[Slosh]

HS2 supporters, because I can't ask this much via twitter, and note this isn't a nimby post as I would've supported UK Ultraspeed:

-Why the Y formation when it wouldn't like all northern cities like UK Ultraspeed's reverse S would?

-Why was the worst possible technology picked, technology that is set to go 100kmh slower than the already proven Transrapid technology and slower still than the Japanese "Chuo Shinkansen" (with accents) which is due to be operational a year after HS2 opens? Why was the technology with a huge turning circle picked, surely maglevs with a way smaller turning circle would've upset less people/meant no ancient woodlands would need to be moved meaning they'd still be ancient woodland etc etc etc? Why was the louder, less clean, ageing technology chosen?

-I heard one pro hs2 comment was that us younguns like to travel. In Germany you can go anywhere spontaneously for €40 for up to 5 people. How about improving the current lines too?

-Like I said, Japan's first intercity maglev line is meant to go operational shortly after HS2 does. Is it really the wisest investment in future high speed transport then?

-I may think of more, but for now *braces for answers too clever for me*

[Riderz]

Im pro HS2 - and live in a small town which will have HS2 pass within meters of the town boundary. One of my mates will have the line run within about 10 meters of his barn, and about 100 meters from the house.


While the town is on the whole against HS2 its daft to try and oppose technology. We are already behind in our railway infrastructure and not to invest in something seems backward. Why do we have to have the best? We dont, we need something fast, efficient and reliable.

[Morgsie]

A 2007 White Paper entitled Delivering a Sustainable Railway rejected UK Ultraspeed

[mr-breaker]

(Original post by Slosh)

-Why the Y formation when it wouldn't like all northern cities like UK Ultraspeed's reverse S would?

what is this I don't even?

If you're asking why the Y instead of the S it's logical. Why would you want to go via Manchester when going from Leeds to London? It's also cheaper, faster for everyone going from Leeds to London and gets built quicker = more revenue.

It also gives you more options for getting to Glasgow and Edinburgh, the real end-game.

-Why was the worst possible technology picked, technology that is set to go 100kmh slower than the already proven Transrapid technology and slower still than the Japanese "Chuo Shinkansen" (with accents) which is due to be operational a year after HS2 opens? Why was the technology with a huge turning circle picked, surely maglevs with a way smaller turning circle would've upset less people/meant no ancient woodlands would need to be moved meaning they'd still be ancient woodland etc etc etc? Why was the louder, less clean, ageing technology chosen?

Transrapid/Chuo, in the context that we are talking about here are solutions looking for problems. Maglevs still need a big turn radius (read: not small enough to avoid digging up whichever part of Buckinghamshire it goes through).

You also have the issue that the system is useless unless fully complete. No one is gonna get a maglev to Birmingham to get a train to Leeds/Glasgow/whatever. That negates the whole speed advantage of maglev. Now think about how you are going to finance the building of a new (and untested in this context) transportation system that won't make any money until it's totally finished.

I'm not sure you can describe HS2 as "the worst possible technology picked". It's a train line that connects to another train line, Can you do that with maglev?

Bear in mind as well that only 2 companies actually make the technology needed for maglev transportation. Good luck keeping the price down with that one..........

-I heard one pro hs2 comment was that us younguns like to travel. In Germany you can go anywhere spontaneously for €40 for up to 5 people. How about improving the current lines too?

1) the current lines ARE getting improved.

2)Your price question is a political problem, nothing to do with whether a train line should be built or not.

-Like I said, Japan's first intercity maglev line is meant to go operational shortly after HS2 does. Is it really the wisest investment in future high speed transport then?

Since it's designed to:
*increase capacity in the railway system
*connect to HS1, and thus the European high-speed railway

yes.

[thefish_uk]

(Original post by Slosh)
HS2 supporters, because I can't ask this much via twitter, and note this isn't a nimby post as I would've supported UK Ultraspeed:

....

A few thoughts (apologies if these have already been said):

- Cost / regulatory barriers of getting a radically new technology approved in the UK. Large degree of cost uncertainty in trying out something that's so expensive to begin with and relies on technology that's so new to the UK. Which doesn't seem worth it when you consider it doesn't offer that much over HS2...

- There's no compatibility with existing technology - an advantage of HS2 is that even when only part of the network has been completed trains will be able to travel at high speed up to say Birmingham / Manchester and then continue to Scotland on conventional rail.

- The UK is too small and the cities too evenly distributed along its length to get all that much out of trains travelling so fast - consider that trains need to accelerate / decelerate / corner at a rate that's comfortable for passengers. Yes, trains going from London to Scotland non-stop will be able to make the most of this - but will they be able to justify the cost of Ultraspeed on their own? (Not forgetting the fact that you must have built the maglev system the entire way before you can reap the benefits.)

