HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general discussion

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

The "alleged mile" by Google is 0.6 miles or 14 minutes walk. Others on this forum can correct me if needed and explain why this isn't an impediment to connectivity.

I think it's more like 0.3 miles from the Moor Street Queensway entrance, with a much expanded tram system linking it and the likelihood that Moor Street (literally right next door) will be serving a much bigger role over time for national rail services.  The whole area will be totally different to now.  A lot of useful information is contained in this link:

https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/downloads/file/730/birmingham_curzon_hs2_masterplan

[TaplowGreen]

Given 40 people were killed in the Wenzhou high speed line collision due to faulty signalling I'm not sure I would entirely want to trust a Chinese led consortium either.

Similar number of deaths to Clapham Junction. Perhaps we should be wary of the British too?

[Celestial]

Given 40 people were killed in the Wenzhou high speed line collision due to faulty signalling I'm not sure I would entirely want to trust a Chinese led consortium either.

Similar number of deaths to Clapham Junction. Perhaps we should be wary of the British too?

Clapham wasn't a brand new railway though (which is what we are considering), with a signalling system that turned out to be faulty. I'd rather take the last 13 years (give or take a few days) without a crash resulting in a fatality as a better comparison.  There have been 173 deaths (and just shy of 1000 injuries) from rail accidents in China since Graygrigg (according to Wikipedia).  Yes, China is an immense country, any comparison of stats must take that into account, but still...

[broadgage]

And I suspect that relatively minor rail accidents in china that kill only one or two people are not even recorded. There is considerable pressure from TPTB^▸ (The Powers That Be) in china to make things look good, including not reporting accidents.

[TonyK]

Simon Jenkins continues his never ending battle against HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), as unencumbered as ever by any real understanding of the scheme.

Oh. I marked him as "Undecided".

Given 40 people were killed in the Wenzhou high speed line collision due to faulty signalling I'm not sure I would entirely want to trust a Chinese led consortium either.

I should think it would all have to be signed off by our own foreign engineers, surely? As to how a democracy deals with inconvenient buildings in the way, we have long used compulsory purchase as a way of making sure the state gets its way. It's just a little more drawn out, like everything else.

[eightonedee]

Some very silly stuff written by him

A warning - if you don't like rants, don't ask me about him and his attitude towards housing planning policy. I had better say no more - having just praised our wonderful moderators I don't want to upset them by posting something intemperate!

[grahame]

Some very silly stuff written by him

A warning - if you don't like rants, don't ask me about him and his attitude towards housing planning policy. I had better say no more - having just praised our wonderful moderators I don't want to upset them by posting something intemperate!

Oh go on - we love open discussions.  Big topic at a meeting I was at on Wednesday in London ...

[Trowres]

Some very silly stuff written by him

A warning - if you don't like rants, don't ask me about him and his attitude towards housing planning policy. I had better say no more - having just praised our wonderful moderators I don't want to upset them by posting something intemperate!

You prompted me to have a quick look at some of Simon Jenkins's writing on housing. I can see some things that would be controversial but the following observations by Simon would find a lot of support from people interested in transport and the environment:

Stamp duty discourages transactions just when they should be encouraged. Limiting VAT^▸ (Value Added Tax) relief to new construction discourages urban renewal

[eightonedee]

To be fair Trowes, not everything he says is daft!

[TaplowGreen]

Probably inevitable that someone would......

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51722251

[IndustryInsider]

...and probably inevitable that it will fail...

[TonyK]

...and probably inevitable that it will fail...

It's one thing stopping something that doesn't have permission in place from being built. It's another thing entirely stopping the biggest civil engineering project in Europe in its, er, tracks after a few billion quid has already been spent. That's before we start discussing whether an all-electric railway emits more carbon dioxide than a couple of motorways full of cars and a few airliners. The Heathrow case, let us remember, was an Appeal Court judgment reversing a High Court decision, and not saying that a third runway at Heathrow was a bad idea, in a process that took years from start to finish.

That is assuming the process is finished - Heathrow's owners  have lodged appeal papers with the Supreme Court. The government sent out signals that it wasn't going to back that, but could reconsider that position if it seemed an possible solution to this "challenge", should it go further than the strongly worded solicitors' letter. Because if the Supreme Court reversed the Appeal court's decision, that would bind all lower courts, something that would remove that particular obstacle from HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), albeit at the expense of a few villages under the new Runway 27R/09L at EGLL. I would expect in any case that the lower courts would be unwilling to make decisions based on a major point of public interest and nationally important transport infrastructure that is still being argued in the Courts. The Court of Appeal wouldn't, even if the High Court did, and trains could be running before Mr Packham gets his day before the man in the Father Christmas outfit.

I am assuming that Mr Packham's present employer isn't funding this challenge as part of a Springwatch special investigation into ways of getting the government to scrap the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page), and that he isn't paying for this himself but relying on crowdfunding or rich backers. If that is the case, I wonder how much a desire to be in the papers and on the telly more has influenced his decision to be the face of this case?

The solicitors' motivation is much more honest, as the bill will show.

[CyclingSid]

Presumably he isn't employed by the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page), well probably not directly?

[Red Squirrel]

...That's before we start discussing whether an all-electric railway emits more carbon dioxide than a couple of motorways full of cars and a few airliners...

On Monday, at the TravelWatch South-West meeting, Thomas Ableman of SNAP (an on-demand coach operator) presented a case that motor-coaches are the most carbon-efficient form of transport per passenger-kilometre. If I can, I'll put up the slide he showed us when it's published on the TWSW^» (TravelWatch SouthWest - website) website, but (as I remember it) it showed that diesel coaches emit 45 carbons per passenger kilometre whilst trains emit 65. Which is more. Cars and aeroplanes emit hundreds and hundreds, of course, but we all agree that we need fewer of those (don't we?)

He did admit that electric trains emit less than 45 (it would have been nice to see the figures, but that wouldn't have served his argument), but he claimed that that was neither here nor there because so many trains have dirty old diesel engines.

HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), if I remember correctly, will be electrically-propelled.

[onthecushions]

I think the difference is in passenger density. IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly) the bus allows 0.18m2/pp, the train 0.5. Load factors then come in (don't we know it) as well as the attractiveness of the transport mode to the car /plane user with the choice and journey time.

Statistics....

OTC