FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The 15 billion pound railway
The 15 billion pound railway
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So who's paying for this? hope it's not us northerners grrrrrrr."
But we have a fantastic rail network in the north.
Loads of seats at peak times, clean fast trains, cheap tickets and a fantastic service across the Pennines.
I'm off to take my tablets and have a lie down now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity. "
I think the birmingham case is stronger though, do you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity. "
£15 000 000 000 to get away from Liverpool faster? I'm in |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity.
£15 000 000 000 to get away from Liverpool faster? I'm in"
  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity.
I think the birmingham case is stronger though, do you? "
I don't think there's a strong enough case to warrant any of it. Birmingham is only a stones throw from London as it is. By the time the train gets up to max speed it would be time to start slowing down again. As a small country we just don't need it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity.
I think the birmingham case is stronger though, do you?
I don't think there's a strong enough case to warrant any of it. Birmingham is only a stones throw from London as it is. By the time the train gets up to max speed it would be time to start slowing down again. As a small country we just don't need it. "
I wouldn't call it a stone throw personally. I'd certainly never consider doing business in birmingham with the current transport system. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Think big think maglef!. There was a time when this country used to do big grand fanciful and wonderful stuff!
600mph---------
London to Manchester in 30 minutes including two stops  .
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Let's all just stay in the Victorian era which is when the infrastructure was designed.
We can still use our state of the art (in 1975) Intercity 125's.
And the person who said that the UK is not big enough to need high speed rail. Try telling that to anyone who has to travel from Scotland to London.
Spain, France, Italy all have 200mph or more trains, and we are still trundling along at 125. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Let's all just stay in the Victorian era which is when the infrastructure was designed.
We can still use our state of the art (in 1975) Intercity 125's.
And the person who said that the UK is not big enough to need high speed rail. Try telling that to anyone who has to travel from Scotland to London.
Spain, France, Italy all have 200mph or more trains, and we are still trundling along at 125. "
Sorry but the point is....the majority of the public are not behind this as we are in times of austerity and this is the last thing we should be thinking about blowing all this money on!
The system we have works and a little extra money would help but this new line is a luxury we can't afford. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The 15 billion pound railway is the across town underground rail link in London.not the proposed line improvement from London to the north. "
Now that makes sense....I thought the price had dropped for HSBC  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Let's all just stay in the Victorian era which is when the infrastructure was designed.
We can still use our state of the art (in 1975) Intercity 125's.
And the person who said that the UK is not big enough to need high speed rail. Try telling that to anyone who has to travel from Scotland to London.
Spain, France, Italy all have 200mph or more trains, and we are still trundling along at 125. "
The high speed line is going to stop at Leeds, Scotland isn't in the picture. It's cheaper and quicker to fly from Scotland to London and it still would be with the high speed train so your point has no substance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If it means less crowding, and quicker journeys across London, great. If it's so more people can be crammed into London to swell the Government coffers, fuck off.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Could it be so all those MPs who have second homes away from the cramped conditions in London can get here super fast, when they want to vote on their pay rise, or something that means more money for them and their friends.
*cynical head on today * |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So they are saying we have to cut down on all of the emissions, oh wait let's make trains run faster and burn more fuel 
They are electric."
Do they generate their own electricity?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
cracks me up ...
homeless people
housing shortage
nhs in trouble
prisons overflowing and bursting at the seams
roads in a state of dis repair with pot holes
i know , lets spend 15 billion on a train |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The 15 billion pound railway is the across town underground rail link in London.not the proposed line improvement from London to the north. "
Exactly the programme is on BBC Two
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So they are saying we have to cut down on all of the emissions, oh wait let's make trains run faster and burn more fuel
They are electric."
Unless it's totally green electric....there will be more emissions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"cracks me up ...
homeless people
housing shortage
nhs in trouble
prisons overflowing and bursting at the seams
roads in a state of dis repair with pot holes
i know , lets spend 15 billion on a train "
Zero sum fallacy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions. "
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So they are saying we have to cut down on all of the emissions, oh wait let's make trains run faster and burn more fuel
They are electric.
Unless it's totally green electric....there will be more emissions. "
Simply not true.
More than 50% of the national grid comes from non-emitting sources.
Thus you can cut the emissions down as a ratio of that.
Furthermore our current high speed trains use a diesel engine to power an electric motor with the obvious efficiency losses that comes with in transferring power from one medium to another, so direct electric power to electric traction will not have that significant loss associated with it.
Thus electric trains are more efficient and their power uses fewer hydrocarbons. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions.
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course. "
Wasn't it the lib dems? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions.
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course.
Wasn't it the lib dems?"
No. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions.
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course.
Wasn't it the lib dems?
No."
In January 2009 the Labour government established High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd), chaired by Sir David Rowlands,[13] to examine the case for a new high-speed line and present a potential route between London and the West Midlands.[14] The government report suggested that the line could be extended to reach Scotland.[15]
From wiki. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It should be an economic cycle of reinvestment and job generation that eould benefit our economy. All it'll really do is make a load of mps and government officials richer from back handers and the plush positions they'll have lined up as directors of the (probably foreign) companies that will get the contracts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It should be an economic cycle of reinvestment and job generation that eould benefit our economy. All it'll really do is make a load of mps and government officials richer from back handers and the plush positions they'll have lined up as directors of the (probably foreign) companies that will get the contracts."
