HS2 DELAYED UP TO 5 YEARS

[jra]

If private enterprise sees a profit in HS2, private enterprise should fund it. Of course, they see no such thing - the rail companies will continue to hold out the begging bowl so they can pay shareholder dividends. Time to renationalise the whole system.

HS2 is being funded by the Department of Transport (government) via Networkrail (which is a public body responsible for the railway infrastructure), not by the TOCs (privatised train operating companies). Therefore there are no dividends to be paid, other than to the companies building the railway line.

Governments see no reason to completely re-nationalise the railways, i.e. the TOCs, as passengers are increasing in record numbers, so much so it's been difficult to keep up with demand in many areas.

I agree with you about there being more subsidies for buses in rural/more remote areas, as these can be poor or non-existent.

[Jon55]

I live not far from where HS2 will pass through and a popular wedding venue has had a notice to close - very sad because it was a farm with very pretty fields and trees, I attended a wedding there a few years ago. The owners will get compensation but I wouldn't like to live near a high speed railway track. Just imagine you move out into the countryside expecting peace and quiet and then suddenly the building engineers move in and dig a great big trench, uprooting trees that have been there for years and spoiling the countryside. Perhaps I am bias because I never travel by train and use the motorway or airports instead.

[jra]

I live not far from where HS2 will pass through and a popular wedding venue has had a notice to close - very sad because it was a farm with very pretty fields and trees, I attended a wedding there a few years ago. The owners will get compensation but I wouldn't like to live near a high speed railway track. Just imagine you move out into the countryside expecting peace and quiet and then suddenly the building engineers move in and dig a great big trench, uprooting trees that have been there for years and spoiling the countryside. Perhaps I am bias because I never travel by train and use the motorway or airports instead.

You may well be forced to travel by rail as road congestion continually gets worse, but you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways due to I dunno, not building HS2 for example.

I'm sorry to hear that the wedding venue/farm has to go, but that just shows you how overpopulated England is, as presumably, it would be easy enough to build around if that were not the case.

As far as the noise, humans and a lot of wildlife adapt to it very well. I've seen wild geese, a kingfisher and a roe deer at Luton Hoo. This is right under the flight path of an international airport (with one aircraft movement every 5-10 minutes). You quite often see rabbits next to the railway line (in a field) and when a train goes past they don't even look up let alone run away. Noise can be minimised on railway lines in certain places by cuttings, tunnels and trees (other vegetation).

Britain’s railway network is the most congested anywhere in Europe

In the last 20 years the number of people travelling on the rail network has doubled, and the rail network, our stations and our platforms are dealing with more passengers than they were ever designed for.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... rade-plan/

Since the mid-1990s the number of passengers using Britain’s railway has doubled. At peak times on the busiest parts of the network, Britain’s railway is full.

New capacity is urgently required to meet the continued rise in demand which will mean there will be an extra one billion journeys by the mid-2030s. Conventional ways of providing this capacity by building new railway infrastructure would be hugely disruptive, very high cost and probably unachievable.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

See also ERTMS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ent_System

[Rolluplostinspace]

I live not far from where HS2 will pass through and a popular wedding venue has had a notice to close - very sad because it was a farm with very pretty fields and trees, I attended a wedding there a few years ago. The owners will get compensation but I wouldn't like to live near a high speed railway track. Just imagine you move out into the countryside expecting peace and quiet and then suddenly the building engineers move in and dig a great big trench, uprooting trees that have been there for years and spoiling the countryside. Perhaps I am bias because I never travel by train and use the motorway or airports instead.

You may well be forced to travel by rail as road congestion continually gets worse, but you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways due to I dunno, not building HS2 for example.

I'm sorry to hear that the wedding venue/farm has to go, but that just shows you how overpopulated England is, as presumably, it would be easy enough to build around if that were not the case.

