Infrastructure Project Priorities

[Waverley125]

Crossrail two should, very simply, not happen. Not while there are still pacers in the north, not while so-called 'main lines' between Britain's largest cities run with DMUs than can't average 60mph, not while railway lines desperately needed to serve the inflow of commuters into northern centres remain closed.

Crossrail Two is a vanity project for a city and a people so engorged on the public purse they have no sense of scale, or of the needs of others.

Oh dear, your existing multiple-line tube and electric railway system is slightly overcrowded.

 

[jon0844]

Nevertheless, it almost certainly will happen and as the population of London increases ever more in the next 10-20-30 years, we'll see more expansion too.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Crossrail two should, very simply, not happen. Not while there are still pacers in the north, not while so-called 'main lines' between Britain's largest cities run with DMUs than can't average 60mph, not while railway lines desperately needed to serve the inflow of commuters into northern centres remain closed.

Crossrail Two is a vanity project for a city and a people so engorged on the public purse they have no sense of scale, or of the needs of others.

Oh dear, your existing multiple-line tube and electric railway system is slightly overcrowded.

We should not have a railway network or cars and supermartkets while people starve in Africa and people are slaves around the world. Yet ims ure you use them

Oh you cant go faster then 60mph.

 

[joeykins82]

Ahahaaa. "Slightly overcrowded."

The "multiple tube and electric railway lines" serving London often arrive at the stations they are supposed to serve during the morning peak already at capacity. Not already at seating capacity, at "no-one else can board this service and there still be sufficient space for all passengers to breathe and/or not suffer sexual violation" capacity.

I live by Manor House on the Piccadilly line and routinely have to allow 2-3 trains to pass through before I am able to board. The same then happens again when I try to change to the Victoria Line at Finsbury Park.

Public Transport in London is in some respects a victim of its own success.

Are you suggesting that no-one should be considering what strategic interventions will be required to keep the capital from total gridlock because some committed developments to the public transport in the north have not yet been completed? Last time I checked the TPE northern route was in the process of being electrified...

 

[Waverley125]

wow. You have to wait for 2 or three trains? That's a massive problem when the trains themselves are every 5 minutes. Good gosh, standing on a platform for 15 minutes waiting for a train.

Try coming north. Trains so full you can't get on them, and there's not one for an hour, and it's a dirty, smelly 20-year old bus body bolted to a coal wagon, that, were there a crash, would shatter into a thousand pieces.

As for 'TPE north' being wired. Yes, it is. Which is like saying that because we'll give the starving African kids a drink in a week or two, we can keep drinking our bollinger unaffected.

Neither line between Leeds & Sheffield is electrified, there are no good standard regular commuter services to the five towns, there are almost no urban stations in Leeds, despite gridlock on the roads going into it.

The answer is simple. London has gorged itself at the buffet for a very, very long time. It's time that the London wishlist, which they've become so accustomed to having fulfilled, was put back on the shelf.

Not a single penny, except for necessary maintenance of existing infrastructure, should be spent on transport schemes in London until the north of England has a public transport system worthy of that name.

 

[tbtc]

I've had posts deleted in the past for trying to explain to bitter Northerners that the north/south divide isn't as black and white as they'd like to pretend, so I hope that one of the Mods can split this diversion off into a "Eeeh, lad, it's grim up North" thread (where we can become parodies of Monty Python's Four Yorkshiremen sketch) rather than just deleting this (?).

Quotes like "there are almost no urban stations in Leeds" are a bit silly though.

As someone who's lived in Yorkshire for around twenty years (and used to commute between two Leeds stations each day), I'm all for Crossrail2 - I think that it would give much better value for money than many schemes outside the capital.

Spend the money where it's needed - and a tunnel under London is going to benefit a lot more people than electrifying the railway between Pontefract and Goole, as Waverley125 has championed).

 

[HSTEd]

Spend the money where it's needed - and a tunnel under London is going to benefit a lot more people than electrifying the railway between Pontefract and Goole, as Waverley125 has championed).

Electrify everything!

Then build Shinkansen in all directions.

 

[The Ham]

Mod Note: refers to this thread

Can I just remind users of what was said in the opening of this thread.

