Hs2 Again

[mushroom25]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23744619

this report may well sound the death knell for HS2. Yet the fact remains that the capacity increase yielded by the upgrade of the west coast rail route started in 1999 (and is still not finished) has already been used up. A further upgrade would involve many more years of disruption but in any case is just not feasible.

so what's the answer? Extra transport capacity is needed now, never mind in the future. where should the government invest - upgrading the M1 and M40?

[Gromit]

Investing in motorways is definitely not an alternative. Capacity by new road is eaten up a lot more quickly than rail capacity.

The economic argument for improving the line from The North to the south is reducing travel time making it more attractive for business users.

Widening the M25 would not be cheap either. It would cause a lot more disruption, blight many more homes, but would not make travelling long distances across the country any easier.

[jake-the-peg]

Well that's one alternative

There are a lot of problems with HS2 - financially it's very dubious, heaven knows how much a ticket on it will end up costing! By the time it's extended to the North of England I'd be surprised if a ticket wasn't 4 times the plane ticket

I might half understand it if there was the ability for it to take freight - a high speed spur from Southampton to Birmingham/London could take vast quantities of freight off of the roads speeding road journeys and saving distributers large amounts of haulage fees

Wonder how much people like Stobarts contribute to party coffers

[Gromit]

This is about the prposed building of the M25 but could be written now about HS2.

// The plan was hugely ambitious and met, almost immediately, with opposition from a number of directions. The report Motorways in London, published in 1969 by the architect/planner Lord Esher and Michael Thomson, a transport economist at the London School of Economics, calculated that costs had been enormously underestimated and would show marginal economic returns. They predicted large quantities of additional traffic that would be generated purely as a result of the new roads. Access to the new roads would soon be overwhelmed even before the rings and radial roads were near capacity, while about 1 million Londoners would find their lives blighted by living within 200 yards of a motorway. The Treasury and the Department of Transport both came out against the scheme, primarily because of worries over the cost. //

Fortunately Ken Livingstone's GLC were instrumental in fighting the nimbys and the road was built.

[FredPuli43]

Intrigued by the observation [above] that the train fare could end up costing four times the air fare. How many, if any, flights are there from London to places to be served by this train? I know that I have disappointed by no flights to most big cities in the North, Glasgow and Edinburgh excepted.

[jno]

They predicted large quantities of additional traffic that would be generated purely as a result of the new roads

That happened as predicted, didn't it? The M25 was built to take traffic off other roads, but in fact it created new traffic.

http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/blogs/roads/M25-traffic-london

[mushroom25]

//By the time it's extended to the North of England I'd be surprised if a ticket wasn't 4 times the plane ticket..//

by that time, Jake, fuel will be so expensive that it's likely there won't be any domestic flight network.

[Gromit]

Fares costing 4 times more is just scaremongering. The fares on HS1 are not significantly higher, so why would HS2 be different?
If the route was being financed privately, then the companies involved would need to recoup the money for their shareholders. But HS2 would be financed from central Government so that does not apply.

[jno]

I'd be surprised if a ticket wasn't 4 times the plane ticket

That's not been the London-Paris experience, though I appreciate more Londonders want to go to Paris than to Leeds (and almost no Parisians at all want to go to Leeds).

[TTG]

Will only be used by a few people. I agree with Jake...freight is the key.

[mushroom25]

it is capacity for freight that HS2 is intended to realise - by moving the inter-city services to HS2, many more freight paths can be generated on the existing network, because the paths are not constrained by the 125mph paths of the fast trains.

the only way to squeeze more capacity from the existing network is for all trains to run at the same speed, ie 75mph. this would result in long-distance trains returning to journey times of 50 years ago.

[Gromit]

// fuel will be so expensive that it's likely there won't be any domestic flight network. //

No it won't. Planes will be more fuel efficient. Modern planes use 50% less fuel than 20 years ago. Which is why they are trying to build more runways, not close them.

Freight will not transfer back to rail in any significant numbers. Since the 1980s the shift to road has meant depots, distribution centres and ports have been built on the motorway network. They are not going to move now. The rail network is already choaked so there is not the capacity for more freight to return.

[jake-the-peg]

You're forgetting Mushroom airfuel isn't taxed at the same rate as petrol

A flight from London to Manchester *return* today is coming in at just over £100.

Unless a government changes that taxation situation I stand by what I said

Obviously London Birmingham isn't a worthwhile flight but I don't think there's enough demand there to justify HS2 - and as I recall the House of Lords committee agreed and called for the project to be approved for all stages rather than just piecemeal.

In terms of it's Green credentials - if you read the environmental assessment the Government produced it makes the case on the grounds that it will reduce flights from Heathrow - which when you consider that we are currently talking about how to *increase* London flight capacity is clear nonsense.

I don't think it matter - all parties seem to want to do this so I cant see it not happening now.

I do think it will be an economic disaster as the Channel Tunnel was but as with that people will forget in time.


I still think a freight line makes more sense

[jake-the-peg]

That's the point Gromit

Rebuilding a freight network to make it a realistic alternative would change people's planning decisions.

Remember we're talking about a decade long timeline with HS2

Just imagine our motorways with 50% fewer HGVs

[Dodger666]

I know nothing about trains but, if more capacity is needed on the railway network, why can't they add more coaches to existing trains?

No doubt someone will say the platforms aren't long enough. Planes manage with just one door, surely train passengers can walk through coaches to the nearest door at the platform.

The proposed HS2 to Birmingham will terminate about 1000 mtrs short of New Street station at the old Curzon Street station. The local taxi drivers must think all their Christmases and birthdays will have come at once. They are also planning to provide walkways from Curzon Street to the city centre. (Imagine that with a large suitcase). Any time saved by the train will be lost once you reach Birmingham city centre.

[Gromit]

// Just imagine our motorways with 50% fewer HGVs //

Or imagine motorways with 50% less cars holding up important distribution.

[emmie]

imagine not getting your shopping from supermarkets, or any goods for that matter, because the HGV's have been severely cut, same for the capital, there are plans afoot or at least talk of cutting the number of large vehicles that drive through here, they could try, but suggest that people will start moaning when they have to do without, it's called convenience, and everyone is used to it. Large lorries have to deliver goods to building sites, large projects all over the capital, like crossrail, and home building, whether private or social housing, it is going on.
I think the HS2 project was ill thought, it will cause massive disruption in the capital, not least for many homes, businesses in certain parts that will have to be demolished.

[mushroom25]

//if more capacity is needed on the railway network, why can't they add more coaches to existing trains..//

you're right, the platforms aren't long enough. on the west coast line, the limiting factor is Liverpool Lime Street, where extending the platform is all but impossible.

[VHG]

Building more motorways to cure the traffic problem is like buying larger trousers to cure the obesity problem.

[mushroom25]

it works for me, VHG

:-D

[VHG]

>>>>The proposed HS2 to Birmingham will terminate about 1000 mtrs short of New Street station at the old Curzon Street station.

No it wont. The "front" of the HS2 station will be right next to Moor St station, which is about a 10 minute walk to New St station. In fact it would be quicker to walk to New St station than to get a taxi.

The old Curzon St station will be about half way along the new HS2 station, but there will be an exit nearby for people who want to come out the side entrance to go to buildings nearby.

Plan of the HS2 station, with the main entrance shown clearly in the bottom left, right next to Moor St station

http://i443.photobucket.com/albums/qq155/frothblower/forum%20photos/f11t23p188n2.jpg