Should HS2 be scrapped?

Watch
Poll: Should HS2 be scrapped?
Keep working on it (6)
33.33%
Scrap it (12)
66.67%
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#1
I think that britain is much smaller than continental europe, so we don't need faster rail than in continental europe. 125mph is ample.
0
reply
scorpion95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 weeks ago
#2
I think it should be scrapped, and the money used to improve the north and midlands. The money could be used to improve the public transport routes etc, It is already quite quick to get train to london so don't see why a new train track needs to be built to get there 5 or 10 minutes faster when ticket prices are going to overpriced even more than they are currently
2
reply
gem2004
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 weeks ago
#3
I don't think we need HS2 because all the government needs to do is improve the current trains. They already cost wayyy to much - it’s more expensive to take the train from London to Manchester than flying to New York and back. There are also constant delays - perhaps more train drivers and better schedules would improve this. Not to mention that HS2 is planned to go through nature reserves with endangered species in Wales. It's like whoever planned it valued people getting to their destination a few mins faster over preserving the environment! A disgrace.
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 weeks ago
#4
(Original post by Laurence010401)
I think that britain is much smaller than continental europe, so we don't need faster rail than in continental europe. 125mph is ample.
This has been done to death on here.

Everyone knows it isn’t essential but it is essential to increase capacity and reduce bottle necks on the system.
2
reply
BlueIndigoViolet
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 weeks ago
#5
(Original post by Laurence010401)
I think that britain is much smaller than continental europe, so we don't need faster rail than in continental europe. 125mph is ample.
some victorian dude: 14mph is ample we don't need those damned fast death machines
1
reply
Karisa96
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 weeks ago
#6
I definitely think after all this time, and spiraling costs, it should be scrapped.
1
reply
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 weeks ago
#7
(Original post by Laurence010401)
I think that britain is much smaller than continental europe, so we don't need faster rail than in continental europe. 125mph is ample.
The railway will just about pay for itself when it's fully completed. They have already spent £8 billion on it. Might as well finish it.
0
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by scorpion95)
I think it should be scrapped, and the money used to improve the north and midlands. The money could be used to improve the public transport routes etc, It is already quite quick to get train to london so don't see why a new train track needs to be built to get there 5 or 10 minutes faster when ticket prices are going to overpriced even more than they are currently
YES!! If they have £100 billion to spend of the railway they should spend it on our current rail system. They can improve it so that trains don't get delayed as much, and that will cut journey times
0
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by scorpion95)
I think it should be scrapped, and the money used to improve the north and midlands. The money could be used to improve the public transport routes etc, It is already quite quick to get train to london so don't see why a new train track needs to be built to get there 5 or 10 minutes faster when ticket prices are going to overpriced even more than they are currently
About the increasing cost of train tickets - HS2 would of course be much more expensive to travel on than existing trains. Ironic that it was started by a labour government. And before long it'll be 'virgin trains HS2' or something like that
0
reply
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 weeks ago
#10
Scrap it and promote flying.
0
reply
Hudds999
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 weeks ago
#11
Scrap scrap scrap.
0
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by gem2004)
I don't think we need HS2 because all the government needs to do is improve the current trains. They already cost wayyy to much - it’s more expensive to take the train from London to Manchester than flying to New York and back. There are also constant delays - perhaps more train drivers and better schedules would improve this. Not to mention that HS2 is planned to go through nature reserves with endangered species in Wales. It's like whoever planned it valued people getting to their destination a few mins faster over preserving the environment! A disgrace.
Thank you for pointing this out! I hadn't even thought of that. I've read so much about how HS2 will improve the environment and cut carbon emissions, but now that i think about it, many habitats would have to be displaced.
1
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by gem2004)
I don't think we need HS2 because all the government needs to do is improve the current trains. They already cost wayyy to much - it’s more expensive to take the train from London to Manchester than flying to New York and back. There are also constant delays - perhaps more train drivers and better schedules would improve this. Not to mention that HS2 is planned to go through nature reserves with endangered species in Wales. It's like whoever planned it valued people getting to their destination a few mins faster over preserving the environment! A disgrace.
also, prsom! Exactly what I was saying/thinking. Improve the current rail system instead of investing in a new one
0
reply
Blaze_3103
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 weeks ago
#14
I think the current construction method should be scrapped. I'm a civil engineer and have no idea why they chose to go overland! If they tunneled the entire thing it would only cost £30bn- no joke