Crossrail is not open and the next major project being planned and hotly debated is HS2 and there are many other projects around the country which would provide extra capacity which could be just as worthy, if not more so, of funding. Those subjects all have their own threads for discussion and we needn’t repeat ground which has been gone over again.

Therefore if Crossrail 2 was announced to be going ahead what would you like it to look like and what other linked projects would you like to see to provide the best benefit to the rail network?

Therefore the right or wrongs of investing in London vs investing elsewhere is one of the subjects that does not need to be repeated on this thread. Yes there are those that think that Crossrail 2 should be put on hold until other investment has happened elsewhere and I welcome their thoughts. However I would like the main discussion of the thread not to be sidetracked on it for too long.

 

[Waverley125]

Considering London population is expected to grow by the size of Leeds by time HS2 arrives something along the lines of Crossrail 2 will benefit far more people than most other schemes including the Northern Hub.

So thoses that attack the South East's investment should remember the system is based on benefits so the higher the population the bigger the benefits will be.

I wonder how some would cope with stations being closed in peak as the stations quite simply can't cope with the numbers using it? This happens on a daily basis in London and in no way is the Northern's overcrowding as bad as the South's. if your complaining two car hour services are busy, can you not see the fact that people that are three times longer (like in the example given) yet three times more frequency. So where is the bigger problem? The South with problems with capacity despite having 9 times more capacity in the examples given is clearly going to benefit more. Simple maths shows you that.

Yeah, so as you admit, the problem's self-reinforcing. London has more people, ergo gets more investment, ergo has more people.

Christ, southerners haven't two brain cells to rub together.

Aside from the list of reasons I could give you about why a national economy based solely on London is hugely detrimental, if your problem's overcrowding, I'd suggest a great way of fixing it is getting people to move to/stay in the North. Which could happen if we got our fair share of investment. I'd suggest getting an extra train or two so we could up some frequencies would cost far less than building Crossrail bloody two!

Crossrail cost £16bn. The cost of electrifying the York-Manchester main line is 10% of that. £16bn would transform the public transportation in the north of England.

£16bn could buy us:

-Multiple extensions of Merseyrail, Manchester Metrolink, T&W Metro & a full Trolleybus Network for Greater Leeds

-Electrified Urban rail to serve the commuter belt in all four of those centres

-100mph main lines between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds & Sheffield

I'm not against London getting its fair share of investment. But DfT spending alone (not including Olympic funding & other sources) is 5 times higher per capita in London than elsewhere. Than needs to be balanced out.

£3.2 billion. That you can have, go mental with your £3.2bn. But the other £12.8 than you've been stealing from the rest of the country, we'll have that back thanks very much. There's plenty up our neck of the woods that needs doing to.

 

[The Ham]

Yeah, so as you admit, the problem's self-reinforcing. London has more people, ergo gets more investment, ergo has more people.

Christ, southerners haven't two brain cells to rub together.

Aside from the list of reasons I could give you about why a national economy based solely on London is hugely detrimental, if your problem's overcrowding, I'd suggest a great way of fixing it is getting people to move to/stay in the North. Which could happen if we got our fair share of investment. I'd suggest getting an extra train or two so we could up some frequencies would cost far less than building Crossrail bloody two!

Crossrail cost £16bn. The cost of electrifying the York-Manchester main line is 10% of that. £16bn would transform the public transportation in the north of England.

£16bn could buy us:

-Multiple extensions of Merseyrail, Manchester Metrolink, T&W Metro & a full Trolleybus Network for Greater Leeds

-Electrified Urban rail to serve the commuter belt in all four of those centres

-100mph main lines between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds & Sheffield

I'm not against London getting its fair share of investment. But DfT spending alone (not including Olympic funding & other sources) is 5 times higher per capita in London than elsewhere. Than needs to be balanced out.

£3.2 billion. That you can have, go mental with your £3.2bn. But the other £12.8 than you've been stealing from the rest of the country, we'll have that back thanks very much. There's plenty up our neck of the woods that needs doing to.

The problem is based on how DfT looks at what is good value for money. They look at something like Crossrail, Thameslink, tube upgrades and the like and they can see that there is clearly a market for it, in that the existing system can't cope with the numbers of passengers and there are 10's of thousands of them each day, not just at peak hours but through out the day.

