|
Forums34
Topics48,345
Posts813,037
Members9,208
| |
Most Online1,046
Aug 24th, 2023
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,868 Likes: 167
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
|
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,868 Likes: 167 |
As a railway buff, I know a lot about the current network and journey times. I can be in Kings Cross in two hours from the front door on a good connection now.
HS2 won't be any quicker from here because getting to it will take just as long as now, and you can lose 20 minutes on a connection.
Much of the current system has capacity for four tracks because there used to be four. Occasionally there are bottlenecks where viaducts enter cities, such as North of Sheffield and North of Leeds.
The Woodhead line from Sheffield to Manchester is almost intact and could be reinstalled without much effort.
The whole HS2 project stinks of jobs for mates, and based on the Panorama priogramme, many people will pay dearly by being under compensated for business disruption and house CPOs.
Work has started in Birmingham around the old Curzon Street station. Now that is a building worth bringing back into use. The oldest surviving station building from 1838.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Curzon_Street_railway_station_(1838-1966)
DaveW
'05 Red Roadster S1
'16 Yellow (Not the only) Narrow AR GDI Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,653 Likes: 4
Charter Member
|
|
Charter Member
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,653 Likes: 4 |
Sounds like they don't even have a fixed budget for completion and a massive overspend highly likely.
Personally I can't see how it can be considered money well spent.
Martin (Deano)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,861 Likes: 137
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,861 Likes: 137 |
High speed trains are a bit like Concorde - a brilliant idea 30 years ago but not needed today now that we have fast broadband.
The investment would be much better directed in my view to increasing capacity (more frequent larger trains) rather than speed - plus of curse improving the trans pennine routes.
Tim H.
1986 4/4 VVTi Sport, 2002 LR Defender, 2022 Mini Cooper SE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 9,285 Likes: 69
Needs to Get Out More!
|
|
Needs to Get Out More!
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 9,285 Likes: 69 |
I agree re improving the present rail system. Larger capacity trains as per the trend in planes, better freight system to reduce road carriage. Why not hubs that centralise trailers, containers, then local companies deliver the final shorter distance? It would reduce the numbers of large lorries on the artery routes. Mail gets transported overnight and not real issues there. If really delivery is needed thwn ok, use the best method. Better scheduling of deliveries is not rocket science.
I think we are becoming obsessed with fast delivery and next day forces the transport to match. Unless it is URGENT then let it go with the flow. The fast deliveries are often unnecessary.
We used to send car rads to the Midlands assembly plants by road and often under JIT conditions. If a problem occurred then we sometimes sent special delivery ( a real pain due to poor scheduling and sudden changes in the plants.). Too many wanted no buffer stocks as it looked good. We tried to deliver the day before ......
Plus Four MY23 Furka Rouge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 15,794 Likes: 14
Formerly known as Aldermog Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Formerly known as Aldermog Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 15,794 Likes: 14 |
I agree re improving the present rail system. Larger capacity trains as per the trend in planes, better freight system to reduce road carriage. Why not hubs that centralise trailers, containers, then local companies deliver the final shorter distance? It would reduce the numbers of large lorries on the artery routes. Mail gets transported overnight and not real issues there. If really delivery is needed thwn ok, use the best method. Better scheduling of deliveries is not rocket science.
I think we are becoming obsessed with fast delivery and next day forces the transport to match. Unless it is URGENT then let it go with the flow. The fast deliveries are often unnecessary.
We used to send car rads to the Midlands assembly plants by road and often under JIT conditions. If a problem occurred then we sometimes sent special delivery ( a real pain due to poor scheduling and sudden changes in the plants.). Too many wanted no buffer stocks as it looked good. We tried to deliver the day before ......
Moving freight from road to rail is virtually impossible, in any meaningful way. Today's railway fits in freight where it can, passenger services take priority. So more freight capacity is needed. One of the "reasons" for HS2 was to separate fast passenger traffic from slow freight. Unlike the old pre-Beeching system where most main line routes had 4, sometimes 6 lines and there were regular relief sidings where slow trains could be paused whilst the expresses went through, todays railway is mostly 2 track. There were sidings at most large stations where freight was trans-shipped from rail to road for the last few miles. Any one remember British Road Services? Today those "goods yards" are all carparks, or have been sold off for housing development. A further point: the modern system is mostly 2 tracks, with the additional tracks lifted because they were not needed: some main lines were reduced from 4 tracks to one.... Why, you ask, simply replace the old track? Sadly, modern electronic signal systems and overhead electrification mean the space once occupied by the slow and relief lines has been lost. So, the only solution is to build new tracks. They will be capable of higher speeds, but that is a side benefit. The new lines will be built to the Continental loading Gauge, so container trailers can be carried. This is impossible on the old UK loading gauge system. Only one railway was built to this gauge, the Great Central. Beeching closed it. In the South East, where the lines run at over capacity, leaving no time for maintenance resulting in delays, crowded trains and other horrors, serious consideration is being given to re-opening once closed lines, even though in some cases this will mean compulsory purchase of land, houses and industrial building that have been built over the track. Bottom line:we need to invest in the railway network as we did in the road network in the 60s and 70s. This means £ trillions, not £ billions.
Peter,
66, 2016 Porsche Boxster S
No longer driving Tarka, the 2014 Plus 8...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,868 Likes: 167
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 21,868 Likes: 167 |
There's still talk of re-opening the Great Central.
