My god,what an utter waste of money..Somebody should be held responsible for this utter waste of taxpayers money..

Gideon/Hameron. Vanity project.

A fabulous idea IF the government had simply got on with it and insisted on cost protection, particularly where the northern sections are concerned.

I travel from Leeds to London fairly regularly. The service is, on the whole excellent. I really don't see the need to spend billions to shave 15 minutes off the journey.

No government is ever held responsible when it pours money down the drain on massive projects.

Couldn't everyone just set off 15 minutes earlier using the current system?

Far too big an undertaking, and like most of the Governments grand projects has ended up in billions of the tax payers money.

A large proportion wasted on “consultants” who have done very little in their privileged position of being deemed experts.

It’s should have been binned a long time ago.

Pimlico_Claret wrote:Couldn't everyone just set off 15 minutes earlier using the current system?

Oooh, no, no, no. Some people are far too busy to spend 15 extra minutes on a train.

It was a totally stupid idea right from the outset. Trains from Manchester to Euston take about 2 hours 20 minutes these days and the service whenever I've used it has been spot on. Why spend gazillions to shave about 20 minutes off that time?? It simply isn't necessary or justified by the cost. Ironically I'm all in favour of greater use of the railways which means I'm all in favour of far greater investment in the system, BUT the cash being literally thrown away on HS2 is a scandal and should be used instead to reinstate lines where there is a proven need/demand (e.g. like Colne to Skipton? maybe) and to upgrade tired lines and rolling stock. The money spent on the Tod curve a few years back must be some of the best money ever spent on the railways in the past 30 years! And that cost peanuts in relation to what we're talking here. I actually think the whole HS2 idea was propelled forward at a time when we were facing real recession following the banking balls up and the then government saw it as a project to employ shed loads of construction workers along with the peripheral jobs the actual construction would create in the short term. The long term NEED for the project, along with the cost (including human cost to people in the way) wasn't a priority, sadly! (And neither was the fate of the Bree Louise!! )

TheFamilyCat wrote:I travel from Leeds to London fairly regularly. The service is, on the whole excellent. I really don't see the need to spend billions to shave 15 minutes off the journey.

Spot on there. A country the size of England & Wales** does not need trains that knock minutes of a journey. What is needed is that investment put into improving and extending the rail network.
** Scotland will not be part of the UK soon

TheFamilyCat wrote:I travel from Leeds to London fairly regularly. The service is, on the whole excellent. I really don't see the need to spend billions to shave 15 minutes off the journey.

It's not just about your trips to London though is it? Knocking 30 (not 15) minutes off that journey is one of many benefits.

Have you ever got a train from Leeds to Sheffield/Nottingham/Derby or Birmingham? On a dirty diesel cross country service using Victorian infrastructure. HS2 would revolutionise those particular journeys but everyone thinks it's just about getting to London.

Have you ever needed to get from Heathrow Airport to Leeds?
Absolute nightmare at the moment, getting the underground across the city to Euston. HS2 will make that journey a simple change of platforms to crossrail at Old Oak Common. Game changer.

Have you ever took a high speed train in France, Spain or Japan? Why wouldn't it be a success here?
It is a lot of money but it's over the next 15 years we aren't forking out a 75 billion lump sum in one go.

mdd2 wrote:Spot on there. A country the size of England & Wales** does not need trains that knock minutes of a journey. What is needed is that investment put into improving and extending the rail network.
** Scotland will not be part of the UK soon

Is HS2 not improving and extending the network?
It isn't just about speed is it.

I agree fully with Dark Cloud and the general sentiments above, however I understand that the key benefit from HS2 isn't the 'saving on time', it is the 'increased capacity' that the new lines would allow. I'm not sure of the ins and outs of that, but it was a counter argument used when I advocated scrapping it in a discussion with a colleague.

They haven't even said the HS2 will even get to Manchester/Leeds yet.. It's all supposition.

I would suggest as a far smaller country, the distances we're talking are far shorter than in Spain, France and Japan.

Every building contract goes over budget as they tender the lowest quote possible to get the job, based on nothing going wrong at all.

I think HS2 is more about more space in the timetable rather than knocking 15 minutes off. The North needs it.

CopacabanaClaret wrote:It's not just about your trips to London though is it? Knocking 30 (not 15) minutes off that journey is one of many benefits.

Have you ever got a train from Leeds to Sheffield/Nottingham/Derby or Birmingham? On a dirty diesel cross country service using Victorian infrastructure. HS2 would revolutionise those particular journeys but everyone thinks it's just about getting to London.

Have you ever needed to get from Heathrow Airport to Leeds?
Absolute nightmare at the moment, getting the underground across the city to Euston. HS2 will make that journey a simple change of platforms to crossrail at Old Oak Common. Game changer.