Why do you think there aren't major british railway stock or signalling companies anymore? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Also this 15 billion pound figure... so what? It's not dead money, its not 15 billion buried in a hole in the ground, it's 15 billion in people's pockets getting spent back into the economy! "
And improving the productivity of the nation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It should be an economic cycle of reinvestment and job generation that eould benefit our economy. All it'll really do is make a load of mps and government officials richer from back handers and the plush positions they'll have lined up as directors of the (probably foreign) companies that will get the contracts."
Who's laying the track? A quango? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions.
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course.
Wasn't it the lib dems?
No."
This would suggest differently
Labour and HS2
By johnredwood | Published: October 29, 2013
The press picked up an important story about HS2 over the week-end. They claim that Mr Cameron will drop HS2 if Labour turn against the project. This makes sense.
A large project like HS2 would benefit from cross party support. As it will take so long to construct its build period is likely to span different governments. It is easier to do well if all involved agree with it. More importantly, in this Parliament HS2 is only proceeding because of Labour support. There are enough Conservative and other MP opponents of HS2 to stop it if all Labour MPs voted against. All the time Labour votes for HS2 or abstains, it has enough votes to carry.
Many people find this Parliamentary arithmetic difficult to grasp, yet it is the same arithmetic which means all the time Labour and Lib Dems block a referendum on the EU we cannot have one, and the same arithmetic which finally led to a vote for a lower EU budget when Labour switched sides and joined Conservatives. Labour votes with the Coalition government to push through many EU measures.
By saying they will make a decision later rather than sooner Labour are being indulgent with themselves and with public money. If it is Labour’s intention later this Parliament to kill off the HS2 project by coming out against it and voting with other opponents in the Commons to stop it, they should understand that means more wasted money in the meantime. If this Coalition government does not have the votes to carry the project right through this Parliament owing to a future change by Labour, it would better to kill it off now. That will require Labour honesty about their future voting intentions and a sense of responsibility with public money. In this Parliament Labour cannot always enjoy the luxury of opposition, as their votes do determine a good number of policies. In this case Labour is helping push through spending on a project which they now say they may wish to cancel later. The Coalition government has been proceeding on the basis that Labour invented this project and will continue to support it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions.
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course.
Wasn't it the lib dems?
No.
This would suggest differently
Labour and HS2
By johnredwood | Published: October 29, 2013
The press picked up an important story about HS2 over the week-end. They claim that Mr Cameron will drop HS2 if Labour turn against the project. This makes sense.
A large project like HS2 would benefit from cross party support. As it will take so long to construct its build period is likely to span different governments. It is easier to do well if all involved agree with it. More importantly, in this Parliament HS2 is only proceeding because of Labour support. There are enough Conservative and other MP opponents of HS2 to stop it if all Labour MPs voted against. All the time Labour votes for HS2 or abstains, it has enough votes to carry.
Many people find this Parliamentary arithmetic difficult to grasp, yet it is the same arithmetic which means all the time Labour and Lib Dems block a referendum on the EU we cannot have one, and the same arithmetic which finally led to a vote for a lower EU budget when Labour switched sides and joined Conservatives. Labour votes with the Coalition government to push through many EU measures.
By saying they will make a decision later rather than sooner Labour are being indulgent with themselves and with public money. If it is Labour’s intention later this Parliament to kill off the HS2 project by coming out against it and voting with other opponents in the Commons to stop it, they should understand that means more wasted money in the meantime. If this Coalition government does not have the votes to carry the project right through this Parliament owing to a future change by Labour, it would better to kill it off now. That will require Labour honesty about their future voting intentions and a sense of responsibility with public money. In this Parliament Labour cannot always enjoy the luxury of opposition, as their votes do determine a good number of policies. In this case Labour is helping push through spending on a project which they now say they may wish to cancel later. The Coalition government has been proceeding on the basis that Labour invented this project and will continue to support it."
What does that last sentence say? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The whole point of HS2 was to increase capacity on the line. Why didn't they just use double decker trains as they do in the States and some parts of Europe?
"
the gauge of the track isn't wide enough |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions.
HS2 conceived under a Labour government of course.
Wasn't it the lib dems?
No.
This would suggest differently
Labour and HS2
By johnredwood | Published: October 29, 2013
The press picked up an important story about HS2 over the week-end. They claim that Mr Cameron will drop HS2 if Labour turn against the project. This makes sense.
A large project like HS2 would benefit from cross party support. As it will take so long to construct its build period is likely to span different governments. It is easier to do well if all involved agree with it. More importantly, in this Parliament HS2 is only proceeding because of Labour support. There are enough Conservative and other MP opponents of HS2 to stop it if all Labour MPs voted against. All the time Labour votes for HS2 or abstains, it has enough votes to carry.
