HS2: For or against?

[whole diary]

[Btline]

I'm on the fence for HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)). I know the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) is out of capacity, but I worry too much about the effect of services to Coventry (for example) being AXED to 1 tph and 10 minutes slower.

I also fear it will be like Ebbesfleet and Stratford - not integrated at all with the rest of the rail (or public transport) network.

As there will be no "Nimbys" on this forum, it should be an interesting result, as no-one here will directly gain or get blighted.

[ChrisB]

We do need the capacity. All main stations will get at least a half-hourly service, but yes, they might well call at additional stations, like Northampton once an hour.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

we dont need high speed we need capacity, speed is a luxury,and should not be put before capacity with the growth of train travel is needed!

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

The problem seems to me to be that the many people who object to HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) are people who live along the route between London and Birmingham and whilst that is as far as it would go for many years, will see no useful benefit. HS2 needs to be considered in relation to its proposed extension to the north and as part of the development of the national rail network that is desirable for many reasons that most of us on this website know about.

Many of the objectors do not seem to take any account of the indirect benefits of HS2 such as relieving the pressure on the non high speed lines that many do use.

It has been a high public profile project. If you look at the recently opened A3 tunnel, this has cost many millions and benefits only the people using that road and the people who live near and will see less congestion around their area. But how many people objected to that scheme on the grounds that they will not benefit from it?

I would support HS2 but would question whether it is necessary to spend 25% of the tunnelling at the London end. After all, it is not proposed to do the same into Birmingham.

[ellendune]

The capacity is certainly needed. 

The question therefore is how to provide that capacity.  A high speed line makes it easier to separate traffic of different speeds.  It also give a sporting chance of getting some of the travellers out of planes if the price is right. 

The option of piecemeal improvement of the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) and lengthening trains will only help to an extent. Anyone who reads the RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) will see it is never going to solve the problem.  Also pieceemal improvement brings more disruption to existing travellers. 

If you live in the Chilterns and only do business in London then of course there is no need for a high speed line.  But without it the north which was once our economic powerhouse will be difficult to access.  Unless the north does develop then the economy in the south east will continue to overheat and we will ahev to build houses and factories all over the chilterns instead!

Those of us who have a UK^▸ (United Kingdom) wide business recognise the need.  In Europe HS^▸ (High Speed (short for HSS^▸ (High Speed Services) High Speed Services)) has changed the way I travel.  I do take the train to Leeds, but Newcastle and Edinburgh I am affraid I still fly as the train is too slow and too crowded to work in effectively.

[eightf48544]

Basically in favour but not at the expense of exisisting lines. I'd far rather have the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) and MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) electrified plus in fill so South and East of at least Salisbury is elctrified to include Hastings Ashford Uckfield (Lewes) Reigate Wokingham.

Then infill in London with GOB. Kew Curves, Dudding Hill lines.

Thats beofre we look at wirng off the West Coast and cross Pennines.

The leave Marylebone which ought be wired to Birmingham but at least to Banbury. with Oxford Banbury and Basingstoke Reading. Electrifying Marylebone Birmingham will provide more capacity between Birmingham and London.

Also i think the London terminal should be an underground through station (between Euston KX with a  link through to HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) with a depot in East London so trains drop passnegers leave for the depot then return refreshed to pick up. Cuts down dwell time. Need at least 6 platforms maybe 8. Similar to Berlin HBF Tief.

Agree with reflex that it's capacity we need we are actually too small a country to have an LGV^▸ (Large Goods Vehicle). Our towns are too close together.

Perhaps HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) should be built form Scotland Southwards then the London Birminghm stretch will become imperative.
  

[TerminalJunkie]

Don't care (for TJ)

Ta. Although this time I picked one of the other options

[ellendune]

Also i think the London terminal should be an underground through station (between Euston KX with a  link through to HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) with a depot in East London so trains drop passnegers leave for the depot then return refreshed to pick up. Cuts down dwell time. Need at least 6 platforms maybe 8. Similar to Berlin HBF Tief.

You would probably need to double the cost then.  Already most of the cost is at the London end. 

[anthony215]

I am for HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) , although that said i am not too happy about some area's getting a reduction in teh number of trains they have. Also I think HS2 should continue to scotland and will certainly take a lot of pressure off the west coast mainline which could provide more capacity for local services.

I did wacth the pete waterman interview on channel 4 on youtube a week or so ago and i have read his article in teh latest rail magazine and he does present a good case for HS2. I also feel for somke of these people who will have to move, but i do think some objectives presented by 1 or 2 of the anti hs2 groups are stupid.(I would call some of these people nimbys, but i got told off on another forum for it.)

[smokey]

I'm for HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)).

It's Great to see the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) standing up for Rail for Once, I expect pressure from Europe has a Lot to do with it.
DfT's New Build policy has been ROAD, ROAD, ROAD, ROAD, ROAD, oh and Airports for well EVER, since the DfT came into being.

Any New Railway. Road, Airport, even a New Canal will have those who say it's NOT NEEDED, in the Wrong place, too expensive etc.

High Speed 2 should run from London & the South right through to Scotland.

For those who fear HS2 will cut service demand on the West Coast, remember that a lot of Traffic on HS2 will be New to Rail, taken from the Roads and Air Routes.

And a Simple Rule to protect the West Coast services would be:

 Who ever gets awarded HS2 to Run, CAN NOT be involed in running the West Coast Service

So in today's game that would rule out Virgin from winning the HS2 Franchise unless they handed back West Coast.

[Electric train]

And a Simple Rule to protect the West Coast services would be:

 Who ever gets awarded HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) to Run, CAN NOT be involed in running the West Coast Service

So in today's game that would rule out Virgin from winning the HS2 Franchise unless they handed back West Coast.

I think DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have a different idea to you, they plan to let the West Coast franchise with HS2 as part of the bid, DfT need to get the money from somewhere to build HS2 this is one source

[Btline]

Yes - HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) will effectively become part of the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line). So Coventry and Wolverhampton will have services slowed down and axed. I think this is the biggest worry - Coventry is actually a top destination from Euston!

[mjones]

Although I believe the intention is to increase the frequency of the limited stop services , taking advantage of the capacity released by diverting the fast services onto HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)). A slower but more frequent service could be just as attractive in terms of ability to compete with driving times, by reducing waiting times.

[ChrisB]

I don't think it will reduce demand from COV so they'll still get fast trains in the peak, just fewer of them, as the train will still need to be as full leaving there.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Well, having bided my time, I've now voted. 

And that allows me to see the latest scores on this particular member's poll.

Interesting reading.