[Politics] HS2 Decision

[Madafwo]

HS2 is not being paid for out of the rail budget, it has it's own budget. And as per this article it frees up space and capacity for other services.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-financial-benefit-controversy-a8937936.html

Besides, even sinking the full fantasy £100bn figure into the existing railway network would make surprisingly little difference. The WCML was upgraded in the early 2000s for £13bn, that merely kicked the can down the road for that railway filling up on capacity until around 2025. And that was one upgrade on one line which bought about 20 years worth of breathing space. HS2 should be good for a century or more.

Another article that goes into a bit of detail [TWEET]1227135342488190976[/TWEET]

 

[Mackenzie]

I'm not sure I follow your logic. The network is a shambles, so they're improving it. Why is that an odd decision?

Well we'll have one super-duper high speed line but with poor connections either end. Surely you'd want the network running efficiently as the first priority?

 

[essbee1]

HS2 is not being paid for out of the rail budget, it has it's own budget. And as per this article it frees up space and capacity for other services.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-financial-benefit-controversy-a8937936.html

Besides, even sinking the full fantasy £100bn figure into the existing railway network would make surprisingly little difference. The WCML was upgraded in the early 2000s for £13bn, that merely kicked the can down the road for that railway filling up on capacity until around 2025. And that was one upgrade on one line which bought about 20 years worth of breathing space. HS2 should be good for a century or more.

It's still public money though. HS2 will become just a big white elephant imho, but I understand where you're coming from. Time
will tell.

 

[Uter]

HS2 is not being paid for out of the rail budget, it has it's own budget. And as per this article it frees up space and capacity for other services.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-financial-benefit-controversy-a8937936.html

Besides, even sinking the full fantasy £100bn figure into the existing railway network would make surprisingly little difference. The WCML was upgraded in the early 2000s for £13bn, that merely kicked the can down the road for that railway filling up on capacity until around 2025. And that was one upgrade on one line which bought about 20 years worth of breathing space. HS2 should be good for a century or more.

Worth noting also that the WCML upgrade was originally budgeted for £2bn, finished late, went many times over-budget, caused huge disruption and was de-scoped.

"Why don't we just upgrade existing lines" is something we tend to hear a lot, but that comes with massive risks and would be unlikely to deliver the same step-change in capacity.

 

[A1X]

Well we'll have one super-duper high speed line but with poor connections either end.

Not sure I get your point, Euston has connections to virtually any part of London, and is but a short walk away from St Pancras & Kings Cross which have connections to almost every other part of London. At the other end Birmingham connects to the whole West Midlands and Manchester is a northern hub. I do get that it's a shame it doesn't plug into HS1, that's a big miss IMHO, but hopefully not forever.

Surely you'd want the network running efficiently as the first priority?

That's what HS2 helps to achieve.

 

[Stat Brother]

Apart from freeing up paths for additional services.

In any case, there are lots of upgrades going on. E.g. the East Coast mainline is being upgraded and that with add extra paths in a couple of years.

and Southern will be getting trains, some of which will run nearly on time.



Oh the humanity.

 

[A1X]

"Why don't we just upgrade existing lines" is something we tend to hear a lot, but that comes with massive risks and would be unlikely to deliver the same step-change in capacity.

It's also, logically, a lot easier to do things on time and on budget when you're building something new rather than working on something which already exists, doubly so if you have to keep the thing which exists available at all times. It was a lot quicker and easier to build the Amex in a field in Falmer than it would have been to build it on top of the Withdean while we were still playing scheduled matches there.

 

[A1X]

and Southern will be getting trains, some of which will run nearly on time.

Careful now, HS2 doesn't work miracles.

 

[Uter]

It's still public money though. HS2 will become just a big white elephant imho, but I understand where you're coming from. Time
will tell.

Why do you think it will be a white elephant? Passenger numbers on the national network have been rising on average 40 million a year for around 25 years. That's a huge increase which is not really showing much sign of slowing.

