HS2 canal crossing points

[furnessvale]

4 minutes ago, Athy said:

At this distance we can't prove it, but I very much doubt that. Nowadays, most households have a car and many have two; such a multiplication of private vehicle ownership astounded and confounded just about everybody, and I'm convinced that the government were included amonst that number.

The love of railways is a very recent thing.  As late as 1981, the government of the day closed the Woodhead Pass, the only electrified railway over the Pennines and the only one capable of carrying high shipping containers without expensive modification.  Before that the Settle Carlisle line was severely threatened.

When these actions were taking place the writing was very much on the wall as to where our roads were going but they carried on regardless.

George

[dor]

Just now, Mike Todd said:

On what basis do you say that it will not then be needed?

Are you suggesting that travel will decline, despite the sustained growth for a long time (like for ever!) in travel of all sorts?

Or are you suggesting that we will find a way of utilising roads that is several times more efficient than now?

Or are you positing an entirely new form of transport? (like teleportation)

The difference between 'needed' and 'most cost effective' is important. For the balance to change significantly then there will have to be very large uplift in the relative cost of using HS2.

HS2 is going to be 30 years or more before it gets to Manchester.  Do you really think that people will still be commuting to an office in a city to the same extent that they do now?  We do desperately need more freight on the railways, but that needs a government that is prepared to make it financially viable, rather than carry on with the huge subsidies that road haulage gets.  Yes there will still be a "rush hour", but outside of that the freight could easily be moved, either during the day or at night.   I quite often travel from Crewe to Euston to link up with Eurostar (from St Pancras - why do we have to we still have to drag our cases half a mile up Euston Road?) and the trains are generally half empty, or less.   OK so some improvements will be needed to some of our main lines, but that would be a fraction of the cost of HS2.

[john6767]

6 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

We move goods to and fro,east to west and North to South.

Spike Milligan once said, to save fuel costs why dont the Germans bomb Germany and the British bomb Britain! 

Why do business people need to travel the country. There's video links etc. 

Very true over the last 20 years of my working life the amount of business travel has steadily reduced to the point that now it is usually only for "jollies".  Other than that all meetings take place on the internet from home.

[Mike Todd]

Restoring branch lines is a rose tinted glasses idea.

Many of the lines were already dying as they were speculative developments trying to cash in on growth market. Sometimes they just got it wrong or found that the best routes were already taken.

A lot of the tracks are no longer available as other things have been built over them (although that does not stop HS2!) Much the same as restoring some canals.

Furthermore, the branch lines, where they worked, depended on people using their horse and cart to to 'the last mile', especially in rural areas, where the predominance of closed branch lines are. You would have to find ways of building large car parks alongside the stations (as has happened in some outer metropolitan places)

Another fear would be that they would then accelerate the concentration of employment into dense city areas with more people having ever longer commutes, whether by rail or road.

3 minutes ago, dor said:

HS2 is going to be 30 years or more before it gets to Manchester.  Do you really think that people will still be commuting to an office in a city to the same extent that they do now?  We do desperately need more freight on the railways, but that needs a government that is prepared to make it financially viable, rather than carry on with the huge subsidies that road haulage gets.  Yes there will still be a "rush hour", but outside of that the freight could easily be moved, either during the day or at night.   I quite often travel from Crewe to Euston to link up with Eurostar (from St Pancras - why do we have to we still have to drag our cases half a mile up Euston Road?) and the trains are generally half empty, or less.   OK so some improvements will be needed to some of our main lines, but that would be a fraction of the cost of HS2.

Where do you get the 30 years from? I thought that it was under 20.

[Athy]

8 minutes ago, dor said:

 I quite often travel from Crewe to Euston to link up with Eurostar (from St Pancras - why do we have to we still have to drag our cases half a mile up Euston Road?)

A regular Tube service is available.

As for "dragging" your case rather than "carrying" it, if this means that you one of those people who uses those appalling, anti-social suitcases on wheels, then yes, I think you ought to take the Tube to reduce the risk of getting in the way of innocent pedestrians and running over their feet.

