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

Polarbear · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
I think even Chris Grayling knows the cost will be vastly more than the current budget.

Hence there is no business case and we are left watching the government waste more of our money each day until someone finally puts this poor dog down.

But that is not the answer to my question. You state "I think even Chris Grayling knows the cost will be vastly more than the current budget". That may or may not be the case, but until the cost is revised, that's the official cost of the project.

I will say it again, If you are so confident that all the experts, politicians, engineers, designers, etc. have got it so wrong, you should present your costed, detailed plans to the SOS for transport as soon as you can.

With the greatest of respect, the purpose of this thread is to discuss reasons for people not wanting HS2. You have put forward many alternatives, none of which appear to be thought through or costed. When other posters put their arguments in defence of HS2 to you, you reject them out of hand, without much respect for their views and certainly no hard evidence .

The forum is, I would venture to say, a gathering of rail enthusiasts, quite a few of whom work for, or have worked for the industry. If you feel so strongly that those in charge have made the wrong decisions regarding HS2, you may be better off protesting to your MP.

RailUK Forums

jayah · 18 May 2019

Polarbear said:
But that is not the answer to my question. You state "I think even Chris Grayling knows the cost will be vastly more than the current budget". That may or may not be the case, but until the cost is revised, that's the official cost of the project.

I will say it again, If you are so confident that all the experts, politicians, engineers, designers, etc. have got it so wrong, you should present your costed, detailed plans to the SOS for transport as soon as you can.

With the greatest of respect, the purpose of this thread is to discuss reasons for people not wanting HS2. You have put forward many alternatives, none of which appear to be thought through or costed. When other posters put their arguments in defence of HS2 to you, you reject them out of hand, without much respect for their views and certainly no hard evidence .

The forum is, I would venture to say, a gathering of rail enthusiasts, quite a few of whom work for, or have worked for the industry. If you feel so strongly that those in charge have made the wrong decisions regarding HS2, you may be better off protesting to your MP.

Groundhog day isn't it?

Not that long ago, Crossrail was about 3 months from opening in December 2018, on time and on budget. Except it wasn't, everyone was just waiting for the right moment to tell us.

MarkyT · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
If they encountered challenges in design just getting to Meadowhall, wait until they get a spade in the ground.

The whole point of detailed design development is to reduce risk and avoid cost overruns. You bandy around figures off the top of our head while countless professionals actually beaver away refining the scheme and its estimates, taking out uncertainties. I know who I believe.

jayah · 18 May 2019

MarkyT said:
The whole point of detailed design development is to reduce risk and avoid cost overruns. You bandy around figures off the top of our head while countless professionals actually beaver away refining the scheme and its estimates, taking out uncertainties. I know who I believe.

I am afraid the fact Crossrail was 3 months from opening before announcing a 2 year delay, proves beyond any measure of doubt that even if these people know the true cost and time, they cannot be trusted to tell the rest of us.

jayah · 18 May 2019

MarkyT said:
The whole point of detailed design development is to reduce risk and avoid cost overruns. You bandy around figures off the top of our head while countless professionals actually beaver away refining the scheme and its estimates, taking out uncertainties. I know who I believe.

Except that all of these schemes in recent history have encountered massive cost and time overruns.

MarkyT · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
Groundhog day isn't it?

Not that long ago, Crossrail was about 3 months from opening in December 2018, on time and on budget. Except it wasn't, everyone was just waiting for the right moment to tell us.

No one is denying that Crossrail is in trouble, but what's the worst case overspend to completion? 10% perhaps? While that's a ongoing nightmare for people running the project it is not yet an unmitigated disaster, and still promises a step change in East- West connectivity across London once open. Crossrail is also a very complex project with all it's stations being built and fitted out under the UKs largest city. As I said earlier HS2 has deliberately eschewed major underground station construction. Paradoxically, some criticising the scheme suggest it would be much better if it had deep underground through stations in the cities it serves even though that would add significantly to cost and risk.

EM2 · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
Except that all of these schemes in recent history have encountered massive cost and time overruns.

Again, HS1 was on time and on budget.

jayah · 18 May 2019

MarkyT said:
No one is denying that Crossrail is in trouble, but what's the worst case overspend to completion? 10% perhaps? While that's a ongoing nightmare for people running the project it is not yet an unmitigated disaster, and still promises a step change in East- West connectivity across London once open. Crossrail is also a very complex project with all it's stations being built and fitted out under the UKs largest city. As I said earlier HS2 has deliberately eschewed major underground station construction. Paradoxically, some criticising the scheme suggest it would be much better if it had deep underground through stations in the cities it serves even though that would add significantly to cost and risk.

