Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
"There could be disappointment in places such as Newcastle and Liverpool that they do not feature in the rail plan."
yep, those industrial, financial and media powerhouses... fucks sake. Like, obviously rail connections to those cities are very important, but probably not worth spending billions building high speed railway lines to, just yet. Manchester and Leeds are the media and financial centres outside of London, it makes sense to link them. Most of the people who are anti-HSR are like the opposite of NIMBYS- they'll only support high speed rail if it stops directly outside their fucking house or something.
Nice to see that there's actually cross party effort to bring our railways at least in line with Europe.
my issues with expenditure on high speed rail is that I think the money would be better off being spent on improving existing transportation networks. we all laugh at the Edinburgh Tram for being grossly mismanaged, but even in that state it only cost about 1/60th of what HS2 is going to run to. the big extension going on in Nottingham right now apparently costs £570m. the improvements that could be made to basically every mid and large city outside London with even half of the £17bn put aside for the first stage of HS2 would be enormous.
if you get what I mean? Pretty much all government money is only there dependent on various interested parties getting what they want.
Or I'm just massively cynical.
Glad to see this is being looked at but I have massive doubts about the cost/benefit of this scheme. There would be massive tunneling required, and huge improvements to infrastructure in both Manchester and Leeds city centres for actually a pretty modest time saving. High speed rail only becomes financially viable over longer distances as trains pelt along at full tilt because that's where the time is saved. A short journey or one with frequent stopping/starting massively reduces the business case. This is why HSR is more successful in other, larger countries, where things are more spread out (France, China). As I recall the business case for HS2 wasn't too strong for this reason as the distances between London-Birmingham-Manchester aren't big enough to rack up those huge journey time savings.
However, there's definitely scope for better links in the North. More capacity, wider electrification, new rolling stock and upgraded interchanges.
that was just the misguided way they chose to market it to the layman. It's about capacity mainly, creating dedicated intercity links on new railways which can bypass the archaic railways we're currently using, which don't have the capacity for fast intercity services as they mainly serve commuters from satellite towns etc.
Whilst a new Leeds-Manchester railway is definitely needed, I agree that the business case for that being a high speed railway may seem odd in isolation, but obviously creating a Leeds-Manchester link simultaneously creates a Leeds-London link cos of the already existing HS2, so they'd be pretty insane not to build a high speed line.
but that doesnt exist yet, and the only one they are definate about trying to do is from London to Birmingham.....NOT definately going to try to do one then going up to Manchester. They talk about doing one from Birmingham to manchester but they are not certain about that, the only thing that is certain about is that it is being used as a justification for doing the London Birmingham one.
PS I do think that the cross pennine one makes more sense than HS2
PPS why are they called HS2 and HS3? where the fuck is HS1?
PPSSS I dont see that HS2 London to Birmingham brings much benefit for the waste of the scarce resoure of public money spending, it only shaves off a small amount of time, and you in a station that then requires you to travel (by other means) to another station to get a connection, which eats up any time saved.......as for capacity, there is already an underused other London - Birmingham link (Birmingham Moor Street - Marylebone only £29 odd pounds return on the day PLUS free internet.....plus you can get a seat and it is altogether more pleasant than virgins smelly trains from new st
HS1 trains stop at more places on that line and aren't operated by Eurostar, AFAIK.
and it's very, very unlikely that they'd build HS3 without building the Birmingham-Manchester link (which will definitely happen, imo).
Also we're obviously talking about capacity in 20 years time, not now. Ineffectual 'other lines' between cities run by different train companies are another problem with our rail network. The aim is to give us exclusively intercity lines, while existing lines are used for stopping services and also massively increasing the freight capacity, taking a lot of lorries off the road and reversing some of the damage that was done in the Thatcher-era with regards to freight.
of HS2 forward to be built first, probably because the legal and financial complexities on the London part are so complex
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/10378599/Northern-leg-of-HS2-could-be-built-first-to-bring-benefits-to-the-north-quicker.html so there's no guarantee this potential HS3 will have to wait until after HS2 is done.
plus the SNP government has put an Edinburgh to Glasgow route in the next Scottish National Planning Framework document.
I'm not sure it really makes sense, it's the London link that will provide the financial return, but I wouldn't complain if it happened that way round.