[Peter-Bullfinch]

It would seem from the published figures that every man, woman and child  in the UK will need to stump up around £75 each every year until 2026 to pay for the new line. 

I hope after that I will get a few free rail tickets to London as a thank you for my contribution rather than the one third I get off at the moment with my Senior Rail Card.

[dor]

6 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Restoring branch lines is a rose tinted glasses idea.

Many of the lines were already dying as they were speculative developments trying to cash in on growth market. Sometimes they just got it wrong or found that the best routes were already taken.

A lot of the tracks are no longer available as other things have been built over them (although that does not stop HS2!) Much the same as restoring some canals.

Furthermore, the branch lines, where they worked, depended on people using their horse and cart to to 'the last mile', especially in rural areas, where the predominance of closed branch lines are. You would have to find ways of building large car parks alongside the stations (as has happened in some outer metropolitan places)

Another fear would be that they would then accelerate the concentration of employment into dense city areas with more people having ever longer commutes, whether by rail or road.

Where do you get the 30 years from? I thought that it was under 20.

When did a government project of this size ever come in on time (and on budget?).

I live in south Cheshire and we are only just (today in fact) being notified of the start of the consultation period.  There are a number of vested interests determined to get their way and I can see it dragging on for much longer than the Government is allowing for.

I'll believe it when I see it (although I won't live that long...).

 

[dor]

2 minutes ago, Athy said:

A regular Tube service is available.

As for "dragging" your case rather than "carrying" it, if this means that you one of those people who uses those appalling, anti-social suitcases on wheels, then yes, I think you ought to take the Tube to reduce the risk of getting in the way of innocent pedestrians and running over their feet.

And going by tube means walking nearly as far at either end and isn't any quicker.  And no I'm not one of those people who run over other people's feet, I'm more considerate than that; why do you assume that I would?  But if I am going to Lyon for two weeks I need more than I can now comfortably carry that distance (never mind that i am supposed to not lift anything over 5kg).

[Naughty Cal]

18 minutes ago, dor said:

HS2 is going to be 30 years or more before it gets to Manchester.  Do you really think that people will still be commuting to an office in a city to the same extent that they do now?  We do desperately need more freight on the railways, but that needs a government that is prepared to make it financially viable, rather than carry on with the huge subsidies that road haulage gets.  Yes there will still be a "rush hour", but outside of that the freight could easily be moved, either during the day or at night.   I quite often travel from Crewe to Euston to link up with Eurostar (from St Pancras - why do we have to we still have to drag our cases half a mile up Euston Road?) and the trains are generally half empty, or less.   OK so some improvements will be needed to some of our main lines, but that would be a fraction of the cost of HS2.

You would think that moving freight at night would be a sensible move. Yet several of the large distribution centres we have worked on lately have planning conditions restricting the delivery hours. 

Yep. You guessed it latest 8pm!

[Peter X]

I doubt you'd save much of the distance walked (if any) by using the Northern or Victoria Line for a transfer between Euston & St Pancras, by the time you'd done the corridors and escalators. And especially in rush hour, which is pretty much all week except for a few hours of Sunday mornings nowadays in London, walking it would probably be faster.

[mrsmelly]

19 minutes ago, Peter-Bullfinch said:

It would seem from the published figures that every man, woman and child  in the UK will need to stump up around £75 each every year until 2026 to pay for the new line. 

I hope after that I will get a few free rail tickets to London as a thank you for my contribution rather than the one third I get off at the moment with my Senior Rail Card.

You may be lucky and get free travel somewhere nice rather than London if you ask. Senior rail cards are a damn good deal in my opinion. I don't use mine very often but each time it saves me more than its actual cost and valid for a year,

[Machpoint005]

1 hour ago, furnessvale said:

The true figure is £55billions, spread over 16 years, and that includes all the new trains  that are to run on the line.  The actual infrastructure is considerably less than that.

Does anyone honestly expect the budget to stay the same over 16 years? Think Channel Tunnel, Humber Bridge, the Garden Bridge that never got built, Hinkley C power station ...

