FabSwingers.com forum: HS2

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Anyone else think this is a monumental waste of money???

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What is HS2?..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *kywatcherMan
over a year ago

Southwick

"What is HS2?.."

A high speed rail link..apparently the future of the country is dependent on it being built.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

if it keeps me in a job im for it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"What is HS2?..

A high speed rail link..apparently the future of the country is dependent on it being built."

Ahh I see.

Money well spent!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

"Anyone else think this is a monumental waste of money???"

Does the money actually exist? Real money that is - not QE wonga.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Anyone else think this is a monumental waste of money???"

There are limited numbers who would use it but if it really did bring companies out of London to other cities and reduce the costs for people in London on housing and make jobs in regional cities it might not be a bad thing. Cost wise though its very expensive.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

"What is HS2?..

A high speed rail link..apparently the future of the country is dependent on it being built.

Ahh I see.

Money well spent!

Its going to cost £121 million per mile... bargain eh!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"What is HS2?..

A high speed rail link..apparently the future of the country is dependent on it being built.

Ahh I see.

Money well spent!

Its going to cost £121 million per mile... bargain eh!"

Don't effect me mate.

when the arse falls out of the economy and we can't afford to supply food.

I'm eating the rich and famous people first gotta assume they taste better ya!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

121 million per mile spent on UK jobs not the unwanted war effort though

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

"Anyone else think this is a monumental waste of money???

Nobody actually believes that's what'll happen.

The train will run at the same speed in both directions.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *kywatcherMan
over a year ago

Southwick

This technology has been in operation in France Spain etc for many years and largely successful.

If the UK go ahead with this project we'll just be catching up.

I would rather we invested in Maglev trains which are still fairly experimental but speeds are much greater ie Japan is testing trains running at 310+ mph.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

They could invest the money in developing flying cars!!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

" ......

I would rather we invested in Maglev trains which are still fairly experimental but speeds are much greater ie Japan is testing trains running at 310+ mph."

But for how long? 310 mph is good over several hundred miles or more but if the distances, London - Bham or Bham - Manchester are relatively short, how far do the trains actually travel flat out?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *wingerdelightCouple
over a year ago

eastliegh

There are already trains that go to the same places. The cost is way too high. And the tickets will be Aswell. A white elephant imop

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They need to change the trains in the underground. God they are so slow!!

...but HS2 sounds good. I can get to meets quicker hahaha.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"Its going to cost £121 million per mile... bargain eh!"

Because the N*I*B*Y's will do anything to challenge and slow down its building by years.

Only in this country do we approve of Luddites and self interest minorities hold back the development of the whole country.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *kywatcherMan
over a year ago

Southwick

" ......

I would rather we invested in Maglev trains which are still fairly experimental but speeds are much greater ie Japan is testing trains running at 310+ mph.

But for how long? 310 mph is good over several hundred miles or more but if the distances, London - Bham or Bham - Manchester are relatively short, how far do the trains actually travel flat out?"

I don't the answer...is the answer.

But it must be better and safer than a system that's been in place since the 18th century which relies on a wheeled carriage remaining on a set of tracks.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"if it keeps me in a job im for it"

if i get a job on there then i say yes

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *cottishrichMan
over a year ago

Here and there

It's about time we spent some serious money on infrastructure in the uk, the railway network is still practically Victorian and the roads can barely cope as it is. Unless someone invents the hovercar in the next decade then high speed railways are the future.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hello all,

I agree with the original poster, it's not good value for money, better to upgrade and improve what we have.

A point I've made before, the claimed journey times are only half the story, factor in the travel to and from the stations and see how much of a gain there actually is. We are a small country and the cost of high speed trains is wasted.

Another thought, as it's going to take so long to build will the need for travel (for business, as this is one of the 'selling points' by the government)still exist or will electronic communication be so improved that travel will not be nearly as important?

Alec

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *wingerdelightCouple
over a year ago

eastliegh

"Hello all,

I agree with the original poster, it's not good value for money, better to upgrade and improve what we have.