Whilst when they look at other cities and train capacity tends to only be a problem during the peak hours and on services which could be increased in frequency, so they look to the TOC's to sort it out. However the TOC's don't want to invest because it is towards the end of their franchise so everything is put on hold.

Also, some London & South East projects do provide the possibility of benefits elsewhere. For instance there are many that complain that the SW is getting even less investment than the North and that Devon & Cornwall need better train services (as they don't even have a good road network to get to the rest of the country). However without the spending on Reading Station and Crossrail there would be no spare paths for extra trains towards London and without more London bound trains there is little chance that the train services would generate enough passengers and/or income to justify further investment.

 

[DarloRich]

Crossrail two should, very simply, not happen. Not while there are still pacers in the north, not while so-called 'main lines' between Britain's largest cities run with DMUs than can't average 60mph, not while railway lines desperately needed to serve the inflow of commuters into northern centres remain closed.

Crossrail Two is a vanity project for a city and a people so engorged on the public purse they have no sense of scale, or of the needs of others.

Oh dear, your existing multiple-line tube and electric railway system is slightly overcrowded.

Point of order Mr Chairman - The replacement of Pacers is not an Infrastructure project so i move that the debate be curtailed.

 

[D365]

The procurement of DMUs in order to help the cascade process is an infrastructure project? Any fixed plans to replace the Pacers are too? Depends on opinion, I suppose. One of my favourite ideas gives around 40 172s (or similar with updated engines) to SW. The order could also be extend to 3/4 car DMUs for Goblin if required. This would cascade the 158/159 (and 172) fleet to other operators of these, allowing units to move down the Sprinter/Pacer chain. Hopefully, this will be enough to replace Pacers at the bare minimum by 2020.

But anyway, my primary question is whether there exists a measure for congestion/head or delay/head - head being the passengers on a particular route. I imagine the data would be difficult to collect though.

 

[Haydn1971]

Although I'd love to see a 100mph service linking Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield and Nottingham on a 10 minute frequency using brand new four car EMU's, and a lovely 6-8 car range of 70mph EMU's serving the West Yorkshire area, the unfortunate blockage is that first, we don't have the passenger numbers to justify that kind of investment, second, we enjoy the cheapest fares in the country due to cheap trains and big subsidies and last, I'd rather have a few targeted investments to suit my journey to work

So that will be a personalised 140 mph direct service from my house to work - that would be a helicopter then ! Surely we could a lottery of lucky people to get this service for life (removes tongue from cheek)

Back in the real world, I'd like massive free (or at least very cheap) parking facility at Sheffield Station and a 11 car CrossCountry service on a 15 minute service to Leeds - I'd be a happy bunny with that. Alternatively, cheaper and just as peachy for me, for CrossCountry to stop at Meadowhall, where there is free parking.

 

[Waverley125]

it's a project which, as laid out above, needs government investment, of which there is a finite amount.

It's not that projects in the north don't have good CBRs-they do-but they get pushed down the list for ever more investment in London. Look how long it's taken to electrify Manchester-York via Leeds, and they're still haggling about doing Middlesbrough-Northallerton and Hull-Leeds/Doncaster. Both projects have CBRs well above 2.5, yet funding still isn't guaranteed.

 

[tbtc]

Firstly, thanks to whichever Mod set this thread up (and didn't just delete the non-Crossrail posts altogether) as I think that this is an interesting debate (though understandably doesn't belong on the Crossrail thread).

Secondly, rail is suited to mass transportation. Crossrail is going to see something like two hundred coaches an hour in each direction. It'll be pretty busy from day one. Anyone who doesn't see that as a priority for spending is a little too parochial.

Thirdly, rail has to deal with the reality of the UK. Wouldn't it be nice if London wasn't the centre of everything? That's irrelevant - London *is* the centre of everything (aren't something like two thirds of all rail journeys in/to/from London?). You might as well suggest that it'd be nice if we didn't have rush hours or we staggered Christmas so there wasn't one big "rush". We've got to deal with what's in front of us - and a new Trolleybus for Leeds isn't going to be enough to tempt people away from London.

Fourthly, Northern England doesn't need a lot in terms of infrastructure spending beyond electrification. Most lines see trains a lot shorter than the maximum platform length. Just sort out some extra carriages and you solve most of the problems that we have.

