[Closed] HS2... whats the point?

Nobody seems to complain abnout the amount wasted on the mototrways, eg lane widening extra lanes , new lights and signs and junctions .

Then about a mile from me 87 million was spent on strengthening one motorway junction and bridge,Bidston Moss m53, junction 1,while the trains running under it where built in 1979, and the national cycle network track also running below it has had no money spent on it since it was built.

A cheaper idea would be to convert the motorways one side to railways m1 and m25 being classic examples, turn uop at a park and ride and get on a train, get off at the other end and then hire bike or coach/bus.

except for the capital investment in the infrastructure, oh and Eddie Stobart will have to sell a few lorries and buy a few trains

Like they've been doing for a number of years now:
[img] [/img]

The trouble with flight comparisons is that a lot of people are using domestic flights and connecting to longer ones. A decent proportion of people flying Manchester-Heathrow for example (you can't fly to City, and BA withdrew the Gatwick route due to lack of demand in April, make of that what you will) many of those people will be changing to trans-Atlantic flights. They won't get the train, whatever you do.

I forget the figures, but my dissertation at Uni was on the WCML upgrade and the 'need' for HS2.

Surely most of these 'full' planes from Leeds and Manchester must be connecting flights where the destination isn't London but the airport, which of course is far less risky from a delay perspective (airline's problem). I'd expect businesses in Slough and Chiswick to benefit from proximity to the airport but not those outside of that radius.

Totally agree on the disruption you get from a short-haul flight where there's an intense amount of unproductive faffing.

Rail travel's where it's at from a productivity perspective but even then it can be challenging in a busy standard class. I use ECML from Wakefield to City occasionally out to Reading and if I work with the meeting planners there's plenty of opportunity to get discounted travel (not necessarily advanced purchase).

Unfortunately the British rail network has been wrecked over the past few decades (or going back even further), while our main European competitors have kept on investing in theirs. To put that right will take investment.

The UK has pandered to road for far too long and needs to invest far more into transport diversity, as well as planning "link up" between different modes.

IMO the UK should be planning multiple high speed links, north to south and east to west. Otherwise the UK will increasingly become a less desirable place to invest for manufacturing compared to mainland Europe.

Maybe they could reduce costs by bringing it under a Government infrastructure works department instead of just spunking billions in profit to private companies.

How much of this £40bn is spent within the UK? I assume rolling stock would be built by European companies, but what about the rest?

A little known fact
Ilkley London fare = £257
Ilkley Doncaster = £17.70
Doncaster Newark = £34.60
Newark London = £135

Thats a fair saving, even cheaper if you split the ticket Retford Newark Peterborough

I don't get why the country needs a very expensive slightly faster rail link?

It's got pointless, over-budget waste of cash written all over it.

So why are the government so eager to push this through?

i live in sheffield,...//
want to go Manchester?

I think we need the capacity but because it will be built by the private sector you can be sure the final bill will be way over the estimate as it always is with these projects. Watch out for former ministers poping up 'working' for the companies involved.

Flight from Manchester to Heathrow - ~£90 (train normally ~£180 odd if booked at short notice)
Taxi to airport - £15
Taxi/Train the other end depending on how many of us are travelling/meeting there

It's really really simple to fly, I'm absolutely gutted that BA have stopped the Manchester to Gatwick flight, my OH used to fly down there all the time and hire a car from the airport for all her business down in Dover/Deal/Hastings then just drop the car off at the airport in the evening.

Getting a train to anywhere the other side of London from the north is a massive pain in the arse.

One of the train's advantages over flying is the being able to arrive in a city centre location. HS2, however, isn't going to city centre locations outside of London.

i live in sheffield, maybe we need fast trains to london, but we already have them, and they're not full all the time.

but we definitely need quick trains to Manchester, Leeds and Beyond.

want to go to london? - 170 miles in 2 hours, this is fine.

want to go Manchester? - you may as well walk the 30 miles, you'll get there faster than the train...

want to go to Edinburgh? - first you'll need to drive to Gatwick, for a flight to Frankfurt, for another flight to Edinburgh.

