UK, 2022 : "Why HS2"... Meanwhile, in France: HST "TGV": project started in 1974, 1st line Paris-Lyon (427 km) opened in 1981. World speed record on rails: 380 kph (1981), 515 kph (1990), 574 kph (2007). In 2022: 800 TGV trains a day transporting 110 million passengers per year.. Travel Paris-Bordeaux: Wednesday 4 january 2023, departure Paris 9:11 - arrival Bordeaux 11:14mn, 630 km duration 2h03mn, 29 euros...
Indeed if the UK was truly serious about high speed rail, we would have built to Edinburgh and Glasgow and down through Newcastle and through Leeds….with the full Northern Powerhouse without the watered down version…
SR.N1, the first hovercraft prototype in 1959. Less than 10 years later in 1968 SR.N4 carrying 60 cars and 418 passengers enters service. We used to do this kind of stuff well.
@@Rail_Focus I regularly travel from Nottingham to Southampton. Door to door my journey is: By train: 6h 30m, £650+ for family (flexi ticket return). By car: 3h, £60 fuel. The car provides full autonomy over departure time, route, stops, luggage etc. I can even fly, Notts to Southampton transferring in Jersey and it is faster than the train. When HS2 is finished, how much will the tickets cost? The existing ticket price for Birmingham to London is already ridiculous (approx. £100 return). Unfortunately trains just don't make economic sense. We could subsidise the ticket price, but we will still pay for it just indirectly through taxes.
This excellently curated video and some of the unfortunate comments are a fantastic example of how you can explain how HS2 is the UKs most needed investment and all the benefits it will bring until you're blue in the face and people will watch and still comment that "HS2 is bad because X" even though X has been addressed / disproved multiple times in the video. *sigh*
Gareth gives a good explanation, though I live in an area where the homework doesn't seem to work. My nearest WCML station is Coventry, and on the current timetable, every rush hour train stops there (there used to be exactly one that skipped it). That's an exception though.
I watched all your videos about HS2 which I have supported it since they first was talking about it plus I say to some people who I know we need to have HS2 to free up more freight trains to run on like the West Coast Mainline and also when it's finished I am planning to go on one of the trains from Euston to Birmingham as the where Washwood Heath Depot is that used to be the Alstom factory where I saw some of the new units which were the 175's, 334's, 458's plus the 460's. Very good videos about HS2 and can't wait to see if you do anymore about them.
We also need a new line between London and South Wales. Currently, such traffic shares a single line with just two physical tracks with all the services between the South West and the Midlands. This is a consequence of closing the southern part of the mainline between Bristol and Birmingham in the late 60s (Bristol to Yate). The consequence today in the greater Bristol region is daily road congestion hell, because it’s not possible to open up more “commuter” stations as the track capacity simply can’t support the extra trains.
We need a High Speed line connecting Birmingham Curzon to Bristol Parkway with high speed spurs to South wales via a new Severn tunnel and a tunnel underneath Bristol to a new underground though-station at Temple Meads, tunnel to the other side of Bristol to allow for high speed links to Bristol Airport and Bridgwater to link to conventional lines out of Devon and Cornwall. Then re-align a few sections of the GWML around Yate, and before and after Swindon, and quad track sections for stopping services at Yate and Wootton Bassett, and get high speed rolling stock on the GWML and you can get as fast as the OLE can take, probably 200mph between Bristol and Didcot. Link the GWML to HS1 and high speed international services out of Bristol and Cardiff would be very much possible, imagine what that would do for the economy.
@@WalesRails I'm openminded about how one achieves these goals. It seems to me that either one removes the London South Wales traffic or the South West Midlands traffic from the "pinch point" near a place called Winterbourne. I would love it if we could take over the current GWML for commuter traffic - I would reopen many stations in South Gloucestershire - at places like Winterbourne, Coalpit Heath, Chipping Sodbury, Wickwar, Tytherington and Thornbury, and substantially increase the services to Yate. I can see that a Bristol "Cross-rail" tunnel could be a way to achieve some of this and would allow commuter services to be provide to north-east Bristol in particular. Basically, I look at the the map of rail services around Greater Manchester or other major conurbations and it's painfully obvious that the Greater Bristol region (including South Gloucestershire, North Somerset, Bath & North East Somerset) is very poorly served by rail in comparison. I see people complaining - with considerable justification - about the poor services in The North - delays, cancellations, overcrowding etc - and can't help noting that in Greater Bristol such problems don't exist in many cases because there are no trains whatsoever!