Fifthly, trying to even out spending per head of the population is a waste of time when dealing with rail projects. We should judge things on the best cost/benefit ratios. And if that means more spending in London than Sheffield then I can accept that.

 

[D365]

It's a bit difficult to judge with spending/head (population, have I got that right?); although London clearly has the highest across the country, a lot of traffic comes from those living outside who commute.

 

[ntg]

Crossrail two should, very simply, not happen. Not while there are still pacers in the north, not while so-called 'main lines' between Britain's largest cities run with DMUs than can't average 60mph, not while railway lines desperately needed to serve the inflow of commuters into northern centres remain closed.

Crossrail Two is a vanity project for a city and a people so engorged on the public purse they have no sense of scale, or of the needs of others.

Oh dear, your existing multiple-line tube and electric railway system is slightly overcrowded.

All well and good if you can back that up with some numbers, but I think if were were to map of the data of rail investments as a function of population-movement-density the weighting towards London wouldn't be that unfair, as others have implied.

Unfortunately the money goes where the people do, and people go where the money is....

 

[Kettledrum]

Fourthly, Northern England doesn't need a lot in terms of infrastructure spending beyond electrification. Most lines see trains a lot shorter than the maximum platform length. Just sort out some extra carriages and you solve most of the problems that we have..

This is a really good point. Significant improvements to services in some parts of the country could be made with relative modest outlay. Earlier this week I was crammed in a peak time Cross Country service from Birmingham New Street to Nottingham which Cross Country had decided was going to be only 2 coaches.

All these services need to be 5 coaches, but we all know the rolling stock simply isn't there.

In some parts of the country overcrowded one or two coach trains are common-place. Surely these need to be addressed before Crossrail2.

 

[Ironside]

This is a really good point. Significant improvements to services in some parts of the country could be made with relative modest outlay. Earlier this week I was crammed in a peak time Cross Country service from Birmingham New Street to Nottingham which Cross Country had decided was going to be only 2 coaches.

All these services need to be 5 coaches, but we all know the rolling stock simply isn't there.

In some parts of the country overcrowded one or two coach trains are common-place. Surely these need to be addressed before Crossrail2.

Given the lower price fares up north, and therefore lower revenue, surely it makes sence to buy new lower price electric stock as electrification takes place. Until then cascaded stock should move up north as it becomes available.

 

[D365]

Given the lower price fares up north, and therefore lower revenue, surely it makes sence to buy new lower price electric stock as electrification takes place. Until then cascaded stock should move up north as it becomes available.

You get what you pay for? Refurbed 319s, and indeed any other Mk3 EMUs, will be much akin to new-build in terms of quality.

 

[jopsuk]

One of the important things to consider is that much of the capital spending on projects such as Crossrail comes from sources such as s106 money levied on private developments along the route. In London, controversially, this is being stretched already- boroughs not served by Crossrail are having their s106 funds raided.

s106 is used to fund infrastructure. It supposed to help mitigate the impact of the housing/office/retail/etc on things such as transport.

Now, these big developments that raise LOTS of s106 money just don't happen on the same scale in other parts of the country. They happen in London. The money is therefore spent in London. Yes, a significant chunk of central government spending goes into these projects as well, but it is proportional

 

[Class377/5]

Yeah, so as you admit, the problem's self-reinforcing. London has more people, ergo gets more investment, ergo has more people.

Christ, southerners haven't two brain cells to rub together.

Aside from the list of reasons I could give you about why a national economy based solely on London is hugely detrimental, if your problem's overcrowding, I'd suggest a great way of fixing it is getting people to move to/stay in the North. Which could happen if we got our fair share of investment. I'd suggest getting an extra train or two so we could up some frequencies would cost far less than building Crossrail bloody two!

Crossrail cost £16bn. The cost of electrifying the York-Manchester main line is 10% of that. £16bn would transform the public transportation in the north of England.

£16bn could buy us:

-Multiple extensions of Merseyrail, Manchester Metrolink, T&W Metro & a full Trolleybus Network for Greater Leeds

-Electrified Urban rail to serve the commuter belt in all four of those centres

-100mph main lines between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds & Sheffield

I'm not against London getting its fair share of investment. But DfT spending alone (not including Olympic funding & other sources) is 5 times higher per capita in London than elsewhere. Than needs to be balanced out.