As far as the noise, humans and a lot of wildlife adapt to it very well. I've seen wild geese, a kingfisher and a roe deer at Luton Hoo. This is right under the flight path of an international airport (with one aircraft movement every 5-10 minutes). You quite often see rabbits next to the railway line (in a field) and when a train goes past they don't even look up let alone run away. Noise can be minimised on railway lines in certain places by cuttings, tunnels and trees (other vegetation).

Britain’s railway network is the most congested anywhere in Europe

In the last 20 years the number of people travelling on the rail network has doubled, and the rail network, our stations and our platforms are dealing with more passengers than they were ever designed for.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... rade-plan/

Since the mid-1990s the number of passengers using Britain’s railway has doubled. At peak times on the busiest parts of the network, Britain’s railway is full.

New capacity is urgently required to meet the continued rise in demand which will mean there will be an extra one billion journeys by the mid-2030s. Conventional ways of providing this capacity by building new railway infrastructure would be hugely disruptive, very high cost and probably unachievable.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

See also ERTMS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ent_System


https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

We need to build more roads and upgrade others so we can actually get to where we want to go.
Trains taking much more freight might be a good idea.

[jra]

I live not far from where HS2 will pass through and a popular wedding venue has had a notice to close - very sad because it was a farm with very pretty fields and trees, I attended a wedding there a few years ago. The owners will get compensation but I wouldn't like to live near a high speed railway track. Just imagine you move out into the countryside expecting peace and quiet and then suddenly the building engineers move in and dig a great big trench, uprooting trees that have been there for years and spoiling the countryside. Perhaps I am bias because I never travel by train and use the motorway or airports instead.

You may well be forced to travel by rail as road congestion continually gets worse, but you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways due to I dunno, not building HS2 for example.

I'm sorry to hear that the wedding venue/farm has to go, but that just shows you how overpopulated England is, as presumably, it would be easy enough to build around if that were not the case.

As far as the noise, humans and a lot of wildlife adapt to it very well. I've seen wild geese, a kingfisher and a roe deer at Luton Hoo. This is right under the flight path of an international airport (with one aircraft movement every 5-10 minutes). You quite often see rabbits next to the railway line (in a field) and when a train goes past they don't even look up let alone run away. Noise can be minimised on railway lines in certain places by cuttings, tunnels and trees (other vegetation).

Britain’s railway network is the most congested anywhere in Europe

In the last 20 years the number of people travelling on the rail network has doubled, and the rail network, our stations and our platforms are dealing with more passengers than they were ever designed for.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... rade-plan/

Since the mid-1990s the number of passengers using Britain’s railway has doubled. At peak times on the busiest parts of the network, Britain’s railway is full.

New capacity is urgently required to meet the continued rise in demand which will mean there will be an extra one billion journeys by the mid-2030s. Conventional ways of providing this capacity by building new railway infrastructure would be hugely disruptive, very high cost and probably unachievable.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

See also ERTMS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ent_System


https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

We need to build more roads and upgrade others so we can actually get to where we want to go.
Trains taking much more freight might be a good idea.

No we don't need to build new roads. The existing road network goes to just about anywhere already. Even the government realises this.

Roads aren't the problem, it's the number of vehicles on them. These vehicles all have to be parked somewhere. Around here there are hardly any empty parking spaces now, let alone in 30-40 years time. Building more roads isn't going to solve the problem.

It's a moot point anyway, as major roads cost almost as much per mile to build as a railway line, but are far less efficient in moving people.

[Rolluplostinspace]

I live not far from where HS2 will pass through and a popular wedding venue has had a notice to close - very sad because it was a farm with very pretty fields and trees, I attended a wedding there a few years ago. The owners will get compensation but I wouldn't like to live near a high speed railway track. Just imagine you move out into the countryside expecting peace and quiet and then suddenly the building engineers move in and dig a great big trench, uprooting trees that have been there for years and spoiling the countryside. Perhaps I am bias because I never travel by train and use the motorway or airports instead.

