|
Witham Bobby
|
 |
« Reply #1845 on: June 18, 2025, 11:22:18 » |
|
A couple of days a week I drive up the M42 and back for work. Sometimes also travel around the Hams Hall area, on the A446.
This area is where the HS2▸ line will have junctions to take trains into Birmingham Curzon Street and out again, on towards Lichfield, where there will be a junction onto the WCML▸
I've watched progress for months and months, building (so far) one overbridge, and mile upon mile of piers for what will be viaducts. I can't help thinking that the job has been specified to include all the "nice to haves", and not kept to the basics. I'm not a civil engineer, but I suspect that viaducts are multiple times more costly than embankments
I just wonder who (if anyone) is in charge of what and how much is being spent on what
The whole thing smacks of politicos not wanting to get themselves a bad reputation on spending or specification grounds, so they've handed it over to an arms length contracting system, without proper oversight. There is no one to carry the can for when things go wrong. everyone concerned can point at everyone else. The story of modern government in the UK▸
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #1846 on: June 18, 2025, 11:58:04 » |
|
An additional £25bn is being thrown into this money pit. Quietly slipped into the Spending Review. Rachel Reeves decided not to mention this massive contribution to infrastructure spending when she gave her speech to the house. I wonder why? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/13/labour-hs2-money-rachel-reeves-spending-reviewThe Chancellor should've cancelled the entire project rather than throw more money at it. The assessment was probably that it's too far gone, not physically but politically, to cancel. What's the scientific name for HS2▸ ? album elephanto pretiosa |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 18, 2025, 20:15:29 by JayMac »
|
Logged
|
"Good news for regular users of Euston Station in London! One day they will die. Then they won't have to go to Euston Station ever again." - David Mitchell
|
|
|
|
John D
|
|
« Reply #1847 on: June 18, 2025, 12:10:43 » |
|
The rescheduling and re specifying things has not only pushed up costs by billions, it has made complete mockery of timescale.
There are you tube videos showing some sections have finished the earthworks and structures and are being landscaped. Only one TBM is now working (at Bromford), all the others have finished. But they have disbanded the crews rather than start the 2 Euston TBMs which are ready to go. Politicians don't understand basic continuity to save money.
There are set of newsletters, and these suggest in next few months many more new bridges will be in use, and the earthworks completed where there are currently old roads and deviations blocking the way.
Of course, big question is what has been gained by having some sections built (ready for fit out ) by mid 2026 if other parts have been deliberately/carelessly delayed upto 5 years
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John D
|
|
« Reply #1848 on: June 18, 2025, 14:16:53 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timmer
|
|
« Reply #1850 on: June 18, 2025, 17:58:18 » |
|
All the billions of pounds that have been poured into this massive white elephant that could have been spent elsewhere on the rail network. One project in particular that comes to mind is the bottleneck at Welwyn that would have increased capacity on the ECML▸ .
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #1851 on: June 19, 2025, 12:00:20 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Trowres
|
|
« Reply #1852 on: June 19, 2025, 21:57:55 » |
|
It is interesting to compare HS2▸ with schemes elsewhere.
Denmark's first high speed line (Copenhagen-Ringsted) had a slight head start on HS2, the idea being considered from 2007 (vs. 2009 for HS2). Again, capacity was a primary motivation. Speed aspirations were more modest, with 250kph being considered.
Much of the route runs parallel with motorways. There is some tunneling in urban areas; also some viaducts; but not on the scale of HS2. The work was planned as multiple contracts in the range of Euro30m to Euro200m.
Construction started in 2012 and it was opened in 2019. Operations had a very gradual start due to problems with the ETCS▸ . The route forms an integral part of the Danish network and will, a few years from now, connect to the European network via the Fehmarn Belt link to Germany.