£3.2 billion. That you can have, go mental with your £3.2bn. But the other £12.8 than you've been stealing from the rest of the country, we'll have that back thanks very much. There's plenty up our neck of the woods that needs doing to.

I'm going to pick up a point you made in your post, other sources. One thing I've mentioned before now is the lack of investment that business in the north put into infrastructure.

For example Heathrow Airport is giving £200m towards Crossrail. Canary Wharf group is building their station, Berkley homes is building station box.

The north needs to get local business onboard to help lower the cost of works and make it more attractive to the Government. Didn't Manchester Airport give a chunk of money to TfGM for the Metrolink extension to the Airport? More of this is needed.

By the way, it seems your figures don't actually back your own point up. Crossrail is not costing the UK £16bn as the Government is only putting in money for a third of that. Rest is loans taken out by TfL. So your £3.2bn is reduced to £1bn. Not going to get much of your wish list built for that. As for stealing, well guess what, it's not yours. I'm not sure of the figures but if you added what London gives to the GDP then I'm sure your figures will show its money London's added not the rest of the country.

Also note your commenting on it being London gets all the Crossrail benefits. Actually your wrong. Benefits will be spread out far and wide to places like Portsmouth, Hertford, Baskingstoke etc so may you should learn why the projects being built as its solving three problems at once. To do them separately will cost far more.

Also note that your wish to electrify wont happen until after all the major projects. Currently the ability to wire up is going to be at max for the next five years. After then wholesale wiring across major routes north will be likely as the hardware is already there along with skilled labour to do it. Long term savings should justify it as well.

However your comment about brain cells is not very nice nor productive in this debate and just makes you sound bitter.

 

[D365]

I'm going to pick up a point you made in your post...

I couldn't agree more. There may appear to be bias but the increased spending in London can justified - not that I haven't said fully justifiable, it is understood that not everyone will agree. If we all shared the same viewpoint, we wouldn't have any creative solutions to the problems faced today globally. What more can I say? A lot, probably :P

 

[Class377/5]

I couldn't agree more. There may appear to be bias but the increased spending in London can justified - not that I haven't said fully justifiable, it is understood that not everyone will agree. If we all shared the same viewpoint, we wouldn't have any creative solutions to the problems faced today globally. What more can I say? A lot, probably :P

And here's my post in Crossrail 2 thread that further the point....

That's the basic argument from HS2 Ltd - it's overall passenger growth, not HS2, that is likely to justify Crossrail 2.

See Question 7 of the written answers to the TSC

Chris

I'm quoting here what it says about Crossrail 2

7. We were told by TfL that they were worried about capacity at Euston to handle and disperse the passenger flows generated by the combination of HS2 and existing routes. They told us that Crossrail 2 would need to be in operation before the opening of HS2 to handle demand. We have also received representations about the disruptive impact of the Euston HS2 works on the existing train service into Euston. Can you comment on these issues?
HS2 would increase the numbers of national rail passengers using both the mainline and Underground stations at Euston. As well as rebuilding the mainline station improvements to the Underground station would also be made, including a new direct link to Euston Square. These works would be expected to deal with crowding issues in the Underground station.

In terms of crowding on the underground trains, our analysis indicates that the extra number of Underground passengers at Euston due to HS2 would be small compared with the overall numbers already using the Underground. Whilst high quality public transport access and dispersal at all HS2 stations would undoubtedly be desirable to maximize the benefits of the new line, HS2 Ltd is not in a position to comment on the value for money of particular schemes.
Even without HS2, the number of national rail passengers arriving or departing Euston will grow by 100% by 2043 resulting in around 8,700 additional passengers using the Underground station during the morning peak. The average loading of all London Underground services travelling through Euston Underground in the 3 hour AM peak period is currently 138% and is expected to increase to 185% in 2043 without HS2. Both the Northern and Victoria lines which stop at Euston are likely to be particularly heavily crowded.
By 2043, HS2 Ltd estimates some 5,500 additional rail passengers would use Euston Underground Station in the morning peak as result of HS2 Phase 1 – but this is equivalent to an increase in the total number of passengers travelling on London Underground services passing through Euston of just 2%. As a result of HS2 Phase 1 we estimate only a small additional increase in crowding on LUL services at Euston from 185% to 191%.

