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

[si404]

Sorry if it's been covered already, but what's this about?

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/iain-dale/hs2-journey-from-manchester-to-glasgow-slower/

From Manchester to Glasgow, I'd imagine that journeys would be faster. Why? Because Pendolinos can casade down and be used on that route - which won't use HS2...

Certainly it has an effect for London to Scotland services, but the slower journey on the bits where only tilters can do 125mph north of Golborne would give a negative difference roughly an order of magnitude smaller than the positive difference being able to go up to 248mph south of Golborne does.

It's for want of a nail type stuff.

The ultra high speeds were just (if you'll pardon my language) political willy-waving.

To a large extent, yes. And the higher speeds have hijacked the main need for it (capacity) in the public psyche - leading to stuff like the complaint about it that Dougal links to and the bogus myths about 'only saves 10 minutes'. But, at the same time, the Ultra High Speeds kill those stories dead when actual facts are examined, whereas some might still have a bit of life in them with 'only' 300km/h.

And the Ultra High Speeds don't cost much more than regular High Speeds, which in turn don't cost much more than Classic 201km/h Speeds.

 

[swaldman]

HS2 trains will not be able to make use of the Enhanced Permissible Speeds (EPS), used by Pendolinos and Voyagers, on the West Coast main line as they will not tilt. This means that, as things stand, they will be limited to a maximum of 110mph, rather than 125mph, and have to adhere to slower limits on sinuous sections of the route. However with high powered traction motors I would expect any difference in journey times to be negligible to non existent.

Would the WCML power supply allow HS2 trains to use all their power for acceleration? If not, are there any plans to upgrade it?

(I'm not doubting your overall conclusions, just curious on this point)

 

[kilonewton]

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

There are no other answers to this.

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd
Two Snowhill
Snow Hill Queensway
Birmingham
B4 6GA

Well it’s not being managed from London, is it?

 

[JohnB57]

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd
Two Snowhill
Snow Hill Queensway
Birmingham
B4 6GA

Well it’s not being managed from London, is it?

Maybe it will be when they can get there a bit quicker.

 

[mmh]

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd
Two Snowhill
Snow Hill Queensway
Birmingham
B4 6GA

Well it’s not being managed from London, is it?

I'll have to tell my friend who works on HS2 his job's been moved from Westminster to Birmingham if he's in the pub later.

I think it'll come as a bit of a shock to him, so I'll buy him a drink first.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I'll have to tell my friend who works on HS2 his job's been moved from Westminster to Birmingham if he's in the pub later.

I think it'll come as a bit of a shock to him, so I'll buy him a drink first.

And I'll have to tell my friend his job has moved from York to Westminster..... And one of my other friends is moving from Manchester to Westminster. We could meet in Leeds with my other friend and I could tell them all at once maybe to save time?

There are people all over the country working on it....

 

[underbank]

High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd
Two Snowhill
Snow Hill Queensway
Birmingham
B4 6GA

Well it’s not being managed from London, is it?

Depends. That address is a serviced office building housing loads of companies. Where are most of the workers actually working? Where are the main meetings being held? Where do the bosses have their main offices/desks? Quite common for a business to have one address, but with the real management being done elsewhere.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Dispatches programme last night asked some interesting questions, and Prof Stephen Glaister had some forthright things to say about the business case.
Alistair Darling had some serious criticism too, despite having supported it as Chancellor.
However, the presenter just spent the last 5 minutes quoting unnamed extremist politicians who have rooted objections to the project.
Quoting ever larger construction sums without any detail is just designed to frighten people.
Andy Burnham is bound to say that in the limit, we should spend money in Manchester rather than on a national scheme.
They also found the very worst of Northern commuter routes to present the "man/woman in the street" view.
Much of the recent Northern pain has nothing to do with HS2 or NPR.
It just amounted to "spend money on us up here, not them "down south"".
They don't appreciate that NPR will not fly without HS2 to tag it on to.
The impression was also given that major upgrades in the north would be quicker and cheaper than HS2.
HS2 actually has a design and an implementation plan. NPR has neither, and is a decade away even if it is committed this year.
The HS2 boss Mark Thurston was cornered and could only repeat the mantra of a £56 billion budget.
Is it a surprise that big money is being spent on land and property purchase, and in compensation?
Disappointing.
I do think the temperature is rising though.
A bad Brexit could still do for the project (and other government priorities).
Some decisions on cost reduction would help the debate, without jeopardising the whole thing.
If only the government was ready to reorganise the rail industry now rather than in a year's time.