You may well be forced to travel by rail as road congestion continually gets worse, but you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways due to I dunno, not building HS2 for example.

I'm sorry to hear that the wedding venue/farm has to go, but that just shows you how overpopulated England is, as presumably, it would be easy enough to build around if that were not the case.

As far as the noise, humans and a lot of wildlife adapt to it very well. I've seen wild geese, a kingfisher and a roe deer at Luton Hoo. This is right under the flight path of an international airport (with one aircraft movement every 5-10 minutes). You quite often see rabbits next to the railway line (in a field) and when a train goes past they don't even look up let alone run away. Noise can be minimised on railway lines in certain places by cuttings, tunnels and trees (other vegetation).

Britain’s railway network is the most congested anywhere in Europe

In the last 20 years the number of people travelling on the rail network has doubled, and the rail network, our stations and our platforms are dealing with more passengers than they were ever designed for.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... rade-plan/

Since the mid-1990s the number of passengers using Britain’s railway has doubled. At peak times on the busiest parts of the network, Britain’s railway is full.

New capacity is urgently required to meet the continued rise in demand which will mean there will be an extra one billion journeys by the mid-2030s. Conventional ways of providing this capacity by building new railway infrastructure would be hugely disruptive, very high cost and probably unachievable.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

See also ERTMS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ent_System


https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

We need to build more roads and upgrade others so we can actually get to where we want to go.
Trains taking much more freight might be a good idea.

No we don't need to build new roads. The existing road network goes to just about anywhere already. Even the government realises this.

Roads aren't the problem, it's the number of vehicles on them. These vehicles all have to be parked somewhere. Around here there are hardly any empty parking spaces now, let alone in 30-40 years time. Building more roads isn't going to solve the problem.

It's a moot point anyway, as major roads cost almost as much per mile to build as a railway line, but are far less efficient in moving people.

Trains move people from A to B but when the people want to go from A to C D EF etc trains are useless.

[jra]

I live not far from where HS2 will pass through and a popular wedding venue has had a notice to close - very sad because it was a farm with very pretty fields and trees, I attended a wedding there a few years ago. The owners will get compensation but I wouldn't like to live near a high speed railway track. Just imagine you move out into the countryside expecting peace and quiet and then suddenly the building engineers move in and dig a great big trench, uprooting trees that have been there for years and spoiling the countryside. Perhaps I am bias because I never travel by train and use the motorway or airports instead.

You may well be forced to travel by rail as road congestion continually gets worse, but you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways due to I dunno, not building HS2 for example.

I'm sorry to hear that the wedding venue/farm has to go, but that just shows you how overpopulated England is, as presumably, it would be easy enough to build around if that were not the case.

As far as the noise, humans and a lot of wildlife adapt to it very well. I've seen wild geese, a kingfisher and a roe deer at Luton Hoo. This is right under the flight path of an international airport (with one aircraft movement every 5-10 minutes). You quite often see rabbits next to the railway line (in a field) and when a train goes past they don't even look up let alone run away. Noise can be minimised on railway lines in certain places by cuttings, tunnels and trees (other vegetation).

Britain’s railway network is the most congested anywhere in Europe

In the last 20 years the number of people travelling on the rail network has doubled, and the rail network, our stations and our platforms are dealing with more passengers than they were ever designed for.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... rade-plan/

Since the mid-1990s the number of passengers using Britain’s railway has doubled. At peak times on the busiest parts of the network, Britain’s railway is full.

New capacity is urgently required to meet the continued rise in demand which will mean there will be an extra one billion journeys by the mid-2030s. Conventional ways of providing this capacity by building new railway infrastructure would be hugely disruptive, very high cost and probably unachievable.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

See also ERTMS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ent_System


https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

We need to build more roads and upgrade others so we can actually get to where we want to go.
Trains taking much more freight might be a good idea.

No we don't need to build new roads. The existing road network goes to just about anywhere already. Even the government realises this.