(1) If there are more points where lines merge, delay factors and timetable management will become more complicated. (2) In addition to travel between London and regional cities, if you do not consider travel between regional cities, the more distance you have from London, the more vacant seats you will have. (3) I think it is necessary to consider selling the Class800 series to Amtrak in the United States by changing the vehicle size. (4) I believe that the JR Group and the LNER should promote the development of intercity railroads in the United States, Canada, and Australia. (5) Besides the necessity of HS2, we also need to consider monetization. For example, if you connect from "London" to "Glasgow" via "Birmingham", "Manchester", "Leeds", "Newcastle", "Edinburgh", you can travel long, medium and short distances. In other words, you can monetize from various needs. (6) If the travel time exceeds 4 hours, you cannot beat the airplane. For that reason, I think that the idea of connecting medium-distance routes (routes with a travel time of 4 hours or less) should be considered. (7) The introduction of the Linear Shinkansen should be considered in order to reduce the time required for long-distance routes to less than four hours. (8) I think it is necessary to design routes that make the most of the strengths of railways. For that reason, I think it would be good to incorporate airplanes and buses into the railway route design.
I don't get 3 and 4 especially 4 shouldn't these groups be focusing on supporting the development of new uk railways? I think for 5 to work it would be nice to have an oyster system but for the whole of the uk not just London. although it would be nice to build a separate line for long distance services ie London to Glasgow I think building a maglev service would be hard, super expensive and maybe even pointless. Also yeah I agree I think the uk in general needs better connections to the train stations themselves yes improving the rail would be nice but also improving other transit services like busses trams and the like would do wonders for increasing the number of people going on trains and reducing the cars on the road, and I think just having good connections to the stations themselves from the suburbs and other high density hot spots would get us there.
@@orangeflipgram6549 I would like the UK to understand more about the railway business model. If so, you will understand that 3 and 4 will be important for the development of British railways. Besides, Japan and the UK should enter the railroad industry in the United States, Canada, and Australia before it's too late. Next, I would like you to include the Linear Shinkansen as an option. Also, in order to establish the operation results of the Linear Shinkansen. I would like you to support JR Tokai. Next, I also think that the IC card system is important. I think the combination of the IC card system and transportation infrastructure is optimal. By the way, I think that the monorail is better than the tram because it separates the road and the tracks. What do you think? Besides, I think the monorail is easier to install than the subway.
One thing that will mitigate delays is the fact services have been timed at 200mph, trains will only need to travel at 225mph to make up time, so at least some flexibility has been designed in. HS2 won't be running anywhere near capacity either, unless the Eastern arm is constructed. Even then the core line could theoretically take 20tph.
@@Rail_Focus The structure of Japanese stations has the following structure in order to avoid slowing down when a train overtakes. Especially for routes traveling at speeds above 160 km/h. == Explanation image made by me: docs.google.com/drawings/d/1z_ZKyIIikWtM59bhLshKhHe613ZCP3b4KBzixmujL1U/edit?usp=sharing ==
I do think that it’s beneficial for having HS2 but at the same time it costs £millions & £millions as it’s only started. And with Phase 1 of HS2 to be built that is schedule to be completed before 2030.
It’s true that it’s expensive, but it’s a high speed rail line built crossing a densely developed nation. The costs of just developing and preparing the plans are of course going to be high. But this had to be built either now or later on - when parts of the country and the cities it has to reach would be even denser. Built it now, and once it’s there, the costs won’t matter. Did you know the President and the Chief Engineer of the Japanese Railways resigned when building the original Tokaido Shinkansen due to high costs? They were reinstated after its completion, and look at Japan and it’s railways now. Public infrastructure is pretty much always worth the costs
So? it'll pay that cost back in the first decade though economic, social and environmental benefits, not to mention a reduction in cost of road maintenance as more freight can come off the roads. The overall cost might sound like a lot but spread that out over the years and decades that HS2 will operate and its ridiculously cheap and not one of, but THE BEST way to invest taxpayers money to deliver the mentioned above benefits and a return on investment for the taxpayer.
At what speed will the trains be able to travel? England is a small country and we only need a few extra lines and trains that are punctual. Biggest waste of taxpayers money for years.
