One mainly for U.K. Forum members, but non-U.K. members can of course comment if they wish too. What are your views on High Speed 2 in the United Kingdom? Is it value for money? Should the money be invested in other railway projects instead? Does the U.K. need HS2? Will HS2 deliver what it is supposed to deliver? Is the proposed route appropriate? Does the cost justify what we’ll end up with?
Better for the environment It will be a great connection for the country Will reduce the amount of cars on the road which can therefore be better for the rail industry It will free up the West Coast Mainline for more Freight which removes more Road-haulage which is one of the highest contributors to road damage and fuel consumption (apart form Aeroplanes) I personally think it is a great project! I can slightly understand why people are annoyed at why it’s being built because it has the potential to remove some habitats, But if this was a 6 lane Motor way being built, how would a railway (the most economically friendly mode of transport (excluding Bikes), be any worse? Therefore, it is a great investment despite the cost of the evaluation and the planning etc.
In my opinion, it's absolutely value for money for the benefits it'll bring. I know the costs are astronomically high but for the increase in capacity that it delivers, it has to be considered a necessity to cope with future demand. Once complete, it has capacity for 16 400m trains per hour which will enable model shift from roads to rail on a scale that we could only dream of with current infrastructure, as there's only so many trains we can run on the southern section of the WCML and that limit's already been reached. Moving intercity trains off the WCML will create many more paths for local services and freight, moving even more traffic away from roads. Rail travel should also become more reliable as there'll no longer be slower trains causing delays in front of intercity trains and the brand new infrastructure will in itself be more reliable and easier to maintain than the existing routes leading to fewer signal failures, points failures, etc. The route should be built in full, with Leeds and Manchester branches to allow as many passenger flows as possible to be moved onto HS2 to take advantage of its huge capacity and to free up space on the ECML as well. I don't think any project should be done instead of HS2 as it's so clearly needed. I can understand why some people in the North think that the money's better spent on other projects such Northern Powerhouse as it's easy for them to ignore the reasons why HS2 is needed as the capacity constraints it solves are mainly down south on the southern part of the WCML and ECML. There are some projects that definitely need doing in North to increase capacity though such as Transpennine electrification and improving the Castlefield corridor in Manchester as a matter of urgency but these suppliment HS2, not replace it. Building HS2 and the commitment to reopen lines also makes it clear that UK government is finally moving away from the mentality that it adopted in the 50s that car is king and rail is relatively unimportant. And who knows, if it's a success, we may see more high speed lines in the near future, especially now as the government wants transport to be carbon neutral by 2050.
Not living in the UK, I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I'm always in awe at your ability to build and finance such monumental projects such as Crossrail and HS2. American taxpayers wouldn't even listen to such proposals. Amtrak has to beg for every dollar from Congress, especially for capital projects.
I’m not American, but I can clearly see that Americans don’t want to fund or build new railways... we are almost the same here in the UK. But I have seen some involvement in a Texas High Speed? Is this still in planning?
Yes it is still in planning - Look forward to the system if it ever gets built - I make the trek from Houston to Dallas frequently and would be a patron of the service -- Flying is just too burdensome for the short flight but 3 to 4 hours on the road each way is a waste as well. Unfortunately the hassle to park get through TSA ect makes the actually time spent traveling about the same if you choose to fly. And we don't have traffic in Houston or Dallas (yea right....) so bad traffic can add an additional hour or more to the trip. Only saving grace is we do not have photo based speed traps as the UK does so cruising down the highway at 85 is the norm.
Well I hope it does get built. Here in the US we have lots of local efforts at high speed rail, not just in Texas but in California, Florida and in the Midwest. For years, I've heard about plans to link Chicago and St Louis, Chicago and Milwaukee etc but they never seem to get beyond the talking stage. Sorry if I've taken this thread away from the original topic.
OK, let me answer each point you've raised here with a railway employees view. 1. - The money doesn't exist unless it's built. It's an extremely low interest bond loan that is paid back by revenue, without it being built there is no value for money on this project. 2. See answer to point 1. 3. - Yes the current Victorian infrastructure has no more room to increase capacity for local and freight trains. To increase the capacity on the existing network, this new high speed rail line would remove the need for high speed express trains on the existing network, opening up the much needed paths to allow for fast freight and the push to a CO2 neutral economy (you need to drastically cut HGV journeys) 4. - This really depends on what you are expecting it to deliver. It's going to provide a quicker journey time to Birmingham and Manchester with Phase 1, it will then provide faster times to Leeds, Sheffield etc with Phase 2, and then Scotland with Phase 3, so yes it will reduce the amount of internal flights with are huge pollutants. If you want to move more freight off the roads, then yes it will deliver capacity to do this considerably. Most distribution centres are in and around Birmingham, and there's no more room for freight trains, yet a huge demand for them. 5. Yes, it takes minimal open space, yes it destroys a few wildlife sites but name another engineering project that hasn't harmed somethings habitat. 6. Considering the costs to do what you raised in point 2, would be quadruple the costs of HS2, then yes its justified.
The trouble is, we have a country who’s views on Railways are terrible. The Airlines don’t want high speed railways because it puts them into worries because it’s competition. This is one of the reasons why the APT wasn’t successful. As the video said, the Car was seen to be better for the oil industries and for the governments profit. Therefore, the railways were privatised etc etc. But I’m not going to get political. This is one of the only Railways built in England since HS1 some good years ago. Therefore, isn’t it time that we continue to build our railways empire?
Helps London to Birmingham. Doesn't help the south west Doesn't help the north considering there not focused on that bit yet. Gets to Scotland little bit faster. Price keeps soaring