Many people find this Parliamentary arithmetic difficult to grasp, yet it is the same arithmetic which means all the time Labour and Lib Dems block a referendum on the EU we cannot have one, and the same arithmetic which finally led to a vote for a lower EU budget when Labour switched sides and joined Conservatives. Labour votes with the Coalition government to push through many EU measures.
By saying they will make a decision later rather than sooner Labour are being indulgent with themselves and with public money. If it is Labour’s intention later this Parliament to kill off the HS2 project by coming out against it and voting with other opponents in the Commons to stop it, they should understand that means more wasted money in the meantime. If this Coalition government does not have the votes to carry the project right through this Parliament owing to a future change by Labour, it would better to kill it off now. That will require Labour honesty about their future voting intentions and a sense of responsibility with public money. In this Parliament Labour cannot always enjoy the luxury of opposition, as their votes do determine a good number of policies. In this case Labour is helping push through spending on a project which they now say they may wish to cancel later. The Coalition government has been proceeding on the basis that Labour invented this project and will continue to support it.
What does that last sentence say?"
Oh bugger |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
just out of interest, how much wonga did the nation blow on a chunnel and hs1 to connect us to a continent that we no longer want to have any dealings with? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It should be an economic cycle of reinvestment and job generation that eould benefit our economy. All it'll really do is make a load of mps and government officials richer from back handers and the plush positions they'll have lined up as directors of the (probably foreign) companies that will get the contracts.
Why do you think there aren't major british railway stock or signalling companies anymore? "
The British signalling companies are a pale shadow of their former selves. I've witnessed the rapid decline of Westinghouse in Wiltshire for just one example. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It should be an economic cycle of reinvestment and job generation that eould benefit our economy. All it'll really do is make a load of mps and government officials richer from back handers and the plush positions they'll have lined up as directors of the (probably foreign) companies that will get the contracts.
Who's laying the track? A quango? "
Apologies. My full cynicism has been let loose by the lurgy. My usual sunny disposition will hopefully be restored sooner rather than later. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"just out of interest, how much wonga did the nation blow on a chunnel and hs1 to connect us to a continent that we no longer want to have any dealings with? "
Now that was a hole in the ground worth putting money into. It makes a fortune! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Let's all just stay in the Victorian era which is when the infrastructure was designed.
We can still use our state of the art (in 1975) Intercity 125's.
And the person who said that the UK is not big enough to need high speed rail. Try telling that to anyone who has to travel from Scotland to London.
Spain, France, Italy all have 200mph or more trains, and we are still trundling along at 125.
Sorry but the point is....the majority of the public are not behind this as we are in times of austerity and this is the last thing we should be thinking about blowing all this money on!
The system we have works and a little extra money would help but this new line is a luxury we can't afford."
Thou some journeys are longer than others (lot) longer in some cases, and as much as i agree with what you say its likely the plans for this new rail route were drawn up a while back and it would cost now to cancel it hugh amounts of money.. But it does make me wonder even if the plans were drawn up sometime ago 15 billion pounds even then was a hugh amount to gamble with not knowing how the countrys future finances would stand it makes you wonder if they would still do the same thing now not knowing what the future holds. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"just out of interest, how much wonga did the nation blow on a chunnel and hs1 to connect us to a continent that we no longer want to have any dealings with?
Now that was a hole in the ground worth putting money into. It makes a fortune! "
they'll be tendering out contracts for bricking it back up again in 2019 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I'll reiterate what I said above. The 15 Billion Pound Railway is a cross-London link. The programme is on BBC2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w
HS2 is a £56 Billion project - increased from original estimates of £35 Billion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Okay... I am now confused
Are people here confusing hs2 and crossrail "
Yes. It's now clear to me it's Crossrail, which, in my opinion, is very much needed because of the amount of housing and business development going on in the East and South East of London. The stations near me are being upgraded to accommodate the trains and people using them. Hopefully, it will take some of the strain off of Barking and Mile End stations. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'll reiterate what I said above. The 15 Billion Pound Railway is a cross-London link. The programme is on BBC2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w
HS2 is a £56 Billion project - increased from original estimates of £35 Billion."
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I'll reiterate what I said above. The 15 Billion Pound Railway is a cross-London link. The programme is on BBC2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w
HS2 is a £56 Billion project - increased from original estimates of £35 Billion.
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country "
London needs more transport, including buses, trains and river buses. There will be 100s of thousands more people in the next 5 years, if the building continues. They have to get around somehow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"I don't think this country is big enough to justify a high speed rail network. You can get from Liverpool to London in under 2 hours, that's fast enough. Why spend billions to shave 40 minutes off it. Pointless really. The money would be better spent upgrading the current network and trains and increase capacity. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"We need better inter northern services between Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds etc they are appalling at present,but the inter city just needs more carrages on the trains."
Direct Rail are having locomotives and new carriages built for that service. The coaches won't be here until next year at the earliest though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country "
Actually with the greatest of respect crossrail is needed
It will regenerate parts of suburban London both east and west and will help connections right from east anglia and Essex , Kent and south east London thru to Woking, Guildford, reading and Oxford... and also with the interchange to the thameslink north south line it means people outside London won't have to use the underground as much
Actually it also means Heathrow to Gatwick connection times will be quicker |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It should be an economic cycle of reinvestment and job generation that eould benefit our economy. All it'll really do is make a load of mps and government officials richer from back handers and the plush positions they'll have lined up as directors of the (probably foreign) companies that will get the contracts.
