Does the UK really need High Speed 2?

[MrMetro]

I'm interested to hear the opinions regarding the proposed high speed rail link between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.

At the moment, I'm undecided. Personally, I think the money could be spent on improving the existing rail network, or installing light rail/tramways in congested cities such as Leeds and Bristol.

[Mark]

I think it's folly personally considering the time saved will be so little compared with the current routes. I understand that if you want a new line then building a high speed line is only slightly more expensive than a standard one.

The sad fact is that the money is available for a high profile pretige project, especially to London but the same money isn't available for building new trains and carriages and replacing badly outdated rolling stock, as that isn't glamorous enough.

[BDunnell]

My answer to this is that we should have done it ages ago. Now, it seems increasingly like an extravagance. When it happens, you can bet your life that it will be viewed not just as another part of the rail network, which is how high-speed train services are seen in France and Germany, but as some sort of special 'prestige' service. This isn't exactly what the UK needs.

When it does happen, I hope that at the same time we see see competition through the Channel Tunnel, because that route is unique amongst rail services in being one that would actually benefit from the monopoly operator having some rivalry. Then, maybe, the high-speed line will attract travellers from further north onto the railways as a means of crossing the Channel.

[Rollo]

Maybe the UK needs it, but no-one is going to pay for it.

Given that the operators of Lorries and Semis are able to bend governments to their will and hold them and the British people to ransom through stikes, thereby demanding ever more stretches of concrete which are being subsidised by the state, and fellow road users who having had railways destroyed by "time and motion" expert Dr Beeching in the 1960s, now have to sit in queues to go anywhere, then no.

Whilst the French can build 500km/h trains which are efficient and have a pricing structure rivalling airlines (but can put a passenger in the middle of a city rather than 20 miles from its centre), the bottom line is that Britain doesn't deserve High Speed Trains because neither the state which is forced to fund the infrastructure (despite doing precisely that with roads) or the private operators who skim the profits off the top and therefore won't do so.

Budget 2011: fuel duty cut delights road lobby | UK news | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/23/budget-2011-fuel-duty-cut-road-lobby)
Ministers 'gave in to road lobby over speed limits' - Home News, UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ministers-gave-in-to-road-lobby-over-speed-limits-723945.html)
New toll m-way 'bowing to road lobby' | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-309257/New-toll-m-way-bowing-road-lobby.html)

[heroes_46]

I think money can be spent on improving the existing rail networks.

[Dave B]

I live 5 minutes walk from a station served by HS1. It's twice the price to get into London, and we've lost several slower local services to accomodate the high speed trains. I suspect HS2, if it is ever built, will be a similar fudge. I also understand that while it cuts the journey time to Birmingham, the proposed new station is so far outside the city centre that any advantage is lost.

[Gregor-y]

Britain, like the US, neglected its rail network through the 60s and 70s and tried cheap solutions updating the existing network. Inner City tilting trains and Metroliners were poor substitutes for dedicated high speed passenger service. Doing it now will be very expensive but linking cities in the UK and cities in the US that are close together will be a lot better in the long run compared to the level of military spending we need to maintain ready access to oil.

[wedge]

When it does happen, I hope that at the same time we see see competition through the Channel Tunnel, because that route is unique amongst rail services in being one that would actually benefit from the monopoly operator having some rivalry. Then, maybe, the high-speed line will attract travellers from further north onto the railways as a means of crossing the Channel.

Isn't this going to happen? I seem to remember the Dutch are planning a service to Amsterdam in a few years time as on of their trains arrived at St Pancras.

I live next to the Midland Mainline and it stops right at St Pancras. The time it takes to get to the continent via plane or train is similar but the experience of train is so much better IMO.

[BDunnell]

Isn't this going to happen? I seem to remember the Dutch are planning a service to Amsterdam in a few years time as on of their trains arrived at St Pancras.

It was the Germans, actually, and yes, it is going to happen, but more competition than that would be welcomed — at least by me, given my experiences of Deutsche Bahn in recent months.



I live next to the Midland Mainline and it stops right at St Pancras. The time it takes to get to the continent via plane or train is similar but the experience of train is so much better IMO.