Around 200mph, with a maximum speed of 225mph on straight sections if needed to make up time. HS2 is similar in length to many HS lines around the world. By diverting non-stop trains in from the WCML it will free up capacity on existing lines for improved local and regional links and capacity for freight.
What are the two highest CO2 emitter’s. 1.The manufacturing of steel. 2.The manufacturing of concrete And HS2 is entirely built out of? Hmmm let me think a second.
Can't build things out of thin air unfortunately. The difference being if HS2 can drive a significant modal shift from air and roads it will repay the carbon.
Just wait until you find out what road infrastructure and road vehicles are made out of and the figures on passenger km travelled per tonne of steel or freight tonne transported per tonne of concrete. Remember, the vast majority of cars, vans and lorries on the road right now didn't exist 15 years ago. 33 million cars, 5 million vans, half a million lorries, most of them will be scrapped in 15 years and new manufacturing required. All HS2 will need after initial construction is a few rails replaced here and there every few years, the rolling stock will last 40 years at least with the large structures and tunnels lasting literal hundreds of years, multiple times over than car infrastructure.
I think they could of saved money if they just built a newer west coast / east coast main line a more direct running ether down the middle or near ether one ya know instead of turns and hills more straight it would probably be slightly cheaper than Hs2
That wouldn't work as both the WCML and ECML go through populated areas, so to build alongside they would have to demolish a lot of properties and cause huge disruption to the existing lines, that HS2 avoids. Only HS2 can double capacity by being segregated and designed for 400m long trains, this simply wouldn't be possible if they had to deal with the constraints of existing infrastructure.
@@Rail_Focus I guess but still I think we are a bit late onto the game had we built this 50 years ago we would of been able to save money and live better also the fact it’s only going to what Birmingham makes it not completely but a little pointless yes reduces congestion but still it would make more sense running from London to Scotland but that would make it a direct competitor to the wcml and ecml I think hs2 has its ups and downs let’s just wait and see if it’s successful But still what was it 40 odd billion estimated to complete jeer it won’t be making profits for at least a decade
There's absolutely no evidence to show better train services will elliviate road usage. especially as the average commute to work which is the biggest factor and commute is about 35 minutes on average and the catchment area's for trains are not usually within ideal distances to homes, they serve commercial/business/economic centre links. the reason train services are being used its purely finincial, but as soon as the threshold is reach people buy cars. its really a non argument.
35 minutes, good thing HS2 frees up capacity on the WCML allowing more Avanti services to stop there rather than flying through non-stop like the majority current do. Also frees up paths on WCML for freight, which will remove thousands of HGVs. Also people do still drive and fly from the North to London, anything than can be done to move those people onto rail is a bonus.
HS2 adds virtually no additional suburban / urban capacity. The Elizabeth line, London Overground, Bakerloo line, and West coast main line, not forgetting the 10 Bus routes, Taxies and Uber, already serve Willesden Junction (or the soon to be rebranded Old Oak Common) to Central London, commuter corridor, and the existing options stop in between and go beyond the Euston road. Add an HS2 ticket between Old Oak Common and Euston will also cost far more than even an Elizabeth line ticket, let alone the TfL Zone 1-2 £1.65 fare needed to commute into central London, on one of the existing services, that depart every 5 mins. The under utilised Elizabeth line also runs to the almost adjacent King's Cross / St Pancras, and almost as quickly as the promised HS2 service, and at £7.70, a fraction of the HS2 fare. The Elizabeth line and platforms can run longer and more frequent trains, if there was the demand, which at present there isn't. Similarly Birmingham International to Central Birmingham is already served by urban rail, buses, taxies, and uber and aiding bodies, using regional air travel to reach the centre of Birmingham, quicker the the £3.40 train services that depart every 15 mins, from the airport, really undermines the environmental sale pitch. As to freeing capacity at Rugby, far more frequent commuter services to Coventry and Birmingham, re-opening the Great Central main line between Nottingham, Loughborough, Leicester, Rugby, and Aylesbury, would offer residents of Rugby access to the Chiltern and Midland mainlines, and East West rail, and far more additional work destinations, not forgetting options for freight to bypass the WCML. Allowing more frequent commuter services between Rugby, Coventry and Birmingham. After all the justification HS2 will permit more, long, slow, freight to run on the WCML, in the slots the HST's previously occupied, will offer nothing to the residents of Rugby, Coventry, or Birmingham, in the way of improved sub-urban, commuter rail services, in the West Midland conurbation. The official, pre pandemic, forecast of 15,439 daily passengers, travelling between London and Birmingham, 7,700 in each direction, every day, on the > £100bn line, with fixed debt servicing and running costs in excess £10bn a year, raises the opportunity cost, as each family of 4 travelling will require a teaching assistants annual salary of taxpayer subsidy, to reduce the price to simply a multiple of a WCML ticket, else a family day return, to visit London Zoo, or some other frivolous, CO2 emitting activity, will exceed £20,000. Similarly adding capacity between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, York, and Hull, on the Worlds first, initially pre-Victorian line, that is almost identical in length to the London to Birmingham route, but with an existing 4hr 23min travel time, not the 1hr 22min Avanti offer in the South, would offer more attractive commuter, and coast to coast freight options, on an existing corridor, and likely see far more bodies and freight move to rail. Other than offering employment to several thousand construction workers, cement factory workers, quarry workers, sand dredgers, tree fellers, steel importers, commodity speculators, architects, ... for decades, at taxpayers expense. That they are sure to be grateful for, with generous donations to the sponsoring political parties. There's really no numerate justification for HS2.