Accordingly, any requirement for additional underground capacity would be predominantly triggered by general growth, not the effect of HS2. We believe that the same conclusion holds, in principle, for the wider Y network which would further increase demand at Euston but may also limit demand growth at Kings Cross St Pancras as passengers transfer to high speed services from the ECML and MML. We have not, however, analysed these numbers in equivalent detail, as we have yet to finish our work on developing the route and business case for links to Manchester and Leeds. HS2 Ltd will be working with TfL on the impacts at Euston as the Manchester and Leeds work is finalised, and is ready to provide any necessary input to TfL’s wider ongoing strategy for modernising and improving Underground services should a decision be taken to proceed with HS2.

So overcrowding at 185% by 2043 without HS2 shows the extend of the overcrowding. Crossrail two should help reduce those numbers while also solving capacity problems on the current SWT & GA franchises by running 12 car mainline sized trains.

And what Northern and Transpennie Express' expected over crowding levels by 2043 post the Northern Hub and electrification? Are they really higher than 200%?

The north's capacity can easily b increased to an 8 car peak railway and 4 car off peak if its that needed however those that have spoken before in many thread simple believe it should be a 6/3 railway as there's not the demand currently.

BTW folks the OP poster seems to be trolling as he's done a post about why South London needs a new Tube line yet has been out spoken in this thread. Think he needs to make his mind up then comment.

[Fantasy] A new tube line for South London
thinking about the congestion in south London, with the mix of both fast and slow passenger services into the centre, is it time to convert much of the south london suburban rail network to tube operation?

In addition to a few ideas I've seen proposed:

-Extending the Northern line from Kennington to Clapham Junction via Battersea

-Extending the Northern line from Morden to Sutton

-Extending the Bakerloo line from Elephant & Castle to Hayes via Camberwell and Lewisham

I'd like to suggest a few ideas of my own.


The first, main section of tunnelling would occur along the south bank of the Thames, and would run from South Bermondsey to Clapham Junction via St Johns, New Cross, Bermondsey, London Bridge, Blackfriars, Waterloo, Vauxhall & Queenstown Road.

Beyond here, there would be two branches of lines, taking over the slow lines, and all stations on existing surface lines

EAST

South Bermondsey-Dartford via Greenwich
South Bermondsey-Thamesmead via Lewisham & Blackheath South
South Bermondsey-Dartford via Lewisham & Bexleyheath

WEST

Clapham Junction-Sutton via Balham, Tooting and Wimbledon
Clapham Junction-Epsom via Mitcham Junction
Claphan Junction-Epsom Down via West Croydon
Clapham Junction-East Croydon

Also, the SLL to be extended from Peckham Rye to East Croydon via Dulwich

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=77317

 

[RichmondCommu]

Crossrail two should, very simply, not happen. Not while there are still pacers in the north, not while so-called 'main lines' between Britain's largest cities run with DMUs than can't average 60mph, not while railway lines desperately needed to serve the inflow of commuters into northern centres remain closed.

Crossrail Two is a vanity project for a city and a people so engorged on the public purse they have no sense of scale, or of the needs of others.

Oh dear, your existing multiple-line tube and electric railway system is slightly overcrowded.

Irrespective of the fact that London drives the rest of the economy? For all those towns in the North that rely on public sector jobs; where do you think the money comes from? That’s right the private sector in the South East.

Yes I would agree that the North requires much needed investment but please remember the vital role that London plays in the wider economy.

 

[Waverley125]

As someone weirdly agrees, the north needs is some electrification and new carriages, at relatively low expense.

Yes, but we can't get that money because it's being hoovered up into things like Crossrail. NGT in Leeds might get cancelled for want of £76m from the DfT, despite having a CBR of 3.86. £76m is 0.5% of the Crossrail budget.

While it is true than individually, Crossrail has a higher CBR, that's inaccurately measured against other individual projects. The real comparison that needs to be done is Crossrail 2, on its own, against a £16bn package of improvements for the rest of the country.

Yes, new carriages & wiring would be nice, but there are also some other pretty substantial projects could do with being done (just from West Yorks)

1. Re-quadrupling Dewsbury-Diggle, including station re-openings & openings along the line to increase capacity sufficiently for 6tph Leeds-Manchester and half-hourly Leeds-Huddersfield & Huddersfield-Manchester stopping services.

