Benefits of High Speed Rail project exaggerated, secret report reveals

ugly

LE
Moderator
It won't. HS2 might be of some very limited advantage to the fortunate few who are able to use it. It will be of no benefit at all to the majority who live in the areas it passes through, who will be unable to access it as there will no intervening stopping points. Any capacity that is freed up on the WCML will not be optimised as all available investment potential will have been used up for the forseeable future on the HS2 project.

Will the slower Chiltern Line route to Birmingham (which serves many intervening areas en route) be viable any more?
I think the Chilterns can grow partly due to the disruption that HS2 will bring to the WCML and also it will mean improvements as the wcml freight gets sent on the chilterns if the WCML is stuffed or being dug up.
The capacity on WCML will be used up really quickly but that isn't the point, you need to hold white periods in your timetables to allow engineering work and maintenance. This is whats driving digital railway design to allow fault finding whilst reducing actual lineside disruption
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
The Chiltern Line route only now follows the old GCR route as far as Aylesbury. The main Chiltern Line to Birmingham follows the old GWR route.
Banbury, the bit between was a Joint. In a way you are right but the busiest bit and worst engineered is the GCR bit.
Lots of talk over the years regarding reopening the GCR at least as far as Rugby. I dont think the political will exists. The Chilterns as a route nearly disappeared in the 1970's. Locating some senior BR offices to Marylebone ensured its survival!
 
I've no idea why you think that, as I've never advocated anything like.
That's the impression I've gained from your posts. As I said, I didn't know if that is your view, but that's how it read to me.
The regional railways ARE a bloody disgrace & the commuter lines into most cities in no way adequate for the ever increasing number of passengers projected.
Agreed. What's that got to do with HS2? Do you honestly believe that if HS2 was cancelled tomorrow, the Accrington Stanley spur line upgrade and all the other smaller projects would be dusted off and built in its place? If so, I have some shares in London Bridge investments you may be interested in...
Tell me again how HS2 will help as people are pushed to stop/priced out of using private vehicles...
Eh? Don't remember telling you that the first time. Must be the port.
 
That's the impression I've gained from your posts. As I said, I didn't know if that is your view, but that's how it read to me.
Agreed. What's that got to do with HS2? Do you honestly believe that if HS2 was cancelled tomorrow, the Accrington Stanley spur line upgrade and all the other smaller projects would be dusted off and built in its place? If so, I have some shares in London Bridge investments you may be interested in...
Eh? Don't remember telling you that the first time. Must be the port.
More likely you have shares in HS2 construction companies going by support for blowing £52bn (or much more) on a vanity project that will benefit a minuscule number of passengers. :roll:
 
More likely you have shares in HS2 construction companies going by support for blowing £52bn (or much more) on a vanity project that will benefit a minuscule number of passengers. :roll:
No shares, just faith in the worth of building things. Almost always it’s better to build than not, and better to build big than small.
 
I occasionally use HS1 and very convenient it is too. Well worth the surcharge. But mass transit systems only work when the vehicle is not simply moving fresh air around.

The rail lines were a Victorian solution that eclipsed the canals because they could carry people as well as coal. But you still have to get to/from the terminus.

I don't think cutting 20 minutes of that journey time is sufficient benefit.

For me, the next leap forward in transport will be the driverless car. It promises to revolutionise transport, reduce the need for car ownership, reduce parking (and hence congestion) and pollution in cities.
 
And therein lies a lot of the problem We area small overcrowded island.The current rail network is trying to work in between buildings and using existing Victorian engineering solutions to the problems they had 100 years ago.
Short of scrapping the whole lot and starting from scratch I don't see an easy solution.
Well, it's your fault then. You ******* shouldn't have started the industrial revolution, be railway pioneers etc., you could've been late to the party and have had all nice and shiny new kit now.
 
