tim... wrote:

"Someone Somewhere" wrote in message
...
On 30/06/2016 09:07, Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
wrote:
In article ,
(tim...)
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(tim...) wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(tim...) wrote:

"Robin9" wrote in message
...


The National Audit office has already suggested that HS2 should
be
delayed, supposedly to reduce costs.

there are plenty here who think that vanity project will nor be
entirely missed

It's a lot more than a vanity project. There will be severe
capacity
limitations on the WCML very soon now if it isn't built.

I suppose that is the problem of coming to a group where not
everybody has engaged in (an earlier) discussion on this subject
elsewhere

Whilst it is true that capacity problems might dictate that the
best
solution is for a new two track railway between London and Trent
Valley junctions, plus (as separate requirements) rebuilding Euston
and the long promised Stafford cut off

the rest is a totally unnecessary vanity project

If High Speed Rail is a "vanity project" then why has most of the
developed world been adopting similar projects for decades?

because they have a different geographical spread of their population
than we do

Japan?

Or South Korea?
https://en.m.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Hig...in_South_Korea

aare either of those meant to disprove my claim?

please show your working

We don't have to disprove your unlikely claim. You're the one who said
there was something about Britain that made it so unlike Japan, Korea,
France, Germany, Italy, Spain, China, etc. You need to explain what is
so
different about Britain.


Isn't it that we are a smaller, denser island that is even more
capital-centric than many of the others?

thank you :-)

plus the smaller regional centres are much closer together, so the time
savings from HS lines between them is marginal

Being more capital-centric makes it more, not less, important that other
regional centres have fast, frequent links to the centre.

On 30/06/2016 10:01, d wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for HS2
is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this wouldn't play
too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this fancy train so
we can shift more containers. Soz"

--
Spud

And I presume that all paths are currently in use 24x7 (excepting
maintenance requirements) as most freight is only time-sensitive to the day.

Or are there further agreements not to upset the beauty sleep of those
who live next to the WCML for which we're now committing to building a
whole new railway?

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:41:27 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 30/06/2016 10:01, d wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for HS2
is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this wouldn't play
too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this fancy train so
we can shift more containers. Soz"

--
Spud

And I presume that all paths are currently in use 24x7 (excepting
maintenance requirements) as most freight is only time-sensitive to the day.

Or are there further agreements not to upset the beauty sleep of those
who live next to the WCML for which we're now committing to building a
whole new railway?

Beats me. Personally while I think there is a case for improvements to rail
links to the north, it certainly doesn't warrant 50 billion and counting. I
think the money would be better spent improving cross country routes and
building proper metro systems in Brum & manchester and more tram systems in
smaller cities like the one in nottingham.

If the government is really serious about its "northern powerhouse" then you
need serious public transport in major cities. They figured this out in europe
decades ago - most large french and german cities have metros.

--
Spud

On 30/06/2016 11:17, d wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:41:27 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 30/06/2016 10:01, d wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for HS2
is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this wouldn't play
too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this fancy train so
we can shift more containers. Soz"

--
Spud

And I presume that all paths are currently in use 24x7 (excepting
maintenance requirements) as most freight is only time-sensitive to the day.

Or are there further agreements not to upset the beauty sleep of those
who live next to the WCML for which we're now committing to building a
whole new railway?

Beats me. Personally while I think there is a case for improvements to rail
links to the north, it certainly doesn't warrant 50 billion and counting. I
think the money would be better spent improving cross country routes and
building proper metro systems in Brum & manchester and more tram systems in
smaller cities like the one in nottingham.

If the government is really serious about its "northern powerhouse" then you
need serious public transport in major cities. They figured this out in europe
decades ago - most large french and german cities have metros.


I also don't understand the slwoing down of projects "to save money" -
surely one thing that everyone agrees on is that railway inflation is
somewhat higher than other traditional measures - look at the difference
in cost between the Channel Tunnel and Crossrail as a good example.

In article , d () wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for
HS2 is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this
wouldn't play too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this
fancy train so we can shift more containers. Soz"

Not just freight. The capacity shortage also constrains commuter flows south
of about Rugby.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 07:13:12 -0500,
wrote:

In article , d () wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for
HS2 is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this
wouldn't play too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this
fancy train so we can shift more containers. Soz"

Not just freight. The capacity shortage also constrains commuter flows south
of about Rugby.

And that's now. HS2 isn't about meeting demand this month, this year
or this decade: it's an investment in capacity that will be needed in
the more distant future. And it's a much better, cheaper way of doing
so than to add another two dedicated tracks to the existing WCML.

One way that high speed lines add capacity is by being dedicated, so
all the trains have the same (high) performance. It's the mixing of
low and high speed trains, and flat junctions, on classic lines that
reduces capacity.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:27:09 +0100
Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 07:13:12 -0500,
wrote:

In article , d () wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for
HS2 is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this
wouldn't play too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this
fancy train so we can shift more containers. Soz"

Not just freight. The capacity shortage also constrains commuter flows south
of about Rugby.

And that's now. HS2 isn't about meeting demand this month, this year
or this decade: it's an investment in capacity that will be needed in
the more distant future. And it's a much better, cheaper way of doing
so than to add another two dedicated tracks to the existing WCML.

Though it might not increase capacity too much, I wonder how much it would
cost to upgrade sections of the WCML so that the pendilinos could actually do
their design speed of 140mph? Ditto east coast.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:27:09 +0100
Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 07:13:12 -0500,
wrote:

In article , d () wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:47:41 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
In terms of capacity, I realise there is freight and local services, but
is there really no scope for increasing the number of InterCity trains
north from Euston beyond 9/hour?

Obviously not or they'd have probably done it. AFAIK the real reason for
HS2 is to free up paths on the WCML for freight though I guess this
wouldn't play too well with the public: "We need you lot to pay for this
fancy train so we can shift more containers. Soz"

Not just freight. The capacity shortage also constrains commuter flows south
of about Rugby.

And that's now. HS2 isn't about meeting demand this month, this year
or this decade: it's an investment in capacity that will be needed in
the more distant future. And it's a much better, cheaper way of doing
so than to add another two dedicated tracks to the existing WCML.

Though it might not increase capacity too much, I wonder how much it would
cost to upgrade sections of the WCML so that the pendilinos could actually do
their design speed of 140mph? Ditto east coast.

It would reduce capacity, for reasons that have often been outlined here.

Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
Basil Jet
wrote in :

Now that the entire population of the Middle East are no longer moving
to London

Brexit has no effect on migration from outside the EU.

No, but the Brexit campaigners were suggesting (wrongly, of course) that
Turkey was soon join the EU, and that Arab refugees in Germany would soon
be granted citizenship, and would then be able to freely move to the UK.

In message , at 14:42:07 on Thu, 30 Jun
2016, d remarked:

I wonder how much it would cost to upgrade sections of the WCML so that
the pendilinos could actually do their design speed of 140mph?

Perhaps you should ask Network Rail, who spent ten years and 9bn failing
to do this within living memory.
--
Roland Perry