High Speed Rail Link?
10 January 2012, 03:21 PM
#31
Here's the problem in a nutshell: BEFORE privatisation we had 11-13 coach trains plus a loco.
That was deemed wrong so we bought 8 coach DMU's and EMU's.
THEN they wonder why the trains are overcrowded.
The NE-SW line USED to run 8 coaches and a loco in winter, up to 14 and a loco in summer.
Then it went to 8 car HST's.
NOW it has FOUR car DMU's
And it cost MORE to buy the new trains needed than to refurbish the old, plus the new ones mostly came from abroad, whereas the old would have been refurbished in the UK.
You couildn't make this sort of stuff up, it's EXACTlY what people in the know about railways said would happen
10 January 2012, 03:33 PM
#32
One or two on here missing the true reason behind HS2, and many now getting confused by Europe.
Let's straighten out that one first: Europe has NOT told us to build this, it's a suggestion that we might benefit from better rail links with them, and they with us, and it's ENTIRELY up to the UK government whether we build or not.
Monies COULD be forthcoming from the EC to help with the build.
Secondly, the true reason we need HS2 is because the present lines are all but full. NO MORE freight can be accomodated, and very little passenger. The lines, signalling etc are all up to capacity.
One of the reasons is the new shorter trains. Another is more freight.
IF we can free up paths on the West Coast, and later, the East coast, by building HS2, then good.
But we have always taken one step back for every two forward in this country: we HAD a decent link from London to the midlands and Manchester, it was engineered to continental loading gauge, MUCH bigger than ours.
It was closed in it's entirety by Beeching
The Great Central Railway, RIP
And lastly: what's with the projected TEN YEARS to build HS2???
The French built their link from Paris to Lille, and calais, a total of 250 miles in around SIX years.. Over MUCH worse terrain than here
WE need TEN years to build a hundred miles?
What happened to the much vaunted UK engineering???
Let's straighten out that one first: Europe has NOT told us to build this, it's a suggestion that we might benefit from better rail links with them, and they with us, and it's ENTIRELY up to the UK government whether we build or not.
Monies COULD be forthcoming from the EC to help with the build.
Secondly, the true reason we need HS2 is because the present lines are all but full. NO MORE freight can be accomodated, and very little passenger. The lines, signalling etc are all up to capacity.
One of the reasons is the new shorter trains. Another is more freight.
IF we can free up paths on the West Coast, and later, the East coast, by building HS2, then good.
But we have always taken one step back for every two forward in this country: we HAD a decent link from London to the midlands and Manchester, it was engineered to continental loading gauge, MUCH bigger than ours.
It was closed in it's entirety by Beeching
The Great Central Railway, RIP
And lastly: what's with the projected TEN YEARS to build HS2???
The French built their link from Paris to Lille, and calais, a total of 250 miles in around SIX years.. Over MUCH worse terrain than here
WE need TEN years to build a hundred miles?
What happened to the much vaunted UK engineering???
10 January 2012, 05:46 PM
#33
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Swansea
Posts: 4,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And lastly: what's with the projected TEN YEARS to build HS2???
The French built their link from Paris to Lille, and calais, a total of 250 miles in around SIX years.. Over MUCH worse terrain than here
WE need TEN years to build a hundred miles?
What happened to the much vaunted UK engineering???
The French built their link from Paris to Lille, and calais, a total of 250 miles in around SIX years.. Over MUCH worse terrain than here
WE need TEN years to build a hundred miles?
What happened to the much vaunted UK engineering???
The other problem is NIMBY, its hard enough to get a windfarm built without WW3, so imagine what Government would survive a compulsory purchase order and carving up parts of the UK. I`ve not a problem with it, as I think the Beeching cuts should be reversed as much as practically possible, as that would give the extra capacity, the small lines feeding the larger out of town HSS stations.
And we need a 50+ year thought about transport, not the current nostalgic look to the 1970`s. But cannot see it happening as 99% of the population of the UK is selfish and can`t see past its own nose, and if they don`t benefit they don`t want to know, which explains why we are here.