You can fly from Manchester, http://www.edinburghairport.com/flight-information/route-map

And East Midlands, non stop

A little known fact

Same line, same trains, same ticket office, different prices, stupid.

The UK has pandered to road for far too long and needs to invest far more into transport diversity, as well as planning "link up" between different modes.

IMO the UK should be planning multiple high speed links, north to south and east to west. Otherwise the UK will increasingly become a less desirable place to invest for manufacturing compared to mainland Europe.

Part of the problem is that the UK's geography just doesn't really lend itself to high speed rail in the same way as France/Germany/Spain. We don't have big cities with nothing in between, we have lots of intermediate towns folk will want to stop at.

Our rail network is one of the busiest in the world, and it needs sorting, but look at France beyond the TGV and surburban routes, it's crap! Switzerland is among the best, and no HSR in sight.

HS2, however, isn't going to city centre locations outside of London.

except Leeds, and Manchester...

Part of the problem is that the UK's geography just doesn't really lend itself to high speed rail in the same way as France/Germany/Spain. We don't have big cities with nothing in between, we have lots of intermediate towns folk will want to stop at

Yeah France\Germany and Spain have no small towns 🙄

Switzerland is among the best, and no HSR in sight.

The population of Switzerland is about 8 million, and is about 1/6th the size of the UK, not even close to being comparable.

njee20 - Member

Switzerland is among the best, and no HSR in sight.

One of the oft quoted myths

[url= http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gotthard_base_tunnel/Rail_network/Swiss_Railways_heads_towards_its_limit.html?cid=4364 ]Dont kid yourself[/url]

It will serve very little purpose
I think a decent link between Liverpool and Hull would serve the North better

Its London centric nonsense to think the solution to all ills is better links to London

Better things could be done with the money to improve the train journey

scaled - Member

Getting a train [s]to anywhere the other side of London from[/s] in the north is a massive pain in the arse.

fify.

[s]Getting a train to anywhere the other side of London from in [/s]the north is a massive pain in the arse.

FTFTFY 😉

Liverpool and Hull

really? is there much traffic between the two?

I'm all for HS2, reduce short hall flights, freeup frieght capacity, and also, have a big fast awesome train. In actually fact there is a huge investment in the railways coming, the transpennine route is scheduled for electrification, as are some of the smaller lines. This isn't just a line to get people to Lun-Dun, but to get people out of london, on weekend breaks, you name it. We don't, in fact can't know just what the effects of it will be. But its a fraction of what we're spending on arms and other stuff, and its a massive super fast train. We need a bit of national pride back.

I do think it should start at edinburgh and work its way down, that's the London centric bit.

Everyone's getting all outraged at the cost, but I've heard very little explanation and discussion of WHY it has to cost so much, or indeed, take so damn long.

Liverpool to york is being electrified,

Sadly the tunnels trought he penines linking manchester to sheffield where closed a while ago, and filled wih cables pipes etc to stop them being reused as a high speed link, the edinburgh waverley route was also closed, now being partially reopened in scotland, and lots more routes have been lost forever by poor or non existent planning

Liverpool and hull are both major ports, with both Birkenhead and the inland trafford park freight terminal/manchester ship cannal being huge sourses of freight traffic.

unklehomered - Member

except Leeds, and Manchester...

40 miles apart, an hour on the train.

this is crap, HS2 won't help for at least 25 years.

this is crap.

as he said. FWIW it was a point made on Radio 4 that the train journey between these two ports and across the northern heartland / M62 cannot be made without changes and takes as long as Liverpool to London

As I said it is London centric solution to a problem I am not sure exists

leeds manchester is currently being electrified , and geting faster trains and a higher frequency.