Outturn cost for the 60km double track electrified line? DKK10bn, or about £1.2bn (give or take a bit on the exchange rates)
(edited to correct the name of the link to Germany)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sixty3Closure
|
|
« Reply #1853 on: June 20, 2025, 23:31:59 » |
|
I was talking to someone who owns a business contracting on HS2▸ . A piece of equipment stopped working so they sent an engineer. The engineer explained that they needed to turn the machine on to see the error code although it was probably a £400 card but the HS2 person refused as it broke safety protocols and there was no one available to manage the change process to allow the machine to be turned on. This went on for a while until HS2 asked if the engineer could install a whole new unit which apparently was allowed and there was a change process for. £20,000 later this was done and as an added bonus the contractor was asked to take the old kit away. He replaced the card for £400 and then sold it for £15K.
I've kept the details vague to avoid identifying anyone but fair to say this was not in a high risk area. It does highlight though that perhaps there's not great financial controls and a culture that doesn't really think about the sums of money being spent or sees spending as an easier way to fix problems than managing them. £20K is probably a tiny part of someone's discretionary spend but repeat this hundreds of times over the course of the project and you can see why costs mount up. Also how dysfunctional is a project if you can swap a machine out but not turn it on to run diagnostics?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6666
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
|
« Reply #1854 on: June 21, 2025, 17:03:24 » |
|
In the Times the other day, I saw Morten Morland's cartoon and thought "TG will like this".  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
matth1j
|
|
« Reply #1855 on: July 10, 2025, 12:55:44 » |
|
From the Telegraph: HS2▸ ran tens of billions of pounds over budget and will open years late because it was designed to be unnecessarily fast, MPs▸ have been told.
Lord Hendy, the rail minister, made the claim as he criticised the decision for the route to be built for trains running at speeds of 225mph, faster than on most high-speed networks overseas.
He said: “It is hard to understand why there was such zealotry about the highest-speed, high-speed railway in a relatively small country when the origination of it was to relieve capacity [problems].
“The case for better connectivity is pretty clear. The West Coast Main Line was predicted to be nearly full, and it is nearly full and under huge pressure.
“But there are two questions that doesn’t answer. One is why we needed an exceptionally fast railway, rather than just a fast railway.
“The other is the speed of delivery. I’m not sure I can make the case that it was desperate. Why it was pursued with such speed – and now we are suffering the cost of it – is hard to say.”
Lord Hendy questioned why HS2 needed to be even faster than the High Speed 1 route that runs between London’s St Pancras International Station and the Channel Tunnel, which at 186mph, he said was “quite fast as it is” and the standard speed for European high-speed lines.
He said about one-third of the HS2 route runs underground or through cuttings in order to keep the line straight and maximise speed, which had created significant engineering challenges.
The former chairman of Network Rail, which manages the UK▸ ’s train tracks and major stations, told the House of Commons transport committee that civil engineering work that should have been completed by now was still only about 60pc complete, with just one-third of the wider scheme, including tracks, trains and overhead power lines, finished.
‘Appalling mess’
Last month, the Government said that the opening of HS2 would be delayed beyond 2033 after cost overruns swelled to £37bn, despite the northern half of the project being scrapped to save money.
Heidi Alexander, the Transport Secretary, said the scheme was an “appalling mess” following a “litany of failures” and could end up becoming the most expensive railway line in the world. Some £2bn alone was spent on its now-cancelled second phase to Manchester.
Alan Over, director general for major rail projects at the Department for Transport, told MPs that HS2 was built to such a high specification in part because of a political desire to go one better than Britain’s European rivals.
He said: “If you are going to build a new railway, you might as well make it faster than our historic railways. The speed helps a bit with the capacity as well, because you can get more trains through in the given amount of time.
“The question is, why did the country choose to do it faster than the French or faster than the Germans or faster than the Spanish? There was a bit of ‘we want to join the high-speed revolution’ and be as good as everyone else in that regard.”