It certainly is, when it works, and huge improvements to Eurostar are long overdue. Whenever I come back from Berlin to the UK, I always come by train.

[MrMetro]

I live 5 minutes walk from a station served by HS1. It's twice the price to get into London, and we've lost several slower local services to accomodate the high speed trains. I suspect HS2, if it is ever built, will be a similar fudge. I also understand that while it cuts the journey time to Birmingham, the proposed new station is so far outside the city centre that any advantage is lost.

Indeed, I read about Southeastern cutting a number of its 'Mainline' and 'Metro' services in favour of its overpriced High Speed service in Private Eye a couple of months ago.

[BDunnell]

Indeed, I read about Southeastern cutting a number of its 'Mainline' and 'Metro' services in favour of its overpriced High Speed service in Private Eye a couple of months ago.

With such attitudes as those on the part of rail operators in the UK, it is no wonder that the concept of a national rail network has come to mean little beyond a website and an enquiry line.

[Malbec]

When it does happen, I hope that at the same time we see see competition through the Channel Tunnel, because that route is unique amongst rail services in being one that would actually benefit from the monopoly operator having some rivalry. Then, maybe, the high-speed line will attract travellers from further north onto the railways as a means of crossing the Channel.

Has DB managed to get its ICE trains approved for the tunnel yet? IIRC they needed to be walkthrough for the entire length of the train.

My wife worked for Eurostar back in the depths of time and some of the stories were shocking, some not necessarily being the fault of the company though. I don't think it would be too difficult for an alternative company to provide a more capable service.

As for the UK rail network, I would prefer it if some 'modernisation' was performed to the normal network. Electrifying a greater proportion to bring it screaming and kicking to the level attained elsewhere by the 1980s would be a start.

[BDunnell]

Has DB managed to get its ICE trains approved for the tunnel yet? IIRC they needed to be walkthrough for the entire length of the train.

Not sure. That was my understanding too, though I seem to recall reading something about the regulation being relaxed slightly.



My wife worked for Eurostar back in the depths of time and some of the stories were shocking, some not necessarily being the fault of the company though. I don't think it would be too difficult for an alternative company to provide a more capable service.

And, critically in my view, one that was not viewed and priced as a 'premium' service, as Eurostar is in spite of its serious shortcomings, especially for passengers in standard class. Compare Eurostar's standard class with that on DB's ICEs, even the older ones, and the difference is night and day.



As for the UK rail network, I would prefer it if some 'modernisation' was performed to the normal network. Electrifying a greater proportion to bring it screaming and kicking to the level attained elsewhere by the 1980s would be a start.

As would be ending the absurd situation whereby so many different agencies and organisations are involved in different aspects of rail service provision. No wonder so many small stations and the land around them have fallen into virtual ruin, when you consider the fragmentation caused by Major's failed privatisation, not to mention issues relating to maintenance.

[wedge]

My wife worked for Eurostar back in the depths of time and some of the stories were shocking, some not necessarily being the fault of the company though. I don't think it would be too difficult for an alternative company to provide a more capable service.

I was affected by the snowstorm just as it was making its impact last December. Just as delays and cancellations are snowballing they dealt with the backlog by sticking you on the next available train whereas - according to those who lacked temperament - the airlines attitude is toughs**t if your original plane is cancelled you can't jump on the next one.


And, critically in my view, one that was not viewed and priced as a 'premium' service, as Eurostar is in spite of its serious shortcomings, especially for passengers in standard class. Compare Eurostar's standard class with that on DB's ICEs, even the older ones, and the difference is night and day.

Same in Japan. I'm 6 foot and was amazed by the legroom in cattle class considering most East Asians are shorties.

[Sonic]

I live 5 minutes walk from a station served by HS1. It's twice the price to get into London, and we've lost several slower local services to accomodate the high speed trains. I suspect HS2, if it is ever built, will be a similar fudge. I also understand that while it cuts the journey time to Birmingham, the proposed new station is so far outside the city centre that any advantage is lost.

Sounds like we are in the same neck of the woods Dave, and as you no doubt know those same HS1 trains have now been reduced to just 4 carriages because there is so little demand most of the time.