Why do you think there aren't major british railway stock or signalling companies anymore?
The British signalling companies are a pale shadow of their former selves. I've witnessed the rapid decline of Westinghouse in Wiltshire for just one example. "
Yes but why do you think that has happened? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country
Actually with the greatest of respect crossrail is needed
It will regenerate parts of suburban London both east and west and will help connections right from east anglia and Essex , Kent and south east London thru to Woking, Guildford, reading and Oxford... and also with the interchange to the thameslink north south line it means people outside London won't have to use the underground as much
Actually it also means Heathrow to Gatwick connection times will be quicker "
On the crossrail I will bow to your judgement as I have very little knowledge of commuting in london.
But I would hope it would remain in the public sector after all the tax payers investment.....but I have a feeling it will get sold off cheaply if this government remains in power,which sadly is looking very likely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It will do piss all for the north east as usual most ppl in the south don't even know we're that is waste of money for me "
I would be more than happy for this Government to invest money in the North East, to create jobs, build homes to entice people there, instead of London. The reason Crossrail is needed (and the many more buses they have added) is because of the hundreds of thousands of people who have moved here-and still coming - and the need for them to get into London to work. It's too expensive to buy or rent in London, for the average worker, so people are looking at Greater London, because it's cheaper. This is, of course, causing property prices to rise quickly and rents are rising accordingly. It won't be long before every inch of land has been built on and we run out of room.
Then, maybe, the North will become an option and you will get your wish. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Aw well as long as London and the south are looked after then wtf "
It's where a large amount of the money is generated, why wouldn't the Government look after it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Aw well as long as London and the south are looked after then wtf
It's where a large amount of the money is generated, why wouldn't the Government look after it. "
there are advocates of implementing a ring fenced business infrastructure tax on companies to pay for this kind of thing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
By then my friend there will b nothing left up here I understand that London is important it's like the 80s when almost every man in teeside worked there the more you spend in London the more you drag ppl in how about investing more in the north so they don't need to go to London |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country
Actually with the greatest of respect crossrail is needed
It will regenerate parts of suburban London both east and west and will help connections right from east anglia and Essex , Kent and south east London thru to Woking, Guildford, reading and Oxford... and also with the interchange to the thameslink north south line it means people outside London won't have to use the underground as much
Actually it also means Heathrow to Gatwick connection times will be quicker
On the crossrail I will bow to your judgement as I have very little knowledge of commuting in london.
But I would hope it would remain in the public sector after all the tax payers investment.....but I have a feeling it will get sold off cheaply if this government remains in power,which sadly is looking very likely."
Crossrail is owned by Transport For London (TFL) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Aw well as long as London and the south are looked after then wtf
It's where a large amount of the money is generated, why wouldn't the Government look after it. "
Aren't we all in this togeather.A large amonut of money is generated in Manchester. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country
Actually with the greatest of respect crossrail is needed
It will regenerate parts of suburban London both east and west and will help connections right from east anglia and Essex , Kent and south east London thru to Woking, Guildford, reading and Oxford... and also with the interchange to the thameslink north south line it means people outside London won't have to use the underground as much
Actually it also means Heathrow to Gatwick connection times will be quicker
On the crossrail I will bow to your judgement as I have very little knowledge of commuting in london.
But I would hope it would remain in the public sector after all the tax payers investment.....but I have a feeling it will get sold off cheaply if this government remains in power,which sadly is looking very likely.
Crossrail is owned by Transport For London (TFL)"
See clip below taken off Wikipedia which suggests it will end up in the hands of the big business
TfL is also responsible, jointly with the national Department for Transport (DfT), for commissioning the construction of the new Crossrail line, and will be responsible for franchising its operation once completed.[3] |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"By then my friend there will b nothing left up here I understand that London is important it's like the 80s when almost every man in teeside worked there the more you spend in London the more you drag ppl in how about investing more in the north so they don't need to go to London "
If the tories get in for a decade youll look back with fond memories of the 80s  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Aw well as long as London and the south are looked after then wtf
It's where a large amount of the money is generated, why wouldn't the Government look after it. "
Aren't we all in this togeather.A large amonut of money is generated in Manchester. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Aw well as long as London and the south are looked after then wtf
It's where a large amount of the money is generated, why wouldn't the Government look after it. Aren't we all in this togeather.A large amonut of money is generated in Manchester."
Exactly... there is a lot of work going on... crossrail in London, Manchester metrolink expansion, net in Nottingham, West Midlands metro, Sheffield supertram
In the north east the Tyne and Wear metro could be expanded easily... they have the track beds to washington there! They could expand to blyth using the freight lines! Sunderland to Hartlepool using rail lines but the issue is there is no joined up thinking and the councils only look at for themselves
For example... there was a proposal to link up Newcastle Sunderland Middlesbrough and Durham in one big tram system... but none of them could agree! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"cracks me up ...
homeless people
housing shortage
nhs in trouble
prisons overflowing and bursting at the seams
roads in a state of dis repair with pot holes
i know , lets spend 15 billion on a train "
This isn't the only train we're getting. Cambridge is getting an underground network courtesy of our new major.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Also this 15 billion pound figure... so what? It's not dead money, its not 15 billion buried in a hole in the ground, it's 15 billion in people's pockets getting spent back into the economy!