I`m NOT a fan of nationalisation, but from around the world the only areas where it effectively works is when it is nationalised. But NOT the way it was.
10 January 2012, 06:22 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Runway two seven right.
Posts: 6,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone explain to me why it's ok to rip up miles of countryside and charge the tax payer 32 billion (double it at least), yet it's not ok to allow a private company to build another runway that has a smaller environmental impact?
10 January 2012, 06:49 PM
#36
waste of money that doesnt actually get you there 20 mins earlier as said above , it drops you 15 mins outside of the city so all that money for 5 saved mins is fooking ludacrous+ it will run through my back garden so its gonna knacker me selling the house and ill have a fapping great train running right past my house
1. if you live in london why work in birmingham(i know silly but really did someone complain that their journey was to stressful)
2. surely the journey wasnt that long to begin with an hour and a half if that !
3. its goin to kill the town that i live in (house prices,noise,etc)
4. its going to go striait through the little counryside we have around here +2 local farms that produce milk,eggs ,meat for our local comunity(all will have to close)
5.our local boat club ,resovoir,recreation area will go ,as the track goes strit through the middle of it
i could go on, but in my eyes spending all that money while they moan about schools , hospitals etc is a ****ing joke !!
4.
1. if you live in london why work in birmingham(i know silly but really did someone complain that their journey was to stressful)
2. surely the journey wasnt that long to begin with an hour and a half if that !
3. its goin to kill the town that i live in (house prices,noise,etc)
4. its going to go striait through the little counryside we have around here +2 local farms that produce milk,eggs ,meat for our local comunity(all will have to close)
5.our local boat club ,resovoir,recreation area will go ,as the track goes strit through the middle of it
i could go on, but in my eyes spending all that money while they moan about schools , hospitals etc is a ****ing joke !!
4.
10 January 2012, 07:25 PM
#37
SN Fairy Godmother
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on a minute. Am I missing something here 
We were told all last year, the Country is on it's knees, major cuts would have to be made. People are on the bones of their ar$es, pensioners winter fuel payments cut, pay freezes for Hospital staff etc. This year to be even worse. I could go on.
Yet, they find all this money for THIS. Either they have lost the plot or I have
We were told all last year, the Country is on it's knees, major cuts would have to be made. People are on the bones of their ar$es, pensioners winter fuel payments cut, pay freezes for Hospital staff etc. This year to be even worse. I could go on.
Yet, they find all this money for THIS. Either they have lost the plot or I have
10 January 2012, 08:13 PM
#39
Hang on a minute. Am I missing something here
We were told all last year, the Country is on it's knees, major cuts would have to be made. People are on the bones of their ar$es, pensioners winter fuel payments cut, pay freezes for Hospital staff etc. This year to be even worse. I could go on.
Yet, they find all this money for THIS. Either they have lost the plot or I have
We were told all last year, the Country is on it's knees, major cuts would have to be made. People are on the bones of their ar$es, pensioners winter fuel payments cut, pay freezes for Hospital staff etc. This year to be even worse. I could go on.
Yet, they find all this money for THIS. Either they have lost the plot or I have
11 January 2012, 09:46 AM
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
One or two on here missing the true reason behind HS2, and many now getting confused by Europe.
Let's straighten out that one first: Europe has NOT told us to build this, it's a suggestion that we might benefit from better rail links with them, and they with us, and it's ENTIRELY up to the UK government whether we build or not.
Monies COULD be forthcoming from the EC to help with the build. ...
Let's straighten out that one first: Europe has NOT told us to build this, it's a suggestion that we might benefit from better rail links with them, and they with us, and it's ENTIRELY up to the UK government whether we build or not.
Monies COULD be forthcoming from the EC to help with the build. ...
I'll say again, we CANNOT afford this when we're "cutting" services left, right and centre. We have NO money to do this, especially when there are much more deserving projects on out doorstep. Potholes being just one!
