HS2, Yes or No?

Posted from TSR Mobile

About 15 minutes quicker than the Virgin trains.

Great itsn't it?

It'd take 2hr off Brussels to Manchester. Could leave Brussels at 6pm and be in Manchester for a little after 8pm.

Currently standard journey 1hr 24min, fastest 1hr 12min

Will be standard journey time of 49min

So 35mins faster than current standard journey, or 23min faster than the current fastest.

No?

You are correct, I read an article wrong. But 23 minutes personally wouldn't make a difference, especially when ticket prices on HS2 will probably be more expensive.



Posted from TSR Mobile

The Queen's Speech today failed to mention HS2 which I take to mean that the Tories are going ahead with it.

What is the general concensus? I, personally, am against HS2 because it will be an environmental disaster and any economic benefit will mostly be concentrated in London and not the North as the politicians keep saying.

No, it's been proven by Freedom of Information request. That this scheme will have negative economic affects for areas not served by the line. Plus the costing of this line is pretty dubious.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/18_10_13_newsnight_hs2.pdf

Scotland’s share of the cost of HS2 is a mere £4.2bn at the latest estimates (which are of course likely to be revised dramatically upwards over time), which is only enough to double the current government investment in ScotRail for around 14 years.

This isn't really relevant but I'm still angry with the Conservative collation as they didn't implement the revised Scotland bill with in the 100 days pledge. If they did we would of had the power to create a national rail franchise and prevent Abellio from getting the Scot Rail contract.

Whats wrong with Abellio? Half price ticket to Edinburgh tomorrow with their Summer Sale

HS2 will cut an hour from the Glasgow-London journey, so I could get a 18:30 train instead of having to fly. While off yet though.

Also it means Scotland gets a massive capital spending allocation from Westminister.

Millionaire's project for the millionaire's playground. Be nice to actually sort out the railways, especially in Northern growth regions and get them up to scratch. Fellow Manchester commuters will sympathise. 2 carriages at peak times with small riots breaking out is unacceptable. No surprise the companies are forcing workers into potential strike action.

No. No amount of economic benefits can justify the environmental damage from the many ancient woodlands, SSSIs and nature reserves that HS2 will plough straight through and destroy. Ancient woodland in particular is already a rare habitat and the last thing we should be doing is destroying even more of it.

I'm also skeptical of the claim that it will help close the north-south divide.

Maybe if the route was different I might reconsider my objection.

The South East rail network is at full capacity, population from Manchester, Birmingham, London to Kent is rapidly increasing, expanding airports or motorways is strongly opposed. What is the alternative?

There wouldn't be a direct train through, you'd have to stop and change train in London for border control purposes unless the UK joins the Schengen area. Would it beat a plane on either time or cost? Eurostar is already much more expensive than cheap flights.

The South East rail network is at full capacity, population from Manchester, Birmingham, London to Kent is rapidly increasing, expanding airports or motorways is strongly opposed. What is the alternative?

If something like that is definitely necessary, I'd at the very least like the route changed to reduce the environmental impact.

One possibility is to slow the train down, which I believe has been raised before (can't remember by who though). That way the line doesn't have to be as straight, and it could be curved to go around some sites rather than straight through them.

I'd rather it didn't go ahead at all, but that would be an OK compromise if it reduced the number of sites that get damaged or destroyed.

This isn't really relevant but I'm still angry with the Conservative collation as they didn't implement the revised Scotland bill with in the 100 days pledge. If they did we would of had the power to create a national rail franchise and prevent Abellio from getting the Scot Rail contract.

HS2 will not be extended to Scotland

If something like that is definitely necessary, I'd at the very least like the route changed to reduce the environmental impact.

One possibility is to slow the train down, which I believe has been raised before (can't remember by who though). That way the line doesn't have to be as straight, and it could be curved to go around some sites rather than straight through them.

I'd rather it didn't go ahead at all, but that would be an OK compromise if it reduced the number of sites that get damaged or destroyed.

Executives at Network Rail warn they will struggle to squeeze much more peak capacity out of the existing network. Even modest annual growth forecasts of just over 1 per cent point to some trains becoming increasingly overcrowded.

Worse, the UK’s road network, which carries more than 90 per cent of all traffic, is under strain. Government figures predict a rise of 10m in the UK population by 2033, resulting in a 46 per cent jump in traffic and a 54 per cent increase in delays.

Sorry for my ignorance and I have tried to read up on the controversy surrounding HS2. But are they not building tunnels to try mitigate the worst impact on the surrounding? is it simply the case that it is not tunnelling long enough or in some areas at all? I truly believe we should do whatever is reasonably possible to protect the environment, but ask any one who regularly commutes between Birmingham and London it's a nightmare and not fit for a exploding population.

Personally im for it in terms of the concept however the advantages of bridging the north-south divide are hugely overexagerated as it goes as far as Leeds.