General Chat

I often go to Sheffield by train :-( but it is usually better than the motorway. Of course Brum is not in the north but the West Midlands.
If a northern rail network is to work and make economic sense than it must include Birmingham New Street. The current focus on to/from London is all wrong.

Did I hear the news right?

They are thinking of scrapping this.

Emma it will be decided by the end of the year but scrapping it " has not been ruled out".

There are moves afoot, Emma. Someone must have had a common sense tablet!

Thanks Rose....all that money and probably loads more by the time
they decide what to do.

For what they thought they might save time-wise it has been a big waste of money, but obviously, someone thought it was great hence all the work done on it already. the heartache some people must have gone through already is shameful.

Why do so many on this thread seem to think that the main reason for HS2 is to save time? The primary reason is to increase the capacity of the rail network by removing some intercity traffic from the old lines, which should benefit local rail times as well.

They should have put the money into our crumbling schools and hospitals..a total waste of money...apart from all the lives they wrecked along the way..buying up people’s homes on the cheap.

That may be so Kense but at what cost :-(

"I have squandered my resistance
For a pocket full of mumbles, such are promises
All lies and jests
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest"
- Simon

http://www.hs2actionalliance.org/case-against-hs2/capacity/

Kense I think the concentration on the time is simply because that is the main subject of the table I referred to? Not how HS2 would benefit ( or otherwise) the existing network. Even in most of the blurb the emphasis is on cutting times however to balance that:

"High Speed Two (HS2) aims to create a world class high speed rail network to support economic growth, both in cities it connects, and for the UK. The project aims to deliver a shift to low carbon transport and provide opportunities to enhance the quality of life of communities most in need."

On that last point, my question would be, will it have a beneficial effect if say 'most' passengers travelling from London use the HS2 to Birmingham. Will rail companies consider that running the slow trains calling at more stations is still financially viable? or will those slow routes be abandoned because they can't turn a profit?

Ditto the second part of the route, Birmingham to Manchester, will one have to travel to Birmingham to get a train that goes to Manchester ( stopping at Crewe ?) and then change there for Chester or Liverpool, rather than as at present take the train direct from Shrewsbury to Chester. ( a nice route I've travelled often).

I don't know much about train travel in that area and it won't affect me directly if HS2 doesn't go ahead.

My suspicion is that the Government realises that after Brexit we will not be able to afford it. The money saved will be useful to fund the money needed to sort out the Brexit problems.

I have just caught up with yesterday's news and discovered that, apparently, BoJo seems to favour installation of the cross-country Manchester to Leeds first. I have no idea whether it's true or, indeed, why. Meanwhile, having travelled that route many times, I think there are decent connections by rail and road between the two without spending a small fortune to save a few minutes.

As Rollo stated earlier, by not running services from mainline stations, any installation defeats the object of knocking minutes off a journey. As HS2 is supposedly going to be most beneficial to business people, any time spent getting into, say, Birmingham proper will add to journey times and, therefore, defeat the objective of HS2.

Plain crazy thinking by some who may possibly have vested interests or not.

Perhaps some of the money saved could be spent on extending the M62 as far as Hull. Until very recently I had assumed that it did but no it just runs into a two lane dual carridgeway about 10 miles short of Hull.

If there is going to be a review work should be halted before a lot more money is wasted. Only yesterday people were evicted. :-(
More road closures next week and so it goes on. :-| :-| :-|

That's shocking, Von. I would have expected work to be held in abeyance pending completion of a review.

Do you think the powers-that-be who are in charge of HS2 already know that a review will not take place or have prior knowledge that any review will result in no change?

That's what I'm reading into it.

If work is held up pending a review then the project would not be completed on time and it would give contractors an excuse for cost increases.

From the BBC Site:
"Why is HS2 being built?

Thousands of rail commuters in the UK have to endure train services that are often subject to delays and cancellations.

As well as having to contend with strikes, in the early part of this summer timetabling chaos caused severe disruption.

Even Transport Secretary Chris Grayling has admitted that parts of the UK rail system are stretched to breaking point.

"The system is bursting at the seams… The reality is, the system is full," he told the BBC's Today programme, adding that on certain lines "if the slightest thing goes wrong, that can disrupt the network quite significantly".

That is why, he says, the UK needs high-speed rail links, such as the government's flagship HS2 programme, to take the pressure off commuter services and leave more room for freight."

----

If it isn't built then presumably motorways will need to be enlarged (probably more evictions) and more flights may be needed.

Time will tell.

Absolutely Joy and what's more they don't care a fig. :-(

Several thousand trees,planted earlier this year by HS2 to replace some they had cut down,died from neglect. They ommitted to water them during a particularly dry spell.
Now they are due to plant another lot to replace those.
Don't tell me that's not a waste of money :-| :-| :-|

The reason given for that was that it was cheaper to replace the trees that to water them during a drought.

What sort of reasoning is that :-0

I'm not against a high speed rail but happen to think that it has not been thoroughly thought through to benefit a larger percentage of the country. :-D

It's obvious that escalating costs will prevent the expansion past Birmingham.