And so have I. My respect increased as I read the article, and thank you for the link, grahame. The New Statesman is not my chip-wrapper of choice.

Lord Adonis showed that he is more than just a political animal when he took the transport portfolio. His tour of Britain by train, and the subsequent published musings served to show that he has knowledge, passion, and pragmatism in the correct proportions, and was a safe pair of hands for such a crucial role. He is a skilled communicator, and is not afraid to point out the earlier failings of his own party.

I am also developing respect for Patrick McLoughlin, and not just for his humble origins. The arguments he made after the Darling outburst are exactly the ones made by the noble lord. He speaks for the coalition as well as the Conservative party, and despite Lord Adonis' criticism of the slow pace of action, and his gentle dig about Labour having much to do in 2015 to get the project firmly established, there is clear unanimity at the top level of the three parties. 

So a project with more history than the Labour announcement in 2010 was called in by a cash-strapped coalition looking for big savings, examined by a Tory grandee and still found to be essential. This episode shows just how much transport policy has to rise above politics. If I ever get the chance to found my National Infrastructure Authority, I shall ask Lord Adonis and Patrick McLoughlin to head it.

Exactly my point. We either need a new railway or we don't, and the evidence is firmly that we do. Not building something would be irresponsible, since the need would not go away, so would need to be done another day, and will inevitably cost more.

Is it a large price tag with marginal BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio)? The cost will not be evenly spread over the years of planning and construction. Land acquisition will be done at the start, and will be a sizeable chunk. Phase 2 is planned to be up and running in 2033, so the annual cost, if the whole costs ^70 billion, will be ^3.5 billion. The risk is clearly of spiralling costs eating up resources so that this becomes the only railway project in the country, and that would be awful. But Network Rail is proving to be better at managing costs than Railtrack before it, and projects are being finished on time and on budget more and more these days than before. That gives me hope that the total cost will not come as a shock, whatever it is. Planning for other projects can then be done with this in mind.

This will be a long post, so sorry in advance. I'll try to stay firmly on track, but there are a couple of big quotes.

No shovel has yet turned a single sod in the HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) construction, and already there is political trouble afoot. The project has hitherto enjoyed cross-party support within the coalition and the Labour opposition, as it had done when Labour was in government. The coalition called in the plans in 2010, but the task before Lord Mawhinney was not to decide whether or the not the scheme should proceed, but whether it should route not from Euston to Birmingham, but from St Pancras via Heathrow, something the Conservatives in opposition had argued for. IMO^▸ (in my opinion), the depth of the consensus on the need for a new route is adequately demonstrated by the result of the Mawhinney review. Though he had been transport secretary under John Major, his review supported the route put forward by HS2 Ltd, the company formed under Lord Adonis to develop the project.

Cross-party agreement is essential for a project of this magnitude, as it was with the Olympics. Without it from the get-go, I do not think we would have made it as far as we have by now. Planning and construction will take the lifetime of at least four governments. The Edinburgh tram system shows the perils. The previous Labour Scottish administration started the scheme in the face of hostility from the SNP opposition. It is only going ahead now because cancellation would cost more than completion (or because the SNP secretly always thought it made sense, but didn't want to be blamed if it went wrong). No-one would risk starting a project costing tens of billions if he thought it would be cancelled after years of work. Uncertainty causes delay and expense, as it did with Edinburgh, Crossrail and the Great Western electrification, announced and cancelled at least twice, though thankfully unstoppable now.

There have been grumblings from the back-benches, particularly those MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) with rural constituencies that will be bisected, but not served, by the line, but support has been strong at higher levels until now. Alistair Darling, former Chancellor and Transport Secretary, took to the Times to argue for cancellation.


The effect of this volte face is potentially enormous. Darling left front-bench politics after the Labour defeat in 2010, to spend more time with the Buds of May. His voice remains a big voice. Only two other people served in the Cabinet continuously throughout the Blair and Brown premierships (Gordon Brown and Jack Straw). Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are quoted as saying they support HS2, but will not do so if costs spiral. Two Eds may be better than one, but this is equivocation, surely.

Patrick McLoughlin has led the charge to shore up the project. He is quoted in today's Times:


My own view is that they are both right, but McLoughlin is much more right than Darling. I say this even though my general political stance is closer to Darling's than McLoughlin's by a good cheap-day return.

