Think we're getting the east/west line through my old town, albeit it's going on what was the old railway previously. They've torn up a lot of old 'Wildland' either side of the old track.
why all the hate for hs2?
- Thread starter 233
- Start date
Think we're getting the east/west line through my old town, albeit it's going on what was the old railway previously. They've torn up a lot of old 'Wildland' either side of the old track.
We could have built >5 gen III nuclear power stations for the cost of HS2 which would have provided 16-18GW of electricity, enough to replace all fossil fuel use, this project therefore is ultimately a disaster for the environment. Nice to know our tax money will be subsidising a rail network for rich business travellers to use.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 13,323
- Location
- London
That's precisely what HS2 achieves, shifting fast trains off slow lines so you can run more stopping services on the slow lines.
No point investing in new local roads if your arterial roads can't handle the current levels of traffic let alone the increase.
HS2 is just the same trains we use now right? or did they actually take the opportunity to make the new track suitable for double decker trains.
the whole thing just seems like a waste of money and sticking a plaster over our crappy rail infrastructure.
in other countries they shave down the platforms so double decker trains will fit and make bigger tunnels
the whole thing just seems like a waste of money and sticking a plaster over our crappy rail infrastructure.
in other countries they shave down the platforms so double decker trains will fit and make bigger tunnels
Iirc it isnt the track it is our low victorian tunnels that arr unsuitable for double decker trains.
indeed or 3 new nuclear reactors abs FTTP to everyone in the country + continued investment in renewables. That would transform our country and economy. HS2 will do none of that and very few people need to get to London from Manchester a hour quicker.
I speak from regular experience if you’re on the train to London in the morning from Manchester for business 1 hour doesn’t matter. I sit there in 1st with a coffee, toaster and have my laptop open and work through a few things or prepare for a meeting.
My question to the forum would be: when exactly is the right time to upgrade our Victorian rail network? Europe has good trains because of "modern" post war infrastructure, a luxury the UK can't ever hope to emulate with current routes unless similar investment is made on diverting around tight turns, narrow tunnels or ever expanding towns.
The issue of government croynism and mis-management of funds is the issue, not the expansion of rail infrastructure.
The issue of government croynism and mis-management of funds is the issue, not the expansion of rail infrastructure.
yea and it's not like our population is going down.
Hs2 seems like no future foresight at all just an "in the moment" project that's not future proof at all just more of the same
We have a few guys on the project and numbers will increase over the next few years as it starts to take shape, I really couldn't care less about the moaners who don't want it, keeps men in work
doesn't make it any less of a tax payers waste of money that could have been spent elsewhere
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 19 May 2010
- Posts
- 1,446
- Location
- Cheltenham
I don’t think you necessarily need double decker trains - by having a route laid down to cope with higher speeds and a focussed capacity of passengers only, you can increase the number of passengers without physically larger rolling stock. Keep the goods and slower services on the old rails and you’re sorted.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,361
There is nothing wrong with high speed rail. What we should be worried about is the price. Why is it so expensive in the UK compared to Europe and Japan.
Answer = BJ and the Conservatives.
Answer = BJ and the Conservatives.
I am against it as there is more important things to spend the money on.
Just think of this money if it were spent on building social homes and new infrastructure instead.
It is a bit like spending 20 billion to add a cosmetic surgery wing to the NHS whilst there is thousands waiting for heart treatment.
Just think of this money if it were spent on building social homes and new infrastructure instead.
It is a bit like spending 20 billion to add a cosmetic surgery wing to the NHS whilst there is thousands waiting for heart treatment.
This is a very good point as well, investment seems to be funnelled into already the best economic areas, so dead economic areas become even more dead and the uk continues to become more and more focused on certain areas, can you imagine a uk government though spending 100 billion on something that doesnt touch London or the north west?
Or you know, actually changing all the illegal flammable cladding everywhere
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,361
We should increase taxes then and have both. A modern country needs a modern rail system.
Why increase taxes, why not audit the HS2, military, NHS and any other government task?
Does capacity matter if more people work from home?
I suppose it would if less people use cars which seems to be the government's plan.
Yes, because there's going to be more people and people don't justwork.
The problems we are having is because the population has increased 4-6 times in the last 200 years since we built the current lines
How will it cope with 120 million people in the country?
Just like the road network is going to need doubling up intime.
Everyone working from home is a bit of a fantasy.
And would create unemployment as all the support industries would suffer
120 million, how on earth?!?