High Speed Links

[WebDude]

It has been given a fairly large amount of coverage, with criticism that it does not link with Heathrow.

Travel times would be reduced :-
London to Birmingham would be about 50 minutes (not 90 minutes).
Leeds, Sheffield, Manchester could be within 80 minutes of London (up to 130 minutes).

Scotland times would reduce from approx 4.5 hours to 3.5 hours (because only part of the journey would be at higher speeds, existing tracks would be used north of Manchester/ Yorkshire for West or East coast lines, respectively.

Euston station would need to be rebuilt, and while I have not taken in the full details, it looks like the Ibis (one of the nearby hotels) might need to be demolished for it to all fit in...

The RAC Foundation, a motoring think tank, is critical of the decision that no new motorways would be built.

There are also questions over whether / how much freight will go by rail - and considering how there have always been problems about taking larger freight containers from the continent through the older sections of the UK railways, it doesn't make sense to keep these new tracks for passengers only.

So - what do you think - will the money proposed (30 billion estimate at present, perhaps pushed up by the time it comes to start building, plus money for inquiries, compulsory purchase, etc) be worth spending on helping a minority get to/from London a bit faster ?

I have not added links to this - sure many people will have read / seen / heard about it, and I'm still digesting the information from the DfT site - they're releasing a CD of all the documents. The BBC web site included links to maps of various places from Birmingham towards London, which look as if everything has already been decided - seems a little premature without having had public discussions - but I guess it's been a very expensive 'feasibility study' to see that if they can force purchases of land and properties, this might be achieved.

Finally, to put some of my cards on the table - I'm far from convinced this is anything more than a costly attempt to play 'catch up' claiming Britain is overshadowed by others in Europe - seems a bit too much like being part of the high-speed trains 'set'. Sure railways are important, but invest in existing routes and services before pumping billions into cutting some times for some major cities (and sticking two fingers up at the people near the route who cannot use these trains).

I question the benefit of cutting the journey times from Birmingham and the other named cities. Yes, there may be a greater case for travel to/from Scotland, but we are in a teleconferencing age, and if we moved to better 'virtual reality' systems, we could have 'conferencing' which could remove the need for so many face-to-face meetings... and the cash could pay for the fibre to make it possible, far faster, and without needing to demolish homes and change the countryside.

We know that what have been classed as 'developing' countries are overtaking us on mobile phone and internet services because they had no existing infrastructure, so jumped to the latest technology where we spent time 'upgrading' 50 and 100 year old technology, and cannot work as well as the latest methods.

this is the route

I am annoyed cos the bucks is moaning - yet Warwickshire is the worst hit, with the rail links cutting aboive grond through beautiful countryside.

A lot of properties will not need to be flattened but will have 14 trains an hour within 100 ft o there homes at 250mph.

It will not effect me or my home but a lot of people I know will be effected and not able to sell hmes efore this is sorted as to wether it is happeneing or not

I do wonder though if the link is to improve the speed to London and will not benifit Birmingham or the north?

Most of the large good football temas are located north of Birmingham - but were was wembly rebuilt and how difficult it is to get out of wembly and home? rarely is it a London team playing there... so both teams have to try to get south - all the time

Would be better if stuf was built in the Midlands or further north as far easier to get to, for all apart from Londerers

Trust me, whatever the figure they are talking about, you can at least double it by the project is finished. At the same time a figure of 250MPH is going to be a little optimistic.

Given how much the government takes off the motorist, I find it obscene that they are going to spend this amount on a rail link whilst drivers are having their cars ruined by huge pot holes that the government say they cannot fill as it costs so much money. BAH !

" but were was wembly rebuilt .."

Quite obviously wembley, your obviously not a football fan or that statement would never have entered your head, wembley is hallowed ground and there is not a team in this country, nay the world who would not give their right testes to play there, football has been played on that site since the 1880's long before the wembley stadium was finished in 1923 and of course winning the world cup in WEMBLEY stadium in 1966. Wembley is an icon, why don't we just move big ben up north because people need a really big clock and they don't want to take the trouble to visit London.

Who in their right mind would even contemplate moving wembley up north ffs?

But putting football aside, wembley is also the venue for many other sporting and musical occassions.

"Most of the large good football temas are located north of Birmingham.."

And 3 out of the top four are from london.

"Given how much the government takes off the motorist, I find it obscene that they are going to spend this amount on a rail link whilst drivers are having their cars ruined by huge pot holes that the government say they cannot fill as it costs so much money. BAH ! "

Indeed.

gosh - you havn't spoken to football fans up north then (cos its the football fans that keep telling me this, I couldn't give a flying fuck where it is placed or if they pull it down and build flats on the land) who don't have the same notions as yourself about wembly

"cos its the football fans that keep telling me this..."

quite obviously they are not true fans if they are whinning about travelling with their team to away matches.

