Is HS2 Needed?

Flying Fokker

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2011
2,743
361
133
I’ve always been against HS 2 on the basist of Costs and need. With Covid and far fewer using trains in the short term it seems the arguments for HS 2 have trundled off to the horizon. Particularly as companies have new ways of working. I‘m not bothered about the face to face meetings between companies as this now seems irrelevant.

I don’t hear much about progress nowadays.
 

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2013
22,008
12,372
363
I’ve always been against HS 2 on the basist of Costs and need. With Covid and far fewer using trains in the short term it seems the arguments for HS 2 have trundled off to the horizon. Particularly as companies have new ways of working. I‘m not bothered about the face to face meetings between companies as this now seems irrelevant.

I don’t hear much about progress nowadays.
Drive past Weston, or further down the Banbury Road, and progress continues, with land being cleared.
 

SBAndy

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2011
1,865
1,343
113
Sheffield
HS2 in its entirety is not at all needed. Improved rail infrastructure between the midlands and the north is though. I’d have started with that stage of the project but was never going to happen.
 

Tommo1993

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2019
2,498
1,729
163
Isn’t it only going to save about 10-15 minutes from Manchester to London? If so, totally worth it!
 

OffenhamSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2015
2,346
1,417
113
Evesham, Worcs
No it isn't! Even if the perception was that it was needed initially, times have changed significantly for the reasons you have set out - the people who thought they needed to get from Brum to London 20 minutes quicker for a meeting (but probably at double the expense to their company) now know they don't need to go at all.
It was always a vanity project to provide jobs in the engineering sector, but now is just a waste of money!

Crackley Lane, between Kenilworth and Westwood Heath is closed for two months for this shambles!
 

lifeskyblue

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2015
5,476
2,715
163
Isn’t it only going to save about 10-15 minutes from Manchester to London? If so, totally worth it!
Just enough time to fit in an extra cup of overpriced coffee but that ‘all important meeting’ must be attended.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2011
24,995
15,204
263
Coventry, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
Yeah it probably is. So is better local links and HS3. Train infrastructure in this country is a joke. I get it upsets a lot of people because of the land taken, but that’s the case for literally any major project in green belt.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
18,855
20,164
263
I've always thought the money would be better spent on a massive program of upskilling the work force.

I also read an article I came across from a train magazine where some fella quite laid out the case for current journey times being cut using an app where the basic premise was most people pre book trains to get the best deal and the app would allow people to swap trains to an earlier train for a small fee and cutting waiting times.

I've had a look and can't find the article but he made a convincing case.
 

dubed

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2012
2,260
848
163
It's totally needed by the contractors and local officials and those inside the government with brown bag connections. If anybody thinks there is any other reason why it is still going ahead and that such things don't go on then more fool them. It's literally criminal.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2011
24,995
15,204
263
Coventry, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
I've always thought the money would be better spent on a massive program of upskilling the work force.

I also read an article I came across from a train magazine where some fella quite laid out the case for current journey times being cut using an app where the basic premise was most people pre book trains to get the best deal and the app would allow people to swap trains to an earlier train for a small fee and cutting waiting times.

I've had a look and can't find the article but he made a convincing case.
The major case isn’t journey times but capacity I thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthernWisdom

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2014
12,669
4,833
163
Nuneaton
The major case isn’t journey times but capacity I thought.
When it started it was probably times but then they realised it wasn’t a big difference so they said capacity, I don’t imagine the trains to London are jam packed at 11am on a Thursday. It’s a vanity project that has now gone to far to stop as big business would lose a fortune, the money would have been better spent improving the current system and internet speeds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dubed

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
18,855
20,164
263
When it started it was probably times but then they realised it wasn’t a big difference so they said capacity, I don’t imagine the trains to London are jam packed at 11am on a Thursday. It’s a vanity project that has now gone to far to stop as big business would lose a fortune, the money would have been better spent improving the current system and internet speeds.
Was it in anyone's manifesto to stop it?

Tories and Labour were both going to go ahead. I'd imagine the greens opposed it.
 

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2013
22,008
12,372
363
When it started it was probably times but then they realised it wasn’t a big difference so they said capacity, I don’t imagine the trains to London are jam packed at 11am on a Thursday. It’s a vanity project that has now gone to far to stop as big business would lose a fortune, the money would have been better spent improving the current system and internet speeds.
Well they're certainly packed earlier! It's also how many trains (including freight) you can fit on the line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shmmeee

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2014
12,669
4,833
163
Nuneaton
Well they're certainly packed earlier! It's also how many trains (including freight) you can fit on the line.
Go later then, there is a lot of wasted effort in travelling to see somebody face to face I have spent years doing it. I went to London for a training session one morning and there was a guy on there who was commuting every day from Crewe he was on a train that got to Nuneaton about 730am and said he wouldn’t get home until 8 pm at night
 

dubed

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2012
2,260
848
163
Well they're certainly packed earlier! It's also how many trains (including freight) you can fit on the line.
Frequent traveller to London pre-lockdown. Trains are packed up to 9am. Thereafter they could lose a coach or two and still have seats to spare. Reverts back to full capacity being required between 4.30-6. Either way, only rarely do you have to travel standing.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2018
6,537
3,965
113
HS2 in its entirety is not at all needed. Improved rail infrastructure between the midlands and the north is though. I’d have started with that stage of the project but was never going to happen.
HS2 is there to be used as extra airport capacity for London. Why do you think the first stage is from BHX to London? I bet once that's done the 'business case' for the second legs up North will suddenly disappear. It's been sold as enabling growth in the regions by connecting faster to London but once again it's a smokescreen people fell for. It's there to benefit London by getting more people into it, not out.

