What do our resident experts make of this?
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/there-is-a-far-better-option-than-hs2-and-it-already-exists/
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Great Central Railway?
(21 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
Hmmmmm
Posted 5 years ago # -
This is the railway equivalent of arguing that cycle lanes should be routed down back streets rather than main roads.
HS2 is massively expensive, seemingly subject to the usual inflated costs of British infrastructure projects. However, it will transform intercity rail travel across Britain and hopefully put a serious dent in domestic aviation.
Also, I have't heard anyone from Japan or France wishing that they had built conventional railways rather than Shinkansen or LGV.
New railways in Britain share another feature with new cycle infrastructure - the processes for approving them are torturous, expensive and put far too much power in the hands of small groups of objectors. All helping to build in delay, conflict and additional cost.
Posted 5 years ago # -
It doesn't seem obvious that hs2 will dent uk domestic flights. I can't seem to find any data but I assume that passenger numbers on flights to London from Birmingham are tiny, same for Leeds and Manchester.
I remember once flying to Heathrow from Leeds, but that was just a connecting flight onwards. I don't really think how you travel to your long distance flight matters, as the CO2 is always going to be tiny in comparison to the long distance flight.
Or are there other popular flight routes to London which HS2 will help by people training to Birmingham and changing there?
Posted 5 years ago # -
654,071 passengers Manchester-Heathrow and 103,706 Leeds-Heathrow. Worth noting a good chuck of those will be connecting and so unless a rail&air type ticket was offered by BA those flights worldly mostly still remain.
HS2 services will continue on the current mainlines and will reduce journey times between Glasgow/Edinburgh-London by about an hour which should make the train more attractive.
But of course the main point of HS2 is not necessarily speed but rather capacity. The existing West Coast Mainline is at bursting point and will struggle to facilitate further growth.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I find this a bit hard to believe -
“
The Great Central was one of the many casualties of the Beeching closures of the 1960s, yet it remains almost totally intact. A few agricultural buildings have been built across it, but otherwise its line remains clear — a recently-built housing estate in Brackley, Northamptonshire, respectfully leaves its course as an undeveloped green corridor, just in case.
“
Mostly now cycle paths?
In environmental terms I’m not clear how much better HS2 would be than domestic flights.
If CC ever gets taken seriously flying will need to be restricted - with or without alternatives being in place.
A significant reason for more people travelling more is obviously cost. Presumably HS2 wouldn’t have cheap fares.
Once again it’s a London-centric project which is unlikely to deal with many of the problems already created by the geopolitical realities of the UK.
It’s the same structural politics that leads to more new roads and unfixed old ones.
You want to ‘invest in infrastructure and create jobs’?
Start by fixing what you’ve got - potholes, deteriorating public buildings, not enough passing loops etc. etc.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I'm very much on the fence about HS2; having experienced high speed trains in Europe, I'd love to have them here; but if the main point is about capacity rather than speed, wouldn't the route proposed in the article be a much cheaper way of improving capacity?
Posted 5 years ago # -
Induced-demand applies to railways as much as it does to motorways.
HS2 will create *new* journeys, *in addition* to those already made by road, flights & conventional rail. New or longer commutes will become possible (thanks to shortened journey times & new stations en route). More frequent business trips could be made (again thanks to shortened times, more capacity). More weekend jaunts, stag/hen dos, etc.
We cannot build our way out of climate change. We have to stop with the building ever more and more capacity and ever more consumption of everything.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I have to say I agree with chdot's position on this. I also have sympathy with that of neddie.
Yet another London-centric project pretending to benefit "the regions". Frankly the suggestion in the Spectator seems much more practical than HS2, less destructive, more beneficial to the Midlands and north west, and cheaper to boot.
Comparisons with Japan, France, etc. are somewhat disingenuous, given the distances involved, relative population densities, etc. We're living on a smallish, overpopulated island and HS2 will not provide much benefit for populations further north than Birmingham.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I used to be agnostic on HS2, when it had the "sweetener" of the long-distance traffic-free cycle route attached to it. Now the cycle path has been removed because reasons...