 

[The Planner]

Depends. That address is a serviced office building housing loads of companies. Where are most of the workers actually working? Where are the main meetings being held? Where do the bosses have their main offices/desks? Quite common for a business to have one address, but with the real management being done elsewhere.

From what I hear, there are quite a significant number up in Brum.

 

[6Gman]

From what I hear, there are quite a significant number up in Brum.

The people we deal with seem to be largely in Birmingham.

 

[The Ham]

The Dispatches programme last night asked some interesting questions, and Prof Stephen Glaister had some forthright things to say about the business case.
Alistair Darling had some serious criticism too, despite having supported it as Chancellor.
However, the presenter just spent the last 5 minutes quoting unnamed extremist politicians who have rooted objections to the project.
Quoting ever larger construction sums without any detail is just designed to frighten people.
Andy Burnham is bound to say that in the limit, we should spend money in Manchester rather than on a national scheme.
They also found the very worst of Northern commuter routes to present the "man/woman in the street" view.
Much of the recent Northern pain has nothing to do with HS2 or NPR.
It just amounted to "spend money on us up here, not them "down south"".
They don't appreciate that NPR will not fly without HS2 to tag it on to.
The impression was also given that major upgrades in the north would be quicker and cheaper than HS2.
HS2 actually has a design and an implementation plan. NPR has neither, and is a decade away even if it is committed this year.
The HS2 boss Mark Thurston was cornered and could only repeat the mantra of a £56 billion budget.
Is it a surprise that big money is being spent on land and property purchase, and in compensation?
Disappointing.
I do think the temperature is rising though.
A bad Brexit could still do for the project (and other government priorities).
Some decisions on cost reduction would help the debate, without jeopardising the whole thing.
If only the government was ready to reorganise the rail industry now rather than in a year's time.

The thing is the existing intercity services take up a significant amount of platform space and time, once they are in their own platforms.

What then happens to that free space? Well according to what those who oppose HS2 it would appear that this space will disappear and be of no use to those commute in and around Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester.

In reality there's going to be more space for longer trains if not more services, however to do so would require HS2.

 

[thejuggler]

Some analysis of that Dispatches programme.

https://paulbigland.blog/2019/02/12...-hs2-a-poor-hatchet-job-not-an-investigation/

 

[PR1Berske]

Some analysis of that Dispatches programme.

https://paulbigland.blog/2019/02/12...-hs2-a-poor-hatchet-job-not-an-investigation/

Really not sure you can call anything from that blog "analysis". Paul is pro-HS2 and only ever repeats pro-HS2 propaganda. If I get critics for being against the scheme, so should he for only being blindly positive.

Nothing is ever "bad" in his view. That's the stuff of fairytales.

 

[si404]

Alistair Darling had some serious criticism too, despite having supported it as Chancellor.

Darling always hated it (along with almost every other scheme that crossed his table at the DfT). Darling only ever tolerated it as not blocking it was the price he had to pay to become Chancellor.

 

[Grumpy]

Really not sure you can call anything from that blog "analysis". Paul is pro-HS2 and only ever repeats pro-HS2 propaganda. If I get critics for being against the scheme, so should he for only being blindly positive.

Nothing is ever "bad" in his view. That's the stuff of fairytales.

I was enjoying reading his analysis until he said that the class 144's don't use any bus components and were built as pure rail vehicles by BR at Derby.

 

[6Gman]

Really not sure you can call anything from that blog "analysis". Paul is pro-HS2 and only ever repeats pro-HS2 propaganda. If I get critics for being against the scheme, so should he for only being blindly positive.

Nothing is ever "bad" in his view. That's the stuff of fairytales.

Well, he seems to have done a pretty sound job of identifying lots of errors in the programme (e.g. Newcastle-Middlesbrough is 30 miles and takes nearly an hour and a half; it's actually 50 miles and takes just over an hour).

 

[6Gman]

Really not sure you can call anything from that blog "analysis". Paul is pro-HS2 and only ever repeats pro-HS2 propaganda. If I get critics for being against the scheme, so should he for only being blindly positive.

Nothing is ever "bad" in his view. That's the stuff of fairytales.

You don't get "critics for being against the scheme".

 

[EM2]

Nothing is ever "bad" in his view. That's the stuff of fairytales.

What is in the blog that is incorrect, apart from the minor error about the 144s?

