Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

[PR1Berske]

One of the problems with HS2 haas been that some rail and transport 'experts' have criticised it from the beginning.
People like Christian Wolmar have constantly denigrated the project without ever costing any alternative schemes which would give the same benefits.
This gives the Govt. a perfect reason to say even rail enthusiasts are critical so we will be right to scrap it.
To say 'there must be a better way' without giving a shred of evidence about the viability or cost of alternative schemes is typical of why we have such a ghastly record of
infrastructure shambles.
So if HS2 is scrapped, what then? Do we just put off carrying more passengers or do we embark on alternative schemes which are not on the drawing board and hve no
costings supplied.
The railway will NOT be getting any more money from the Govt in lieu of what they save on HS2 so it is encumbent upon the naysayers to give costed alternatives.
I wait in hope!

I began a thread asking people to think about what would happen were it scrapped, here

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/what-if-hs2-is-scrapped.176184/

 

[Esker-pades]

Okay well let's examine why and how the WCML is so busy. What can be done to resolve that. What technical solutions, what practical solutions. Let's try to use our brains, not just an apparent bottomless pit of public money. My solutions have been discussed on here endless times.

Were HS2 cancelled, I would celebrate. I'd laugh myself sore. Because it would be the perfect end to a fairytale project. Those of us who oppose it shouldn't be forced to come up with solutions. You believe in fairies, tell us how they should be funded.

Problem: Overcrowding
Solution: HS2 to increase capacity

We have come up with a solution, which parliament has passed.

This "I don't have to come up with solutions" makes me think that you have no solutions.

 

[The Ham]

On Passenger numbers a certain member said this:

Again I do accept the point. We don't know how things will own out over the next ten years. But by the same token ten years ago the arguments for building the thing were based on projections which haven't come to pass.

I'm interested by this 30% claim. We see ups and downs in rail use when we focus on year on year usage statistics. Such an increase would be quite remarkable given existing WCML usage, particularly "whole route" passengers.

I've replied stating:

What claims which haven't come to pass?

HS2 was based on an assumption of 2.5% growth each year, by the end of 2017/18 the account of long distance passengers in the UK had exceeded that to the point where it was beyond the expected growth for 2019/20.

As such the predictions were wrong, but not in a way which those opposed to HS2 like.

These are NOT dubious numbers, yet those opposed to HS2 continue to claim that there's not going to be enough passengers to justify HS2 as passenger numbers are going to be massively below what's predicted. Yet we've got to over 50% of the opening year flows two years ahead of when it should have been reached.

 

[doa46231]

Were HS2 cancelled, I would celebrate. I'd laugh myself sore. Because it would be the perfect end to a fairytale project. Those of us who oppose it shouldn't be forced to come up with solutions. You believe in fairies, tell us how they should be funded.

Apart from being a rather purile comment, it implies you dont think there is a problem anyway.
You may be right.
If you believe we are at 'peak railway' and that no increase in passengers is likely then of course stay as we are.
If on the other hand you believe ridership will continue to increase, solutions must be found.
I think many minds cleverer than yours have tried to solve this problem and came up with HS2.
If it is the wrong solution, as it obviously is to you, just saying 'there must be another way' doesn't cut the mustard!
It behoves someone with such exaggerated views as you have about the whole thing to at least give chapter and verse from those who have studied the problem
in detail to at least give some inkling as to what the alternatives might be together with how much it would cost.
Something you have signally failed to do.
To Quote an American President 'Where's the beef!

 

[jfowkes]

Okay well let's examine why and how the WCML is so busy. What can be done to resolve that. What technical solutions, what practical solutions. Let's try to use our brains, not just an apparent bottomless pit of public money. My solutions have been discussed on here endless times.

... Those of us who oppose it shouldn't be forced to come up with solutions...

Your solutions have been discussed, technically and practically. They have been found wanting. It's true you shouldn't be forced to come up with solutions, but you should at least be able to defend the ones you propose, or admit that they don't work.

 

[PR1Berske]

On Passenger numbers a certain member said this:



I've replied stating:



These are NOT dubious numbers, yet those opposed to HS2 continue to claim that there's not going to be enough passengers to justify HS2 as passenger numbers are going to be massively below what's predicted. Yet we've got to over 50% of the opening year flows two years ahead of when it should have been reached.

By the by, what do you think would happen were HS2 to be scrapped?

 

[Clip]

By the by, what do you think would happen were HS2 to be scrapped?

The money wouldnbt be forthcoming for anything else.

 

[The Ham]

By the by, what do you think would happen were HS2 to be scrapped?

Then one of two things; passenger numbers slow because of capacity constraints or trains get busier and busier with little or no scope to facilitate them.