Alec "

Exactly look what happened to concord. It wasn't scrapped because of the failures it was scrapped because it was no longer needed

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

it wont work here....

there are always cows on the tracks... well seems that way everytime a train delayed or cancelled

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It will create jobs and you have to invest in infrastructure or things grind to a halt.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Id agree that the rail system in this country needs upgrading as it's woefully over capacity. But a new HS rail link is not the answer.

It's being built primarily for business. To transport those who drive business forward to new places where hopefully they'll buy something or set up a base if they like the look of it. I agree that a ratty old intercity isn't the best mode of transport, but it doesn't justify building effectively a business class railway for the very few that will use it.

Spend the money modernising what you have and building more lower speed lines at choke points. Build more rural lines for places that need them to help people settle out of big cities and towns. Build more freight terminals to get trucks off the main routes.

But don't build a railway that is the brainchild of an accountancy firm and a transport minister.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Hello all,

I agree with the original poster, it's not good value for money, better to upgrade and improve what we have.

Alec

Exactly look what happened to concord. It wasn't scrapped because of the failures it was scrapped because it was no longer needed"

I think that might have had something to do with safety and the aircraft being so old.

As for the hs2 depends on how you look at it.

Its creating a lot of jobs around the uk not just in the rail industry but all associated sectors. So more tax revenue less unemployment.

The rail network needs to be upgraded and considering we kinda started the whole railway business it seems laughable that we are so far behind the rest of the world.

No matter how good communication is there will always be a need for transport wether of goods or people.

Lets just see how this plays out as no body can really judge till its finished euro tunnel ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *edangel_2013Woman
over a year ago

southend

"it wont work here....

there are always cows on the tracks... well seems that way everytime a train delayed or cancelled

Last week I was delayed by goats on the tracks.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If its going to make so much money ???

Why the hell does it need public money ???

We are still paying for the old system that was sold off years ago.

The state will be picking up the tab for this,in the next century and beyond.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rummagemMan
over a year ago

Bedworth/Nuneaton

The business case for HS2 has been overplayed imho, especially as the projected cost has grown from £33bn to £70bn and that doesn't even cover the rolling stock.

The original thinking behind the plan was flawed as well as it assumed that business people couldn't/wouldn't work in the train and needed to physically attend meetings countrywide.

Broadband video conferencing on the internet anyone?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rightonsteveMan
over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

"Anyone else think this is a monumental waste of money???"

At the Labour Conference in Brighton, there's a huge inflatable White elephant with 'HS2' on it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rightonsteveMan
over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

[Removed by poster at 24/09/13 21:03:42]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Hello all,

I agree with the original poster, it's not good value for money, better to upgrade and improve what we have.

Alec

Exactly look what happened to concord. It wasn't scrapped because of the failures it was scrapped because it was no longer needed

I think that might have had something to do with safety and the aircraft being so old.

As for the hs2 depends on how you look at it.

Its creating a lot of jobs around the uk not just in the rail industry but all associated sectors. So more tax revenue less unemployment.

The rail network needs to be upgraded and considering we kinda started the whole railway business it seems laughable that we are so far behind the rest of the world.

No matter how good communication is there will always be a need for transport wether of goods or people.

Lets just see how this plays out as no body can really judge till its finished euro tunnel ?

after the Paris crash concord was re developed to fix the failures and allow it to operate safely in the future (tyre's deflectors and strengthened wing tanks ) and it's age was no factor . The raf still operate vc10s and the k2 tankers operated into the 90s . American cargo flyers still use the 727 safely like any machines they need maintained right ...... concord was withdrawn due to its operating costs and the resultant ticket prices losing customers in a recession, as for the rail thing g have no opinion either way as long as we progress and develop

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

if the projected reduced journey times are correct they are talking about 20 mins quicker to Birmingham from London..?

will the cost which no doubt will grow actually be worth it..?

how much more 'business' can be done..

most of our goods go by roads etc and the money could be spent improving that..

seems its Camerons own 'millennium dome' which was another waste of bloody money..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *umpkinMan
over a year ago

near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack!