Remember years ago when it was first announced having an argument with someone when I said it'd end up costing over £80bn and they scoffed. That's already the conservative estimate and they haven't even started construction and found the problems along the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ring Of Steel

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
Dec 15, 2015
6,880
4,924
163
I have been well aware of what HS2 actually is since it first was announced years ago. My parents lost a massive value on their house because of it so a lot of research was done into the project.

The whole thing when you look into it is a massive con, and a lot of people are making good money out of it. Originally they were going to link it to HS1 (channel tunnel), but would have to route through Camden. They basically decided they couldn't take the residents on, so scrapped that part of the route and tried to spin it saying they were only trying to save money. Project was at about 100 Billion at the time and that part would have saved 1 Billion of that. What's the point if it doesn't link up to HS1? Again, just serving London.

Even if you go back almost 10 years, there were obviously people being paid to infiltrate forums and argue pro-hs2 Propaganda. Dodgy as fuck.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Sep 27, 2008
25,585
13,926
363
Coventry
Improvements to the rail infrastructure in this country are massively needed but IMO this isn't the answer. Coventry is a prime example. Trash a load of countryside to run the line through it but won't stop here.

Everytime you see politicians talking about it they talk about being 10 minutes quicker to get to London. Who cares? And why is all the focus on getting people into London, would be much better off targeting getting some of the wealth in London out into the rest of the country.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2018
6,537
3,965
113
I have been well aware of what HS2 actually is since it first was announced years ago. My parents lost a massive value on their house because of it so a lot of research was done into the project.

The whole thing when you look into it is a massive con, and a lot of people are making good money out of it. Originally they were going to link it to HS1 (channel tunnel), but would have to route through Camden. They basically decided they couldn't take the residents on, so scrapped that part of the route and tried to spin it saying they were only trying to save money. Project was at about 100 Billion at the time and that part would have saved 1 Billion of that. What's the point if it doesn't link up to HS1? Again, just serving London.

Even if you go back almost 10 years, there were obviously people being paid to infiltrate forums and argue pro-hs2 Propaganda. Dodgy as fuck.
Agree entirely about HS1. If it's supposedly going to improve international rail travel from Europe who can it do that if it doesn't directly linkto the European rail network?.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2011
20,520
14,682
263
I’ve always been against HS 2 on the basist of Costs and need. With Covid and far fewer using trains in the short term it seems the arguments for HS 2 have trundled off to the horizon. Particularly as companies have new ways of working. I‘m not bothered about the face to face meetings between companies as this now seems irrelevant.

I don’t hear much about progress nowadays.
Yeah, it feels a bit like it could be redundant before it starts.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2011
20,520
14,682
263
I have been well aware of what HS2 actually is since it first was announced years ago. My parents lost a massive value on their house because of it so a lot of research was done into the project.

The whole thing when you look into it is a massive con, and a lot of people are making good money out of it. Originally they were going to link it to HS1 (channel tunnel), but would have to route through Camden. They basically decided they couldn't take the residents on, so scrapped that part of the route and tried to spin it saying they were only trying to save money. Project was at about 100 Billion at the time and that part would have saved 1 Billion of that. What's the point if it doesn't link up to HS1? Again, just serving London.

Even if you go back almost 10 years, there were obviously people being paid to infiltrate forums and argue pro-hs2 Propaganda. Dodgy as fuck.
Yeah, the premise of it is to continue to expand the London commuter belt. It actually compounds the imbalance in the UK economy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shmmeee

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2011
20,520
14,682
263
This is a very fair point.

But can we really see a bunch of politicians and media in London suddenly deciding to change it? So it’s probably this sort of crap or nothing at all.
No, I don't. Tbh it annoys me that everything is presented as a choice between HS2 and upgrading other bits of the network, it is completely false.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2011
24,995
15,204
263
Coventry, United Kingdom, United Kingdom
No, I don't. Tbh it annoys me that everything is presented as a choice between HS2 and upgrading other bits of the network, it is completely false.
Agreed. It’s “yes and“ not “Either or”.

In an equal country the west mids rail plan wouldn’t be a mishmash of buses and pie in the sky undeveloped technologies with a date so far in the future it might as well be an excerpt from a Philip K Dick novel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duffer

skyblue1991

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,447
1,819
113
HS2 in its entirety is not at all needed. Improved rail infrastructure between the midlands and the north is though. I’d have started with that stage of the project but was never going to happen.
Agree, HS2 phase 1 should've started between Leeds and Birmingham

Sent from my I3113 using Tapatalk