HS2

[securespark]

Leg to Manchester could be scrapped.

Meanwhile, Labour refuse to commit to finishing it in full.

HS2 Manchester leg could be scrapped

HS2’s Manchester leg could be scrapped under cost-saving measures being considered by the government, a report has revealed

www.architectsjournal.co.uk

Labour refuses to commit to finishing HS2 rail project in full

Doubts raised as Labour rail architect Andrew Adonis says scrapping Phase 2 would be ‘utter stupidity’

www.independent.co.uk

 

[algas]

What a white elephant, even my daughter who is an engineer with NR admits its a load of b####x but they are financially too far down the line (sorry for the pun) to scrap it completely

 

[Brigadier]

I regularly drive past the scorched-earth-and-concrete outside of Lichfield.

If they pull the plug on the Northern section, that lot will be reclaimed by nature within five years.
Billions wasted.
Not that I didn't think the whole thing was a vanity project to start with.

 

[Justin Passing]

I know 8u88er all about trains, or what goes on up north.
But I do know that when using the things abroad eg France at 200mph, I do wonder why the hell we can't have some like that.
We can't make much of anything now, but trains were something we were good at.
Scrapping it seems just wrong.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Scrapping it seems just wrong.

After investing so much money in it, certainly. The north loses out again.

 

[gant]

Not that I didn't think the whole thing was a vanity project to start with.

Think its origins lie with some eu ruling that every state should have a high speed mainline.
High speed, capable of going over 151 mph.

 

[fillyboy]

Not that I didn't think the whole thing was a vanity project to start with.

But to a large extent, what's wrong with that. Were Crystal Palace or St Pauls Cathedral essential infrastructure or were they vanity projects, built simply because they could be.

What's wrong with vanity projects? was every country that built a high speed railway wrong?

 

[fillyboy]

Think its origins lie with some eu ruling that every state should have a high speed mainline.
High speed, capable of going over 151 mph.

Not sure it's quite that clear cut, but there certainly were directives about compatibility of high speed speed railways.

Council Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996 on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system

 

[diy_fun_uk]

To think we used to lead the way with rail. Imagine if your home that you loved living in was compulsory purchased, only to discover they won't be needing that bit of land after all.

As usual, the north will be short changed whilst folk down south will get from a to b 7 minutes quicker ... yippee!

Slightly OT but I think I read a failing train operator has recently had its contract renewed. Half its services regularly run late.

 

[Diver Fred]

Leg to Manchester could be scrapped.

Meanwhile, Labour refuse to commit to finishing it in full.

HS2 Manchester leg could be scrapped

HS2’s Manchester leg could be scrapped under cost-saving measures being considered by the government, a report has revealed

www.architectsjournal.co.uk

Labour refuses to commit to finishing HS2 rail project in full

Doubts raised as Labour rail architect Andrew Adonis says scrapping Phase 2 would be ‘utter stupidity’

www.independent.co.uk

HS2 goes from the wrong station to the wrong city! It should have gone from St Pancras to Edinburgh with limited stops and links off to Sheffield, Manchester and Leeds.
That route would allow those cities direct links into Europe. (Oops, sorry, of course that isn't necessary as we have left the EU)

 

[Dork Lard]

Gov'mnt' spending on transport infrastructure is a good way to improve our economy but HS2 makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I feel it is more about where the brown envelopes are landing than it is about mass rapid transportation, I don't think our economy will ever get reasonable value for the silly amounts of money they are willing to chuck at it.

 

[noseall]

To think we used to lead the way with rail.

That's part of the issue now, i.e. that we peaked too early. It means that developments grew around a meandering rail line, suitable for slow trains.

 

[Brigadier]

After investing so much money in it, certainly

Sunk cost fallacy.

 

[Brigadier]

But to a large extent, what's wrong with that. Were Crystal Palace or St Pauls Cathedral essential infrastructure or were they vanity projects, built simply because they could be.

What's wrong with vanity projects? was every country that built a high speed railway wrong?

You've previously posted though, that the country has no money.
If we don't have money for essential or humanitarian spending, why should we find borrow some for vanities?

Also, as is the case with most UK capital "grand" projects, it is colossally overspent already, set to massively under-deliver; a vehicle to pour yet more public funds into chums' pockets.

The cost-benefit-analysis was, IIRC, fiddled, to make the project appear beneficial: something about business travellers stare out of the window for their usual journey (rather than work on their laptops), thus making the extra 15 minutes in the office a new gain, rather than just stealing that time from the slower journey.............

Finally, the environmental and social impact of Crystal Palace and St Pauls (your examples) is limited; HS2 has already seen thousands of homes compulsorily-purchased and razed, now for nothing, not to mention the woodlands and habitats that are now gone.




I attend regular meetings - with colleagues from all over the UK - in London already.
Why London?
Because it is already easy to get to, from anywhere.

All HS2 does is reinforces this - and further enables the concentration of wealth in the South-East - rather than making Liverpool to Leeds, or Newcastle to Manchester, easier and faster.

While "London" complains that it is overcrowded already, gridlocked..........so the "solution" is to grease even more people into there.......

The whole country gets saddled with more debt, for decades to come, to oil the path for London even more. With a few crumbs tossed to a very limited number of places, as a sop.

 

[Nige F]

Why London?
Because it is already easy to get to, from anywhere.

1 and 1/2 hours from Eastbourne to Victoria by train . Standing half the time (allegedly) as to the road network - Sussex, the Dead Centre of England.