All the easier options to increase capacity like lengthening trains and running more trains have pretty much been exhausted.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

HS2 construction will do wonders for tax revenues and employment figures. Tho the main infrastructure benefit IMHO will be when they finally link Manchester to Leeds in a way that's fit for purpose

 

[Badger]

They're not though. HS2 is a new scheme and the money could have been used to upgrade/existing lines. It doesn't do much
for the existing.

I think that is the point here Badger.

Well we'll have one super-duper high speed line but with poor connections either end. Surely you'd want the network running efficiently as the first priority?

There's only so much upgrading of existing lines you can do. You end up spending more money for minimal benefits. The only way you'd get real improvements is by ripping up the lines and starting again, which would obviously cost a fortune and cause huge disruption.

HS2 isn't going to solve all the problems but it's a step in the right direction. Money still needs to be spent just to maintain the existing network.

 

[essbee1]

Why do you think it will be a white elephant? Passenger numbers on the national network have been rising on average 40 million a year for around 25 years. That's a huge increase which is not really showing much sign of slowing.

All the easier options to increase capacity like lengthening trains and running more trains have pretty much been exhausted.

Well, two reasons. Firstly technology will have reached the point in 2030+ such that (I think) many business/other journeys will be
pointless. Secondly, because if it offers, what 20 minutes quicker travel to Brum (?) then the first sign that it isn't mega-reliable and people
will opt for the old lines where they can get cheaper fares. I obviously am speculating.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

The HS2 Special now leaving Euston will arrive in Leeds at 2040. (That's the year, not the time.)

 

[blue-shifted]

I don't mind having a high-speed railway link around the country. Improving public transport is a good thing.

What I don't get at all is why it will take ten years to build a railway line from London to Birmingham. Ten years? I just don't understand that at all.

And I will mind if as soon as we've spent our 100 billion on it some cheapskate franchise gets to run trains on it, make a profit whilst charging a fortune for tickets and not investing in a decent service

And that it was quicker to build a railway 170 years ago than it is now. It confuses me

 

[Leekbrookgull]

Seems a bit of an odd decision, given that the rest of the network is a shambles.

Spot -on.20-40 to Manchester ? Delayed.

 

[Questions]

Yes I definitely have strong views one way or another on this.

 

[vegster]

I am just a bit concerned about these 8,000 odd shiny new electric buses that Johnson intends to create....

1, Will they be made in the UK ? And, do we actually still have the capability here ?

2, If so, how and where are we going to import the parts from as it's going to cost a fortune in duties by the time they start building ?

3, Who is going to subsidise all these shiny new buses with their drivers as they criss cross the country virtually empty on the essential but unprofitable routes ?

4, How long before those that voted for Johnson actually realise that 8,000 new electric buses is just another of his routine con tricks ?

 

[darkwolf666]

Why do you think it will be a white elephant? Passenger numbers on the national network have been rising on average 40 million a year for around 25 years. That's a huge increase which is not really showing much sign of slowing.

All the easier options to increase capacity like lengthening trains and running more trains have pretty much been exhausted.

Are you sure those figures are correct, an additional 40 million extra passengers per year for 25 years?

Also, as of 2017 69% of rails journeys were carried out within London and the South East... maybe the hope is a lot of people will move away from the south east, to areas covered by HS2, thereby reducing the pressure on services in the south east and increasing property values up the HS2 line. Win win for those with money and flexibility and a housing portfolio.

 

[beorhthelm]

its the added cost for "high speed" that seems unnecessary, too short to really make much difference.

I am just a bit concerned about these 8,000 odd shiny new electric buses that Johnson intends to create....

1, Will they be made in the UK ? And, do we actually still have the capability here ?

for 8k units you build the capability, would certainly hope they can be built in UK. also, you dont pay duties on imports if you dont want to, and we the tax payer will subsidise the routes.

 

[vegster]

Will anyone other than a select few actually be able to afford at ticket for London-Birmingham at the current rate of fare increases/stagnant post Brexit wages ? Remember, if its going to cost £100 billion plus to build the government is going to have to claw that all back somehow.