[Malbec]

I was affected by the snowstorm just as it was making its impact last December. Just as delays and cancellations are snowballing they dealt with the backlog by sticking you on the next available train whereas - according to those who lacked temperament - the airlines attitude is toughs**t if your original plane is cancelled you can't jump on the next one.

I was thinking more of their attitude towards equipment maintenance or lack of it. SNCF borrowed some Eurostar trains recently to make up for a lack of TGVs and were apparently shocked at the state of the trains they got.

Regarding the problems they had with snow, they'd had problems with snow stopping trains before but not for a prolonged period, they had just calculated it wasn't worth doing anything about it.

[Steve Boyd]

Improvements to the West Coast route are definitely needed. A standard class open return allowing travel on any train from Manchester or Liverpool to London is well over £250. All that buys you is a cramped seat on a Pendolino (if you're lucky at peak times) - remember that tilting trains are narrower than conventional stock so they don't hit trains coming the other way when they're leaning over - so Pendolino seats are noticably narrower than those on an HST, for example.

The improvements that were made a few years ago caused significant disruption so upgrading the existing route is basically a non-starter. Once you've made the decision that a new line is needed then high speed is the only sensible choice. If it takes traffic off conventional train services (& hopefully the M1/M6 - or is that too much to ask?) then it will be well worth it.

There is one significant risk that I saw recently - if HS2 & the proposed electrification of the Great Western main line happen as planned they should be coming into operation just as the last of the nuclear and the higher polluting conventional power stations close, so maybe the trains will only run when its windy!!

[GridGirl]

Improvements to the West Coast route are definitely needed. A standard class open return allowing travel on any train from Manchester or Liverpool to London is well over £250. All that buys you is a cramped seat on a Pendolino (if you're lucky at peak times) - remember that tilting trains are narrower than conventional stock so they don't hit trains coming the other way when they're leaning over - so Pendolino seats are noticably narrower than those on an HST, for example.

Do you really need to purchase an open return though? I purchased first class return from Leeds to Reading for that price last week and the majority of the journey was at peak time. Having said that I am going to book 3 other first class return trips for two people to various other places in the country tomorrow and will probably be spending the best part of £1500 in rail travel. :s

[Steve Boyd]

Do you really need to purchase an open return though?
My journeys to London were usually for BSI committee meetings whose length tended to be indeterminate, so what do you do - book a seat on the 18:30 train & sit around waiting for 3 hours if the meeting finished early or risk booking the 16:30 knowing you might have to either leave the meeting before the item on the agenda you really wanted to get involved in was dicsussed or miss that train & have to wait until 19:30 to return without paying a penalty fare. This probably explains why those committees now meet in Derbyshire & Northants - where most members can drive to conveniently.

[Mark]

Trains may be public transport but the reality is that for most in the UK they are an expensive luxury. Driving is cheaper than the train in most instances, this is not the way it should be.

Apart from the expense it does seem that the rail network in largely maintained by those in London for those in London.

[MrMetro]

True. We are frequently told that we should go via train for business or leisure, but when driving/flying is much cheaper, why would people do that? Don't get me wrong, I do like traveling on trains, but some fares are un-reasonable.

Inter-city rail travel in the UK can be cheap, but only if you know what you are doing in 3 months time, otherwise, 'walk on' tickets are very expensive.

At least we a have a price war in the inter-city coach market between National Express, Megabus and Greyhound UK.

[BDunnell]

Apart from the expense it does seem that the rail network in largely maintained by those in London for those in London.

I'd make two comments about that. First, I've never seen any actual evidence of it, and wonder how such a bias could actually be discerned. Second, London is the capital, and the UK's most populous city, so it is natural for a certain concentration of resources to flow in its direction.

[MrMetro]

I'd make two comments about that. First, I've never seen any actual evidence of it, and wonder how such a bias could actually be discerned. Second, London is the capital, and the UK's most populous city, so it is natural for a certain concentration of resources to flow in its direction.

Leeds and Merseyside got their tram schemes rejected on grounds of cost, yet their were no restrictions for Crossrail. There are other cities which have congestion problems as well, not just London.

[BDunnell]

Leeds and Merseyside got their tram schemes rejected on grounds of cost, yet their were no restrictions for Crossrail. There are other cities which have congestion problems as well, not just London.