 

[The Ham]

Well, he seems to have done a pretty sound job of identifying lots of errors in the programme (e.g. Newcastle-Middlesbrough is 30 miles and takes nearly an hour and a half; it's actually 50 miles and takes just over an hour).

Those opposed to HS2 don't like that being pointed out:

https://twitter.com/joerukin/status/1095442798566883328?s=19

"Errr, two of those are timetables aof 77 minutes, and I think part of the point was asking if they were ever on time..."

 

[TBY-Paul]

Well, he seems to have done a pretty sound job of identifying lots of errors in the programme (e.g. Newcastle-Middlesbrough is 30 miles and takes nearly an hour and a half; it's actually 50 miles and takes just over an hour).

For clarity:-
Middlesbrough-Newcastle
30.96 miles (as the crow fly's)
39.5 Miles by road(via A19) 46mins+
47m60ch via Durham coast line 1h20m
51m06ch via Darlington 1h4m-1h17 (with change at DAR), 1h 15m-1h20 (without change)
39m30ch via Stillington (if the proposed "Northern Connect" service uses this route).
If, and it's a big IF, the "Northern Connect" service uses the Stillington line, I would think Middlesbrough -Newcastle journey time "might" be cut to below 50 mins.

 

[The Ham]

For clarity:-
Middlesbrough-Newcastle
30.96 miles (as the crow fly's)
39.5 Miles by road(via A19) 46mins+
47m60ch via Durham coast line 1h20m
51m06ch via Darlington 1h4m-1h17 (with change at DAR), 1h 15m-1h20 (without change)
39m30ch via Stillington (if the proposed "Northern Connect" service uses this route).
If, and it's a big IF, the "Northern Connect" service uses the Stillington line, I would think Middlesbrough -Newcastle journey time "might" be cut to below 50 mins.

Google maps states 42 miles and 48 minutes.

However even at the direct distance the speed is circa 30mph which is the maximum speed a horse gallops at, so a galloping horse wouldn't be faster, which is what was claimed.

 

[quantinghome]

The vast majority of criticism of HS2 I have observed is lacking in detail. I have yet to see a proper, forensic, takedown of HS2. In fact most of it tends to adhere to the following formula:

"We spend [INFLATED COST ESTIMATE] on [THING I DON'T LIKE]. Let's spend it on [SOMETHING UNOBJECTIONABLE] instead."

Sound familiar?

 

[Snapper]

The vast majority of criticism of HS2 I have observed is lacking in detail. I have yet to see a proper, forensic, takedown of HS2. In fact most of it tends to adhere to the following formula:

"We spend [INFLATED COST ESTIMATE] on [THING I DON'T LIKE]. Let's spend it on [SOMETHING UNOBJECTIONABLE] instead."

Sound familiar?

Ah, yes: Binary choices - the old standby of Hs2 antis. It's normally (but not always) the NHS. I've blogged about that too. https://paulbigland.blog/2017/03/08/spend-hs2-money-on-the-nhs-heres-why-its-financial-illiteracy/

 

[Geezertronic]

Really not sure you can call anything from that blog "analysis". Paul is pro-HS2 and only ever repeats pro-HS2 propaganda. If I get critics for being against the scheme, so should he for only being blindly positive.

Nothing is ever "bad" in his view. That's the stuff of fairytales.

You've obviously not read Paul's Brexit blogs then. if anything Paul points out the obvious flaws that people (like yourself) do not see in the conspiracy theories and fairytales of the Anti-HS2 mob. You are renowned for being anti-HS2 at all costs and not one for reasoned debate on the subject

 

[The Ham]

Ah, yes: Binary choices - the old standby of Hs2 antis. It's normally (but not always) the NHS. I've blogged about that too. https://paulbigland.blog/2017/03/08/spend-hs2-money-on-the-nhs-heres-why-its-financial-illiteracy/

Quite, however the figures are big and so people don't always grasp the impact.

Let's assume that £100bn is the amount spent (which I don't think will be the case, but it just helps with the maths and uses a figure which if people doubt it's because they don't think it works be that much)

If you are paid £25,000 having a one of bonus of £20,000) which you have to spend that year probably isn't going to help much. Even if you opt to buy another car, what happens the next year when you can't afford the insurance and fuel?

This would be like giving the NHS a single lump, yes there's things which it could use it for you still have the problem of are those things which you could afford to run in following years.

