HS2 happening?

[onionbargee]

i cant afford to travel by train, god knows what the cost will be on high speed. Most train travel on a small island like ours is not economically sane anyway, coach travel is unsubsidised, and still 50% cheaper.

[furnessvale]

i cant afford to travel by train, god knows what the cost will be on high speed. Most train travel on a small island like ours is not economically sane anyway, coach travel is unsubsidised, and still 50% cheaper.

The taxes paid by coaches do not cover their costs for the roads they use. Additionally, many "coach" services register themselves as stage carriage services to benefit from subsidised fuel prices.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Graham Davis]

i cant afford to travel by train, god knows what the cost will be on high speed. Most train travel on a small island like ours is not economically sane anyway, coach travel is unsubsidised, and still 50% cheaper.

 

Really?

I can get to Shrewsbury quicker and cheaper on the train than I can by bus or even car!!

I can even get to London for £67 return, and that is without an discount for holding a Railcard.

[Southern Star]

We have HS1 down here and it's fantastic, it knocked 40 minutes off of the journey time to London overnight, plus I can now travel anywhere oop north without having to get the tube.

[Ray T]

We have HS1 down here and it's fantastic, it knocked 40 minutes off of the journey time to London overnight, plus I can now travel anywhere oop north without having to get the tube.

 

At what cost?

 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2013/nov/02/hs2-train-fares-commuter

 

"Take the prices for travelling on our only existing high-speed track, HS1, that whizzes through the Kent countryside. If you live in Ashford, the opening of the line promised a huge improvement in train times into the capital. Sure enough, it now takes just 35 minutes into London St Pancras compared to the 61 minutes it takes on the former route into London Victoria.

 

But at what cost? A season ticket for commuters from Ashford to a London terminal using the old route, plus an onward journey on the tube, costs £4,996 a year. That's a pretty staggering sum for a 54-mile journey (about the same as London to Brighton). But if you want to take the HS1 trains, and save half an hour, the cost rises to £6,360. A commuter paying 40% tax has to earn £10,600 a year just to pay to get into work (oh, and there's a £700 to £900 a year bill to park at the station)."

Edited March 23, 2014 by Ray T

[smileypete]

Pity they can't just reinstate the Great Central railway that was axed as part of the Beeching cuts:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Central_Main_Line

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10406859/HS2-Labour-to-examine-cheaper-rival-plan.html

 

cheers, Pete.

~smpt~

Edited March 23, 2014 by smileypete

[magnetman]

Is that the old line near Braunston puddle banks? The bridge with the Pink Floyd graffiti?

[Southern Star]

 

At what cost?

 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/blog/2013/nov/02/hs2-train-fares-commuter

 

"Take the prices for travelling on our only existing high-speed track, HS1, that whizzes through the Kent countryside. If you live in Ashford, the opening of the line promised a huge improvement in train times into the capital. Sure enough, it now takes just 35 minutes into London St Pancras compared to the 61 minutes it takes on the former route into London Victoria.

 

But at what cost? A season ticket for commuters from Ashford to a London terminal using the old route, plus an onward journey on the tube, costs £4,996 a year. That's a pretty staggering sum for a 54-mile journey (about the same as London to Brighton). But if you want to take the HS1 trains, and save half an hour, the cost rises to £6,360. A commuter paying 40% tax has to earn £10,600 a year just to pay to get into work (oh, and there's a £700 to £900 a year bill to park at the station)."

For commuters maybe, off-peak it's the same price as travelling on the Electrostar trains. I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with having a modern railway network rather than one where it takes longer to get somewhere than it did 100 years ago. As a road haulier I should have a vested interest in opposing modernisation of the rail network, but I try to be impartial in all things.

[furnessvale]

Pity they can't just reinstate the Great Central railway that was axed as part of the Beeching cuts:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Central_Main_Line

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10406859/HS2-Labour-to-examine-cheaper-rival-plan.html

 

cheers, Pete.

~smpt~

That would make sense for freight but sadly it is not on offer.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[Ray T]

Is that the old line near Braunston puddle banks? The bridge with the Pink Floyd graffiti?

 

Yes, I believe so.

Edited March 23, 2014 by Ray T

[Southern Star]

That would make sense for freight but sadly it is not on offer.

 

 

It wouldn't be viable for freight, that's why it was closed in the first place, and back then it was closed because it couldn't compete with ex World War Two army surplus trucks travelling at 20 mph and carrying 8 tonnes.

[furnessvale]

For commuters maybe, off-peak it's the same price as travelling on the Electrostar trains. I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with having a modern railway network rather than one where it takes longer to get somewhere than it did 100 years ago. As a road haulier I should have a vested interest in opposing modernisation of the rail network, but I try to be impartial in all things.