@@Nick-kz6dg Why listen to a fallacious "false authority" when there's many a published forecast, as summarised in the like of: "EHS0071/EAC/14-15 Alan Andrews-Written evidence". The HS2 business case, when the construction costs were to be £27bn, not >£90bn, state there will be 300,000 daily riders of HS2, with the forecast DAILY demand for journeys between London and Birmingham increasing between 2008 and 2043: 2008 - 6,600 (No HS2), 2043 (No HS2) - 15,200, 2043 (With HS2) - 20,900 . Which suggests HS2 is expecting 285,000 to 295,000 daily journey's between Old Oak Common and Euston in 2043, to reach the 300,000 daily riders, to justify the then £27bn outlay. The construction costs, as have interest rates, quadrupled since, so to break even HS2 will need over a million passengers travelling between Euston and Old Oak Common daily. Which doesn't seem very likely given the cheaper alternatives.
Rail photography on Redbbuble, prints, mugs, t-shirts and much more: www.redbubble.com/people/EngPhotography/explore?page=1&sortOrder=recent
UK, 2022 : "Why HS2"... Meanwhile, in France: HST "TGV": project started in 1974, 1st line Paris-Lyon (427 km) opened in 1981. World speed record on rails: 380 kph (1981), 515 kph (1990), 574 kph (2007). In 2022: 800 TGV trains a day transporting 110 million passengers per year.. Travel Paris-Bordeaux: Wednesday 4 january 2023, departure Paris 9:11 - arrival Bordeaux 11:14mn, 630 km duration 2h03mn, 29 euros...
Indeed if the UK was truly serious about high speed rail, we would have built to Edinburgh and Glasgow and down through Newcastle and through Leeds….with the full Northern Powerhouse without the watered down version…
SR.N1, the first hovercraft prototype in 1959. Less than 10 years later in 1968 SR.N4 carrying 60 cars and 418 passengers enters service.
We used to do this kind of stuff well.
Overall rail ticket prices will have to be reduced if the government wants to see a modal shift to rail.
yes in addition to providing the capacity
This can only be achieved if there's sufficient capacity. For too long rail fairs have been used to modulate demand.
@@Rail_Focus I regularly travel from Nottingham to Southampton. Door to door my journey is:
By train: 6h 30m, £650+ for family (flexi ticket return).
By car: 3h, £60 fuel.
The car provides full autonomy over departure time, route, stops, luggage etc. I can even fly, Notts to Southampton transferring in Jersey and it is faster than the train.
When HS2 is finished, how much will the tickets cost? The existing ticket price for Birmingham to London is already ridiculous (approx. £100 return).
Unfortunately trains just don't make economic sense. We could subsidise the ticket price, but we will still pay for it just indirectly through taxes.
I love the two part Beeching report 'subtly' placed on the bookcase with its front cover facing us...
This excellently curated video and some of the unfortunate comments are a fantastic example of how you can explain how HS2 is the UKs most needed investment and all the benefits it will bring until you're blue in the face and people will watch and still comment that "HS2 is bad because X" even though X has been addressed / disproved multiple times in the video. *sigh*
Thank you so much, I do the best I can to explain the benefits of the project and what's going on on site.