Alternitve of you spilt it over a 60 year period (the assessment period for HS2) would result in an extra circa £1.5bn per year. However on the above example it would result in about a £300 per year pay rise for that person on £25,000 a year. Again not really going to make a big difference in what can/can't be done.

 

[The Ham]

The one good thing from the Dispatches program is that those opposed to HS2 can't claim that there's not a need for more rail investment.

 

[6Gman]

Quite, however the figures are big and so people don't always grasp the impact.

Let's assume that £100bn is the amount spent (which I don't think will be the case, but it just helps with the maths and uses a figure which if people doubt it's because they don't think it works be that much)

If you are paid £25,000 having a one of bonus of £20,000) which you have to spend that year probably isn't going to help much. Even if you opt to buy another car, what happens the next year when you can't afford the insurance and fuel?

This would be like giving the NHS a single lump, yes there's things which it could use it for you still have the problem of are those things which you could afford to run in following years.

Alternitve of you spilt it over a 60 year period (the assessment period for HS2) would result in an extra circa £1.5bn per year. However on the above example it would result in about a £300 per year pay rise for that person on £25,000 a year. Again not really going to make a big difference in what can/can't be done.

Indeed.

As I've tried to explain several times on this thread and others, it is important to distinguish capital spending from revenue spending.

My Granny dies and leaves me £5,000. I have three options for spending it:

a) I could spend it renovating my house, installing energy-efficient heating, insulation etc etc
b) I could spend it on buying a new(er) car
c) I could spend it on a holiday, a big party and alcohol.

What are the consequences five years later?

a) I am better off each year because my heating bills are much cheaper
b) The car is worth a lot less than I paid for it
c) I've got nothing to show for it except photographs and memories.

The first is a capital investment with an annual return.
The second is a capital investment, but one which depreciates - eventually to a zero value.
The third is revenue expenditure, which is gone.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

People are opposed to it because it is way overpriced for what it will achieve, it's destroying the landscape as well as homes and businesses, its being built in modern Britain and well no doubt as woefully unreliable as the rest of the network, it really only benefits people living in London and Birmingham and is another shafting to everyone else and finally the money could be better spent else ware on things such as electrification (even though I don't support that either), a Dawlish Avoiding line as well as reopening closed lines.
The journey time reduction is pointless as to me the whole obsession with journey times across the network is a waste of money and time.

Those are my reasons for being dead set against HS2.

 

[Snapper]

Quite, however the figures are big and so people don't always grasp the impact.

Let's assume that £100bn is the amount spent (which I don't think will be the case, but it just helps with the maths and uses a figure which if people doubt it's because they don't think it works be that much)

If you are paid £25,000 having a one of bonus of £20,000) which you have to spend that year probably isn't going to help much. Even if you opt to buy another car, what happens the next year when you can't afford the insurance and fuel?

This would be like giving the NHS a single lump, yes there's things which it could use it for you still have the problem of are those things which you could afford to run in following years.

Alternitve of you spilt it over a 60 year period (the assessment period for HS2) would result in an extra circa £1.5bn per year. However on the above example it would result in about a £300 per year pay rise for that person on £25,000 a year. Again not really going to make a big difference in what can/can't be done.

Indeed. It's a basic economic lesson many don't grasp but both you and '6Gman' obviously do. I ended up blogging about it because it was easier to share the blog than always write yet another riposte to the endless "why not spend Hs2 money on the NHS/Flood defences/Fire Service/Army" - or whatever had triggered them that week.

 

[quantinghome]

People are opposed to it because it is way overpriced for what it will achieve, it's destroying the landscape as well as homes and businesses, its being built in modern Britain and well no doubt as woefully unreliable as the rest of the network, it really only benefits people living in London and Birmingham and is another shafting to everyone else and finally the money could be better spent else ware on things such as electrification (even though I don't support that either), a Dawlish Avoiding line as well as reopening closed lines.
The journey time reduction is pointless as to me the whole obsession with journey times across the network is a waste of money and time.

Those are my reasons for being dead set against HS2.

You could equally apply your logic to any other large infrastructure project that we've built over the last few decades. For example...

HS1 - only benefits people in Kent
M25 - only benefits London
M62 - only benefits Manchester and Leeds
Crossrail - only benefits central London
WCML upgrade - only benefits London and Birmingham
Derby station rebuild - only benefits Derby
A1(M) upgrade - only benefits Newcastle
Manchester Metrolink - only benefits Manchester
Norwich bypass - only benefits Norwich

So none of these should have been built, right?