Have you ever took a high speed train in France, Spain or Japan? Why wouldn't it be a success here?
It is a lot of money but it's over the next 15 years we aren't forking out a 75 billion lump sum in one go.

Only sharing my experience. I agree that there is more to it than just speed but I personally believe a lot of it can be achieved by spending a lot less (which in turn could then be spent elsewhere.

Alanstevensonsgloves wrote:I agree fully with Dark Cloud and the general sentiments above, however I understand that the key benefit from HS2 isn't the 'saving on time', it is the 'increased capacity' that the new lines would allow. I'm not sure of the ins and outs of that, but it was a counter argument used when I advocated scrapping it in a discussion with a colleague.

It's all about increasing capacity. The West Coast Mainline is full, there are no spare paths for extra trains. A train leaves Euston heading North every 3 to 4 minutes. Nor can you extend existing trains without major infrastructure upgrades. Those double decker trains in Europe are great but are not an option over here with our Victorian bridges and tunnels.

People seem to have the forgotten the years of weekend closures and bus replacements last time there was a major upgrade to the route around 15 years ago. It was a nightmare.

If we remove some of these intercity services from the West Coast mainline onto a new line it causes minimal disruption to services during the construction period. Then the old west coast line can be reused for extra freight and commuter services.
Have you seen how many lorries are on the M6 these days?
Look at the projections for increased traffic too. We are rapidly approaching breaking point, clearing the West Coast mainline of intercity traffic will at least provide the space for an alternative.

Dark Cloud wrote:I would suggest as a far smaller country, the distances we're talking are far shorter than in Spain, France and Japan.

Sorry I don't buy that argument. This island is a perfect size for high speed rail.

Tokyo to Osaka 506kms
Madrid to Barcelona 625kms
Paris to Lyon 466kms
London to Glasgow 663kms
London to Manchester 336kms

Mate of mine on the HS2 path removed from his house, compulsorily sold for about 80% of current retail value.

Will they rebuild it and put him back, and put his kids back in the school they had to leave?

I'm about 15 meters outside the compensation area but the villages are cut in half.
My house can't be sold. Who would buy it now or even rent it?
Connecting roads will be lost - access to school lost - hospital access increased by 20 to 40 minutes - sports fields lost - a thriving business park lost as companies now move out.
Jobs lost where I am and no benefit at all to anyone for miles round here.

For what?

Some people getting very off this white elephant

If anyone thinks this will really benefit all the North think again.
The richer end of any infrastructure link always benefits - eg London.

The money would be better spent totally on Northern infrastructure.
It won't be though will it.
Yet Cross Rail........................

TheFamilyCat wrote:I travel from Leeds to London fairly regularly. The service is, on the whole excellent. I really don't see the need to spend billions to shave 15 minutes off the journey.

It's not just about shaving 15 minutes off your travel time (actually closer to 30 minutes). HS2 relives a fuckton of pressure on the existing network by allowing those fast services to travel on their own set of lines instead of holding up every other service that needs to use portions of the same track that faster services use. This means more localised services running faster and more frequently. More rush hour services. And since rail will become a much more viable option for commuters up and down the country it means fewer cars on the road, which means less congestion and better commute times there too. Shaving some time off your Leeds to London commute is what the newspapers and politicians focus on because that's what the stupid public is interested in. It's the sexy, eye catching headline.

The problem with HS2 is how much it's costing, not how effective it will be. And the reason it's so stupidly expensive is because scumbag contractors constantly inflating the cost beyond what it actually should cost. Hundreds of millions of pounds per mile is a ******* scandal. Even at £100bn it's probably still worth it, but it shouldn't cost a tenth, and if I had my way the government would be in complete control of the project rather than hiring contractors who have a fiduciary responsibility to squeeze us out of every penny thay can.

Edit: I also forgot to point out that while your arse is spending 30 minutes less on a train because the journey time is shorter, that isn't just 30 minutes saved. That's over one-third of passenger traffic removed too.

I support HS2 .. however I fear that the current review will announce at Christmas that the Leeds leg will be scrapped. This is ok as long as an accelerated HS3 with proper funding becomes a firm commitment. The economic potential of Leeds and Manchester is huge but is completely throttled by poor connections between the two.

This all just makes me want to play Railroad Tycoon 2 again.

Creating a series of little Londons is crap. Should be spending on all the various towns and the rail links between them.

basil6345789 wrote:Creating a series of little Londons is crap. Should be spending on all the various towns and the rail links between them.

HS2 is spending on rail links between towns.

Surely it's time for a good, modern service connecting East and West in the North? A direct route connecting Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds and Hull would make a massive difference up here, and take some of the strain off the M62, which just can't cope with the amount of traffic using it now.

Imploding Turtle wrote:
... if I had my way the government would be in complete control of the project...

