Extending Crossrail to Reading - ongoing discussion, merged topic

[whole diary]

[James]

To be honest it's more peoples homes that will get destroyed if HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) goes ahead, I can't see people being quite about that to be fair. I am still thinking why such a scheme is needed when other parts of the country have no railways at all whilst other critical hubs need investment quickly, Yet others have 4 or 6 track railways with fast and slow passenger trains and now planned and frakly silly HS2 scheme.

The impressive thing about the hS2 route was how homes were affected. The announced changes at Euston has dramatically reduced that already. Its not just abut how much capacity there is already, but how much is needed!

Yep indeed thats correct, i suppose in the ideal world both 6 tracking and HS2 are needed in the end 

[ChrisB]

And 6-tracking the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) / GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) won't destroy peoples homes? Of course not.

(think of all the homes next to the railway in urban areas)

Doh.

[James]

And 6-tracking the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) / GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) won't destroy peoples homes? Of course not.

(think of all the homes next to the railway in urban areas)

Doh.

Well Chris thanks for pointing that out, obviously you know more than anyone else, about what the railway needs, so please do tell me what you would do in the ideal world, thats if you have time to respond that is 

[ChrisB]

Pretty much what's planned actually :-)

[James]

Pretty much what's planned actually :-)

Fair enough, as long as all communities get investment and a fair enough service, then all should be satisfactory

[Chris125]

Whilst it is true that any upgrade of the West Coast Mainline is likely to be expensive and disruptive, truthfully building a HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) line will disrupt peoples livelihoods much deeper than upgrading existing lines, also the countryside doesn't need trains racing through at 250 mph.

Far more people live alongside the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) than the route of HS2; widening it would involve closing far more roads, demolishing many more businesses and properties, and seriously disrupting a vast number of existing rail passengers and freight users for a considerable length of time. HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) has show that the impact of high speed trains on the countryside can be mitigated and is far less intrusive than a major road.

Chris

[James]

Whilst it is true that any upgrade of the West Coast Mainline is likely to be expensive and disruptive, truthfully building a HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) line will disrupt peoples livelihoods much deeper than upgrading existing lines, also the countryside doesn't need trains racing through at 250 mph.

Far more people live alongside the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) than the route of HS2; widening it would involve closing far more roads, demolishing many more businesses and properties, and seriously disrupting a vast number of existing rail passengers and freight users for a considerable length of time. HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) has show that the impact of high speed trains on the countryside can be mitigated and is far less intrusive than a major road.

Chris

But building HS2 is going to cost more cash, which means taxes for all of us. Tbh I think the WCML if it can't be upgraded to 6 tracks should have double deck trains with various railway bridge remodelling done so the double deck trains can run. Of course there will be disruption but building the new HS2 through the chilterns is a big no no. Investing in what we have is better than unnecessary schemes like HS2. That's why i like the idea of 6 tracking the London to Reading as it's a potentially good scheme that will benefit people even if sacrifices are to be made i.e giving up homes or business. Unfortunately that's reality of life. Also like I said before communities in Somerset/Devon and Cornwall need more investment than the north, as the north has the WCML ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) and MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about). It's time to do the right thing and investment money and taxes on the more important areas of the country that deserve it. Oh and if neccesary 'think this was suggest by someone on this forum' why not rip up the motorways and build the railways on then, with smaller roads used for trams 

[mjones]

Have you any idea how much all the 6 tracking and bridge raising for double-decking you propose would cost, or how disruptive it would be for existing services? Unless you have some realistic estimates, you simply can't assert that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) would be more expensive.  And why is building HS2 in the Chilterns a no-no? It isn't as if there aren't already lots of major roads going through it.

[James]

Have you any idea how much all the 6 tracking and bridge raising for double-decking you propose would cost, or how disruptive it would be for existing services? Unless you have some realistic estimates, you simply can't assert that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) would be more expensive.  And why is building HS2 in the Chilterns a no-no? It isn't as if there aren't already lots of major roads going through it.

Some valid points are made I don't know how much it would to upgrade the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) or the end cost of HS2 will be, but I really cannot understand why such an unnecessary scheme is needed when again you have enough railways to the north. It's not necessary to build through the chilterns or so one can get to the midlands and the north quickly that's why you have virgin trains and east coast trains. And what is so wrong in using them, also do you really want to pay more taxes? A line clearly has to be drawn somewhere

[ChrisB]

building the new HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) through the chilterns is a big no no.....6 tracking the London to Reading as it's a potentially good scheme that will benefit people even if sacrifices are to be made i.e giving up homes or business.

On that argument, what's wrong with building through the Chilterns?....as you say, sacrifices for the common good are ok!

but I really cannot understand why such an unnecessary scheme is needed when again you have enough railways to the north.

Enough? That's why the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) is full with no paths for Blackpool and other large centres that are the same size as Devon & Cornwall combined in terms of pax....no, capacity provision is why HS2 is being built. To provide paths for more trains & freight that are demanding paths but supply can't currently be provided.

Leaving aside the argument of whether a diversionary route is needed, there *are* additional paths in the SW to London & the rest of the country already (ok, you might have capacity problems east of Reading) - it's the speed of journey that most quibble about. So the demand for further paths doesn't actually exist. There is a possible shortage of rolling stock, but that would be exacerbated with your suggestion (unless you spend even more tax money in providing additional stock for which the demand for services from pax probably isn't much)

[paul7575]

Some valid points are made I don't know how much it would to upgrade the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) or the end cost of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) will be, but I really cannot understand why such an unnecessary scheme is needed when again you have enough railways to the north. It's not necessary to build through the chilterns or so one can get to the midlands and the north quickly that's why you have virgin trains and east coast trains. And what is so wrong in using them, also do you really want to pay more taxes? A line clearly has to be drawn somewhere

Everything you suggest about alternatives has been analysed to death in the HS2 published papers.  No one in the industry seems to believe that upgrading the WCML like you suggest is possible.  They have the experience and known costs of the recent upgrades during the 2000s, such as the Trent Valley four tracking.  Then don't just think about the main route, Rugby to New St via Coventry is a particularly difficult stretch to improve while remaining operational.

But this is off topic for the Crossrail thread, we should end the debate.

Paul

[James]

Sorry i only realized that now, i have nothing further to say on the HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) argument.
Can mods please move the relevant topic if it needs to be the HS2 topic. Thanks

[Electric train]

I fail to see what HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) has to do with extending Crossrail to Reading.

There seems to me some people that will hitch their anti HS2 onto any and every rail infrastructure and service improvement project.

[stebbo]

Probably to do with money, or potential lack of........

[stuving]

We're on a promise"! Well, almost. Terry Morgan (Crossrail Chairman) is now saying we can expect an announcement of the continuation to Reading "soon".