I also think it's a vanity project- you don't need to travel that fast
But it's essential to get people on trains and off the road and use the other lines for freight- getting HGVs off the road. So we need more passenger lines built to move the freight off the road making it more greener
1
reply
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 weeks ago
#15
We have gone too far to scrap it, we need the extra rail capacity. So we need the route, though you could argue whether it needs to be at much above Eurostar speed.
0
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by gem2004)
I don't think we need HS2 because all the government needs to do is improve the current trains. They already cost wayyy to much - it’s more expensive to take the train from London to Manchester than flying to New York and back. There are also constant delays - perhaps more train drivers and better schedules would improve this. Not to mention that HS2 is planned to go through nature reserves with endangered species in Wales. It's like whoever planned it valued people getting to their destination a few mins faster over preserving the environment! A disgrace.
(Original post by Blaze_3103)
I think the current construction method should be scrapped. I'm a civil engineer and have no idea why they chose to go overland! If they tunneled the entire thing it would only cost £30bn- no joke

I also think it's a vanity project- you don't need to travel that fast
But it's essential to get people on trains and off the road and use the other lines for freight- getting HGVs off the road. So we need more passenger lines built to move the freight off the road making it more greener
Interesting 🤔 if it was a network of tunnels, the only ecosystems that would be damaged are earthworm networks.
But then earthworms are essential workers in the carbon and nutrient cycles, as they are needed to decompose dead plant material, putting nutrients back into the soil, hence allowing new plants to grow.
Also, in this day and age, most passengers would want wifi, which would be difficult to achieve underground
0
reply
Blaze_3103
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by Laurence010401)
Interesting 🤔 if it was a network of tunnels, the only ecosystems that would be damaged are earthworm networks.
But then earthworms are essential workers in the carbon and nutrient cycles, as they are needed to decompose dead plant material, putting nutrients back into the soil, hence allowing new plants to grow.
Also, in this day and age, most passengers would want wifi, which would be difficult to achieve underground

You can now get WiFi on majority of the tube which is underground. So the technology is always improving. It still would be hard to achieve a WiFi signal traveling that fast above ground too!

As for the earthworms- depends on the species. Most earthworms live near the surface or at most burrow up to 2m deep.
You mostly need to worry about noise, vibrations from fast moving trains so the tunnels ideally would be more than 2m below ground so houses, services (eg. gas) , trees, worms aren't affected.
0
reply
Laurence010401
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by barnetlad)
We have gone too far to scrap it, we need the extra rail capacity. So we need the route, though you could argue whether it needs to be at much above Eurostar speed.
That could potentially work
Existing avanti west coast pendolinos could use the new HS2 tracks, and the existing line between London and Birmingham/manchester could be used for more regional services perhaps
0
reply
Ambitious1999
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by Laurence010401)
I think that britain is much smaller than continental europe, so we don't need faster rail than in continental europe. 125mph is ample.
Scrap it. Anyway train travel in the UK is bloody expensive with their extortionate fares.
Ironically extinction rebellion supports HS2 despite the wide spread environmental destruction but then ER for some reason is very pro-train. Either the ER ranks are full of train spotters or it’s a way of further destroying the UK aviation industry. Or they are just simply out of touch with reality.
0
reply
Ambitious1999
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by Laurence010401)
Interesting 🤔 if it was a network of tunnels, the only ecosystems that would be damaged are earthworm networks.
But then earthworms are essential workers in the carbon and nutrient cycles, as they are needed to decompose dead plant material, putting nutrients back into the soil, hence allowing new plants to grow.
Also, in this day and age, most passengers would want wifi, which would be difficult to achieve underground
Odd that extinction rebellion supports HS2 along with their love of trains.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How will you be receiving your results?

Going into school to pick them up (191)
33.28%
Receiving them online / by email (288)
50.17%
I still don't know (95)
16.55%

Watched Threads

View All