Thanks
Thanks for the Super 😊
Gareth gives a good explanation, though I live in an area where the homework doesn't seem to work. My nearest WCML station is Coventry, and on the current timetable, every rush hour train stops there (there used to be exactly one that skipped it). That's an exception though.
Rugby is my second nearest, and the homework seems to work better there, as trains between Manchester and London do skip it.
The capacity benefits for the WCML is still a valid reason for building the line though
I watched all your videos about HS2 which I have supported it since they first was talking about it plus I say to some people who I know we need to have HS2 to free up more freight trains to run on like the West Coast Mainline and also when it's finished I am planning to go on one of the trains from Euston to Birmingham as the where Washwood Heath Depot is that used to be the Alstom factory where I saw some of the new units which were the 175's, 334's, 458's plus the 460's.
Very good videos about HS2 and can't wait to see if you do anymore about them.
We also need a new line between London and South Wales. Currently, such traffic shares a single line with just two physical tracks with all the services between the South West and the Midlands. This is a consequence of closing the southern part of the mainline between Bristol and Birmingham in the late 60s (Bristol to Yate). The consequence today in the greater Bristol region is daily road congestion hell, because it’s not possible to open up more “commuter” stations as the track capacity simply can’t support the extra trains.
We need a High Speed line connecting Birmingham Curzon to Bristol Parkway with high speed spurs to South wales via a new Severn tunnel and a tunnel underneath Bristol to a new underground though-station at Temple Meads, tunnel to the other side of Bristol to allow for high speed links to Bristol Airport and Bridgwater to link to conventional lines out of Devon and Cornwall.
Then re-align a few sections of the GWML around Yate, and before and after Swindon, and quad track sections for stopping services at Yate and Wootton Bassett, and get high speed rolling stock on the GWML and you can get as fast as the OLE can take, probably 200mph between Bristol and Didcot. Link the GWML to HS1 and high speed international services out of Bristol and Cardiff would be very much possible, imagine what that would do for the economy.
@@WalesRails I'm openminded about how one achieves these goals. It seems to me that either one removes the London South Wales traffic or the South West Midlands traffic from the "pinch point" near a place called Winterbourne. I would love it if we could take over the current GWML for commuter traffic - I would reopen many stations in South Gloucestershire - at places like Winterbourne, Coalpit Heath, Chipping Sodbury, Wickwar, Tytherington and Thornbury, and substantially increase the services to Yate. I can see that a Bristol "Cross-rail" tunnel could be a way to achieve some of this and would allow commuter services to be provide to north-east Bristol in particular.
Basically, I look at the the map of rail services around Greater Manchester or other major conurbations and it's painfully obvious that the Greater Bristol region (including South Gloucestershire, North Somerset, Bath & North East Somerset) is very poorly served by rail in comparison. I see people complaining - with considerable justification - about the poor services in The North - delays, cancellations, overcrowding etc - and can't help noting that in Greater Bristol such problems don't exist in many cases because there are no trains whatsoever!
Will they build a link between HS1 and HS2? Because then more people will choose the train instead of the plane between Paris/Brussels
Unfortunately not under the current plans.
One of the biggest wasted opportunities of HS2, we desperately need a massive link between HS2 & GWML to HS1 and Mainland Europe.
(1) If there are more points where lines merge, delay factors and timetable management will become more complicated.
(2) In addition to travel between London and regional cities, if you do not consider travel between regional cities, the more distance you have from London, the more vacant seats you will have.
(3) I think it is necessary to consider selling the Class800 series to Amtrak in the United States by changing the vehicle size.
(4) I believe that the JR Group and the LNER should promote the development of intercity railroads in the United States, Canada, and Australia.
(5) Besides the necessity of HS2, we also need to consider monetization.
For example, if you connect from "London" to "Glasgow" via "Birmingham", "Manchester", "Leeds", "Newcastle", "Edinburgh", you can travel long, medium and short distances.
In other words, you can monetize from various needs.
(6) If the travel time exceeds 4 hours, you cannot beat the airplane.
For that reason, I think that the idea of connecting medium-distance routes (routes with a travel time of 4 hours or less) should be considered.
(7) The introduction of the Linear Shinkansen should be considered in order to reduce the time required for long-distance routes to less than four hours.
(8) I think it is necessary to design routes that make the most of the strengths of railways.
For that reason, I think it would be good to incorporate airplanes and buses into the railway route design.