The point is those opposed to HS2 continue to state that HS2 have got the numbers wrong (which they have) and therefore HS2 isn't needed (even though passenger growth had been higher than predicted).

Has passenger growth been higher or lower than predicted?

If higher what's the option to facilitate for this growth of not HS2?

Maybe HSUK? Only that uses that week known under used line for getting out of London the MML.

 

[EM2]

By the by, what do you think would happen were HS2 to be scrapped?

The WCML, the MML, and the ECML would get very full very quickly.

 

[EM2]

I do recall you stating the planning community weren't up to the job because we cannot meet your expectations though. I don't recall you telling us what you do though so we can also criticise that.

I've never used those words or that expression. My view has always been that there must be ways to deal with the WCML which didn't require building a new railway, leaving the old one to rot.

I must have imagined this posting then:

The people who do it for a living have failed if they're having to concede to a multimillion pound experiment connecting London to Birmingham with no intermediate stops.

I would love to have the opportunity to rewrite the timetables, to prove there's another way than HS2.

What I've called "smart timetables" is my term for ways to change from fixed, rigid timetables to using more flexibility and changes in number of carriages.

Flexibility in what?
Carriages stored where to make these changes?
How do you move these carriages around the network without planning them into the timetable?
When will you need to move them, at what notice?

 

[The Box Photter]

That was quite a reasonable post until it descended into the standard misty eyed unit hating, loco hauled bit. I will ask again as no one has answered it yet. What do you do, if growth continues even at a slowed rate, when the extended trains become full?

Sorry about the misty-eyed bit. I just want to ride in proper trains with comfy seats which line up with the windows. If they have to be EMU or DMU or hybrid that shouldn't be an excuse to make the passenger accommodation sub standard.

 

[mmh]

The WCML, the MML, and the ECML would get very full very quickly.

Why would there be any significant impact on the MML or ECML if the point of HS2 is to take long distance trains off the southern WCML?

There are contradictory arguments in this thread. HS2 will provide no new capacity anywhere else.

 

[Ianno87]

Why would there be any significant impact on the MML or ECML if the point of HS2 is to take long distance trains off the southern WCML?

There are contradictory arguments in this thread. HS2 will provide no new capacity anywhere else.

Phase 2B sees Leeds-Euston and Newcastle-Euston services, therefore no need to retain such services* into King's Cross instead.

Similarly, Sheffield-Euston services would take demand off current Sheffield-St Pancras services, so more space for those joining at Leicester.

*Well, some services would likely stay in some form, but stopping at more stations to pick up intermediate flows more as trains will no longer be full of longer distance passengers.

This in turns takes more Stevenage/Peterborough passengers off GTR, etc etc etc

 

[mmh]

Most/all train operators treat loading data as commercially confidential.

If that's true, where do the statistics for the annual announcement of the most overcrowded trains (e.g. the infamous Glasgow to Manchester morning one) come from?

 

[Ianno87]

If that's true, where do the statistics for the annual announcement of the most overcrowded trains (e.g. the infamous Glasgow to Manchester morning one) come from?

Usually released by DfT (I think?), whom TOCs are obliged (I believe) to share with, as they are with Network Rail for forecasting purposes, and treated in the strictest confidence.

What is seldom ever released is demand for *every* train an operator runs.

 

[mmh]

Please explain how what I said is not true?

Please, please don't regurgitate the "it's only between London and Birmingham" nonsense *again*

It's not true because there'll be no additional capacity north of Birmingham/Crewe. You could move every current Virgin service to HS2 but they all go somewhere off HS2, on the current lines and to the current short platforms.

 

[6Gman]

Perhaps if it had been less grandiose from the start - all classic compatible in order to serve existing terminals and city approaches - did France build vast new city centre terminals when they started to develop the TGV?

The keyword should have been "Incremental".

It's under attack from the Tory brexiteer right and on the left I believe Corbyn and McDonnell would love to use the cash elsewhere whatever they say in public just now.

This is going to be a turbulent year and HS2's chances are about 50/50 of making it through it!

This seems a very fair analysis.

There was too much "prestige" and not enough "practicality" when the project was being framed.

 

[ABB125]

It's not true because there'll be no additional capacity north of Birmingham/Crewe. You could move every current Virgin service to HS2 but they all go somewhere off HS2, on the current lines and to the current short platforms.

Yes, because if HS2 went all the way to Scotland, how much more would it cost? People think it's too expensive anyway (although it has a positive benefit to cost ratio).

 

[6Gman]

Bring back loco-haulage and reinstate turnround and release facilities at terminus stations. Look at common practice throughout Europe and the rest of the world. A loco (or two) at the head of a long train when it's busy and a loco at the head of a short train then its less busy (but because the coaches are all compatible and available, they can be added to strengthen the service).

