Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[omega3000]

Fix the bloody roads first  then you can play with the trains , preferably steam

[TheBoy]

We have a precedent. HS1. Its a flop, and under utilised.

The business case for HS2 doesn't stack up. If you read the consultation bumf, its blatant. The biggest savings, they think, is "wasted time" lost on longer journeys. Not only is that rubbish - anyone who has been on a commuter train in the last 5 years, now most trains have laptop charge points and wifi, will know - but it is based on the hourly rates of execs. NOT joe public.

It has no benfits over the existing infrastructure, save a few minutes (15mins from Birmingham, 40mins from Leeds).

As IT infrastructure improves, and society changes, commuting will reduce - this is already happening.


*IF* they do get the fares the same as existing lines - which will only happen if we taxpayers subsidise it more - the likes of Chiltern will go bust (Hoorah! ), and it will be akin to the closing of the branch lines, as all stations between Birmingham and London will close.

[JesterRT]

As IT infrastructure improves, and society changes, commuting will reduce - this is already happening.

That was exactly my point - agree completely - most businesses need to change the idea that everyone needs to sit in an office.  The IT infrastructure already exists - incentivise business to invest in this more and people don't need to travel, and (if they're sensible) they get a better work/life/commute balance.

[TheBoy]

As IT infrastructure improves, and society changes, commuting will reduce - this is already happening.

That was exactly my point - agree completely - most businesses need to change the idea that everyone needs to sit in an office.  The IT infrastructure already exists - incentivise business to invest in this more and people don't need to travel, and (if they're sensible) they get a better work/life/commute balance.

The last mile is still a problem for many, but fast broadband is spreading. I have a pair of FTTC lines here, and it really is a new way of home working compared to ADSL.

[Entwood]

As IT infrastructure improves, and society changes, commuting will reduce - this is already happening.

That was exactly my point - agree completely - most businesses need to change the idea that everyone needs to sit in an office.  The IT infrastructure already exists - incentivise business to invest in this more and people don't need to travel, and (if they're sensible) they get a better work/life/commute balance.

In the service sector perhaps .. but what this country needs is to MAKE stuff .. and that can't be done on the internet/telephone/whatever form of magic IT you describe.

It requires PEOPLE .. managers/inventors/designers/workers in a production facility producing goods, or attracting those who may wish to purchase said goods to actually SEE them, and their production methods (this is called selling your product).

And one way to get folks to come and see your product is not to waste their valuable time in travelling by mule.

[Rods2]

I'm actually in favour of HS2 as a concept, but I'm very anti what is proposed. The problem is that we are still using 19th century technology with all of it high maintenance, high running costs and performance limitation issues. 200mph is about the limit that is practical for rail based railways. Freight will never be a major operator due to wear and fatigue issues due to its weight compared with passenger trains.

We should be following Japan's lead where they are building the first 400mph+ maglev train. If we built this then it would make up to Edinburgh commutable to London, so spreading the London effect as far as Scotland. For cheap rail fares you would want this to be fully automated, so no expensive drivers necessary, only guards, there is no direct contact with the ground so no wear and maintenance issues, a wider track gauge to increase passenger comfort and to allow the transport of cars and freight. This would make the running costs reasonable and therefore ticket prices reasonable.

In a post oil and gas economy, which we have got to face over the next 50 years, then electric mass transport systems make sense, powered by nuclear Thorium power stations. There is enough Thorium reserves to last over 1000 years. The present proposal makes no more sense to me than building motorways for horses and carts. 

[Kevin Wood]

As IT infrastructure improves, and society changes, commuting will reduce - this is already happening.

That was exactly my point - agree completely - most businesses need to change the idea that everyone needs to sit in an office.  The IT infrastructure already exists - incentivise business to invest in this more and people don't need to travel, and (if they're sensible) they get a better work/life/commute balance.

The last mile is still a problem for many, but fast broadband is spreading. I have a pair of FTTC lines here, and it really is a new way of home working compared to ADSL.

Very true. I travel very little now compared to when I first started working, largely due to better digital communication. I see that working for all industries. Manufacturing needs good short range commuter transport not high speed rail links half way up the country. Who knows how much further this will have progressed by the time they've opened this white elephant? We probably won't be moving from our homes.

Ironically, the last mile of public transport is even more of a problem for most, non existent, in fact. That's where the government should be focusing, IMHO. If you're going to upset a load of people, do it by putting in some of the infrastructure that Beeching trashed. While they're at it, have a cull of all the fly-by-night private bus and train operators who provide such a sh1te service. High speed links are utterly pointless if the majority can't access them.