And improving the productivity of the nation. "
So does that mean we can afford more bank holidays? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Also this 15 billion pound figure... so what? It's not dead money, its not 15 billion buried in a hole in the ground, it's 15 billion in people's pockets getting spent back into the economy!
And improving the productivity of the nation.
So does that mean we can afford more bank holidays? "
Actually as artificial intelligence takes off improving productivity, you'll probably find that we start having more leisure than working days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Aw well as long as London and the south are looked after then wtf
It's where a large amount of the money is generated, why wouldn't the Government look after it. Aren't we all in this togeather.A large amonut of money is generated in Manchester.
Exactly... there is a lot of work going on... crossrail in London, Manchester metrolink expansion, net in Nottingham, West Midlands metro, Sheffield supertram
In the north east the Tyne and Wear metro could be expanded easily... they have the track beds to washington there! They could expand to blyth using the freight lines! Sunderland to Hartlepool using rail lines but the issue is there is no joined up thinking and the councils only look at for themselves
For example... there was a proposal to link up Newcastle Sunderland Middlesbrough and Durham in one big tram system... but none of them could agree!"
I'll give you that one too...as Middlesbrough council, and Redcar and Cleveland council could not agree on a much needed bypass that has been on the drawing board for around 60 years.
Now Redcar and Cleveland have granted planning permission for a housing estate to be built on the route...killing off any chance off it happening.
Maybe our tees Valley mayor came a little too late. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Aw I'm not holding my breath on the new mayor is it an extra 15million for the whole tees valley to spend cudnt get a decent house in London for that lol"
The budget for HS2 makes for hillarious reading, 41% of it isn't even allocated to anything tangible. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Aw I'm not holding my breath on the new mayor is it an extra 15million for the whole tees valley to spend cudnt get a decent house in London for that lol"
No but maybe he can cut across the bullshit we have between neighbouring councils...and to be honest as a Labour voter myself....I feel it's good we have a tory mayor as our councils just do not work together. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Aw I'm not holding my breath on the new mayor is it an extra 15million for the whole tees valley to spend cudnt get a decent house in London for that lol
The budget for HS2 makes for hillarious reading, 41% of it isn't even allocated to anything tangible. "
That's probably the marketing budget! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That's probably the marketing budget!"
the budget was written by economists who've allowed that figure as a cash in hand payment .... adam smith's "invisible hand" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Crossrail is owned by Transport For London (TFL)
See clip below taken off Wikipedia which suggests it will end up in the hands of the big business
TfL is also responsible, jointly with the national Department for Transport (DfT), for commissioning the construction of the new Crossrail line, and will be responsible for franchising its operation once completed.[3]"
that is correct but not the way you are interpreting it.... tfl will run the crossrail franchise... it basically runs all the inner london suburban overland rail lines (north, south, east and west london lines) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Crossrail is owned by Transport For London (TFL)
See clip below taken off Wikipedia which suggests it will end up in the hands of the big business
TfL is also responsible, jointly with the national Department for Transport (DfT), for commissioning the construction of the new Crossrail line, and will be responsible for franchising its operation once completed.[3]
that is correct but not the way you are interpreting it.... tfl will run the crossrail franchise... it basically runs all the inner london suburban overland rail lines (north, south, east and west london lines)"
Ah well we will have to wait and see...call me a fool if you like but I'm feeling very optimistic at the moment that Labour is coming into this election at last.
So things might change a little. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'll reiterate what I said above. The 15 Billion Pound Railway is a cross-London link. The programme is on BBC2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w
HS2 is a £56 Billion project - increased from original estimates of £35 Billion.
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country "
Nobody wants? Or nobody wants in their back yard? Those are two different things and only one is worth heeding.
Better rail connections makes the whole country work better.
However this is an internet forum and we must decry all change and only perpetuate myths from self serving media outlets as if they are gospel.
Have we given any thought to the principle that the only stuff which gets any exposure is the loud moaning voices as that makes much more engaging news and gets the twitterati out on their keyboards saying incredibly sage and witty things, whereas someone saying "yea that looks fairly good" won't illicit the same amount of social intercourse? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"I'll reiterate what I said above. The 15 Billion Pound Railway is a cross-London link. The programme is on BBC2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w
HS2 is a £56 Billion project - increased from original estimates of £35 Billion.
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country
Nobody wants? Or nobody wants in their back yard? Those are two different things and only one is worth heeding.
Better rail connections makes the whole country work better.
However this is an internet forum and we must decry all change and only perpetuate myths from self serving media outlets as if they are gospel.
Have we given any thought to the principle that the only stuff which gets any exposure is the loud moaning voices as that makes much more engaging news and gets the twitterati out on their keyboards saying incredibly sage and witty things, whereas someone saying "yea that looks fairly good" won't illicit the same amount of social intercourse?"