I read some of the railway press and it`s surprising what the "escalating costs2 of HS2 actually are! As with all projects, there`s a basic price that it will be built for with some contigency built in to cover for say unexpected cround conditions or similar. That is perfectly normal and anyone in the building trade will tell you the same thing. Where the increasing costs of HS2 come in are for things that may not exactly be a neccessary part of the basic working of HS2 but are "embellishments". These could be extra trains services of diversions, bus feeder services, enhanced cycle routes and cycle storage facilities. When you read some of them, unless you have the full imformation in front of you, some of the extras look as if they bugger all to do with HS2! In some cases the "embellshments" could be done without HS2 being built and still be of beifit locally! In the vast majority of cases, the money for these "embellishments" are coming from a different pot from the main HS2 one and may even be scourced privately in the same way as some developers have to fund playgrounds or road improvements when they do a new build.

Personally. I hope HS2 is built as I see the budget airlines getting more expensive and to be honest, not that convenient. If it`s properly linked with HS1 it becomes part of an Europe wide network of high speed railways and that can only be a good thing - for everyone, not just buisness which it was never intended to do in the first place.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"Exactly look what happened to concord. It wasn't scrapped because of the failures it was scrapped because it was no longer needed"
And I thought it was scrapped because the French needed a scapegoat to cover up the fact that they were not properly maintaining or removing debris from the runway.

Maybe I got that wrong...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"it wont work here....

there are always cows on the tracks... well seems that way everytime a train delayed or cancelled

Last week I was delayed by goats on the tracks. "

WOW goats..cows must of been off for the day then

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

I'll say exactly what I did last time, I think that if you are going to build HS2, that is has to line up with HS1, in the sense that "london" just becomes another station, as opposed to terminus...

it absolutely can work, but it has to work the same way as it has in europe to be a viable competitor in the short airline market....

there is a reason you dont see flights between paris and brussels, and brussels and amsterdam anymore... why? because it is quicker to go city centre to city centre by train!

so the airlines actually use the trains for transfer....

so if hs2 can for example a lot of short domestic flight routes disappear... such as london to manchester, or leeds/bradford, or newcastle, or glasgow/edinburgh...... then it will pay for itself a lot quicker

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

If the argument is about overcrowding in the carriages and too many trains in each individual line, why not have longer trains and, where possible longer platforms.

That way we could run fewer trains, space them wider apart and run them faster (where safe).

We can't really go for double decker trains 'cos of tunnel height restrictions so longer, as Fabsters know, is the answer.

PS. Despite what someone said (above) getting freight off the roads and onto the rails, preferably overnight, is the answer.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

what ever protests we all make it is too late

bet it is all done and dusted before anyone knew about it and our opinions are wasted

no we don't agree with it as it will wreck the countryside, that is already diminishing at a fast rate

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

I think this is going to turn into a north/south issue... where those in the south will say no.. and those in the north will say yes please....

I remember having this same arguement when HS1 was being built... and yet do we have that same arguement now???

it has to be two pronged arguement... 1)the faster intercity/eurocity journeys.... and 2)the faster commuter journeys (for example hs1 is also used for suburban commuter journeys from london to the kent coast)

it just cant be "linked off" from the rest of the rail network... it has to be able to be linked in so that cities that are offshoots will have much better connections

so for example... have a linked in manchester offshoot for liverpool, birmingham for the east midlands, leeds for yorkshire ect ect... and if those trains can use it to go faster... then it is much more viable....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

So long as you have joined up thinking at the hubs. No sense in getting to a hub 20 minutes early if you have to wait an hour for a connection.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

people can hardly afford to travel on trains now so how will they be able to on the HS2.all that expense just to get north or south an hour quicker.might as well upgrade the lines we have now and reduce our taxes.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I think it's the wrong solution to our rail needs. We need rail solutions that help the majority to travel affordably, and that would get more cars off the roads.