Darling talks about "visionary" projects being glamorous, but says that transport works best when it is boring. I know what he means, but he has got it wrong. If a new railway is a necessity, then it ceases to be visionary unless the proposed vehicles are powered by Dilithium crystals or anti-matter. The high speed aspect could be visionary, but it makes perfect sense to me, at least, to future-proof and get the maximum benefit from the new line. I find support for this view from McLoughlin, again in a Times interview, this time from 22 June:


Darling's view is more cautious, more small-c conservative. It is the same caution that scrapped the Bristol tramway and gave us instead a half-assed road building scheme in the Trojan horse of Metrobust. Darling, remember, was the man who agreed with Atkins' suggestion to rip up the Severn Beach line for a busway. He also turned down Manchester's Metrolink extension, although he relented in the face of the campaign of obstinacy that was mounted. The success of the latter two shows that he was wrong in those instances.

Darling says correctly that the business case for HS2 is crucial. This approach is exactly what got us Metrobust in Bristol rather than improvements to public transport, but he has a point. He destroys it by saying that people are productive on trains because they can work during the journey. He doesn't mention that they can't if the have to stand outside the toilet for the whole journey because of overcrowding. Capacity, not speed, is the clever bit of HS2. More people will be able to work on trains if it is built, because there will be more of them.

The cost is a bit of a red herring. On a project of this size, we will probably only be able to estimate the full cost about two years after the route is complete. Any figures quoted now will be the roughest of guesstimates. This is not to say that we should not control costs - far from it. Every stage of the route should be scrutinised with an intense scrute, and every best practice implemented.

On the terminal matter, the proposal is to use the former Curzon Street station. It was originally called Birmingham Station, but was renamed in 1852 as other stations opened. Although the Grade 1 listed former entrance is the only building to survive, the area has not been heavily developed since closure in 1966. It was then used as a Parcelforce depot until 2006. Birmingham City University have (had) plans for a new campus using some of the site, and Birmingham City Council planned to refurbish the entrance hall for rental to a quality tenant. iIt is, BTW^▸ (by the way), the oldest surviving example of monumental railway architecture in Britain. Continuing the line to New Street, Moor Street, or any other station would involve considerable demolition and/or tunneling, plus significant enlargement of the chosen station to reduce congestion. Birmingham Curzon Street ceased to be viable for passenger use because of being on the eastern edge of the city, giving rise to traffic problems even in the 1850s. It ceased to be a major interchange when New Street opened in 1854, but ceased passenger use in 1893. It has my support as the new terminus, but will need links to the other nearby stations.

I'm fairly sure that the Eurostars, before HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) opened, were able to make the switch "on the fly". The momentum must be towards 25KV AC in the long term, but it will be a long, slow process. It would make sense to do it piecemeal, route by route, until the rolling stock remaining at third rail is so old and in such a minority that it makes sense to finish the conversion rather than build two types of train. Of course, there are plenty of trains into London that are already 25KV - are any of these lines also third rail?

In Network Rail's 2003 Technical Plan, we read that about 40% of the railway is electrified. I'm not aware of much new electrics since then. Of that 40%, around 60% is 25KV OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE"), 40% by other systems, predominantly third rail, but with the Tyne and Wear Metro still 1500V DC^▸ (Direct Current) OLE. Though only 40% is electrified, about 60% of passengers journeys are by electric traction. Being 25KV doesn't guarantee youth - some of it dates back to the late 1950s following the 1955 BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) Modernisation Plan, although much will presumably have been renewed since then.

A view held also by the Transport Minister.

Barrow has seen considerable regeneration over the past 20 years, and work continues on a marina, due for completion in 2020. It is visited by cruise ships, although most passengers would head for the lakes. Then there is the not inconsiderable presence of BAe systems. There are about 80,000 people living there. I suppose the big reason against electrification is the distance from Windermere, but I have sympathy with the locals' view that any reduction in service would be damaging to the area.

Four apiece, I reckon.

No, it is connected to the campaign for the re-qaudrupling of the linw from Bristol Temple Meads to Filton Bank, and was what was before me on the day I signed up and had to thinl of a name quickly. Had it been the following evening, it could have been "Dog taking a dump" or something. It has served me reasonably well. Further analysis can be found here.


I'm the only man I know with a record player. You are not the first to hold that opinion.

STE, that sounds a very blas^ description of a mere change of name, but your earlier post hints at what a major change this really is.

I'll be up there with you, RS. Can't wait to see Four Track, Now!

Has work started on the rail depot that way yet? I haven't been through on the train for ma while, and can't gett close enough by road. And now Filton Airfield is closed, I don't even fly over it.