£3bn on £15bn isn't 10%.

It is clear putting HS2 alongside Crossrail that the £55.6bn quoted budget is a complete work of fiction.

Polarbear · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
Groundhog day isn't it?

Not that long ago, Crossrail was about 3 months from opening in December 2018, on time and on budget. Except it wasn't, everyone was just waiting for the right moment to tell us.

Again, you won't respond to basic questions that are put to you when challenged.

MarkyT · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
I am afraid the fact Crossrail was 3 months from opening before announcing a 2 year delay, proves beyond any measure of doubt that even if these people know the true cost and time, they cannot be trusted to tell the rest of us.

I don't think it was the scheme planners that were dishonest, but rather the delivery contractors and construction managers who have been institutionally and commercially incentivised to present an overly optimistic perspective in the face of problems encountered. Lessons can and must be learned otherwise the UK might as well just give up building anything big and new.

EM2 · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
Anyone with experience in major UK rail transport infrastructure projects in the past 20 years has probably ruled themselves out of having a valid opinion either.

Except for the ones on this thread (that doesn't include me).

EM2 · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
It is clear putting HS2 alongside Crossrail that the £55.6bn quoted budget is a complete work of fiction.

Evidence?

Esker-pades · 18 May 2019

@jayah - I offer again. Rather than just spewing out random words, show us on a map where the additional tracks can go.

Show us where the freight trains can go.

Show us how to suddenly create loads more paths on the Stockport to Manchester throat.

You can say whatever words you like, but if you can't provide evidence to back up your words, they are utterly, utterly pointless.

Bletchleyite · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
The cost benefit for HS2 is nonsense. The primary benefit of the line is the time saved by those using it

No, it isn't, once again.

The primary benefit is effectively to 6-track the south WCML due to a lack of capacity (that those two extra tracks are nowhere near the other 4 is irrelevant, as there is no intention to stop trains on those two tracks south of Birmingham anyway). The primary benefit of this is twofold - make existing services more punctual and reliable by adding resilience, and releasing a number of paths on the south WCML itself to add more local and regional services[1]. That it makes journeys to Birmingham and points north a bit quicker is a side benefit. Without the primary benefit, there is no way it would even be being considered.

[1] A very large part of which is to serve MK's long distance and commuter market - a town that is most probably going to have a population of well over half a million if not more by the time it has finished - and a very middle-class population, too, so a prime market for InterCity rail.

Bletchleyite · 18 May 2019

MarkyT said:
I don't think it was the scheme planners that were dishonest, but rather the delivery contractors and construction managers who have been institutionally and commercially incentivised to present an overly optimistic perspective in the face of problems encountered. Lessons can and must be learned otherwise the UK might as well just give up building anything big and new.

The problem is fundamentally caused by lowest-cost tendering which doesn't adequately take into account deliverability.

Bald Rick · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
£3bn on £15bn isn't 10%.

It is clear putting HS2 alongside Crossrail that the £55.6bn quoted budget is a complete work of fiction.

It’s £1.4bn on £15bn.

6Gman · 18 May 2019

Peter Kelford said:
Trains can be run at up to 20 coaches like elsewhere.

How many stations have the capacity to handle 20 coach trains?

Where is this "elsewhere"?

Bald Rick · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
More tracks on the WCML will not be more expensive per mile than HS2 tunnelling from Ruislip to London.

The reason it’s tunnelled is that it’s cheaper than building on the surface through residential North West London. I know the people who did this piece of work. The same applies alongside the WCML. To get a extra 2 tracks alongside the WCML from London to anywhere you care to mention inside the London Metropolitan area will be cheaper in tunnel than on the surface. Therefore, I’m afraid, you’re wrong.

jayah said:
Most freight on the southern WCML does not need to be there as alternative routes exist from Felixstowe to the North. What freight there is does not need to run in the peaks.

There are over 50 freight paths each way every day on the WCML between Wembley and MK. Fewer than a third of them are to or from Felixstowe. Some of those are going to or from Daventry and therefore must use the WCML. The majority of the freight is to/from various locations in and around London and the South East. In any event, the cross country routes from Felixstowe and Southampton to the Midlands and north west are also at capacity, and plans to provide more capacity are very, very expensive. ‘Most’ freight (ie more than half) therefore does need to use the WCML. Therefore I’m afraid you’re wrong on this count too.

jayah said:
The DC line detours around Watford and Willesden need to be removed. Diverting the Met or Chiltern from Moor Park to Watford High Street and removing the existing Watford Met line is an option worth considering.