There are capacity problems on current lines, and these need addressing, but I don't see HS2, which will cut down current service frequencies - you're gonna love that, having to wait longer for trains!! or you'll have to fork out a fortune for a private company to make a huge profit from you, if you use HS2.

The evidence from other high speed lines from capitals is that they don't redistribute wealth, they just make it easier for the capital to get richer, so it's not likely to help the provinces much.

The other issue is that HS2 has planned stations outside of cities, so you'll have to change and this cuts out alot, possibly all, of the time saved, from a faster line.

The problems imposed on people living in the vicinity of the line, when it's being built as well as when running are also wrongly being addressed. Property prices reduced, for those people who won't even get to use the service, as stations will be 60 miles and more from where they live. Compensation and noise limiting plans are also wrong.

Would be much better to use current infrastructure-routes etc, as much as possible. This may mean running train lines alongside motorways, as well as diversions from current lines, where they can't be upgraded.

As it stands, it's the wrong solution, much too expensive and the cost of it would increase so that it's almost an open cheque book, benefiting very few and inconveniencing the vast majority.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

I can't see things improving without pressure from the train operators and the only way I see that happening is that they be forced to provide a seat for every passenger on journeys over (say) 30 minutes.

Whilst they can still pack em in there's no incentive to invest.

Can you imagine airlines being allowed to do that?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rivate auditionsMan
over a year ago

West Midlands

"if it keeps me in a job im for it

if i get a job on there then i say yes

Poles first for the jobs then rumanians+bulgarians,jobs for brits are further down the line if any!.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

The guy who's been championing HS2 in the Commons has resigned.

"Transport Minister Simon Burns has resigned from the government to run for the position of deputy Commons Speaker.

The MP for Chelmsford has been responsible for the controversial HS2 rail link during the past year, having previously been a health minister.

One of the three deputy Speaker positions is vacant after previous incumbent Nigel Evans stood down to fight sexual assault charges.

Mr Burns has clashed with Speaker John Bercow several times in the past.

On one occasion, Mr Burns described the man under whom he now seeks to serve as a "stupid sanctimonious dwarf"."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *irtydanMan
over a year ago

Blackpool

load of bollocks make the trains bigger

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Its going to cost £121 million per mile... bargain eh!

Because the N*I*B*Y's will do anything to challenge and slow down its building by years.

Only in this country do we approve of Luddites and self interest minorities hold back the development of the whole country."

So your homes okay then

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"if it keeps me in a job im for it

if i get a job on there then i say yes

Poles first for the jobs then rumanians+bulgarians,jobs for brits are further down the line if any!.

How many stops are there then? And what one further down the line do i queue up at?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rivate auditionsMan
over a year ago

West Midlands

"Its going to cost £121 million per mile... bargain eh!

Because the N*I*B*Y's will do anything to challenge and slow down its building by years.

Only in this country do we approve of Luddites and self interest minorities hold back the development of the whole country.

So your homes okay then

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

newsnight have a report on it now..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *rivate auditionsMan
over a year ago

West Midlands

"if it keeps me in a job im for it

if i get a job on there then i say yes

Poles first for the jobs then rumanians+bulgarians,jobs for brits are further down the line if any!.

How many stops are there then? And what one further down the line do i queue up at?

Tut!,Tut!,surely it is obvious?,if you are british you join the queue at the back,but if you are east european you go straight to the front!.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

"if it keeps me in a job im for it

if i get a job on there then i say yes

Poles first for the jobs then rumanians+bulgarians,jobs for brits are further down the line if any!.

How many stops are there then? And what one further down the line do i queue up at?

Tut!,Tut!,surely it is obvious?,if you are british you join the queue at the back,but if you are east european you go straight to the front!.