Dave
11 January 2012, 11:58 AM
#41
I'll say again, we CANNOT afford this when we're "cutting" services left, right and centre. We have NO money to do this, especially when there are much more deserving projects on out doorstep. Potholes being just one!
What I mean is it should have been done during New-Labour era when times were good and everyone could borrow billions without causing any big concern.
Same with widening the A46 between Bingham and Newark. This should have been done ten years ago during the last expansion to Lincoln.
Seems all New Labour were focussed on was to build new houses everywhere without any infracstructure to serve them. Sometimes going as far as destroying transport infrastructure within big cities to allow for more retail/commercial space (example - the New Bull ring, and the Masshouse..they destroyed the road infrastucture to put this lot in, making traffic worse - even for buses!!
)
Last edited by ALi-B; 11 January 2012 at 12:00 PM.
11 January 2012, 12:31 PM
#42
Seems all New Labour were focussed on was to build new houses everywhere without any infracstructure to serve them. Sometimes going as far as destroying transport infrastructure within big cities to allow for more retail/commercial space (example - the New Bull ring, and the Masshouse..they destroyed the road infrastucture to put this lot in, making traffic worse - even for buses!!
)Before (pedestrians seperated from through traffic = less congestion + less accidents):
After (everything at surface level, vehicles+pedestrians+traffic lights = more congestion + more accidents):
There's an irony here. The demolition of the above was to 'break the collar' that stopped city expansion to the East. Well guess what the new HS2 and station line will do? EXACTLY THAT!!
Unless they run it all underground. Methinks the budget squeezers will try to avoid doing that at all costs. Thats why we still have New Street, which is a botched attempt to put a new facade on something that should have been demolished 20years ago.
Last edited by ALi-B; 11 January 2012 at 12:34 PM.
11 January 2012, 12:56 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you really blame people for not wanting the line to go anywhere near their property?
Have you heard the racket as one of the present high speed trains goes by? Think of the drop in property values if you have to watch HS2 go past as well as listen to it.
That is yet another perfectly reasonable point to make on top of all the others which have been quoted above.
Les
Have you heard the racket as one of the present high speed trains goes by? Think of the drop in property values if you have to watch HS2 go past as well as listen to it.
That is yet another perfectly reasonable point to make on top of all the others which have been quoted above.
Les
11 January 2012, 01:13 PM
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
Think about motorway congestion and how it would, just ever so slightly, get worse if all the junctions were converted as above .....
Dave
11 January 2012, 01:33 PM
#46
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are there really that many people travelling between London and Birmingham? and do they really need to get there just 40 mins? earlier. Seems to me to be a massive investment, for which the vast majority of people will receive no benefit.
I'd love to see a list of what other capital projects we could get done for the money.
I'd love to see a list of what other capital projects we could get done for the money.
TX.
11 January 2012, 01:41 PM
#48
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TX.
11 January 2012, 02:07 PM
#49
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And we need a 50+ year thought about transport, not the current nostalgic look to the 1970`s. But cannot see it happening as 99% of the population of the UK is selfish and can`t see past its own nose, and if they don`t benefit they don`t want to know, which explains why we are here.
Local transport - http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/...abletransport/
Rail generally - http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/index.html
TX.
11 January 2012, 02:10 PM
#50
Owner of SNet
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 11,513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on a minute. Am I missing something here
We were told all last year, the Country is on it's knees, major cuts would have to be made. People are on the bones of their ar$es, pensioners winter fuel payments cut, pay freezes for Hospital staff etc. This year to be even worse. I could go on.
Yet, they find all this money for THIS. Either they have lost the plot or I have
We were told all last year, the Country is on it's knees, major cuts would have to be made. People are on the bones of their ar$es, pensioners winter fuel payments cut, pay freezes for Hospital staff etc. This year to be even worse. I could go on.
Yet, they find all this money for THIS. Either they have lost the plot or I have
TX.
11 January 2012, 04:19 PM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dave
11 January 2012, 04:43 PM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Interesting reading here. Seems the politicians took b*g all notice of the response to the consultation exercise ... http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publication...on-summary.pdf .... Check out Part B and click on each question. Note the number "opposed" to each part.
