standard) track down.

HS2 is something that I think we do need, although we really need many more than just the one. as we desperately need additional lines in many parts of the country, but it's not really feasible unless it's done as some sort of major project like HS1/HS2 as it would generally require compulsory purchases of lots of houses along many lines (where I live we've got 4 tracks, and could easily do with at least another one in each direction due to capacity issues).

 

[Glaucus]

Greed, hs2 is needed, but we also need other big projects. It shouldnt be one or the other. It should be both.

The old saying, you have too spend money to make mney applies here.
Germany shows the way. Invest now to profit in a dacade or two and as long as you keep doing it, you recoupe your money and invest it back in to more projects.

 

[Jonnybmac]

We own cars privately, we expect them to build the roads, private companies fly planes, they expect Boris to build them an airport and so on, so forth.

As far as im aware the tax payer doesnt fund the building of roads, road users do with road tax? also, the tax payer doesnt build airports either theyre again, privately owned?

Call it ignorant/selfish but i dont see why the tax payer should fork 21billion+ for a rail that 80% of the taxpayers will not use, and will charge the tax payer a large premium to use.

They said the olympics would bring jobs and money to the country and like that happened

 

[Glaucus]

There is no road tax, vehicle tax goes into the big black pot and has nothing to do with road funding. Pther than road funding comes out the big black pot.

Using your logic no roads should be built as most of the population doen't use all roads.

 

[Jonnybmac]

There is no road tax, vehicle tax goes into the big black pot and has nothing to do with road funding. Pther than road funding comes out the big black pot.

Using your logic no roads should be built as most of the population doen't use all roads.

no but roads are more diverse. 21 billion is a large chunk of money for one stretch of rail that only goes half way up the country. its cheaper to drive a car down to london from where i live than it is to take the train at the moment never mind using this high speed rail that railway companies will probably hike prices up another 50% and go way over budget.

what will slashing an hour off a train journey time achieve?

 

[Glaucus]

Its not just time, its capacity. Something people like to forget about, as it suddenly put a gapping hole in your argument.
Roads are more diverse? Because theres many more of them with far more money spent on them.

 

[gothic_hobbit]

I'd rather the money was spent on more useful things like better healthcare, faster broadband, lower student fees etc.

This.

 

[Hilly]

Isn't the Birmingham station on the outskirts of the city? Are there any estimates to how long it would take to get to the center (where the train currently stops)?


We do need the extra capacity though, and we've probably waited too long to consider any other plans...

No, Birmingham New Street (main train station in Birmingham) is right in the middle of the city pretty much. Right especially where you want to be any ways.

 

[Jonnybmac]

Its not just time, its capacity. Something people like to forget about, as it suddenly put a gapping hole in your argument.
Roads are more diverse? Because theres many more of them with far more money spent on them.

im not arguing anything i was mearly giving my point of view.

from MY OPINION(albiet not very well educated on the subject) this rail will go bust. they wont meet the expected amount of people and so will sell to a private company owned by some foreigner, who will hike prices up more than they already are now.

it will cost me £120 off peak and £200 anytime to travel from middlesbrough to london, and this is meant to be public transport?
in my car, i can do that trip at a cost of £40. if i had passengers, that would be greatly reduced, where as if i had friends travelling with me to london? the proce would double per person.
can you see my logic of why i hate trains? i would be all for it, if the price actually made some logical sense to me, but it seems far cheaper to travel by road, unless you want a sense of speed which is a serious premium to pay

 

[FoxEye]

Unfortunately a lot of those closures would probably be incredibly expensive to reverse, iirc a lot of the lines closed under the Beeching report now have housing or other stuff built along parts of the route so you would have to sort that out before they could even look at getting new (and up to modern standard) track down.

A small number of these closures are being reversed as we speak. There is also a lot of public interest and demand for doing so.

Perhaps the govt should be looking to fund multiple smaller projects. Branch line re-openings (where feasible), extra lines where where we need more capacity (esp freight).

Rather than HS2 which is a massive vanity project with dubious benefit. Even business leaders are divided on the issue, and nobody knows exactly whether it will deliver or not. Simply unacceptable for the money that's being poured into it (or will be).

HS2 is something that I think we do need, although we really need many more than just the one. as we desperately need additional lines in many parts of the country, but it's not really feasible unless it's done as some sort of major project like HS1/HS2 as it would generally require compulsory purchases of lots of houses along many lines (where I live we've got 4 tracks, and could easily do with at least another one in each direction due to capacity issues).

I have no problem with compulsory purchase. I'd be happy to leave my house for a new railway line. I honestly can't stand the people who oppose everything on the basis of "oh the view from my kitchen window is *marvellous*, and I don't want it spoilt".

 

[SPG]

The road network is full, the trains are full, there is not enough airports and the population keeps on going up. We do need HS2 for them reasons alone. Or you could make flexitime 100% compulsory to relive to pressures on transport networks. Oh and the cost of using it



The downside of it is the complete and utter disgrace of how much the tax payer will be ripped off by the government in its purchasing decisions. The endless court battles and NIMBIS. It pains me its not even trains in the UK to be used.

 

[Jonnybmac]

I have no problem with compulsory purchase. I'd be happy to leave my house for a new railway line. I honestly can't stand the people who oppose everything on the basis of "oh the view from my kitchen window is *marvellous*, and I don't want it spoilt".

think its more the fact they dont want a rail line outside their house creating large amounts of noise everytime it passes? i lived briefly behind a railway line and its horrendous...

What could be seen as a risky, very expensive bid for prestige should not be attempted at this time. Our railways are in need of investment, but not in this direction.

In any case, these crowded islands are not ideally suited to this project. High speed visual communication we already have. High speed travel is less important than it was. Journey times would be a little shorter for the few (mostly businessmen) who could afford HS2 fares, but their computers enable them to be gainfully employed whilst travelling anyway.

To avoid ridicule the HS2 would require a constant, reliable and adequate supply of electricity. Oh dear, I suppose for some the ultimate pipe dream might be of HS2 running on exclusively wind-sourced power?

The problem of congestion is largely one of getting daily commuters to work, and is not solved by a few high speed long distance expresses.

Safety at speed demands advanced track design and maintenance, infallible train control, computer reliability, unflagging discipline. The effects of vandalism and of derailments/collisions at speeds of 250/500mph have at least to be borne in mind.

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news...ill-own-hs2-some-time-down-the-line-1-6211820



also the safety side.. look at the spanish high speed crash not but 4 months ago? is high speed rail really that safe? the fact that the lines will require some serious maintenance, when we cant even manage the lines we have now