Roads aren't the problem, it's the number of vehicles on them. These vehicles all have to be parked somewhere. Around here there are hardly any empty parking spaces now, let alone in 30-40 years time. Building more roads isn't going to solve the problem.

It's a moot point anyway, as major roads cost almost as much per mile to build as a railway line, but are far less efficient in moving people.

Trains move people from A to B but when the people want to go from A to C D EF etc trains are useless.

It's called changing trains Jack.

Railways will never get you to everywhere and they never have. Railways aren't roads obviously. If one insists on door-to-door access and is not willing to explore or embrace other forms of transport, then a car is usually your only option. A selfish option in many cases I might add.

When I go to Devon I go from A-B (Luton - London St. Pancras), then B-C (London St. Pancras - London Paddington), then C-D (London Paddington - Devon).

Many railway journeys aren't going to be A-B, that is to be expected and the vast majority of people accept this.

[Rolluplostinspace]

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... rade-plan/

Since the mid-1990s the number of passengers using Britain’s railway has doubled. At peak times on the busiest parts of the network, Britain’s railway is full.

New capacity is urgently required to meet the continued rise in demand which will mean there will be an extra one billion journeys by the mid-2030s. Conventional ways of providing this capacity by building new railway infrastructure would be hugely disruptive, very high cost and probably unachievable.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

See also ERTMS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... ent_System


https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-t ... l-railway/

We need to build more roads and upgrade others so we can actually get to where we want to go.
Trains taking much more freight might be a good idea.

No we don't need to build new roads. The existing road network goes to just about anywhere already. Even the government realises this.

Roads aren't the problem, it's the number of vehicles on them. These vehicles all have to be parked somewhere. Around here there are hardly any empty parking spaces now, let alone in 30-40 years time. Building more roads isn't going to solve the problem.

It's a moot point anyway, as major roads cost almost as much per mile to build as a railway line, but are far less efficient in moving people.

Trains move people from A to B but when the people want to go from A to C D EF etc trains are useless.[/quote]

It's called changing trains Jack.

Railways will never get you to everywhere and they never have. Railways aren't roads obviously. If one insists on door-to-door access and is not willing to explore or embrace other forms of transport, then a car is usually your only option. A selfish option in many cases I might add.

When I go to Devon I go from A-B (Luton - London St. Pancras), then B-C (London St. Pancras - London Paddington), then C-D (London Paddington - Devon).

Many railway journeys aren't going to be A-B, that is to be expected and the vast majority of people accept this.[/quote]

#
I thought the vast majority of people used cars.

[Cannydc]

JRA:-

"As for cattle class, you can avoid this most of the time by travelling off-peak."

and

"you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways"

Someone is contradicting themselves...

[jra]

JRA:-

"As for cattle class, you can avoid this most of the time by travelling off-peak."

and

"you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways"

Someone is contradicting themselves...

The first statement relates to now (mostly). The second statement relates to the future.

I thought the vast majority of people used cars.

They do and that is part of the problem. The long term future (say up to 50 years) of the private motor vehicle is unsustainable.

You were talking about increasing freight traffic. That is good, but every additional freight train takes up an additional train path and there is only so much you can do with the existing network in terms of capacity enhancements, so some new lines will have to be built and re-opened.

[Rolluplostinspace]

I'm sorry to hear that the wedding venue/farm has to go, but that just shows you how overpopulated England is, as presumably, it would be easy enough to build around if that were not the case.

[/u]

Well JT I had you down as our resident trains expert but no longer.
You cannot build around anything if you want a truly high speed line.
It has to be as straight as possible.
Osbourne when chancellor demanded the line avoided his families country pile in Cheshire .... there was uproar from the engineers and planners as a large curve would have to be built into the track.
How that little episode ended I don't know because of a clear lack of any real interest.
I'm sure you could Google it though.
HS lines do not have curves bends and build arounds.

[Fletch]

JRA:-

"As for cattle class, you can avoid this most of the time by travelling off-peak."

and

"you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways"

Someone is contradicting themselves...