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'll reiterate what I said above. The 15 Billion Pound Railway is a cross-London link. The programme is on BBC2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04b7h1w
HS2 is a £56 Billion project - increased from original estimates of £35 Billion.
So over 70 billion for railways nobody wants apart from the private sector who will get minted of running them!
I wish people would wise up to this government. ....at least labour's aim is to renationalisation these....it might take a while to do but surely it would benefit the country
Nobody wants? Or nobody wants in their back yard? Those are two different things and only one is worth heeding.
Better rail connections makes the whole country work better.
However this is an internet forum and we must decry all change and only perpetuate myths from self serving media outlets as if they are gospel.
Have we given any thought to the principle that the only stuff which gets any exposure is the loud moaning voices as that makes much more engaging news and gets the twitterati out on their keyboards saying incredibly sage and witty things, whereas someone saying "yea that looks fairly good" won't illicit the same amount of social intercourse?
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved."
That's not the "general" belief at all.
Words like general are lazy attempts to make something appear mainstream when it is only anecdotally so.
There are a great many people wholly in favour of such schemes but publicising their views generates fewer clicks or view or sales than ill informed diatribes and rants. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
".....
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved."
That is a completely illogical statement. The current rail network infrastructure is of the Victorian era and it has been systematically modified and improved to increase capacity over the years. It is entirely possible to further modify the WCML by increasing platform lengths, reducing separation still further and potentially adding a further track in places and this will result in a certain % capacity improvement.
Adding an entirely new line and Network will provide an exponentially improved capacity and common sense dictates that if you are going to build something new, you build and equip it with the very latest technology. It may be cheaper to build two new tracks and use steam engines - but what would be the point in using Victorian technology in the 21st Century?
HS2 is needed and it makes sense to utilise modern technology. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
I'm not against new railways or investment in railway infrastructure but HS2 is the wrong railway at the wrong time.
Costs are already beginning to rise, and the projected £56 billion is going to be exceeded by a good amount. There has already been trouble awarding contracts in some aspects, and I can see this project costing more like £80 billion. Fares will have to be high, otherwise no one will take on the operating side of it.
It's not due to open fully until 2033, ambitious but doable, despite starting out a couple of years late. New technology and working practices may well be in by then, rendering a lot of the potential gains obsolete.
Environmental concerns are also beginning to come to the fore. This project, especially during construction is not going to be kind to the environment, and will not be environment friendly to run either.
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
".....
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved.
That is a completely illogical statement. The current rail network infrastructure is of the Victorian era and it has been systematically modified and improved to increase capacity over the years. It is entirely possible to further modify the WCML by increasing platform lengths, reducing separation still further and potentially adding a further track in places and this will result in a certain % capacity improvement.
Adding an entirely new line and Network will provide an exponentially improved capacity and common sense dictates that if you are going to build something new, you build and equip it with the very latest technology. It may be cheaper to build two new tracks and use steam engines - but what would be the point in using Victorian technology in the 21st Century?
HS2 is needed and it makes sense to utilise modern technology."
I agree, but I feel as though if they are too do it, they might as well use maglev instead and do an eastern and western, north to south rail line instead. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
".....
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved.
That is a completely illogical statement. The current rail network infrastructure is of the Victorian era and it has been systematically modified and improved to increase capacity over the years. It is entirely possible to further modify the WCML by increasing platform lengths, reducing separation still further and potentially adding a further track in places and this will result in a certain % capacity improvement.
Adding an entirely new line and Network will provide an exponentially improved capacity and common sense dictates that if you are going to build something new, you build and equip it with the very latest technology. It may be cheaper to build two new tracks and use steam engines - but what would be the point in using Victorian technology in the 21st Century?
HS2 is needed and it makes sense to utilise modern technology.
I agree, but I feel as though if they are too do it, they might as well use maglev instead and do an eastern and western, north to south rail line instead."
Why no wait and save the pennies up and get a hyperloop. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
".....
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved.
That is a completely illogical statement. The current rail network infrastructure is of the Victorian era and it has been systematically modified and improved to increase capacity over the years. It is entirely possible to further modify the WCML by increasing platform lengths, reducing separation still further and potentially adding a further track in places and this will result in a certain % capacity improvement.
Adding an entirely new line and Network will provide an exponentially improved capacity and common sense dictates that if you are going to build something new, you build and equip it with the very latest technology. It may be cheaper to build two new tracks and use steam engines - but what would be the point in using Victorian technology in the 21st Century?
HS2 is needed and it makes sense to utilise modern technology.
I agree, but I feel as though if they are too do it, they might as well use maglev instead and do an eastern and western, north to south rail line instead."
Exactly that. By the time that we deliver an over budget HS2, China and maybe Japan will have been running 375mph Maglev trains for a decade.
We will have missed the chance to get an early lead on our European competitors. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
".....
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved.
That is a completely illogical statement. The current rail network infrastructure is of the Victorian era and it has been systematically modified and improved to increase capacity over the years. It is entirely possible to further modify the WCML by increasing platform lengths, reducing separation still further and potentially adding a further track in places and this will result in a certain % capacity improvement.