[mrsmelly]

8 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Does anyone honestly expect the budget to stay the same over 16 years? Think Channel Tunnel, Humber Bridge, the Garden Bridge that never got built, Hinkley C power station ...

The millennium poxy dome..........

[AMModels]

1 hour ago, Ex Brummie said:

Flashback a couple of centuries or so. Why do we need these ditches? Come forward another century or so, and do we really need these 'snorting beasts'?

What about the 1950's? Did we really need these swathes of concrete?

Where would we now be without canals, railways and motorways?  I agree that the saving in time is minimal, but these will be in addition to the existing tracks and anyone using trains knows that there is a need for extra capacity. Any large infrastructure project has its detractors. It is just that this one impacts upon those who consider themselves above the average individual andcan make lots of noise. If we want to keep moving, with an burgeoning population, then so be it. Carry on.

What extra capacity? If people arent travelling from Brum to London or vice versa or they want to get off anywhere in between they will have to catch the old train, so the old trains will still have to run, ergo there will be no increased capacity for freight trains to take advantage of. Ignoring the fact industry likes the door to door nature of road freight.

[Chewbacka]

10 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Does anyone honestly expect the budget to stay the same over 16 years? Think Channel Tunnel, Humber Bridge, the Garden Bridge that never got built, Hinkley C power station ...

I suspect they have a budget target for each big project which has to be met to gain approval.  So the budget is squeezed and approved.  Then the 'extras' which were 'not thought of' at the time, and the 'unforeseen' problems can all be safely added (back) on to the project 'regrettably' pushing up the final cost.  But don't worry because after the review lessons learned will learned and applied to all future projects, if there should ever be one EXACTLY the same..........

[Athy]

1 hour ago, dor said:

 And no I'm not one of those people who run over other people's feet, I'm more considerate than that; why do you assume that I would?  But if I am going to Lyon for two weeks I need more than I can now comfortably carry that distance (never mind that i am supposed to not lift anything over 5kg).

I am delighted that you are the exception that proves the rule.

I thoroughly approve of the use of wheeled suitcases by disabled people and those with back or hip problems, for example. But I suspect that the majority of people who use wheeled suitcases are able-bodied and could easily carry proper bags if they weren't so bone idle. At Stansted Airport, which I use fairly often, you even get people towing their suitcase AND a cabin bag on wheels too, which means that they occupy at least twice the space that they need to, and that they get in the bloody way.

[Horace42]

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

.....difference between 'needed' and 'most cost effective' is important. For the balance to change significantly then there will have to be very large uplift in the relative cost of using HS2.

Do you mean the high cost of using HS2 (price of ticket and journey times) will need to become economical in the course of time  compared to the alternative use of road and air. Not by reduction of HS2 fares or increase of journey times - but by the increased cost of the alternatives.

The latter easily done under the control of the Government by introducing £/mile and congestion charges.

Easy now with the new number plate recognition cameras (installed on the pretext of catching those speeding and avoiding tax) - butconveniently adapted  to monitor the traffic for any money raising venture - and worse - to do it automatically to clock up a charge as you pass the camera - paid by direct debit at appropriate intervals.

Theh Then HS2 travel might seem cheap.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Horace42

[Captain Pegg]

 

1 hour ago, Athy said:

I am delighted that you are the exception that proves the rule.

I thoroughly approve of the use of wheeled suitcases by disabled people and those with back or hip problems, for example. But I suspect that the majority of people who use wheeled suitcases are able-bodied and could easily carry proper bags if they weren't so bone idle. At Stansted Airport, which I use fairly often, you even get people towing their suitcase AND a cabin bag on wheels too, which means that they occupy at least twice the space that they need to, and that they get in the bloody way.

Are you honestly saying folks should strain their back and side muscles carrying bags when they don't have to?

In London the alternative to wheeling a bag isn't so much carrying it as getting the tube or a taxi. Arguably more bone idle. I often choose to walk journeys I could do by tube or taxi including with a wheeled case if I happen to be on an overnight trip.

