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

[PR1Berske]

Yes, it gives more trains between MK etc. and Euston *and* faster, higher capacity trains to the north. Why is that a bad thing?

Because it's not true?

 

[Ianno87]

Because it's not true?

Please explain how what I said is not true?

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

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because it's not true?

Evidence?

 

[PR1Berske]

Evidence?

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.

 

[doa46231]

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.

The M4 doesn't improve anything 'up there' Were you against that?
There seems to be an impression among some people that money saved by not building HS2 will be spent on other rail schemes.
It wont. It will go into the general coffers to be used on the NHS or schools or roads or to lower taxes.
Cancelling it will be a net loss to rail transport in the UK.
The idea that every worthwhile infrastructure scheme has to benefit every part of the Country is nonsense.
How will the Trans Pennine upgrade help me in Milton Keynes. Would I be right in saying therefore it should be scrapped?

 

[kylemore]

There seems to be an impression among some people that money saved by not building HS2 will be spent on other rail schemes.
It wont. It will go into the general coffers to be used on the NHS or schools or roads or to lower taxes.

You hit the nail on the head there!
The former (NHS and schools) if Corbyn and McDonnell manage to get in and the latter (Roads and lower taxes) if the Tories manage to hang on and the Brexiteer right take over from May.
Either way looking chancy for HS2 in 2019!

 

[sprunt]

We've gone through this numerous times.

We have. Yet you still haven't presented your re-planned timetable to show the more efficient use that can be made of the existing WCML infrastructure to provide a capactity increase over and above the capacity that the people who plan timetables for a living can provide. Why not?

 

[PR1Berske]

We have. Yet you still haven't presented your re-planned timetable to show the more efficient use that can be made of the existing WCML infrastructure to provide a capactity increase over and above the capacity that the people who plan timetables for a living can provide. Why not?

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.

 

[The Planner]

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.

 

[PR1Berske]

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.

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.

 

[Clip]

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 do believe you have though

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.

So I say get to work on the timetable and show us how you will get these 'flexible' timetables to work.

 

[jfowkes]

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.

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.

And that remains your view despite several people, some of them in the industry, some of those actual planners, telling you that those changes won't result in significant extra capacity on the WCML and/or are not practical to implement.

What specifically makes you continue to hold your view?

 

[PR1Berske]

And that remains your view despite several people, some of them in the industry, some of those actual planners, telling you that those changes won't result in significant extra capacity on the WCML and/or are not practical to implement.

What specifically makes you continue to hold your view?

I cannot believe, at all, that the only solution is a 30bn, 40bn, 60bn, TBDbn experiment where a new railway is built to Birmingham. Just cannot believe that is the solution. As others have said on this thread, it smacks of politicians getting hard over something they can hang their name to. It doesn't solve the specific problems of congestion in Manchester, it doesn't solve congestion in Wales, it doesn't solve congestion in Scotland. It only helps the railway establishment in London with dubious claims of passenger numbers nobody has proven.

We have to look at what we can afford. Use other London terminal stations, rejig the timetable, fix the WCML where it matters. Do anything to stop spending so much money on HS2.

 

[Bletchleyite]

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.

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.

What railway anywhere in the world doesnt have a timetable?

 

[gallafent]

Use other London terminal stations

Which ones?

rejig the timetable

In what way?

fix the WCML where it matters

Where is that?

 

[PR1Berske]

Which ones?



In what way?



Where is that?

I don't know. Let's all use our imaginations. Let's use money more responsibly.

I love your reply though. People who support HS2 are allowed to say "Spend £60bn on a new railway into Euston and all ills will be fixed " Those of us who oppose the thing are forced to answer every last detail and produce watertight alternatives.

Why don't you who support HS2 detail why the scheme costs so much? Why there are almost no intermediate stations? Why does it not start being built in the North? Why can't we remove services from the existing timetable to free up space?

You lot want to justify why you want to spend the money on this gamble. I shouldn't have to face 20 questions because I happen to think that it's not just a white elephant, it's an entire enclosure of white elephants.

 

[kylemore]

I cannot believe, at all, that the only solution is a 30bn, 40bn, 60bn, TBDbn experiment where a new railway is built to Birmingham. Just cannot believe that is the solution. As others have said on this thread, it smacks of politicians getting hard over something they can hang their name to. It doesn't solve the specific problems of congestion in Manchester, it doesn't solve congestion in Wales, it doesn't solve congestion in Scotland. It only helps the railway establishment in London with dubious claims of passenger numbers nobody has proven.

We have to look at what we can afford. Use other London terminal stations, rejig the timetable, fix the WCML where it matters. Do anything to stop spending so much money on HS2.

I think you're going to get your way - there's a head of steam building (pardon the pun) and I've now revised my estimate of HS2 surviving the year from 50/50 to 60/40 (against). Looking forward to C4's "Dispatches" tonight.

 

[Esker-pades]

I've never used those words or that expression.

So this wasn't you?

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

 

[kylemore]

I don't know. Let's all use our imaginations. Let's use money more responsibly.

I love your reply though. People who support HS2 are allowed to say "Spend £60bn on a new railway into Euston and all ills will be fixed " Those of us who oppose the thing are forced to answer every last detail and produce watertight alternatives.

Why don't you who support HS2 detail why the scheme costs so much? Why there are almost no intermediate stations? Why does it not start being built in the North? Why can't we remove services from the existing timetable to free up space?

You lot want to justify why you want to spend the money on this gamble. I shouldn't have to face 20 questions because I happen to think that it's not just a white elephant, it's an entire enclosure of white elephants.