Adding an entirely new line and Network will provide an exponentially improved capacity and common sense dictates that if you are going to build something new, you build and equip it with the very latest technology. It may be cheaper to build two new tracks and use steam engines - but what would be the point in using Victorian technology in the 21st Century?
HS2 is needed and it makes sense to utilise modern technology.
I agree, but I feel as though if they are too do it, they might as well use maglev instead and do an eastern and western, north to south rail line instead.
Exactly that. By the time that we deliver an over budget HS2, China and maybe Japan will have been running 375mph Maglev trains for a decade.
We will have missed the chance to get an early lead on our European competitors."
Thats slow hyperloop 1000km an hr. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not being built to help the people who may use it, it's being built to give a huge amount of public money to private companies aka Tory Mates of those who make the decisions. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm not against new railways or investment in railway infrastructure but HS2 is the wrong railway at the wrong time.
Costs are already beginning to rise, and the projected £56 billion is going to be exceeded by a good amount. There has already been trouble awarding contracts in some aspects, and I can see this project costing more like £80 billion. Fares will have to be high, otherwise no one will take on the operating side of it.
It's not due to open fully until 2033, ambitious but doable, despite starting out a couple of years late. New technology and working practices may well be in by then, rendering a lot of the potential gains obsolete.
Environmental concerns are also beginning to come to the fore. This project, especially during construction is not going to be kind to the environment, and will not be environment friendly to run either.
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network."
Or to paraphrase... Not in my backyard or the backyard of the media establishment who gives me my opinions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
".....
New railways are always welcome but the general belief is that HS2 would offer few benefits for the cost involved.
That is a completely illogical statement. The current rail network infrastructure is of the Victorian era and it has been systematically modified and improved to increase capacity over the years. It is entirely possible to further modify the WCML by increasing platform lengths, reducing separation still further and potentially adding a further track in places and this will result in a certain % capacity improvement.
Adding an entirely new line and Network will provide an exponentially improved capacity and common sense dictates that if you are going to build something new, you build and equip it with the very latest technology. It may be cheaper to build two new tracks and use steam engines - but what would be the point in using Victorian technology in the 21st Century?
HS2 is needed and it makes sense to utilise modern technology.
I agree, but I feel as though if they are too do it, they might as well use maglev instead and do an eastern and western, north to south rail line instead."
Why? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"I'm not against new railways or investment in railway infrastructure but HS2 is the wrong railway at the wrong time.
Costs are already beginning to rise, and the projected £56 billion is going to be exceeded by a good amount. There has already been trouble awarding contracts in some aspects, and I can see this project costing more like £80 billion. Fares will have to be high, otherwise no one will take on the operating side of it.
It's not due to open fully until 2033, ambitious but doable, despite starting out a couple of years late. New technology and working practices may well be in by then, rendering a lot of the potential gains obsolete.
Environmental concerns are also beginning to come to the fore. This project, especially during construction is not going to be kind to the environment, and will not be environment friendly to run either.
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network.
Or to paraphrase... Not in my backyard or the backyard of the media establishment who gives me my opinions."
I'm not entirely sure what your arguement is? You seem to only be able to offer criticism without any valid input.
Not in my backyard? HS2 doesn't come within 35 miles of me but take the issue of the East Midlands area. Leicester, Derby and Nottingham all campaigned to have a station. All were ignored and now we are going to build a station on derelict railway land 10 miles from Derby and Nottingham. Any time savings are now negated by having to take other forms of transport into the city centres. Joined up thinking would have had the station at East Midlands airport and made a hub there. You'll note that HS2 bypasses Sheffield as well, and if you were to ask the people of all 4 cities mentioned, then without a shadow of doubt, they would all prefer electrification of the Midland Main Line, long promised and not yet delivered.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm not against new railways or investment in railway infrastructure but HS2 is the wrong railway at the wrong time.
Costs are already beginning to rise, and the projected £56 billion is going to be exceeded by a good amount. There has already been trouble awarding contracts in some aspects, and I can see this project costing more like £80 billion. Fares will have to be high, otherwise no one will take on the operating side of it.
It's not due to open fully until 2033, ambitious but doable, despite starting out a couple of years late. New technology and working practices may well be in by then, rendering a lot of the potential gains obsolete.
Environmental concerns are also beginning to come to the fore. This project, especially during construction is not going to be kind to the environment, and will not be environment friendly to run either.
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network.
Or to paraphrase... Not in my backyard or the backyard of the media establishment who gives me my opinions.
I'm not entirely sure what your arguement is? You seem to only be able to offer criticism without any valid input.
Not in my backyard? HS2 doesn't come within 35 miles of me but take the issue of the East Midlands area. Leicester, Derby and Nottingham all campaigned to have a station. All were ignored and now we are going to build a station on derelict railway land 10 miles from Derby and Nottingham. Any time savings are now negated by having to take other forms of transport into the city centres. Joined up thinking would have had the station at East Midlands airport and made a hub there. You'll note that HS2 bypasses Sheffield as well, and if you were to ask the people of all 4 cities mentioned, then without a shadow of doubt, they would all prefer electrification of the Midland Main Line, long promised and not yet delivered.