Maybe, if you get up earlier than the 'east Europeans', you'll be ahead of them in the queue.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the money would be well spent improving the existing rails and infrstructure andn

Investing in local economy

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *obbygggMan
over a year ago

Birmingham

"I'll say exactly what I did last time, I think that if you are going to build HS2, that is has to line up with HS1, in the sense that "london" just becomes another station, as opposed to terminus...

it absolutely can work, but it has to work the same way as it has in europe to be a viable competitor in the short airline market....

there is a reason you dont see flights between paris and brussels, and brussels and amsterdam anymore... why? because it is quicker to go city centre to city centre by train!

so the airlines actually use the trains for transfer....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *wingerdelightCouple
over a year ago

eastliegh

"Exactly look what happened to concord. It wasn't scrapped because of the failures it was scrapped because it was no longer neededAnd I thought it was scrapped because the French needed a scapegoat to cover up the fact that they were not properly maintaining or removing debris from the runway.

Maybe I got that wrong..."
it was scrapped because due to the internet etc people nolonger needed face to face meetings so the demand couldn't cover the huge costs.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Concord was scrapped as the manufacturer wouldn't continue to build parts/support it. Real shame as it was wonderful.

Unlike HS2 which is going to damage much of our country, won't be a major benefit to most of us who don't have the cash to further line the pockets of private train companies with ever higher fares. And it's just not that convenient, with new stations, needing connections at slow speed etc, to where we are. I really hope it's dropped and they increase capacity on current lines, possibly having a new line that's government run/state owned.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

"Concord was scrapped as the manufacturer wouldn't continue to build parts/support it. Real shame as it was wonderful.

It seems they still haven't got firm plans. I really thought this idea would have been scrapped by now.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *unguya2zMan
over a year ago

coventry..ish

"Anyone else think this is a monumental waste of money???"

Yes me

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *umpkinMan
over a year ago

near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack!

Much of the HS2 route follows a railway that should never have been closed in the first place! Sadly, our good friend Mr Beeching deemed it un-necessary. The Great Central railway was built without tunnels and (for trains) step gradients and could easily have been tweaked to suit European trains which are a bit higher and wider than our own. Current plans are to run it into London Euston which bearing in mind the re-building in that part of London is ludicrous! It should have gone into London St. Pancras to give a direct link with the current Eurostars. If planned correctly, internal planes flights in the country could be drastically reduced, most of which require long and costly airport transfers. Take, for instance, Bournemouth to Glasgow by the only airline running between those cities - Ryanair. Bournemouth (Hurn) Airport isn`t that far outside the town but for Glasgow, Ryanair use Prestwich which must be a good hour outside the city! What time and money you`d save by flying is lost in all of the transfers! Whereas the train delivers you right in the centre of the city and much cleaner than an aircraft!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It goes up north you know,,,

Well when they say up north what they mean is, it heads in a northern direction but won't necessarily reach the actual north

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the money would have been better spent re opening lines and stations closed by Dr breeching, or who ever the bloody hell he was, and bringing the ticket prices down, for instance, we could have special tickets for swingers, a third off the price, you could call it a "have it away day" ticket.

If trains reached more places, then ran on time, companies could invest in areas that need jobs, like the colliery towns of wales and Yorkshire, and the steel towns of Sheffield, and the docklands of Liverpool, all great places, with great people, forgotten by everyone, and left to fight for themselves.

That's how you can invest £121m per mile, not getting wealthy business men to London 15 minutes quicker

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *erbyDalesCplCouple
over a year ago

Derbyshire

"It goes up north you know,,,

Well when they say up north what they mean is, it heads in a northern direction but won't necessarily reach the actual north

Of course it will.

Watford Gap is the North, isn't it?

(Mrs ddc once famously said "I'm surprised how far North Watford Gap actually is"

(she's a Londoner))

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I think the money would have been better spent re opening lines and stations closed by Dr breeching, or who ever the bloody hell he was, and bringing the ticket prices down, for instance, we could have special tickets for swingers, a third off the price, you could call it a "have it away day" ticket.

That's how you can invest £121m per mile, not getting wealthy business men to London 15 minutes quicker"
.

I happen to fully agree with you, electrification of current lines would be my priority along with opening many shut down routes!.

If I was going to do this.... I'd go big, maglef 500mph trains London to Manchester in 20 minutes Manchester to the south of France in 2.5 hours....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread