Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Hs2 - Time To Cut Our Losses?
40 Answers
https:/
apparently it'll reduce travel times to the north by 20 mins, is that worth the moolah?
apparently it'll reduce travel times to the north by 20 mins, is that worth the moolah?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
the real problem to be solved is not that it takes the rich too long to reach London, but that the West Coast Main Line is choked almost to the point of paralysis. cancel HS2 by all means but be sure there's a credible alternative strategy in place. the last upgrade of the line was meant to be future proof to the end of this decade, but the capacity improvement has already been used up. Do nothing is not an option. TTT, I await your proposals.
the passenger trains are mostly full and standing, both ways, all day, every day. there are no spare train units to be had to lengthen services or provide more but that's moot because there are no train paths available to run more services, nor can longer trains be operated because of infrastructure limitations at many major stations, including Euston, Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Piccadilly.
there are no spare train paths available on the busiest sections of the line, which means more freight trains cannot be operated. A delay of a few minutes to an existing freight train at (say) Stafford causes congestion to ripple out to the point that commuter trains as far away as Rugby are delayed by more than 15mn. (I live this one regularly.)
HS2 would remove most inter-city services from the equation, leaving the existing main line better able to cope with growing local, residential and freight services.
there are no spare train paths available on the busiest sections of the line, which means more freight trains cannot be operated. A delay of a few minutes to an existing freight train at (say) Stafford causes congestion to ripple out to the point that commuter trains as far away as Rugby are delayed by more than 15mn. (I live this one regularly.)
HS2 would remove most inter-city services from the equation, leaving the existing main line better able to cope with growing local, residential and freight services.
//so the speed improvement is largely irrelevant.//
build new is the best option, and if you're going to do that, you might as well build it the best you can. the faster the trains operate, the fewer you need to have in your toybox. (Virgin learned that 20 years ago - the original specification for the West Coast was for speeds up to 140mph. That was cut to 125mph when the budget ran out, but it left Virgin short of 5 trains.....)
build new is the best option, and if you're going to do that, you might as well build it the best you can. the faster the trains operate, the fewer you need to have in your toybox. (Virgin learned that 20 years ago - the original specification for the West Coast was for speeds up to 140mph. That was cut to 125mph when the budget ran out, but it left Virgin short of 5 trains.....)
Looking at the latest estimate we should cancel it now.
https:/
https:/
The problem with railways is that they should not be seen as profit or loss. If the Victorians had done that we would be in a right mess now.
We have a real problem with lack of investment in rail. The South West for instance is appallingly supported. Even though I live in Bournemouth (on the way) I have to take a real round about route to get there. In addition my trains to London or Manchester are also choked.
New routes and stations are needed across the country. But it will cost and when Governments try to do something then they get slated. So we get nowhere.
We have a real problem with lack of investment in rail. The South West for instance is appallingly supported. Even though I live in Bournemouth (on the way) I have to take a real round about route to get there. In addition my trains to London or Manchester are also choked.
New routes and stations are needed across the country. But it will cost and when Governments try to do something then they get slated. So we get nowhere.
// The South West for instance is appallingly supported. //
it's a little off topic but worth exploring. the solutions to the south west were looked at the last time Dawlish sea wall collapsed, leaving Cornwall and Plymouth cut off. the solutions are there on paper and would be straightforward, but the cost benefit analysis doesn't stack up. on the other hand, extending the M5 to Plymouth does stack up financially, but would it be environmentally acceptable?
it's a little off topic but worth exploring. the solutions to the south west were looked at the last time Dawlish sea wall collapsed, leaving Cornwall and Plymouth cut off. the solutions are there on paper and would be straightforward, but the cost benefit analysis doesn't stack up. on the other hand, extending the M5 to Plymouth does stack up financially, but would it be environmentally acceptable?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.