"
My point is that the arguments you put forward are the same trite and meaningless arguments put forward by either those who don't want it near them or those who aren't getting what they want.
In answer to your second post, It's long been the way that railways work that the stations for mainlines are a little remote from many centres because firstly you cannot bend a railway easily and keep the speed up and secondly the land inside population centres is rather full. Many of the stations which are now in city centres were somewhat more remote when built but the centre moved to the station. Furthermore transport links to the stations are created to allow the locals to access them easily.
Take Perth in West Australia for example. The trains around Perth tend to stop near highways and not the areas that they are deemed to serve. Busses run en-masse to those stations and as a result the system is superb and works perfectly.
Unfortunately in a Tory country state owned and joined up infrastructure serves to put public service over profit and as such is not allowed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
You do know that the 15billion railway is under London don't you? It's the cross rail project.
Many seem to be bringing up HS2. If you think they can bring that in for 15billion then you're dreaming..... spent more than that on planning already and not even started! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"You do know that the 15billion railway is under London don't you? It's the cross rail project.
Many seem to be bringing up HS2. If you think they can bring that in for 15billion then you're dreaming..... spent more than that on planning already and not even started!"
Initial costs were around £35 billion, thats risen to £56 billion and true cost will be more like £80 billion.
Electrifying the length of the Midland Main Line now estimated at about £1.4 billion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Many seem to be bringing up HS2. If you think they can bring that in for 15billion then you're dreaming..... spent more than that on planning already and not even started!"
No they haven't.
That's just fantasy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You do know that the 15billion railway is under London don't you? It's the cross rail project.
Many seem to be bringing up HS2. If you think they can bring that in for 15billion then you're dreaming..... spent more than that on planning already and not even started!
Initial costs were around £35 billion, thats risen to £56 billion and true cost will be more like £80 billion.
Electrifying the length of the Midland Main Line now estimated at about £1.4 billion."
Sadly that's what happens when you ask the people who will be making the profits from building something, how much it is going to cost. The answer is always huge.
Weird, eh? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network."
but this is where those people with railway knowledge or geeks/nerds could tell you something that really infuriates....
HS1 can already link onto the british mainline network, and they had specific trains built they could have gone beyond london (diverted at stratford international and just outside st pancras) to go up the east coast line to york and leeds... and these trains were being used in the UK on mainline routes until that project was cancelled and were given back to SNCF so they could use the trains in france instead.....
you could have had leeds to brussels/amsterdam/paris/marseille trains!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network.
but this is where those people with railway knowledge or geeks/nerds could tell you something that really infuriates....
HS1 can already link onto the british mainline network, and they had specific trains built they could have gone beyond london (diverted at stratford international and just outside st pancras) to go up the east coast line to york and leeds... and these trains were being used in the UK on mainline routes until that project was cancelled and were given back to SNCF so they could use the trains in france instead.....
you could have had leeds to brussels/amsterdam/paris/marseille trains!!! "
Spare Eurostar sets were indeed used on East Coast trains for a period, 2 sets a day from Leeds to Kings Cross if I remember rightly; this was when Eurostar ran from Waterloo. This involved lengthening platforms to accommodate but these sets proved unpopular in service due to the delays taken in closing and opening doors!
After they were returned to Eurostar, they were incorporated back into daily service. Believe it or not, these sets are already in the scrapyard!
German railways DB, have expressed interest in running direct trains through from Germany to London, and have had one of their ICE trains into St Pancras International but delays in set certification and an unstable economic model, means that this isn't being taken any further just yet. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
HS1 had a purpose; to link up European capitals. Allowing a select few areas of the country to benefit by 20 or 30 minutes here and there could be seen as being beneficial in some quarters, others may prefer a general improvement over the whole railway network.
but this is where those people with railway knowledge or geeks/nerds could tell you something that really infuriates....
HS1 can already link onto the british mainline network, and they had specific trains built they could have gone beyond london (diverted at stratford international and just outside st pancras) to go up the east coast line to york and leeds... and these trains were being used in the UK on mainline routes until that project was cancelled and were given back to SNCF so they could use the trains in france instead.....
you could have had leeds to brussels/amsterdam/paris/marseille trains!!! "
The trains could be used. But they could not go over 125mph on the tracks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Scotrail are getting 40 year old class 43 sets from the south."
Yes. the HST was introduced in the late 1970s but have been hugely refurbished, including fitting of new MTU engines. More efficient and environmentally friendly.
Scotrail will get these as the East Coast introduces the Azumas from next year. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Scotrail are getting 40 year old class 43 sets from the south.
Yes. the HST was introduced in the late 1970s but have been hugely refurbished, including fitting of new MTU engines. More efficient and environmentally friendly.
Scotrail will get these as the East Coast introduces the Azumas from next year."
Miss the screaming sound of the old Valenti engines. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Maybe if Leeds wasn't in the north Fabio would of been great for this part of the country tho if only eh lol "
didn't see this comment....
the reason why they couldn't come any further north is because those specific trains can't get over the bridges to get into newcastle central station.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
Complete waste of money 
Thank the gods I stay in Brighton. The Volks Railway has been going for donkeys years. 