Mr Over added: “It’s not bad to have a national ambition. But you have to understand the consequences, that you are then pushing the boundaries and introducing more risk, and that leads to more cost.”
He said that the HS2 was designed for trains faster than all but the speediest Japanese and Chinese models.
Mark Wild, who took over as HS2’s chief executive in December after running London’s Crossrail project, conceded that the project had been too ambitious but said there was now no choice but to persevere with the truncated plans.
He said: “The mistake made here is that the railway is just too fast and too stiff, and that has produced very, very significant civil engineering costs.
“We have clearly got into terrible trouble with the estimate. But the die is cast now and we have to make the best we can of it.”
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #1856 on: July 10, 2025, 13:43:11 » |
|
London to Birmingham is 118 miles
At 225 m.p.h., that's 32 minutes
At 180 m.p.h., it's 40 minutes
At 140 m.p.h., it's 51 minutes
And at 125 m.p.h. its 57 minutes
Of course it will take longer - you have to allow for accelerating and breaking, and allow for the two minutes that you need to be there for closing of the doors, and time to get to and from the stations and platform. Rather more I would ask about the freqency and how long you'll have to be at the station to check in before your train is called - one hopes not as long as Eurostar.
I find myself remaining of the personal opinion that 140 m.p.h. would have been quite fast enough, with half of the extra money spent to raise the speed limit on good access in and out of that backbone.
Questions - for what proportion of the journey will the trains be running at their top speed or even over 200 m.p.h., and are the ends engineered to a less fast standard - Old Oak Common to Perivale - 4.5 miles - at 225 m.p.h. would take a minute and 12 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
a-driver
|
|
« Reply #1857 on: July 10, 2025, 15:25:02 » |
|
London to Birmingham is 118 miles
At 225 m.p.h., that's 32 minutes
At 180 m.p.h., it's 40 minutes
At 140 m.p.h., it's 51 minutes
And at 125 m.p.h. its 57 minutes
Of course it will take longer - you have to allow for accelerating and breaking, and allow for the two minutes that you need to be there for closing of the doors, and time to get to and from the stations and platform. Rather more I would ask about the freqency and how long you'll have to be at the station to check in before your train is called - one hopes not as long as Eurostar.
I find myself remaining of the personal opinion that 140 m.p.h. would have been quite fast enough, with half of the extra money spent to raise the speed limit on good access in and out of that backbone.
Questions - for what proportion of the journey will the trains be running at their top speed or even over 200 m.p.h., and are the ends engineered to a less fast standard - Old Oak Common to Perivale - 4.5 miles - at 225 m.p.h. would take a minute and 12 seconds.
Utter codswallop!!!!!! It’s a piece of infrastructure that’s going to be in place for 100s of years, you build it with the future in mind and thus you need to obtain the maximum speed as possible. You’re in competition with road and air. When it comes to high speed rail around the world, they didn’t get to 125mph and said that’s fast enough. They are still pushing for faster speeds. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Witham Bobby
|
|
« Reply #1858 on: July 10, 2025, 16:06:57 » |
|
HS2▸ was conceived to provide extra capacity (sorely needed in many places, not just on the London to Birmingham route) and to be fit for the future
Lord Hendy now saying that it didn't need to be constructed with such high speed limits in mind does not fully explain the tunnels, many of which are for NIMBY reasons, the viaducts instead of earthworks, the slab track, or the bat tunnel, and several other specification extravagances
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #1859 on: July 11, 2025, 16:15:25 » |
|
HS2▸ was conceived to provide extra capacity (sorely needed in many places, not just on the London to Birmingham route) and to be fit for the future
Lord Hendy now saying that it didn't need to be constructed with such high speed limits in mind does not fully explain the tunnels, many of which are for NIMBY reasons, the viaducts instead of earthworks, the slab track, or the bat tunnel, and several other specification extravagances
Judging by Hendy's comments, it would appear that the 225mph running speed was the greatest "specification extravagance" of them all!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