40 miles apart, an hour on the train.

this is crap, HS2 won't help for at least 25 years.

this is crap.

But that's not the point. It isn't for connecting Leeds and Manchester, they're alreaqdy connected, the HS trains will go right into the heart of both those cities, and in both cases slap bang next to the major train station connecting to the surrounding network, the Dales, the Lake District, The Moors, North Wales. It will make a massive difference to travel in the UK. Both for us, but also for visiting tourists, who will be able to get to the north quickly, and easily. Rather than it taking the best part of a day.

Connect the HS2 directly to Liverpool using the correct European wide gauge tracks so linking the port with the Channel tunnel.
That would make Liverpool the biggest & most important port in Europe. Ships could dock, unload and haul the goods by train directly to wherever they need to be in Europe before the ship could have gone round Britain. Saves time, energy and creates loads of jobs for the North West and helps with the balance of payments. Make a wide gauge 'Branch' line to Sunderland for Nissan & get shifting some more manufacturing.

Rather than it taking the best part of a day.

London to York currently takes less than 2 hours.

It worth noting that whilst flying is currently affordable, i suspect that in 20 years, with fuel costs having rocketed, it will get a lot lot more expensive!

I think it's about time we spent some new money on the railways, and used brand new tech, new lines, routes and rolling stock etc. We've been "mend and make do" for so long now, the legacy of the existing infrastructure is just too large, and creates a massive burden on any new project.

The potential issue, once again surrounds the future of energy costs. As it gets more and more expensive to travel, and yet more and more internet connection bandwidth becomes availible, less and less people will ultimately travel for work reasons. Afterall, of all the people who work in london, what proportion go there to simple sit at a desk infront of a computer??

London to York currently takes less than 2 hours.

Yes but then you've got connecting trains both to Kings X and from York. HS2 goes right by Heathrow. And Leeds the better connecting hub and it takes 2.5 hours, despite it being further south. Cut that leg down to 1hr 20, you could do London to Skipton, Hebden Bridge, Harrogate (don't laugh, some people really like it, its like the south, but in the north), York, Otley, Settle in 3 to 4 hours from your door.

Thing about a connection with London is that London is also connected to Paris and Brussels by train, which means a French tourist could also potentially be in York in 4-5 hours.

Building a decent high speed backbone running down the country also simplifies connections to the rest of the cities not currently included, as you can link into it from the rest of the towns.

yes 4-5 hours or 4 hr 40-5hr 40

Ignoring the cross over of times that is no real saving or benefit for all that cost

Its marginally faster for shits loads of money - basically its the 650 b 😉

I don't have a problem with the large capital cost, as construction is highly labour dependent, most of the money get's circulated back into UK construction companies, which boosts the economy and all their wages get taxed, so a fair chunk (roughly 30%) just comes back as tax revenue.

It worth noting that whilst flying is currently affordable, i suspect that in 20 years, with fuel costs having rocketed, it will get a lot lot more expensive!

True, it's only a matter of time before aviation fuel is taxed properly (like petrol and diesel). It's also only a matter of time before HGVs and LGVs are taxed properly because car traffic is reducing = less tax revenues. So the cost of goods will go up, unless a cheaper way to shift them can be found... ...trains!

Afterall, of all the people who work in london, what proportion go there to simple sit at a desk infront of a computer??

A lot, a stupid amount in fact. Got to be one of the most inefficient way of doing things yet we've all bought in to it!

unklehomered - Member

It will make a massive difference to travel in the UK.

no it won't, HS2 won't create a fast link between any towns/cities that aren't already linked by fast trains.

(i din't know that leeds/manchester was getting electrified, that's good news!)

Footflaps just beat me to it - of the 40bn, approx 15-20bn will be recouped in tax receipts. Whilst at the same time boosting employment, manufacturing etc. Plus hopefully meaning we can hold on to as much of our haemorrhaging hi-tech industry as possible.

iirc it's the same argument the US Gov has for building Nimitz class carriers - spend 6bn but get 3bn back in tax, plus all the other benefits.