Have you tried getting on a tube train the height of the peak with a bag? Last week even without one I had to wait for five trains on the Victoria line before I inched close enough to front of the waiting pack to be able to board. Taking a suitcase wouldn't have been an option. As for Euston to St Pancras the only sensible option is to walk with or without a wheeled bag.

The UKs transport infrastructure can't cope with current demand let alone the forecast of the future. Building branch lines won't help. How can 'investing' money in something that can't even cover it's own operating costs help?

JP

[furnessvale]

4 hours ago, AMModels said:

What extra capacity? If people arent travelling from Brum to London or vice versa or they want to get off anywhere in between they will have to catch the old train, so the old trains will still have to run, ergo there will be no increased capacity for freight trains to take advantage of. Ignoring the fact industry likes the door to door nature of road freight.

Andy, please read the facts about HS2.

It is not just Brum to London.  Even before it is extended north of Brum, all the trains from Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow etc, which currently run non stop down the southern section of the WCML, will join the new line just north of Brum.

As the line extends north, fast trains from the Midland main line and east coast will also join the new line freeing up many paths for more slower passenger and freight trains.

As for freight, even now there is much suppressed demand for freight paths on the WCML so somebody is out there wanting to use rail.

George

[Athy]

2 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

 

Are you honestly saying folks should exercise and build up their back and side muscles carrying bags when they don't have to?

 

I have slightly amended your post.

And, yes.

2 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

 

 

Have you tried getting on a tube train the height of the peak with a bag? 

Yes, many times.

2 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

 

Building branch lines won't help. 

 

Twaddle. Of course it would.

[dor]

1 minute ago, Athy said:

I have slightly amended your post.

Are you honestly saying folks should exercise and build up their back and side muscles carrying bags when they don't have to?

If only it was that easy.  I've always been physically strong, but with a hole in my side and some bits missing it is not really an option any more.  Can you carry a 25 kg bag half a mile easily?

[Captain Pegg]

4 minutes ago, Athy said:

I have slightly amended your post.

And, yes.

Yes, many times.

Twaddle. Of course it would.

Maybe you are right, considering it's about 1837 in your world. You seem happy enough so good luck to you. I'll just carry on wheeling my suitcase into the future if you don't mind.

JP

[Athy]

7 hours ago, dor said:

If only it was that easy.  I've always been physically strong, but with a hole in my side and some bits missing it is not really an option any more.  Can you carry a 25 kg bag half a mile easily?

I did actually say that for people with a disability or a back problem it is fair enough to use this mobility aid.

I'm not sure if my rucksack has ever carried that weight (about 4 stone, isn't it?) but that's the easiest way to carry a heavy load.

7 hours ago, Captain Pegg said:

Maybe you are right, considering it's about 1837 in your world. You seem happy enough so good luck to you. I'll just carry on wheeling my suitcase into the future if you don't mind.

JP

No, it's currently 23:15.

Yes, do, as far away as possible and not in my way, if you don't mind.

EDIT: I should make it clear that this refers to your wheely suitcase, and not to you personally.

[MtB]

On 19/07/2017 at 17:50, dor said:

HS2 is going to be 30 years or more before it gets to Manchester.  Do you really think that people will still be commuting to an office in a city to the same extent that they do now?  

 

Frankly yes I do. In addition the population will have increased by a further 6 million by then too.

Next you'll be claiming the paperless office is just around the corner...!

[LEO]

11 hours ago, Tawny75 said:

This is hot issue here in Aylesbury as the HS2 goes straight through our town and surrounding area but we are not going to be given a stop so we get all the noise and hassle when it is being built and none of the benefit.  If I recall correctly, it is going into a green tunnel when it gets near Chequers.

Hi yes, it will spoil large sections of the Chilterns, but does avoid Chequers, by running through the Wendover gap in the Chilterns. Amersham old town will have problems, but it does enter a tunnel, emerging at Wendover Dean, before heading for Aylesbury and beyond. Sadly the view from Hartwell House (my favourite restaurant) will be ruined. The big short term problem locally will be traffic problems during it's construction as huge quantities of of excavated spoil are moved.

Shame the Great Central line was closed and lost, if retained it perhaps could have helped solve the problem.