I am one of the lucky ones. I can get a bus at the end of my road. Last time I tried to use it it was 30 minutes late. 45 minutes late the previous time. Nevertheless, once it arrives, 15 minutes to the nearest station, then a 45 minute wait for the next train, then an hour and a half into Waterloo (they used to manage it in 50 minutes. Progress!), then mess about on the tube, and then HS2 saves me how much time getting to Birmingham? Does anyone seriously expect I won't take the cheaper, quicker and easier option of just jumping in the car?

As always, the government don't think outside London.

Ever more ways to commute to and from London helps nobody, and, IMHO, will do little to encourage investment in other parts of the country.

.. and I agree about not setting our sights high enough too. Rail will be the new steam by the time they've got round to building all this.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

As IT infrastructure improves, and society changes, commuting will reduce - this is already happening.

That was exactly my point - agree completely - most businesses need to change the idea that everyone needs to sit in an office.  The IT infrastructure already exists - incentivise business to invest in this more and people don't need to travel, and (if they're sensible) they get a better work/life/commute balance.

The last mile is still a problem for many, but fast broadband is spreading. I have a pair of FTTC lines here, and it really is a new way of home working compared to ADSL.

Very true. I travel very little now compared to when I first started working, largely due to better digital communication. I see that working for all industries. Manufacturing needs good short range commuter transport not high speed rail links half way up the country. Who knows how much further this will have progressed by the time they've opened this white elephant? We probably won't be moving from our homes.

Ironically, the last mile of public transport is even more of a problem for most, non existent, in fact. That's where the government should be focusing, IMHO. If you're going to upset a load of people, do it by putting in some of the infrastructure that Beeching trashed. While they're at it, have a cull of all the fly-by-night private bus and train operators who provide such a sh1te service. High speed links are utterly pointless if the majority can't access them.

I am one of the lucky ones. I can get a bus at the end of my road. Last time I tried to use it it was 30 minutes late. 45 minutes late the previous time. Nevertheless, once it arrives, 15 minutes to the nearest station, then a 45 minute wait for the next train, then an hour and a half into Waterloo (they used to manage it in 50 minutes. Progress!), then mess about on the tube, and then HS2 saves me how much time getting to Birmingham? Does anyone seriously expect I won't take the cheaper, quicker and easier option of just jumping in the car?

As always, the government don't think outside London.

Ever more ways to commute to and from London helps nobody, and, IMHO, will do little to encourage investment in other parts of the country.

.. and I agree about not setting our sights high enough too. Rail will be the new steam by the time they've got round to building all this.

Sorry Kevin, but like so many posters you are basing your argument on the facts in the context of today.  As in my previous posts, we must think about 25, 50 or 100 years time and the conditions relevant then.  Life will be very different.

IT, working at home, is all very well now.  But in years to come, if not now, we must return to manufacturing, in the physical form, and that will require workers to be on a site actually building things.  We need those industries in the Midlands and the North generally, so we need a large commuting / living population in those areas to revitalise the commerce there, and for Great Britain generally.  We need to move people at high speed around the land and from Europe to get the best for our industries for their expansion.

As I said before, Victorian England was given a massive secondary boost to it's Industrial Revolution by the railways moving around the workforce to were they were needed, away from the land.  In a country with by 50/100 years time perhaps 75/80 million (?) people we will need rapid transport that is sustainable.  Sorry, and I hate saying this myself, but the car is going to become a liability for anything but local travel. The road system will never cope no matter how often it is extended, and it will be far slower travelling on them than today!

I would add though, in addition to a HS1/HS2 passenger lines, we must have a superfast, super gauged, freight lines (HS3?) to take freight off the roads, which I predict of course will become unviabal for fast movement.

So, in conclusion everyone has got to think "tomorrow" not "today".  That is what the Government are trying to achieve and full marks to them in a field of otherwise growing failure!

[Terbs]

'So, in conclusion everyone has got to think "tomorrow" not "today".  That is what the Government are trying to achieve and full marks to them in a field of otherwise growing failure!'

A clever ploy.....whilst half the country are argueing the why's and wherefore's of HS2, they are not thinking about Europe and the other problems the government have!!!! Pressure relief

[jimac]

<snip>

IT, working at home, is all very well now.  But in years to come, if not now, we must return to manufacturing, in the physical form, and that will require workers to be on a site actually building things.  We need those industries in the Midlands and the North generally, so we need a large commuting / living population in those areas to revitalise the commerce there, and for Great Britain generally.  We need to move people at high speed around the land and from Europe to get the best for our industries for their expansion.