How would you do these detours, particularly without disadvantaging the people who use the stations on them? How would diverting the Met to Watford (which was proposed, but is not now happening) reduce demand on the WCML. (I’ll answer that one for you. It wouldn’t, the studies showed that)

jayah said:
The Bakerloo line needs to lift the traffic south of Wembley and be removed from the DC lines

How can it do both of these ? I don’t understand. If it is taking traffic south of Wembley it needs to be on the D.C. lines. If it is removed from the D.C. lines then you are building new tunnels through North West London, and we are back to point one.

Bald Rick · 18 May 2019

6Gman said:
How many stations have the capacity to handle 20 coach trains?

Where is this "elsewhere"?

I asked that 4 hours ago, and answer there came none.

Bletchleyite · 18 May 2019

Bald Rick said:
How would you do these detours, particularly without disadvantbing the people who use the stations on them? How would diverting the Met to Watford (which was proposed, but is not now happening) reduce demand on the WCML. (I’ll answer that one for you. It wouldn’t, the studies showed that)

Indeed it wouldn't. Who's going to take a one hour journey when you can take a 20 minute one?

Bald Rick · 18 May 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Indeed it wouldn't. Who's going to take a one hour journey when you can take a 20 minute one?

It depends where you’re going, obviously. All those passengers* going MK to Finchley Road daily might choose changing at Watford rather than Euston. But they might not.

* both of them

The Ham · 18 May 2019

Bald Rick said:
I asked that 4 hours ago, and answer there came none.

I can tell you that longer than 12 coach trains certainly wouldn't fit anywhere on the SWR network, as (IIRC) it was considered on one of the early Wessex Route Strategies and showed that it would result in less trains being able to run (even if you had the longer platforms) which results in a lower capacity railway.

Bletchleyite · 18 May 2019

Bald Rick said:
It depends where you’re going, obviously. All those passengers* going MK to Finchley Road daily might choose changing at Watford rather than Euston. But they might not.

* both of them

The NLL and DC line are *so* slow that I've never found this a sensible way to travel - via London is generally much quicker. The closest I've got to it is that if you're going Bletchley (not MKC) to somewhere out of Paddington or Marylebone at some times of day it's quicker (using official connection times) to take the Southern to Wembley Central and change to the Bakerloo.

Sceptre · 18 May 2019

Bald Rick said:
It’s £1.4bn on £15bn.

Though if we did Crossrail's accounting in the same way HS2's accounting has been done, Crossrail would be around £20bn and change; the Crossrail headline cost doesn't includes the 345s, but the HS2 headline cost includes rolling stock.

Bald Rick · 18 May 2019

Sceptre said:
Though if we did Crossrail's accounting in the same way HS2's accounting has been done, Crossrail would be around £20bn and change; the Crossrail headline cost doesn't includes the 345s, but the HS2 headline cost includes rolling stock.

And not forgetting that the price for Crossrail when it was at the same stage as HS2 is now was over £16bn.

MarkLong · 18 May 2019

jayah said:
£3bn on £15bn isn't 10%.

It is clear putting HS2 alongside Crossrail that the £55.6bn quoted budget is a complete work of fiction.

Even 20% of overspending is not acceptable? Again, from a foreigner perspective, no Chinese HSR schema can be finished with only 20% of overbudget (if so, the ppl who take charge of this project will be promoted very fast). But come on, we built thousands of miles already.

danorak · 19 May 2019

This thread is a very useful resource in demonstrating why HS2 is the only game in town. None of the alternatives outlined here seem to have any basis in rationality whatsoever.

jayah · 19 May 2019

MarkLong said:
Even 20% of overspending is not acceptable? Again, from a foreigner perspective, no Chinese HSR schema can be finished with only 20% of overbudget (if so, the ppl who take charge of this project will be promoted very fast). But come on, we built thousands of miles already.

The OP was factually inaccurate.

jayah · 19 May 2019

danorak said:
This thread is a very useful resource in demonstrating why HS2 is the only game in town. None of the alternatives outlined here seem to have any basis in rationality whatsoever.

Diverting freight from Felixstowe to Trafford via Bury St Edmunds and running longer trains on WCML, WCML and MML have no basis in rationality whatsoever.

Really?

jayah · 19 May 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Indeed it wouldn't. Who's going to take a one hour journey when you can take a 20 minute one?

The current detour via Watford High Street slows the DC lines considerably. The WCML needs to be a viable 6 track railway. The Met line can take over High Street enabling the 6 lines to run alongside the FL/SL.

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

Established Member

RailUK Forums

On Moderation

Established Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

On Moderation