Public sector is bad at managing and procuring. Therefore costs overrun. Solution? Make the public sector responsible for even more.

To be fair, if your preferred party gets into power, private enterprise will be a thing of the past so I guess that only leaves government.

Wonderful idea that we can travel to London and save some minutes but how many people do you ever hear talking about the saving of time getting to places in the north of the country.( York Newcastle etc) The thrust of the rail service is still having to travel to places in the south - we should be taking some of the overplacing of national institutions and moving them to cities in the north of the country. And while we are chatting about saving time on the journey do remember to factor in the time taken travelling to a hub station. It's the whole of the journey time taken, that should be considered. Consider driving some miles on the M6 in Cheshire or Lancashire to get to the hub "quickly" !!

"HS2 is spending on rail links between towns" Imploding Turtle ?
All the towns ? Some of the towns?
Which towns are you particularly referring to?
Convince me that Colne Nelson Burnley Chorley Bolton Preston Blackpool will really benefit in any significant way please.

thatdberight wrote:Public sector is bad at managing and procuring. Therefore costs overrun. Solution? Make the public sector responsible for even more.

To be fair, if your preferred party gets into power, private enterprise will be a thing of the past so I guess that only leaves government.

Other countries seem to run their projects just fine. France's high speed rail only cost them £17 million per mile compared to ours which is going to cost £400 million per mile. That's not a typo. So you tell me, on a scale of 1-10, how well these private ******* companies are managing it?

chorleyhere wrote:"HS2 is spending on rail links between towns" Imploding Turtle ?
All the towns ? Some of the towns?
Which towns are you particularly referring to?
Convince me that Colne Nelson Burnley Chorley Bolton Preston Blackpool will really benefit in any significant way please.

Why are you asking me that? I'm not the one who made the statement that money should be spent on rail links between towns. Go ask them.

Imploding Turtle wrote:HS2 relives a fuckton of pressure on the existing network

Is that an SI unit?

thatdberight wrote:Public sector is bad at managing and procuring. Therefore costs overrun. Solution? Make the public sector responsible for even more.

To be fair, if your preferred party gets into power, private enterprise will be a thing of the past so I guess that only leaves government.

One word.

Mapeley.

Imploding Turtle wrote:
HS2 relives a fuckton of pressure on the existing network

Hipper wrote:Is that an SI unit?

No but is going through the whole process again

The future of Chorley, Bolton, Preston etc is as Manchester commuter suburbs so HS2 would help by growing the Manchester economy. It’s not hard to grasp the business case surely.

Well that's it then,it's going ahead then right through to Leeds ...... London to Brum should be ready for 2030 and then through to Manchester and Leeds for 2035..

It's not going to improve our local services one bit..Never mind we will just have to put up with out of date rolling stock,delayed services throughout the region etc etc .

When this topic came up previously, a few months back I suggested that the travelling time between say Piccadilly and Euston was actually pretty quick already and also very reliable and therefore shaving about 15 to 20 minutes off that journey seemed ridiculous and imo pointless given the money and disruption to people's lives and the environment HS2 is causing. It was pointed out to me by those more in the know that HS2 isn't primarily about speeding up Clarets supporters away travel to London by 20 minutes, but is really about increasing capacity on East coast and West coast lines as they are becoming clogged. Fine, I get that. So why not simply spend a fraction of the money widening the existing lines so that instead of say 2 tracks (1 up 1 down) they become 4 tracks side by side. You'd have doubled the capacity and yes, there would be a degree of compulsory purchasing alongside the tracks and it wouldn't come cheap when you take into account bridges and station platforms that need altering etc, etc. but it would be billions less than this fiasco AND with the money saved, some previously axed branch lines could be put back into service where there is a demand. And up and down the country there is plenty of demand.

Bus cuts turn rural areas into ‘transport deserts’
Bus route closures have left nearly a million Britons at risk of being cut off from basic services, research has found.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bus- ... -6b7f8lc0w



But you're alright so it doesn't matter.

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:36 pm

I travel from Leeds to London fairly regularly. The service is, on the whole excellent. I really don't see the need to spend billions to shave 15 minutes off the journey.

It "shaves" nearly an hour off the time from Leeds to London. It massively increases the capacity on the main lines running North South and frees up the existing (full to capacity) lines for local commuter traffic.

Hopefully they will build HS2 and deliver Northern Powerhouse rail at the same time so the East-West routes are also opened up.

The Tories were in a difficult position due to so many Northerners voting for them a few weeks ago. If they'd have scrapped HS2 politically it would have looked awful. I still wouldn't be surprised if they built as far as Birmingham and then scrapped the rest due to cost.

Sproggy wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:17 pm

It "shaves" nearly an hour off the time from Leeds to London. It massively increases the capacity on the main lines running North South and frees up the existing (full to capacity) lines for local commuter traffic.