2. Bradford Crossrail, linking the Airedale & Wharfedale and Caldervale lines, as well as re-opening Low Moor-Thornhill Lees, to provide direct through services from Sheffield & Wakefield to the Spen towns & Bradford

3. Massive station & line re-opening programme across Greater Leeds

4. Leeds city centre improvements-huge concourse upgrade of Leeds City station, plus quadrupling of the Viaduct through Leeds City Centre, and a new station at Marsh Lane.

5. Building of Leeds Tbus not only within Leeds, but connecting out to Bradford & Wakefield to alleviate existing highly congested bus routes.


In addition to this one area, there's a list the length of your arm for expansions to Merseyrail, the T&W, the Metrolink & Midland Metro. We can't get them, because the entire budget is being taken up by Crossrail.

Those projects, taken together, along with a relaxation of planning laws in the North, would facilitate a massive rebalancing away from London that would have hugely beneficial effects.

 

[tbtc]

As someone weirdly agrees, the north needs is some electrification and new carriages, at relatively low expense.

Yes, but we can't get that money

By the end of the decade we are going to see hundreds of miles of electrification in "the north". Leeds to Newcastle will be wholly wired. Blackpool - Manchester. Liverpool - Wigan...

...and that's as well as the Ordsall Chord and other infrastructure improvements (Todmorden, Dore...). So I don't know where you get the "we can't get any money for infrastructure" argument from.

The real comparison that needs to be done is Crossrail 2, on its own, against a £16bn package of improvements for the rest of the country

Crossrail isn't costing Westminster £16bn - as Class377/5 points out much of the cost is coming from taxes imposed on London's private sector - so £16bn seems an odd benchmark.

2. Bradford Crossrail, linking the Airedale & Wharfedale and Caldervale lines, as well as re-opening Low Moor-Thornhill Lees

I could buy into your argument a lot better if you had better examples of where to spend any hypothetical £16bn in these parts. Bradford Crossrail? What demand is there to get from Ilkley to Halifax? Keighley to Huddersfield? Fairly marginal stuff. And would come at the cost of knocking down what's left of Bradford City Centre.

London Crossrail > Bradford Crossrail.

 

[Waverley125]

Also, your argument is just plain weird...If London's so damn good at raising money, why does it need any public money at all?

Shockingly, we can also raise public money. It's the public subsidy needed to make up costs-such as the £76m out of £250m for Leeds NGT that gets endangered.

As for the paltry list of 'improvements' you show, yes, we've had some. Which are nothing less than partially undoing some of the horrific atrophying of public Transport in the north.

We're coming off of a standing start, when hundreds of miles of urban railway that are now badly needed have been closed. Electrification is a start, but it's by no means all we need. Sheffield-Manchester wiring? How about the Caldervale line, which links Bradford, Halifax, Huddersfield, Burnley, Rochdale & Manchester? How about capacity & speed enhancements on Huddersfield-Leeds so that we can do a 40 mile journey in less than an hour?

 

[AndyLandy]

I spend a modest amount of time travelling in Cheshire and in Tyne & Wear. I've commented on Northern's stock being dirty, but by and large, most of the services I've used have been perfectly adequate. It rare that I don't get a seat on the Mid Cheshire service. Conversely, I also spend a modest amount of time in London and it's clear that more capacity is always going to be needed.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see some improvements in the North. In particular, personally, it would suit me greatly if the Mid Cheshire line was 2tph with better condition trains and faster journey times, but I sincerely doubt the business case is there for it, certainly off-peak.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Care to run the benefits of Bradford Crossrail past us then Waverley125, with relevant evidence? Also, how do you plan to make your hundreds of miles of reopenings in Yorkshire alone and dozens upon dozens of new stations financially viable - how do you know, should trolleybuses also be reintroduced, that you'll get an even split across the two modes, without one monopolising the other? As has been pointed out above, London Xrail 2 has a proven need, helping with HS2's distribution of flows in London being one of them. As tbtc has pointed out, the North has quite a lot going for it, I believe proposals to reconnect Skelmersdale to the network are also being looked at in depth. Don't forget Nottingham tram extensions too.