Not at all applicable in the case of UK transport infrastructure..
Tell that to Brunel. Or more appropriately to his legacy, still with us today.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
For me, the next leap forward in transport will be the driverless car. It promises to revolutionise transport, reduce the need for car ownership, reduce parking (and hence congestion) and pollution in cities.
Thankfully I dont live in a city
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
I don't think cutting 20 minutes of that journey time is sufficient benefit.
I think that has to be one of the worst soundbites to be over misused/quoted. It will indeed reduce some journey time to Birmingham (I'd rather make it longer as long as I dont go along the side of the M1) but it is supposed to be a reduction in getting to other places.
 
I was told by someone who worked on it that the HS3 part of linking Cambridge/Peterborough to Edinburgh, Birmingham to Glasgow and then Liverpool to Hull via Manc, Bradford, Leeds will apparently cost the same as HS2 and is far more beneficial to the northern economy, fit for a powerhouse to develop one might say.

However as it doesn’t link to London it is deemed less important to build.
 
Chilterns had the benefit of a light timetable with a newly resignalled terminus when it opened. They have helped fund massive investments on the route under project evergreen. Most of it was to remove the crippling restrictions made by the accountants when BR was in the chair and the stuff was just about good enough for the traffic it ran.
Chilterns was also the last major national route (GCR) into London (a very strange railway for many reasons) and the cost cutting as it ran through the Chiltern hills towards the end of its build are evidenced by the poor quality of embankment and cutting work.
I've been using Marylebone a lot up recently (I'm out of the country until next year now), and they run far more trains there than they used to. Most turn left at Neasden to Oxford and points north. Restoration of passenger services north of Aylesbury would be a logical next step.

Driving into London on the A/M40 is a clusterf*ck, so there's no competition, there even though there's 24/7 coaches from London to Oxford.
 
I'm eagerly awaiting the electric 4x4 that can get me, trailer & quad the 95 miles to the deer lease, drive round the rough tracks & rides, then get me home again & be fully charged by the next morning.
That's some way away I suspect, although I believe manufacturers are looking at electric pickups, and there are electric bikes. But we shouldn't conflate driverless cars and electric vehicles completely.

Also, the use of electric cars will obviously grow faster in towns, especially when most journeys are school runs and trips to the shops.

But I'm more interested in the changes that driverless cars will bring.

1. You get the benefits of mass transit (you can do something else in your journey) but have door to door transportation.

2. Parking is eased: the car doesn't have to wait for you.

3. Also, if you don't have to drive it, the interiors can be optimised for use, rather than be an after thought. Think 'business class' rather than the flight deck.

4. Why own a car? If you only need it an hour a day, just whistle one up from Avis etc. Order a different model for work than the one that takes you and the family on holiday...
 
4. Why own a car? If you only need it an hour a day, just whistle one up from Avis etc. Order a different model for work than the one that takes you and the family on holiday...
After living in London for the last 5yrs, the idea of car ownership doesn't appeal to me anymore. Sure, if I am out on the sticks, or in places with shit public transport, I will get one, but it won't be something I look forward to. Would be nice to have a nice little weekend car, but even that is just a thought. The idea of just jumping in your car and going for a spin to nowhere still appeals, as I used to do it a lot. If I really want one something nice, I can rent one. Why waste all that money for an object which is just sitting around doing nothing most of the year.

This coming from a guy who owned 3 cars and 1 sports bike in the U.S. I still wouldn't mind a bike here in Europe though.
 
After living in London for the last 5yrs, the idea of car ownership doesn't appeal to me anymore. Sure, if I am out on the sticks, or in places with shit public transport, I will get one, but it won't be something I look forward to. Would be nice to have a nice little weekend car, but even that is just a thought. The idea of just jumping in your car and going for a spin to nowhere still appeals, as I used to do it a lot. If I really want one something nice, I can rent one. Why waste all that money for an object which is just sitting around doing nothing most of the year.

This coming from a guy who owned 3 cars and 1 sports bike in the U.S. I still wouldn't mind a bike here in Europe though.
Exactly. I had a car the last time I lived in London (1990!) and it was more trouble than it was worth. When I worked in Bangkok I used public transport and taxis, and the occasional hire car.

When driverless cars hit the market, at first I expect they'll look like normal cars, but it won't take long before people realise it will make more sense to have the seats facing inwards.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top