Hopefully they will build HS2 and deliver Northern Powerhouse rail at the same time so the East-West routes are also opened up.

I suspect that the 80 minutes Leeds to London predicted is a little optimistic.

Dark Cloud wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:44 pm

When this topic came up previously, a few months back I suggested that the travelling time between say Piccadilly and Euston was actually pretty quick already and also very reliable and therefore shaving about 15 to 20 minutes off that journey seemed ridiculous and imo pointless given the money and disruption to people's lives and the environment HS2 is causing. It was pointed out to me by those more in the know that HS2 isn't primarily about speeding up Clarets supporters away travel to London by 20 minutes, but is really about increasing capacity on East coast and West coast lines as they are becoming clogged. Fine, I get that. So why not simply spend a fraction of the money widening the existing lines so that instead of say 2 tracks (1 up 1 down) they become 4 tracks side by side. You'd have doubled the capacity and yes, there would be a degree of compulsory purchasing alongside the tracks and it wouldn't come cheap when you take into account bridges and station platforms that need altering etc, etc. but it would be billions less than this fiasco AND with the money saved, some previously axed branch lines could be put back into service where there is a demand. And up and down the country there is plenty of demand.

From what I gather there were just too many areas where that wasn't feasible. Lines going through cuttings, bridges, tunnels, widening/lengthening stations, etc and in order to do the work you'd have to close existing lines down for ages.

conyoviejo wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:10 pm

Well that's it then,it's going ahead then right through to Leeds ...... London to Brum should be ready for 2030 and then through to Manchester and Leeds for 2035..

It's not going to improve our local services one bit..Never mind we will just have to put up with out of date rolling stock,delayed services throughout the region etc etc .

Have they said that? I thought the announcement yesterday was they were going to take it as far as Birmingham and maybe Crewe but then consider the northern section in order to make cost cuttings and integrate into existing lines.

Sproggy wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:17 pm

It "shaves" nearly an hour off the time from Leeds to London. It massively increases the capacity on the main lines running North South and frees up the existing (full to capacity) lines for local commuter traffic.

Hopefully they will build HS2 and deliver Northern Powerhouse rail at the same time so the East-West routes are also opened up.

However, the ticket prices are unlikely to be cheap for a fast service.

Yep. Start saving up.

A good service linking East to West is badly needed as well. A fast train going from Liverpool- Manchester- Sheffield- Leeds and Hull would be great for the North. Would help take some of the strain off the M62 as well, which just can't cope with the volume of traffic on it now.

As the ex Network Control Manager for Royal Mail I was at a Government led meeting some years ago when this was first muted. At that meeting the potential for reduced travel time from London to B'ham and then Manchester and Leeds were not the main drivers. Although important it was the amount of space that would subsequently be freed up on the existing Networks that would allow more freight to be carried more quickly that was seen as the main advantage. Certainly for Royal Mail that is what we were looking at.

Obviously cost was an issue as the Royal Mail road borne network at the time was cheaper than the rail option. Although we did still run trains from and to the Willesden Depot they had to be full 12 car sets to cost in below that of the road option. Bear in mind that the alternative was 12 Artics. running from London all the way up to just south of Glasgow on the M1/M6. Whether more rail capacity would drive down costs to make Royal Mail consider using more rail borne options is as yet unknown.

HS2 is undoubtedly a huge infrastructure undertaking and much has been made of escalating costs likely to be more than £100 billion. But what I haven't seen is anyone say if that is a reasonable or realistic amount bearing in mind it will be spread over a number of years (10/20). Also it would be interesting to see what the cost of new high speed networks have been in other parts of the world as a comparison.

HS2/3 were always going to be confirmed. The government needs a couple of projects like this to to protect the UK's economic 'growth' by replacing the GDP we are losing due to Brexit.

Further, the costs are being inflated almost weekly, mainly by opponents of the scheme, for contingency events that most likely will not be an issue when work begins. HS1 had exactly the same cost inflation before construction started and actually came in just below the original budget. And lots of the money spent will return to the government in the form of income taxes, NI contributions and indirect taxation anyway both from the contractors and the thousands of workers expected to be employed.

bfcmik wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:31 pm

HS2/3 were always going to be confirmed. The government needs a couple of projects like this to to protect the UK's economic 'growth' by replacing the GDP we are losing due to Brexit.

Further, the costs are being inflated almost weekly, mainly by opponents of the scheme, for contingency events that most likely will not be an issue when work begins. HS1 had exactly the same cost inflation before construction started and actually came in just below the original budget. And lots of the money spent will return to the government in the form of income taxes, NI contributions and indirect taxation anyway both from the contractors and the thousands of workers expected to be employed.

Plus the business tax from the supply chains, regarding the contractors & workers they'll be on a nice little number & won't be rushing, guaranteed work for a lengthy spell.