For 'fans' like those they invented sky sports.

atlantis - around the time of discussions about the possibility of demolishing Wembley there was certainly a lot of feeling from fans outside the South East that whilst it may have a lot of history, it was far from ideal, and they were on FiveLive saying that somewhere more central "Heart of England" would still be accessible to Londoners, but better for everyone else.

I guess that's a 'done deal' but there are signficant problems with the South East's infrastructure, from water shortages and clogged roads, to electricity shortages (no new datacentres can be supplied with power until after the Olympics, according to energy specialists and datacentre firms, which have implemented power reductions by using different computer hardware to avoid the need for as much air conditioning, as a stop-gap).

As for the route - Ivykat - thanks for the map link. I just went off to find the one from the BBC which has links to more detailed maps for places along the route, and shows a bit of what might happen at the Birmingham spur.

Where I lived in Sussex, the Brighton - Portsmouth line was within 100 yards, and with about 8 trains an hour, it was only mildly noisy (there were 8 or 12 coach trains to/from London, and 3 local trains, each way, during most daylight hours).

Last train was around 01:15 and first around 05:45 but there were also freight trains at times. Although the house didn't shake very much, a few trains were felt, and it was something we were so used to that a holiday in Somerset on a farm meant we couldn't sleep as it was tooooo quiet !

Near me now, one route to Chester has homes backing on to the line, and the homes are under 30 feet from that track. I don't think there is much freight, and trains are infrequent (single track at that point) but even at 30-40 MPH they must have some effects in terms of noise/ vibration.

I don't know what actual speeds will be achieved, but with China talking about 3 new lines running at 320 km/h (200 MPH I think) to Europe, Thailand and India, 200 to 250 MPH should be possible, and I can 'feel' for anyone whose home or village is on the proposed route.

Practically every project the Governments get going run over budget and end after the expected end-time. I don't want this to go ahead, but if it does, I doubt it will be finished on time and costing only 30 billion...

One report (Guardian, I think) suggested they want private funding for this. I can see there will be some enormous problems just as London Transport has had with the maintenance being handed over to companies like Metronet.

LOL at people complaining the money isn't being spent on roads. The government spends billions on road building and puts peanuts into the railways. And the little they do spend is swallowed up in consultancy fees and all the profiteering of privatised companies.

Mind you, I wouldn't get overly excited - my local train company is trying to tell us how lucky we are that they are doing major works. Funny how the name of the project has been changed from Thameslink 2000 - it's already ten years late and like to take at least another two or three!

"atlantis - around the time of discussions about the possibility of demolishing Wembley there was certainly a lot of feeling from fans outside the South East that whilst it may have a lot of history, it was far from ideal, and they were on FiveLive saying that somewhere more central "Heart of England" would still be accessible to Londoners, but better for everyone else."

As I said, not real fans.

Wembley is used solely for a handful of games every season, would these same 'fans' also be the ones who moan they have to travel to white hart lane, the emirites or stamford bridge for away matches?, maybe they would like those clubs to move north too.

Shall we also move Wimbledon , twickenham and the Lords to accomodate lazy travellers or people who are still envious of the south?

While were at it let's just take buckingham palace, the Tate and the natural history museum and plonk them in Birmingham.

I've always wanted to see sydney opera house ( but i can't be arsed to travel to oz) do you think we could persuade the australians that they should rebuild that in birmingham?

edam - I thought the Brighton to Bedford route through central London was called Thameslink (doesn't the train stop at St Pancras)... Maybe my memory is playing tricks (no, not that old, but a while since I was on a train in the south).

You are right, webdude, my point is the much smaller Thameslink project is more than a decade late, so I wouldn't hold out much hope for this proposed high speed link happening any time soon.

"who are still envious of the south?"

Not sure where you got that from - although my parents were both from South Wales, I was born in East Sussex an lived there for 30.5 years, and my sisters (~8, 10 and ~12 years older than me) all spent their teenage years there. Only my eldest sister still live in the area.

Without wanting to insult anyone, there is nothing for me to be envious of in the south, whether it has more entertainment venues, or costly houses, or pollution, or higher salaries (with high stress). It is years since I visited London, and to be honest, I'd prefer to move to San Francisco than London, any day, despite the Americans having more guns and potential for violent attack...

Perhaps you are right - that football fans from outside the South East are lazy or not 'true fans' for suggesting a central location for a national football stadium - I don't actually care where it is - my only visit to Wembley was in the early 90s to see Madonna - but I do know that traffic was hell even at midnight trying to get away from the area that particular Saturday night.

edam - Ah, but the schedule is not to start building until 2017, and even then the expectation would be for it to take a decade.

China, on the other hand, is looking to have routes to Europe and western/southern Asia usable by 2020... 5000+ kilometers able to take trains at 200 MPH... Wonder if their tracks will be built in time ? (perhaps, but at what cost to the environment en route?)

yeah, but like any major building project, it will take at least twice as long and cost 20 times as much!