Good luck operating Euston with locos that need to be released. Simply wouldn't work. (I know, I used to plan it when it was a loco-hauled railway)

 

[6Gman]

Because it's not true?

Except it is true.

 

[6Gman]

Building HS2 as currently designed doesn't improve any of the lines or stations or services up here. I know it's repetitive to say, but it's true; as long as it's a line going only to Birmingham, the rest of us gets nothing in return.

You don't have evidence that HS2 will improve things up here. You only have the claim that it makes the southern WCML better for the South.

You may not have worked this out yet PR1Berske but improvements to the southern WCML also benefit the north, because trains from the north to London from the north (and vice versa) go that way!

HS2 will reduce journey times from Cheshire (for example) by around 30%.

 

[6Gman]

I have never promised to provide a replanned timetable. Ever. I've said that there must be ways to retime services, to perhaps alter destination stations, look at modernising signalling and dispatch; I have never said I could provide a new timetable.

I gather you work for the NHS.

How would you react if a railwayman said "there must be ways to cure cancer/ dementia/ MRSA" if only the people involved looked at it in a better way?

 

[6Gman]

I am keeping an open mind but I am personally uncomfortable about HS2, especially given the huge cost and uncertainty about the future of the UK economy.

However, if there's one thing that convinces me to support HS2, it's the arguments of the anti-HS2 community. This is paragraph a nice example. The case for HS2 is dismissed based on "belief" with no actual arguments presented whatsoever. A solution is demanded that solves the specific problems of congestion in Manchester, Wales and Scotland. I'm not against solving those problems but arguing that we shouldn't solve problem A because problem B also exists just results in a logical deadlock where we solve no problems at all. Finally, the lack of proven passenger numbers for HS2 is raised as an objection. As HS2 won't exist until we build it, we can only prove passenger numbers with a time machine - or by just building the damn thing and seeing what happens.

I was initially anti-HS2 for reasons I have set out elsewhere on here.

However, the alternative to HS2 is not a big pot of money instantly available for other worthwhile projects on the railway system.

It is no HS2. And few, if any, other rail projects funded.

Incidentally, I live in the North of England - within 300m of the proposed route. And I can tell you that work has already started ...

So the suggestion that this is only a London to Birmingham project is ... a lie.

 

[ABB125]

I gather you work for the NHS.

How would you react if a railwayman said "there must be ways to cure cancer/ dementia/ MRSA" if only the people involved looked at it in a better way?

And only doing so by diverting the huge amount of funding put towards a new, incredibly expensive drug that cures said illness.
Although, having said that, I do believe that many of the new drugs available are just not worth the eye-watering (to the taxpayer) prices demanded by manufacturers. Is it money well spent on £100,000 of drugs to keep someone alive a year longer, if that year will be full of absolute agony and misery for both patient and relatives? (Yes, I have experienced this before anyone claims I am a cold-hearted person with no compassion.)
But that's off topic.

 

[PR1Berske]

I gather you work for the NHS.

How would you react if a railwayman said "there must be ways to cure cancer/ dementia/ MRSA" if only the people involved looked at it in a better way?

That's such a tenuous strawman argument that I'm not going to bother responding.

You must know that delivering transport and offering medical treatment are two different things.

 

[PR1Berske]

It's not true because there'll be no additional capacity north of Birmingham/Crewe. You could move every current Virgin service to HS2 but they all go somewhere off HS2, on the current lines and to the current short platforms.

Exactly.

HS2 is London planned, London designed, London aimed, London focused.

There are no other answers to this.

 

[sprunt]

That's such a tenuous strawman argument that I'm not going to bother responding.

No, it's an analogy*, and a good one at that. You are claiming that people in a profession other than yours are not producing the best outcome from the resources available - the question was how would you feel if a layman accused you of doing the same in your job. Can't imagine why you wouldn't want to answer that.

*If you persist in the claim that it's a strawman argument, please describe what the straw man that has been constructed is.

 

[sprunt]

There are contradictory arguments in this thread. HS2 will provide no new capacity anywhere else.

It won't create new capacity, no, and nobody has said that it will. It will free up existing capacity.

 

[The Ham]

It's not true because there'll be no additional capacity north of Birmingham/Crewe. You could move every current Virgin service to HS2 but they all go somewhere off HS2, on the current lines and to the current short platforms.

That's only true until such time as phase 2 is built.

However even of Phase 2 isn't built there'll be scope to use small projects to release capacity North of there which otherwise wouldn't be viable without phase 1.

 

[6Gman]

That's such a tenuous strawman argument that I'm not going to bother responding.

You must know that delivering transport and offering medical treatment are two different things.

But the principle of someone with no knowledge of the subject telling people with such knowledge that there "must be" ways of doing something is the same.

@sprunt has made the same point, but with far more elegance than I managed.