Oh dear. Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way, but oh, how I wish you were here! I feel comfortably numb, and my eldest daughter is called Emily.  This whole thread has Echoes, and is costing me Time.

Now, when I see Emily play with her 14-month old son and month-old daughter (yes, I know it's quick, but one of us was in a hurry) I have to ask: "By the way, which one's pink?".

FTR^▸ (Fitness To Run), I spent my 21st birthday at Bingley Hall, Staffordshire, watching Pink Floyd for the second time, doing the "Animals" tour. The first time was Knobworth, where "Wish you were Here" was brand new.

Set the controls for the heart of the sun, somebody, whilst I apologise for a momentary lapse of reason.

I had liberal Pink Floyd music on the car stereo when I was Learning to Fly, but that is enough for now. I have hit The Wall. If I open up much more, I may reveal a Saucerful of Secrets, and would have to make sure they were Obscured by Clouds, lest anyone feel tempted to Meddle. Up and Atom, heart Mother!

Those are indeed brilliant pictures, ST, and I add my thanks to the others. This is railway history in the making, and your archive is valuable.

That's a good question. from time to time, My department's head office was in Leeds for a while. I had to go there and our booking agency often had trouble finding somewhere to stay, even when booking a month in advance.

Bristol was shocking for hotel space in the late 1970s, when I moved here. It has improved greatly since, but that is because there are more than enough customers to go around as a rule, and occupancy rates are fairly high. Airlines have well-developed contingency arrangements around the likes of Heathrow and Gatwick, and can probably hotel an entire 747 with a couple of calls to booking agencies. Bristol will have little in comparison, and if the event occurred during the Harbour Festival or Balloon Fiesta, you would struggle, even if you went down to B&B level.

BA^» (British Airways - about), Virgin, and the like put their crew in 4* minimum hotels. Aircrew avoid jet lag by sticking to GMT (or strictly UTC,  Universal Time Constant, which is the same time as GMT) wherever they are. Certainly, they need their kip, and would be my first priority for housing. The first check-list that any pilot on any flight goes through is "I'M SAFE". Is my performance likely to be affected by:
Illness
Medication
Stress
Alcohol (20 mg per 100 ml, a quarter of the limit for a car in UK^▸ (United Kingdom))
Fatigue (my emphasis) and have I
Eaten sufficient to sustain me through the journey.

If the answer to any one of these is unfavourable, then someone else flies the plane. Of those factors, one could argue that alcohol intake, medication, and food are within the control of the pilot. I knew someone who had a tooth extracted without even local anaesthetic because it would have grounded him for 24 hours.

So a plane full of knackered, angry, hungry, tipsy passengers flown by a pampered and well-rested crew will arrive safely. The PR^▸ (Public Relations) guys can deal with the flak, and if it isn't a regular occurrence, it will not impact passenger loyalty in any big way.

St Johns, Newfoundland, doesn't have much infrastructure beyond the airport. Flying the shortest route between North America and Northern Europe - a great arc, rather than a straight line - it is the last airport out and first airport in, and has great strategic value for emergencies, but not a lot of hotel space. I fully understand why Virgin could not find sufficient beds. As an aside, my son-in-law went there for the day once. He mends planes for the RAF^▸ (Royal Air Force), and as he was about to pack up and return to my daughter for dinner, he was told to pack a team and all the equipment he needed to replace the forward undercarriage of a VC10 tanker into a C-17. Sleeping on the plane, he and his team burst forth onto the tarmac 8 hours later at St Johns, spanners in hand, and were told that the VC10 had a departure slot another 8 hours later. The C-17 went home without them. They finished the job with minutes to spare, slept in the VC10 on the way home, and arrived home in time for a burnt dinner for breakfast and another day's work. They had spent the day in Canada without so much as a cup of tea. After that, they were given time off for a couple of days, and soon ceased to think of themselves as hard done by..

As another exiled Northener, I agree with OTC's point about the two-way flow. But why the big need for speed? Patrick McLoughlin was recently interviewed by The Times. In that, he said:

It seems that the reason for a high-speed line is not the need for a high-speed line, but the need for a line, which might as well be built to high-speed specification. On that basis, the West of England Partnership's rubbish Metrobust scheme might as well be a rapid tram system.

I agree that Something Must Be Done. Railways are very much in the ascendancy again, and money spent now will be money well spent for the future. I would hope that this will not soak up all the available cash to the detriment of smaller projects like Portishead, Greater Bristol Metro, and one dear to my heart, Four Track Now! at Filton Bank.