I would consider Crossrail to be a more important and urgently-needed project than is a tram system in Leeds.

[MrMetro]

I would consider Crossrail to be a more important and urgently-needed project than is a tram system in Leeds.

So its alright for every other city to have **** public transport other than London?

[MrMetro]

And what annoyed most was the excuse for not building the tram scheme, the cost. Yet they can through at least 20 billion at Crossrail. You should know from living in Germany that its not just Berlin, the capital that has extensive public transport.

[Mark]

Quite. London has excellent public transport. In the rest of the country it can best be described as poor.

Advance purchase train fares can be ok, my Mum is going to Edinburgh for £30 return which is similar to the fuel costs but that's only by booking three months in advance.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I would consider Crossrail to be a more important and urgently-needed project than is a tram system in Leeds.

Any wonder we have a north/south divide with attitudes like this? :rolleyes:

[Mark]

I would consider Crossrail to be a more important and urgently-needed project than is a tram system in Leeds.

Why?

[MrMetro]

And what annoyed most was the excuse for not building the tram scheme, the cost. Yet they can through at least 20 billion at Crossrail. You should know from living in Germany that its not just Berlin, the capital that has extensive public transport.

Oh yeah, before anybody points it out, I meant to put throw, not through.Typing on two forums at once.

[slinkster]

I think the money could be best used upgrading current tracks and services first. Initially I thought it was a good idea, particularly linking the major cities to London. I was disappointed with the route however, and I do sympathise with those rural areas that will be affected. I live pretty close to the proposed route and it doesn't bother me too much. Similarly it would have been nice for this to have been done years ago rather than ruining vast parts of countryside with new roads which have done sod all to ease congestion. Our train network (in fact most of our infrastructure) is lacking years and years behind other countries but I fear this is largely to do with shoddy work ethics of big companies. I travelled through Japan for two weeks with ease, and at a relatively fair price- no delays, nothing, despite heavy commuter usage. Puts us to shame.

[MrMetro]

I think the money could be best used upgrading current tracks and services first. Initially I thought it was a good idea, particularly linking the major cities to London. I was disappointed with the route however, and I do sympathise with those rural areas that will be affected. I live pretty close to the proposed route and it doesn't bother me too much. Similarly it would have been nice for this to have been done years ago rather than ruining vast parts of countryside with new roads which have done sod all to ease congestion. Our train network (in fact most of our infrastructure) is lacking years and years behind other countries but I fear this is largely to do with shoddy work ethics of big companies. I travelled through Japan for two weeks with ease, and at a relatively fair price- no delays, nothing, despite heavy commuter usage. Puts us to shame.

There are several key problems with railways in the UK.

1. Lack of intergration. Network Rail own the track and stations, and passenger operations are carried out by several private companies. This results in limited communication between the Train Operating Companies and Network Rail.

2. Profit motive. In most other countries, rail transport is viewed as a public service and an important one at that as well. In the UK however, the government thinks rail and bus services only exist to make the pockets of Brian Souter and Tim O'Toole larger.

3. The Rolling Stock Operating Companies. They own the trains and lease them out to the TOC's at very high prices.

[MrMetro]

Know what? Forget I said anything. I can't be bothered getting into a discussion about north/south spending. I never contribute anything interesting to political discussions on this forum, and if I do, its normally full of poor spelling and grammer and probably not true.

Peace to you all.

Rooster.

[Malbec]

I travelled through Japan for two weeks with ease, and at a relatively fair price- no delays, nothing, despite heavy commuter usage. Puts us to shame.

People have compared the British system to Japan and France but I don't think thats entirely fair.

Both countries subsidise their rail networks to a level Brits would find unacceptable. Japan also has a significant 'advantage' in that the geography and sheer expense of keeping and running a car make rail much more competitive as a transport option, increasing demand and therefore income. Even then their rail networks often run up substantial losses.

[Mark]

Don't forget that the UK railways also get massive subsidies.

[Malbec]

Don't forget that the UK railways also get massive subsidies.

Of course, but to the same extent as Japan and France? I may be wrong but I don't think the British pay anywhere near as much.