A courageous statement which I applaud. Some logistics companies, it would be a disservice to simply call them road hauliers, are maximising their own profits by using rail for the trunk haul where it makes economic sense to do so. Stobart, Russell and Malcolm immediately come to mind. Many other companies make a living moving containers from railfreight depots. Meanwhile, rail companies use road where it makes sense.

 

Road will always be dominant, at least in my lifetime, but moving some traffic off the motorways, relieving congestion for the freight that has no other choice, must make sense for all.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

It wouldn't be viable for freight, that's why it was closed in the first place, and back then it was closed because it couldn't compete with ex World War Two army surplus trucks travelling at 20 mph and carrying 8 tonnes.

True, pretty much the sort of railway wagon that was on offer at the time as well.

 

Just as road now offers a 30t capacity 60mph lorry, rail offers a 66t capacity 75mph wagon so the competition is back on.

[Southern Star]

Yes, rail is fine for bulk movements, iirc the formula is 2,000 tonnes travelling over 200 miles, but I've never seen a railway train reversing onto the back door of my local Tesco.

 

The whole reason people live on narrowboats is that canals are no longer used for general freight movements, canal transport having been superseded by rail transport in the mid to late 1800s. Now, rail transport has been superseded by road transport. One day road transport may be superseded by something else, but it won't be barges or trains.

[Graham Davis]

When I started as a signalman 6 years ago, excluding the steels and coalies, we saw no more than 3 container trains a week. Now we can see 2 a day!! Most of them are Tesco's.

[furnessvale]

Yes, rail is fine for bulk movements, iirc the formula is 2,000 tonnes travelling over 200 miles, but I've never seen a railway train reversing onto the back door of my local Tesco.

 

 

Funny you should mention Tesco. Whilst trains do not go direct to stores, you may not be aware that Tesco now have eight dedicated trains per day, with more planned, making the trunk haul for more local final delivery by rail. road.(sorry typo).

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Edited March 23, 2014 by furnessvale

[nebulae]

The demise of the Great Central Railway was ,at least in part,due to railway politics .It was engineered as a high speed north to south route,to link with a chanel tunnel .Does this idea ring any bells?. Would have been a much less contentious route than the proposed HS2,as it already existed .Unfortunately,this route(publicly owned remember)was not mothballed but was intentialy vandalised,to make sure it could not be re used .Example,Brackley Viaduct,which was destroyed at great expense to create rubble for building projects.This was a high quality civil engineering structure,which would break the budget today .I dont understand how saving time for passengers creates wealth,other than a marginal saving in employee wages.A trip to the toilet and a coffee is not a great savihg in national resources .If the passenger traffic is to be as heavy as predicted,how can freight diagrams be inserted?The higher speed of passenger traffic will make this very difficult .Maybe freight can use extra route availability on secondary routes(but only if the demand is there?

[Graham Davis]

Exactly!! The current lines are full of passenger trains and especially on the main north south lines. It is getting almost impossible to fit anything else to fit into the current timetable. Moving a large percentage of the current "fast" passenger services onto HS2 will free up space both for more freight and more "stoppers" to feed into HS2.

Even my own line has got to the stage that there is almost no timetable space to fit anything else into the daytime time table, so more freight now is moved at night, meaning there is less time to do maintenance. Result is that lines have to be closed Saturday nights and Sundays.

[David Mack]

Pity they can't just reinstate the Great Central railway that was axed as part of the Beeching cuts:

That would make sense for freight but sadly it is not on offer.

The demise of the Great Central Railway was ,at least in part,due to railway politics .It was engineered as a high speed north to south route,to link with a chanel tunnel .Does this idea ring any bells?. Would have been a much less contentious route than the proposed HS2,as it already existed .Unfortunately,this route(publicly owned remember)was not mothballed but was intentialy vandalised,to make sure it could not be re used .Example,Brackley Viaduct,which was destroyed at great expense to create rubble for building projects.This was a high quality civil engineering structure,which would break the budget today.

And the line has disappeared in a number of other places - Nottingham Victoria Station is now a shopping centre, the Nottingham tram runs on part of the route, and is being extended along more of it. Much of the line in Leicester has been redeveloped, and the bridge over the WCML at Rugby has also gone. And the route from north of Leicester to Loughborough is now operated as steam railway. The remaining section of the route from the Londown terminus (Marylebone) is already full with other services.

 

There are numerous smaller chunks which have gone too, so 'reopening' it would in practice involve a lot of new line.