<snip>

OK, we need the industries in the Midlands and the North so how does a high speed train between Birmingham and London help this to be achieved?  We already have "a large commuting/living population in those areas" so there is no need to "move people at high speed around the land".

Decentralisation is the answer, not extending commuting.  As technology moves on we will (or should) require less commuting and travel will increasingly be for recreation.  Manufacturing requires less manpower now than it did 50 years ago, and I don't see that trend reversing.

HS2 is about moving people between very limited locations.  That is a backward-looking solution rather than being innovative about the future.  We should be trying to reduce the need to move people around the country.  That's the real challenge for the future.

[Kevin Wood]

Sorry Kevin, but like so many posters you are basing your argument on the facts in the context of today.  As in my previous posts, we must think about 25, 50 or 100 years time and the conditions relevant then.  Life will be very different.

That's my point exactly. Travel is becoming less important in order to be able to do business, and it may be completely irrelevant in 100 years time.

IT, working at home, is all very well now.  But in years to come, if not now, we must return to manufacturing, in the physical form, and that will require workers to be on a site actually building things.  We need those industries in the Midlands and the North generally, so we need a large commuting / living population in those areas to revitalise the commerce there, and for Great Britain generally.  We need to move people at high speed around the land and from Europe to get the best for our industries for their expansion.

If we are to promote manufacturing then the government would be better off halting the erection of the artificial barriers to manufacturing that have all but driven it out of the UK in recent years. The green agenda and employment conditions in the UK has driven it to sweat shops in the east where child labour and CO2 emissions are of no concern. If we are to have decent standards of living and constantly reducing environmental impact then manufacturing doesn't belong here. On the other hand, perhaps we should be imposing tariffs on imports from places who don't meet our standards on these aspects of manufacturing?

Either way, marginally faster trains won't have any impact.

As I said before, Victorian England was given a massive secondary boost to it's Industrial Revolution by the railways moving around the workforce to were they were needed, away from the land.  In a country with by 50/100 years time perhaps 75/80 million (?) people we will need rapid transport that is sustainable.  Sorry, and I hate saying this myself, but the car is going to become a liability for anything but local travel. The road system will never cope no matter how often it is extended, and it will be far slower travelling on them than today!

The industrial revolution has moved on from this country to elsewhere, though and it won't come back! We need to look to the next revolution, whatever that may be.

As for eliminating the car - I agree. It won't scale up the the requirements of a growing population, but the barrier to other forms of transport is the last mile. We have been making the mistake for decades of not integrating other forms of transport such as rail into housing developments and now have large swathes of conurbation which is only accessible by road. Once you've had to get into a car, you might as well make the whole journey by road.

So, the job for rail is to reach a larger percentage of the population easily. Not as sexy as trains doing 200 MPH, though, so that'll get no political support.

I would add though, in addition to a HS1/HS2 passenger lines, we must have a superfast, super gauged, freight lines (HS3?) to take freight off the roads, which I predict of course will become unviabal for fast movement.

Yes, it would be good to get freight off the roads. It doesn't have to be high speed either, IMHO. It'd be significantly faster than HGV speeds to use conventional rail. Again, it's the last mile, though. I have no idea how far I'd have to take a container to get it on the rail network, but, I suspect that, once I'd loaded it onto an HGV, that would be far enough that I just wouldn't bother with the rail option unless it turned out to be stupidly cheap.

So, in conclusion everyone has got to think "tomorrow" not "today".  That is what the Government are trying to achieve and full marks to them in a field of otherwise growing failure!

I disagree. They are instead looking at networks built in mainland Europe decades ago, to solve the transport problems of mainland Europe, thinking "why haven't we got one of those? I'd like to see my name on that!" and trying to play "catch-up".

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Well, all I will say now is we shall all see; LOL if we live long enough!

Damn, I have just thought I will not be around to say "I told you so!"

No seriously, I cannot say anymore about any HS2,  but I do accept all the counter arguments that may indeed prove to be correct, which would be a crying shame; yes and a huge waste of money! .

[redelitev6]

Keep up at the back ..

http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-news/2013/01/26/a1-dualling-in-northumbeland-is-back-on-agenda-clegg-61634-32682207

Classiic weasel words from Clegg, Northumberland is a sparsely populated area and as such doesn't have many votes or any political clout ,A1 upgrade is light years away, and if the Scots get their independance it will NEVER get done,why spend money linking up to a bunch of ungrateful Jocks who don't want us ?