DaveW
'05 Red Roadster S1
'16 Yellow (Not the only) Narrow AR GDI Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 5,587
Charter Member
|
|
OP
Charter Member
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 5,587 |
I agree re improving the present rail system. Larger capacity trains as per the trend in planes, better freight system to reduce road carriage. Why not hubs that centralise trailers, containers, then local companies deliver the final shorter distance? It would reduce the numbers of large lorries on the artery routes. Mail gets transported overnight and not real issues there. If really delivery is needed thwn ok, use the best method. Better scheduling of deliveries is not rocket science.
I think we are becoming obsessed with fast delivery and next day forces the transport to match. Unless it is URGENT then let it go with the flow. The fast deliveries are often unnecessary.
We used to send car rads to the Midlands assembly plants by road and often under JIT conditions. If a problem occurred then we sometimes sent special delivery ( a real pain due to poor scheduling and sudden changes in the plants.). Too many wanted no buffer stocks as it looked good. We tried to deliver the day before ......
Moving freight from road to rail is virtually impossible, in any meaningful way. Today's railway fits in freight where it can, passenger services take priority. So more freight capacity is needed. One of the "reasons" for HS2 was to separate fast passenger traffic from slow freight. Unlike the old pre-Beeching system where most main line routes had 4, sometimes 6 lines and there were regular relief sidings where slow trains could be paused whilst the expresses went through, todays railway is mostly 2 track. There were sidings at most large stations where freight was trans-shipped from rail to road for the last few miles. Any one remember British Road Services? Today those "goods yards" are all carparks, or have been sold off for housing development. A further point: the modern system is mostly 2 tracks, with the additional tracks lifted because they were not needed: some main lines were reduced from 4 tracks to one.... Why, you ask, simply replace the old track? Sadly, modern electronic signal systems and overhead electrification mean the space once occupied by the slow and relief lines has been lost. So, the only solution is to build new tracks. They will be capable of higher speeds, but that is a side benefit. The new lines will be built to the Continental loading Gauge, so container trailers can be carried. This is impossible on the old UK loading gauge system. Only one railway was built to this gauge, the Great Central. Beeching closed it. In the South East, where the lines run at over capacity, leaving no time for maintenance resulting in delays, crowded trains and other horrors, serious consideration is being given to re-opening once closed lines, even though in some cases this will mean compulsory purchase of land, houses and industrial building that have been built over the track. Bottom line:we need to invest in the railway network as we did in the road network in the 60s and 70s. This means £ trillions, not £ billions. And the funding is coming from ....not the EU as its slipping away which leaves...?
Geneva 2016 plus 8' The Green Godess' 4 side exits .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 15,794 Likes: 14
Formerly known as Aldermog Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Formerly known as Aldermog Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 15,794 Likes: 14 |
And the funding is coming from ....not the EU as its slipping away which leaves...?
It can only come from us, the population = taxes. Infrastructure expenditure benefits everyone, directly or indirectly. There is only so much tax revenue, as a society we cannot have everything we want. No different to running a business.
Peter,
66, 2016 Porsche Boxster S
No longer driving Tarka, the 2014 Plus 8...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 9,285 Likes: 69
Needs to Get Out More!
|
|
Needs to Get Out More!
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 9,285 Likes: 69 |
Freight can be transported overnight.there are regular night/early morning trains from the Milford Haven refinery. Also, coal used to be transported out of hours on the main lines. In ours teelworks we had a bulk transporting by rail to a mill in The Midlands. Passenger traffic is for daytime requirements with limited needfor nighttime.
The tracks are under used at night.
There is already a basic rail network and so the infratructure would need tweaking to distribution centres sited with logical location to marry with ports, roads.
Not such a big cost as a complete overhaul which would be unnecessary. Yes there is a need to modernise signalling and maintain tracks but that is needed anyway not just to create freight requirements.
The HS2 funding is likely to have been sourced already, three sources would have been EU, Private sources and taxation. EU moneywill disappear so how would HS2 be funded?Maybe the EU will honour commitments made as the UK has said it would to similar circumstances. Will the interested private parties cough up? After all, if the economics of HS2 are so attractive then why not? Taxation? Yes a thorny one. Fares will have to be inflated to cover the cost to reduce the tax bill. You want 10 mins off your time of trave? Then pay for it!
It all adds up to a project crying out to be cancelled.
Plus Four MY23 Furka Rouge
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 537 Likes: 3
Talk Morgan Regular
|
|
Talk Morgan Regular
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 537 Likes: 3 |
The project inevitably polarises opinion like many other topics on this forum - well, like one other at least! - but it is important to look at the economic and social case in the round: there is more to it than just shaving minutes off the journey times between Birmingham and London.
Rail transport is one of the most sustainable forms of transport and whilst passenger usage has nearly doubled since privatisation there is still the need to encourage and attract more people to the system and create a larger modal shift than is currently occurring in order to reduce the UK's carbon footprint.
Network capacity is critical and, yes, more can be done to improve capacity on existing routes but still new lines are needed to enhance this further.
Unlike the continent, the UK doesn't have the benefit of a large structure gauge, so the ability to run double decker trains is very limited. Trains are being extend in length but even here there is still an economic implication in terms of the infrastructure alterations required to accommodate this.
Amongst other benefits, creating a new line releases capacity on the existing infrastructure for more intense use on shorter journeys and, as has been mentioned, freight.
I am sure that there will be those who say just improve what is there in order to attract more custom, particularly on overcrowded commuter routes. However to make a big difference in overall patronage it will be necessary to invest in new infrastructure too and HS2 and proposed extensions of this should be seen in this context, particularly when this can then be seen to attract current airline passengers on domestic routes.
Rob T
2017 Tungsten Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