The first statement relates to now (mostly). The second statement relates to the future.

I thought the vast majority of people used cars.

They do and that is part of the problem. The long term future (say up to 50 years) of the private motor vehicle is unsustainable.

You were talking about increasing freight traffic. That is good, but every additional freight train takes up an additional train path and there is only so much you can do with the existing network in terms of capacity enhancements, so some new lines will have to be built and re-opened.

The answer to congestion on the railways is to build more of them

The answer to congestion on the roads is not to build more of them.

How do you square that circle jra?

And how often do you use the roads and actually go outside of your immediate area?

[Rolluplostinspace]

JRA:-

"As for cattle class, you can avoid this most of the time by travelling off-peak."

and

"you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways"

Someone is contradicting themselves...

The first statement relates to now (mostly). The second statement relates to the future.

I thought the vast majority of people used cars.

They do and that is part of the problem. The long term future (say up to 50 years) of the private motor vehicle is unsustainable.

You were talking about increasing freight traffic. That is good, but every additional freight train takes up an additional train path and there is only so much you can do with the existing network in terms of capacity enhancements, so some new lines will have to be built and re-opened.

The answer to congestion on the railways is to build more of them

The answer to congestion on the roads is not to build more of them.

How do you square that circle jra?

And how often do you use the roads and actually go outside of your immediate area?

Every night he stays up guarding his house from it's inmates.
He doesn't drive.
He I think is afraid of leaving the house in case anything untoward happens to it but in this modern world where he doesn't work then staying at home is a laudable near carbon neutral contribution to society if you believe in that stuff.

[Fletch]

JRA:-

"As for cattle class, you can avoid this most of the time by travelling off-peak."

and

"you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways"

Someone is contradicting themselves...

The first statement relates to now (mostly). The second statement relates to the future.

I thought the vast majority of people used cars.

They do and that is part of the problem. The long term future (say up to 50 years) of the private motor vehicle is unsustainable.

You were talking about increasing freight traffic. That is good, but every additional freight train takes up an additional train path and there is only so much you can do with the existing network in terms of capacity enhancements, so some new lines will have to be built and re-opened.

The answer to congestion on the railways is to build more of them

The answer to congestion on the roads is not to build more of them.

How do you square that circle jra?

And how often do you use the roads and actually go outside of your immediate area?

Every night he stays up guarding his house from it's inmates.
He doesn't drive.
He I think is afraid of leaving the house in case anything untoward happens to it but in this modern world where he doesn't work then staying at home is a laudable near carbon neutral contribution to society if you believe in that stuff.

Not near carbon neutral Jack, he has a big powerful boiler he must have on all night to keep him warm whilst on guard duty.

[Rolluplostinspace]

JRA:-

"As for cattle class, you can avoid this most of the time by travelling off-peak."

and

"you'll find the trains packed because the government had failed to relieve congestion on the railways"

Someone is contradicting themselves...

The first statement relates to now (mostly). The second statement relates to the future.

I thought the vast majority of people used cars.

They do and that is part of the problem. The long term future (say up to 50 years) of the private motor vehicle is unsustainable.

You were talking about increasing freight traffic. That is good, but every additional freight train takes up an additional train path and there is only so much you can do with the existing network in terms of capacity enhancements, so some new lines will have to be built and re-opened.

The answer to congestion on the railways is to build more of them

The answer to congestion on the roads is not to build more of them.

How do you square that circle jra?

And how often do you use the roads and actually go outside of your immediate area?

Every night he stays up guarding his house from it's inmates.
He doesn't drive.
He I think is afraid of leaving the house in case anything untoward happens to it but in this modern world where he doesn't work then staying at home is a laudable near carbon neutral contribution to society if you believe in that stuff.

Not near carbon neutral Jack, he has a big powerful boiler he must have on all night to keep him warm whilst on guard duty.

Oh yeah I forgot about the boiler!