I agree it is very London-centric though, and the net result will invariably be jobs moving to the south east.

Sadly the tunnels trought he penines linking manchester to sheffield where closed a while ago, and filled wih cables pipes etc to stop them being reused as a high speed link

More significantly, like most of our rail infrastructure it's 150 years old and not remotely suitable for European gauge trains to use.

no it won't, HS2 won't create a fast link between any towns/cities that aren't already linked by fast trains.

(i din't know that leeds/manchester was getting electrified, that's good news!)

I don't get it - Leeds to Manchester takes about 55 minutes, loads of trains, quicker than driving. What exactly do you want? 200mph trains on that route? London - Birmingham is a vastly more sensible and beneficial route, you can call it "London centric" if you want, but there's a fair few more folk making the journey than Leeds - Manchester 😕

That would make Liverpool the biggest & most important port in Europe. Ships could dock, unload and haul the goods by train directly to wherever they need to be in Europe before the ship could have gone round Britain.

The majority of goods coming into Europe will be coming from the far east, it would take longer to get to Liverpool than many other European ports. I also don't think that Liverpool can handle a lot of the big ships that are now used.

IMO (or eutopian vision) There should be a west coast HS line, from Southampton docks up to Glasgow, an east coat line, London to Edinburgh, plus three east west links. London-Bristol-Cardiff, Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Hull, Glasgow-Edinburgh.

It is london centric, but then so is the economy. Theres definitely an argument for moving stuff out of London but i'm not sure if thats more, or less, likely with more rail capacity?

Might be worth pointing out that autonomous cars will be on the road about 15 years before its finished. Google's autonomous car team has just teamed up with IBM, Cisco and Continental (who already supply lots of car technology to manufacturers).

Its marginally faster for shits loads of money - basically its the 650 b

scaled - Member

Flight from Manchester to Heathrow - ~£90 (train normally ~£180 odd if booked at short notice)
Taxi to airport - £15
Taxi/Train the other end depending on how many of us are travelling/meeting there

Why post the cheapest of one and the most expensive of the other ?
If you are going to compare do it like for like.
Looking for a trip to London tomorrow from Manchester earliest vacant flight is after 10:00 ariving 11:00 and would cost £180 train turn up 9:10 in London 11:23 £108.
Now next month same date
Flying earliest flight 10:00 £53
Train same times £34
3 months time arriving 7:00 to 8:00
£49 flying
£131 Train

Now thats when the train prices look stupid

Got to be one of the most inefficient way of doing things yet we've all bought in to it!

Have we hell. A small but critical number of bosses are still into it because they like the feeling of power that summoning people to them gives. No-one who actually does it likes it, but they would rather do an interesting challenging job and travel than stack biscuits in a local Asda.

MSP - Member The majority of goods coming into Europe will be coming from the far east, it would take longer to get to Liverpool than many other European ports.

Now with NW passage opening up with all these plans and trains competing for global warming Liverpool is ideally placed as the gateway to Europe.

njee20 - Member

I don't get it - Leeds to Manchester takes about 55 minutes ... quicker than driving ... What exactly do you want? 200mph trains on that route?

55 minutes, to travel 40miles?

Quicker than driving? - barely, if at all.

no, i don't want 200mph trains, 90mph would do just fine. ie perfectly normal trains, mundane even.

...there's a fair few more folk making the journey than Leeds - Manchester

is that because currently, the train between Leeds/Manchester is only slightly faster than sailing along the canal?

Now with NW passage opening up with all these plans and trains competing for global warming Liverpool is ideally placed as the gateway to Europe.

Don't know if Liverpool can handle massive container ships or not, but I'm fairly sure the Chunnel can't handle that kind of freight traffic... Think Rotterdam will still get most of the traffic.