So now I am against it, particularly after a set of Twitter interactions with a certain rail engineer. (This shows just how arguing against people can also entrench their views).
Posted 5 years ago # -
Not forgetting that the GCR was originally a northern England railway, with a later London extension!
“
The MS&LR obtained Parliamentary approval in 1893 for its extension to London.[2]:32 On 1 August 1897, the railway's name was changed to Great Central Railway. Building work started in 1895: the new line, 92 miles (147 km) in length, opened for coal traffic on 25 July 1898, for passenger traffic on 15 March 1899,[2]:132 and for goods traffic on 11 April 1899.[1] It was designed for high-speed running throughout.
“
Posted 5 years ago # -
Then there’s -
“
Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR),[1] previously called High Speed 3 (HS3) or Crossrail for the North, is a proposed railway network in the North of England.
“
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Powerhouse_Rail
More possibilities if they hadn’t shut the Woodhead Line (and Tunnel).
Posted 5 years ago # -
But with MrJ’s Magic Money Forest, who knows!!
Posted 5 years ago # -
@chdot you mean the 'faraway fiscal forest'?
One of the things I wondered about was how much of this railway was now cycle routes...or had the potential to become.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Thing is, it isn't as simple as simply rebuilding a bit of disused railway. The southern end of the GCR is still in use, principally by Chiltern Railways. Other parts of the route are also still extant. Given the complexity of the current franchising system, it would be no easy task to turn this into a revived intercity railway.
In addition, there have already been two failed attempts to develop this line in the last 20 years (http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00688/SN00688.pdf) - which were subject to considerable public and political objection.
HS2 will also use a 12 mile section of the GCR solum. The claim that there are no significant blockages to the solum seem to be incorrect, as part of the route is used by Nottingman trams, housing has been built in places plus the Nottingham Victoria shopping centre.
None of this is impossible to overcome - but it isn't as easy as the original article makes out.
Could the vast sums being spent on HS2 be better invested in transport - yes. Walking, cycling and local bus infrastructure across the UK could be transformed beyond all recognition with the sums involved. Regional railways could also be revitalised.
The WCML is at capacity - a bit more could be wrung out with new signalling systems, which would allow 140mph maximum running speeds for inercity trains and for trains to run closer together. However, investment in new capacity is probably needed. Is HS2 the best answer? I genuinely don't know. There is no real reason why building a new high speed railway should cost significantly more than a conventional railway (yes, a bit more - but not too much).
It is worth remembering that many opponents of HS2 aren't really interested in rail or other active and sustainable modes. Protecting their house prices and securing more investment in motorways seems to be the priority of many.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“
In January 2008, Secretary of State for Transport Ruth Kelly confirmed in a statement to the House of Commons that she had an "open mind" as to whether, during the second control period from 2014, "a disused rail line between London and Birmingham" should be reopened as a means of relieving the West Coast Main Line, which was interpreted by rail commentators as referring to the GCML.
“
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brackley_Central_railway_station
Posted 5 years ago # -
“Protecting their house prices“
Also (in some cases) houses, gardens and ‘rural’ location.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@morningsider any idea how chiltern railways is doing? I've used them a few times and had very positive experiences. by contrast west coast mainline is always a nightmare.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@SRD - Chiltern always come near the top of any passenger satisfaction survey, so seem to be a very good operation.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@Morningsider indeed. but is the business model working out?
Posted 5 years ago # -
@SRD - Chiltern is effectively unique in having a 20-year franchise agreement with the DfT which involves wholly private sector investment in genuine service development. It receives no revenue support from the UK Government and has invested in infrastructure development to extend and enhance its services under the three phase "Evergreen" project - including extending the line to Oxford. Possibly the closest thing to a franchising success following the disastrous privatisation of BR in 1996 (not that I support rail privatisation in any way).
So yes, the business model actually seems to be working out.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