A herd of rampaging white elephants even!

 

[PR1Berske]

So this wasn't you?

Oh so that one line is extrapolated to mean "I hate all planners". Not what I wrote, is it?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

More hostile press for HS2 today in the Mail (sorry, but it's quite influential, as Brexit shows).
A Cabinet revolt is brewing it says (there are certainly anti-HS2 ministers there).
Channel 4 Dispatches will cover the scene tonight, apparently ("HS2 - The Great Train Robbery", 2000).

Tonight’s investigation, for Channel 4’s Dispatches programme, claims that although published national accounts show HS2 will rise to an average cost of £4.2billion a year over the next ten years, ministers have secretly allocated up to £6billion a year.
This would bring the outlay to £64billion – £8billion more than budgeted currently and almost twice the initial budget of £33billion set in 2011. The senior Cabinet source tells the programme ministers are now ‘increasingly minded to kill off’ plans for the line and ‘put the money into upgrading services used by millions of voters every day’

Depressing.
Apparently Andrew Adonis wants it scrapped too, despite having kicked the project off in the first place.

 

[jfowkes]

I cannot believe, at all, that the only solution is a 30bn, 40bn, 60bn, TBDbn experiment where a new railway is built to Birmingham. Just cannot believe that is the solution. As others have said on this thread, it smacks of politicians getting hard over something they can hang their name to. It doesn't solve the specific problems of congestion in Manchester, it doesn't solve congestion in Wales, it doesn't solve congestion in Scotland. It only helps the railway establishment in London with dubious claims of passenger numbers nobody has proven.

We have to look at what we can afford. Use other London terminal stations, rejig the timetable, fix the WCML where it matters. Do anything to stop spending so much money on HS2.

This is a bit of a logical fallacy. Your criticisms of the HS2 project, whether they are right or wrong, does not validate your criticism of WCML timetable planning. Even if HS2 solved nothing on the WCML, that wouldn't mean that your proposed solutions will work.

 

[anme]

I cannot believe, at all, that the only solution is a 30bn, 40bn, 60bn, TBDbn experiment where a new railway is built to Birmingham. Just cannot believe that is the solution. As others have said on this thread, it smacks of politicians getting hard over something they can hang their name to. It doesn't solve the specific problems of congestion in Manchester, it doesn't solve congestion in Wales, it doesn't solve congestion in Scotland. It only helps the railway establishment in London with dubious claims of passenger numbers nobody has proven.

We have to look at what we can afford. Use other London terminal stations, rejig the timetable, fix the WCML where it matters. Do anything to stop spending so much money on HS2.

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.

 

[camflyer]

I don't know. Let's all use our imaginations. Let's use money more responsibly.

I love your reply though. People who support HS2 are allowed to say "Spend £60bn on a new railway into Euston and all ills will be fixed " Those of us who oppose the thing are forced to answer every last detail and produce watertight alternatives.

Why don't you who support HS2 detail why the scheme costs so much? Why there are almost no intermediate stations? Why does it not start being built in the North? Why can't we remove services from the existing timetable to free up space?

You lot want to justify why you want to spend the money on this gamble. I shouldn't have to face 20 questions because I happen to think that it's not just a white elephant, it's an entire enclosure of white elephants.

One of the main reasons that it is costing so much is that there is a lot of tunnelling through marginal constituencies involved to keep local politicians happy. It would have been far cheaper to do it all above ground - a given passengers a nicer view. A limited number of intermediate station is the whole point of a High Speed rail link but I suppose other stations could be added later.

Personally, I always thought that it would be a good idea to start the construction in the north and then head south but it just shows what a London-centric country we are.

Which services would you remove from the existing timetable to "free up" space?

 

[Esker-pades]

Oh so that one line is extrapolated to mean "I hate all planners". Not what I wrote, is it?

@The Planner said that you

• Criticised timetablers for not doing a good enough job
• Had not provided a plan of your own

In response to the 2nd point, I showed you evidence that you had offered to provide a timetable that worked (but you have not done it).

And, as evidence that you are criticising the timetablers for not doing a good enough job, see this exchange:

So all the timetablers at Network Rail have got the WCML wrong and you've got it right? And yet whenever you're challenged it becomes "flexible timetables", "technology" which don't mean anything. If you can actually produce a timetable which works and includes all the additional services that HS2 will allow, then please do so. Otherwise....

Short answer, yes. Otherwise they would have found a solution instead of having to build a multi million line from Euston to Birmingham with no intermediate stops.

 

[sprunt]

Oh so that one line is extrapolated to mean "I hate all planners". Not what I wrote, is it?

What you have written, repeatedly, demonstrates that you believe the current timetable uses the available capcity on the WCML sub-optimally. Why is it so unreasonable to ask you to substantiate that even slightly, with something more than "use our imaginations"?

 

[swaldman]

This whole thing sounds like a certain other debate going on in this country. "I don't like your solution. It can't be the best, I just know it. You must find a better solution. No, I don't have any ideas for what it should be."

 

[camflyer]

This whole thing sounds like a certain other debate going on in this country. "I don't like your solution. It can't be the best, I just know it. You must find a better solution. No, I don't have any ideas for what it should be."

Once upon a time people who think they know better than anyone else were just banished to the Crazy Corner of the local pub. Now they have an audience of millions on the internet.

 

[PR1Berske]

What you have written, repeatedly, demonstrates that you believe the current timetable uses the available capcity on the WCML sub-optimally. Why is it so unreasonable to ask you to substantiate that even slightly, with something more than "use our imaginations"?

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.

 

[doa46231]

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!