- Looking at the Wikipedia page on this it appears that proponents have completely forgotten planning constraints - their proposals seem to involve building the entire thing on a viaduct and ideas like taking it straight over the Pennines - which, realistically, are never going to happen. I am guessing that in their cost comparisons with HS2 they have assumed this for the maglev but for HS2 have included the cuttings, tunnels etc currently planned, making it a bit of an unfair comparison. (To be honest, a lot of the "pro" arguments on the Wikipedia page could be described as scraping the bottom of the barrel to say the least.)

[HARRY PUTAH]

This is Britain.

We neither have the industry might and know-how like the Germans or the busy-bee, one nation mentality of the Japanese.

You will find that they will set up public bodies to investigate the benefits, the problems of local communities, the construction industry and this all costs money.

vene before the first crew of diggers is on-site and working away. You will more or less come across massive errors in manufacturing due to specification errors and a severe under-estimate thanks to a developers QS being told to under price it by a few hundred million.

This country will not be able to get things done soon enough.

[Slosh]

My response to all of these cos there are loads,

Why is it called HighSpeed not HighCapacity if that's what the point of it is

[pr0view]

I support high speed rail but they seem to be doing this on the cheap. Should just get Maglev like they have in China and build direct routes rather than save money now have **** trains for eternity.

[mr-breaker]

(Original post by Slosh)
Why is it called HighSpeed not HighCapacity if that's what the point of it is

'cos it's sexier, in the same way that a Gallardo is sexier than a Transit. With HS2 we get a Transit that looks and moves like a Gallardo.........

I can't think of a single High Speed line in the world sold on high capacity, even though this benefit is self-evident.

(Original post by pr0view)
I support high speed rail but they seem to be doing this on the cheap. Should just get Maglev like they have in China and build direct routes rather than save money now have **** trains for eternity.

maglev is useless in the UK for the price it will cost and how long it will take to build. It's literally lighting money on fire.

[Slosh]

(Original post by mr-breaker)
'cos it's sexier, in the same way that a Gallardo is sexier than a Transit. With HS2 we get a Transit that looks and moves like a Gallardo.........

I can't think of a single High Speed line in the world sold on high capacity, even though this benefit is self-evident.





maglev is useless in the UK for the price it will cost and how long it will take to build. It's literally lighting money on fire.

So solely to draw people in :P

I compared the facts provided by HS2 Ltd and UKU and UKU were only higher on cost per mile, but as the Y formation would mean more mileage...

[mr-breaker]

(Original post by Slosh)
So solely to draw people in :P

hey sex sells baby

I compared the facts provided by HS2 Ltd and UKU and UKU were only higher on cost per mile, but as the Y formation would mean more mileage...

Unfortunately UKU's figures are as reliable as Duff and Phillips' valuation of Ibrox and Murray Park.

The engineering is gonna be more expensive for maglev
The vehicles are gonna be more expensive, given that you have a choice of only TWO companies in the maglev industry as opposed to at least 20 train manufacturers capable of producing a high-speed train
You won't get any revenue until the ENTIRE system is built; once the first section of HS2 is ready you're good to go.

[Slosh]

(Original post by mr-breaker)
You won't get any revenue until the ENTIRE system is built; once the first section of HS2 is ready you're good to go.

You won't get HIGHSPEED rail until the whole system is built anyway

[robb93]

by the time it gets built we'll still be years behind other countries anyway. Its a huge amount were spending, i think it would be better spent improving the existing lines. I know a lot of farmers land who its goes through as well, it just seems like some sort of panic idea. We need to something to improve the rail systems but this is not the answer

[pr0view]

(Original post by mr-breaker)
'cos it's sexier, in the same way that a Gallardo is sexier than a Transit. With HS2 we get a Transit that looks and moves like a Gallardo.........

I can't think of a single High Speed line in the world sold on high capacity, even though this benefit is self-evident.





maglev is useless in the UK for the price it will cost and how long it will take to build. It's literally lighting money on fire.

I'm sure people probably said same about the first railways.

[mr-breaker]

(Original post by Slosh)
You won't get HIGHSPEED rail until the whole system is built anyway

You build the first part, open it, trains built today can use it, your journey up north gets quicker..........

(Original post by pr0view)
I'm sure people probably said same about the first railways.

They were saying worse........"15 MPH???? Are you trying to get us killed?"

[Slosh]

(Original post by mr-breaker)
You build the first part, open it, trains built today can use it, your journey up north gets quicker..........

Whereas building a maglev line from London to Birmingham then getting the trains further doesn't count?

[mr-breaker]

(Original post by Slosh)
Whereas building a maglev line from London to Birmingham then getting the trains further doesn't count?

well no unless you're planning to build the Birmingham end under New Street station (the foundations for the Bull Ring say no chance).................