And some people think we live in a democracy ... dream on!"
Dave
And some people think we live in a democracy ... dream on!"
Dave
12 January 2012, 12:09 AM
#54
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 5,763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting reading here. Seems the politicians took b*g all notice of the response to the consultation exercise ... http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publication...on-summary.pdf .... Check out Part B and click on each question. Note the number "opposed" to each part.
mb
12 January 2012, 10:44 AM
#55
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK. I had meant to say "tenders" will go out to EC but of course UK companies can enter the fray.
dl
PS. Is it totally out of the question to widen the existing route and have another track running alongside? I know this wouldn't be high speed but there does seem to be a disproportionate emphasis on getting there 20 mins faster??
dl
12 January 2012, 01:14 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, the amount of time 'wasted' standing around at railway stations would be reduced. A good thing for me, but unfortunately a lost retail opportunity for the rail companies
15 November 2016, 02:31 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WARNING - this is old thread revived.
I remain more opposed to this than ever. Basic £50b + cost doesn't even include rolling stock. We simply can't afford this at present. I doubt very much if people outside the business sector could afford to use it anyway. Just look at the way our citizens are being treated in this country. Mental health problems being ignored, the care sector collapsing, Shelter getting a call every 30 seconds as families are made homeless, prisoners killing each other, hospital beds overflowing with not enough doctors. It's a f,ucking disgrace.
250 mph? What a joke - one derailment at this speed and they would never be allowed to travel that fast again.
NO TO HS2
David
I remain more opposed to this than ever. Basic £50b + cost doesn't even include rolling stock. We simply can't afford this at present. I doubt very much if people outside the business sector could afford to use it anyway. Just look at the way our citizens are being treated in this country. Mental health problems being ignored, the care sector collapsing, Shelter getting a call every 30 seconds as families are made homeless, prisoners killing each other, hospital beds overflowing with not enough doctors. It's a f,ucking disgrace.
250 mph? What a joke - one derailment at this speed and they would never be allowed to travel that fast again.
NO TO HS2
David
Last edited by David Lock; 15 November 2016 at 02:32 PM.
15 November 2016, 04:37 PM
#60
I'm undecided on this one.
I live in apart of the country where the roads are not always approaching gridlock, where freight trains can move about easily in amongst the passenger trains, where you can still be in open countryside within five minutes of getting in your car.
Yet I have been to other parts where the exact opposites are true.
Railways, especially down south, are appraoching saturation levels, and the road network is already there. yet we continue to allow more population down there, to allow more investment down tghere, to encourage still more people to live down there.
Something has to give. We cannot allow lorries to get any bigger. Yet we want...no we demand, our stuff "next day".
So how will it move around if the rail network can't take any more freight?
By road.
Not good.
HS2 will allow a reduction in mainline passenger trains on some of the most congested routes, allowing paths for more freights.
But I do see your point about affording it all......
Still, with Lying Labour looking un-electable for the next few years, we don't have to worry about another Harold Wilson coming in to power and cancelling stuff that had already had £billions spent on it.
I live in apart of the country where the roads are not always approaching gridlock, where freight trains can move about easily in amongst the passenger trains, where you can still be in open countryside within five minutes of getting in your car.
Yet I have been to other parts where the exact opposites are true.
Railways, especially down south, are appraoching saturation levels, and the road network is already there. yet we continue to allow more population down there, to allow more investment down tghere, to encourage still more people to live down there.
Something has to give. We cannot allow lorries to get any bigger. Yet we want...no we demand, our stuff "next day".
So how will it move around if the rail network can't take any more freight?
By road.
Not good.
HS2 will allow a reduction in mainline passenger trains on some of the most congested routes, allowing paths for more freights.
But I do see your point about affording it all......
Still, with Lying Labour looking un-electable for the next few years, we don't have to worry about another Harold Wilson coming in to power and cancelling stuff that had already had £billions spent on it.