I think 20 times is a bit too much - even in jest - but the Chinese, for all their faults, do achieve a lot of what they want, and on time...

I guess the Olympic games might have run a bit over budget, but were they late? I think Greece was cutting it fine, but don't remember any reports about incomplete buildings in China.

No I am not a football fan - all to often I have to listen to the football fans in the midlands complaining about wembly being in London, listening to this time and again that it should be rebuilt much further north just gave me the hint that perhaps there were quite a few football fans that wanted it moved...? TBH I couldn't give a flying truck where it is, the only time I went was to see Wales v scotland at rugby and had to wait or hours to get in and out as the inferstructure is so crap - I will not bother again.

not all building go over budget or over time - heathrow terminal 5 may have had lots of bad press when it was finshed on time and within budget - but that was for the IT faults not the fact it was built on time and to budget - noone reported that small fact

oh webdude
the numbers at the side of each section give the closer view - looking at it I have a friend who will have the train through her back garden and in her kitchen - thing is now it is there she will not be able to sell or move till things have been finalised....

"and cost 20 times as much!.."

That unfortunately has labour stamped all over it;

"The Government has spent an estimated £100bn on computer projects since 1997 ? and several have run into big problems.

National Programme for IT (NHS)

The cost of bringing in electronic patient records that could be accessed by all GPs and hospitals in England has ballooned to £12.7bn. The scheme, originally due to be completed in 2005, will not now take effect until 2015-16.

Defence Information Infrastructure (DII)

Project to replace hundreds of Ministry of Defence computer systems, announced in 2005, is running more than £180m over budget at £7.1bn and 18 months late.

National Identity Scheme

Originally costed at £3bn, the budget for controversial plan for identity cards has risen to £5bn and ministers have abandoned plans to move eventually to make them compulsory.

Single Payment Scheme

The scheme for paying subsidies to Britain's 100,000 farmers has cost £350m but has been beset with problems. Spending watchdogs say it risks becoming obsolete.

Libra system (magistrates courts)

Plans to set up an integrated system for courts have proved more difficult to implement than originally expected and the budget has increased to more than £400m.

GCHQ

The cost of transferring the computer systems of Britain's intelligence and eavesdropping centre to a new building has risen from £41m to more than £300m, according to the National Audit Office.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labours-scramble-to-launch-16311bn-spree-1917781.html

According to the UK National Audit Office,[9] the total cost of The Dome at the liquidation of the New Millennium Experience Company in 2002 was £789 million, of which £628 million was covered by National Lottery grants and £189 million through sales of tickets etc. A surplus of £25 million over costs meant that the full lottery grant was not required. However, the £603 million of lottery money was still £204 million in excess of the original estimate of £399 million required.

Spend. spend. spend. spend. spend.

Well the timescale is "completion is 2027" which is light years away. However, it puts all those homes around the line under a huge black cloud for god knows how long until they pull the plug, which I bet they will.

They should focus on getting what we have got working properly, road and rail, and upgrade that first before they start yet another countryside wrecking ploy.

Thank god I live miles away (it has many drawbacks, but it's highly unlikely anyone will be coming through here at high speed), but I know people in the affected areas and at the moment there don't seem to be any benefits to them.

Atlantis - you could easily do a similar lists for previous Tory administrations. It's not the colour of the rosette that matters. ANY government of whatever complexion tends to overspend on big projects, whether that project is in defence, or construction, or whatever. It's not a uniquely British thing either.

Love to see a poll (sorry if we can create them ourselves, must admit I didn't look for one, but gathered some thoughts {albeit in semi-random order} to put together the first post)...

Bottom line, is whether this represents a "good idea" and value for money?

So far, while they disgree on some aspects, the parties all appear to be in favour of a High Speed railway link towards Scotland, so while the politicians seem to be backing it, what do 'the public' think, I wonder?

(OK, a subset of the public, namely a {small} number on MN).

Sure it won't come as a surprise...

I think it is a poor idea and would prefer

1. improvements to current services

2. push broadband faster and available for all the UK

3. put more freight on the rails, and if necessary, do work to replace bridges and find solutions where long tunnels limit size of freight trains

Doesn't look like it's being dropped

I don't know about building it or not - but to make out we will all benefit is a joke. I use the high speed south eastern line from St Pancras at weekends very sometimes to get to the coast quickly. It costs an absolute fortune, even with F+F railcard - so if this goes ahead it will be the same. Slow routes for the less well heeled and speedy routes for the rich. By god it is ugly too - like riding between two long breezeblock walls into Kent - that maybe because of the illegal immigrant issue and the Channel Tunnel, though.

There was a really good article in the economist about this a few weeks/months ago.

They compared the high speed line built between Seville and Madrid. The trains didn't go as fast as predicted (see history of pendilino for evidence of this) and business actually moved from Seville to Madrid rather than the reverse. Also the towns that stopped getting any service really suffered.