Reckon in the future technology fir home working and video conferences will be so good that these trains will be empty
surely all the northeners go to london rather than each other when they have something important to do/
they should build a manchester - liverpool human cannonball thing
and it's the same for Leeds. The routes between the three cities are slow, very busy, and only getting worse because many services and business are choosing to set up or relocate in northern cities. I'd love a high-speed connection between Manchester and Sheffield (for selfish reasons), but also because the only road between the two is a single-carriage way A road which shuts when it snows and takes over an hour to go 30 miles. Leeds and Manchester at least have an electrified train connection along with the M62.
A Manchester -> Sheffield -> Leeds route would be great, but probably not straight enough
basically - fuck leeds, it's shite.
Bin HS2, divert the funds towards
a) HS3 connecting Leeds/Manchester (/Sheffield)
b) HS4 connecting Glasgow/Edinburgh
Both end up being ~25 minutes end to end, creates 3 (w/ London) city clusters spread across the country, probably leaves quite a lot of change to re-invest in the existing network as needed. Clusters remain linked by Road/Air/existing rail, the only loss is the extra 20 minutes for Brummies to visit civilisation. Yeah?
It'll confuse people.
Maybe use HS2 to connect Kings Cross and Euston?
and re-jigger the economy. Stop wasting time building railways. This isn't Railway Tycoon.
if we're gonna do high speed it has to be london to glasgow, anything else is a fucking waste of time.
although i reckon the airlines are lobbying against this
It's for people to get AWAY from Leeds.
for the good of the nation.
However, there is a problem in that the HS network is not really going to improve services in the same way it does in other countries, partly due to the distance between the stations. 4 hours from Glasgow to London is pretty impressive, I think, and they should be doing further capacity upgrades on the existing networks, like electrifiction and such.
Still, as a railfan, I can't knock a new railway network.
Seriously, though, it should be:
Dublin - bridge/tunnel - Bangor - Stoke - Leicester - Peterborough - Norwich - tunnel/bridge - Rotterdam
Travelling east-west in England is ridic compared to north-south.
Extend it to: Hamburg; Berlin; Poznan; Warsaw; Kiev; Voronezh; Astana.
The daily commute from Astana to Bangor will be much more bearable.
then over the ancient land bridge to America - run fast through the USA - under the ocean back to Dublin.
Worldwide Circle Line. "Oh no I'm going the wrong way around - better call the office I'll be late in"
thewarn spaffed at ^this
we'd like you to vote for us so please imagine a nice fast train you're never going to get
ps: lol scotland/wales/cornwall
by Great Western on improving / electrifying the rail services from Reading going SW
Unless Cornwall wields some great economic power that I'm otherwise unaware of.
Birmingham-Cardiff will happen eventually though.
Manchester-Glasgow has already been discussed and will surely happen, depends on what happens with Scotland come September I guess.
It's the part of the country with the best weather. If people could fucking well GET THERE they might be more inclined to go rather than go abroad.
i would only like more tourists if there was a big big tax on them to cover the strain caused and maybe pump some money into jobs that aren't to serve tourism.
or start from scratch and have no more tourists
I'm going there on holiday in a couple of weeks and it's gonna take me NINE HOURS on the train from Newcastle to Penzance! So yeah, I get what you're saying. I just don't think that tourist economy will ever be big enough to justify a high speed rail link. Plus to be honest, Cornwall is pretty tiny and densely populated and full of tourists all the time as it is, not to mention a load of cunts with their second homes, so I'm not sure that the people of Cornwall would appreciate a huge increase in the amount of tourists visiting the region.
nine hours, amazing. never done it before - i fly easyjet to bristol for about £45 return and it works out loads cheaper/quicker to do that then get a train down. of course, depends on whether or not you want to fly/fly with easyjet. means i get to go on the metro all the way to the end, too.
i know fluffy's flown directly to exeter with flybe before.
Especially the final bit along the coast.
And it only cost me £35 (one way though, driving back). And I'm scared of flying, so it's the only option really! But nine hours....
that was ten hours. imagine if you were going from Aberdeen or something :D
Comparing notes about the length of drive down there is one of life's little pleasures.
Not sure simply having a SUPERFAST train there would be that much of a solution in and of itself. Most Cornwall holidayers would need a car to get about.
tories getting to their other house
seeing as pretty much everyone outside the government and rail industry, as with all infrastructure projects outside of London, is dead against HS2.
Also seeing as it has cross party support (except for the greens, fucking traitors, I guess they want to run a fucking London-Manchester bike co-op. Or just build more roads!) it's hardly going to win votes for any particular party.
I'm always a fan of big developments up north, regardless of cost and benefit. I expect to be able to enjoy quicker trips to manchester in my twilight years
sentiment is about right though