I don't get 3 and 4 especially 4 shouldn't these groups be focusing on supporting the development of new uk railways?
I think for 5 to work it would be nice to have an oyster system but for the whole of the uk not just London.
although it would be nice to build a separate line for long distance services ie London to Glasgow I think building a maglev service would be hard, super expensive and maybe even pointless.
Also yeah I agree I think the uk in general needs better connections to the train stations themselves yes improving the rail would be nice but also improving other transit services like busses trams and the like would do wonders for increasing the number of people going on trains and reducing the cars on the road, and I think just having good connections to the stations themselves from the suburbs and other high density hot spots would get us there.
@@orangeflipgram6549 I would like the UK to understand more about the railway business model.
If so, you will understand that 3 and 4 will be important for the development of British railways.
Besides, Japan and the UK should enter the railroad industry in the United States, Canada, and Australia before it's too late.
Next, I would like you to include the Linear Shinkansen as an option.
Also, in order to establish the operation results of the Linear Shinkansen. I would like you to support JR Tokai.
Next, I also think that the IC card system is important.
I think the combination of the IC card system and transportation infrastructure is optimal.
By the way, I think that the monorail is better than the tram because it separates the road and the tracks. What do you think?
Besides, I think the monorail is easier to install than the subway.
One thing that will mitigate delays is the fact services have been timed at 200mph, trains will only need to travel at 225mph to make up time, so at least some flexibility has been designed in. HS2 won't be running anywhere near capacity either, unless the Eastern arm is constructed. Even then the core line could theoretically take 20tph.
@@Rail_Focus The structure of Japanese stations has the following structure in order to avoid slowing down when a train overtakes.
Especially for routes traveling at speeds above 160 km/h.
==
Explanation image made by me:
docs.google.com/drawings/d/1z_ZKyIIikWtM59bhLshKhHe613ZCP3b4KBzixmujL1U/edit?usp=sharing
==
@@mitsuyamaeda-railfan similar to Birmingham Interchange
I do think that it’s beneficial for having HS2 but at the same time it costs £millions & £millions as it’s only started. And with Phase 1 of HS2 to be built that is schedule to be completed before 2030.
Literally billions we are already in a money pit hs2 won’t be making profits for at least 30 years
It’s true that it’s expensive, but it’s a high speed rail line built crossing a densely developed nation. The costs of just developing and preparing the plans are of course going to be high. But this had to be built either now or later on - when parts of the country and the cities it has to reach would be even denser. Built it now, and once it’s there, the costs won’t matter. Did you know the President and the Chief Engineer of the Japanese Railways resigned when building the original Tokaido Shinkansen due to high costs? They were reinstated after its completion, and look at Japan and it’s railways now. Public infrastructure is pretty
much always worth the costs
So? it'll pay that cost back in the first decade though economic, social and environmental benefits, not to mention a reduction in cost of road maintenance as more freight can come off the roads. The overall cost might sound like a lot but spread that out over the years and decades that HS2 will operate and its ridiculously cheap and not one of, but THE BEST way to invest taxpayers money to deliver the mentioned above benefits and a return on investment for the taxpayer.
WHEN?
2029-2033
At what speed will the trains be able to travel? England is a small country and we only need a few extra lines and trains that are punctual. Biggest waste of taxpayers money for years.
Around 200mph, with a maximum speed of 225mph on straight sections if needed to make up time. HS2 is similar in length to many HS lines around the world. By diverting non-stop trains in from the WCML it will free up capacity on existing lines for improved local and regional links and capacity for freight.
What are the two highest CO2 emitter’s.
1.The manufacturing of steel.
2.The manufacturing of concrete
And HS2 is entirely built out of? Hmmm let me think a second.
Can't build things out of thin air unfortunately. The difference being if HS2 can drive a significant modal shift from air and roads it will repay the carbon.
Just wait until you find out what road infrastructure and road vehicles are made out of and the figures on passenger km travelled per tonne of steel or freight tonne transported per tonne of concrete. Remember, the vast majority of cars, vans and lorries on the road right now didn't exist 15 years ago. 33 million cars, 5 million vans, half a million lorries, most of them will be scrapped in 15 years and new manufacturing required. All HS2 will need after initial construction is a few rails replaced here and there every few years, the rolling stock will last 40 years at least with the large structures and tunnels lasting literal hundreds of years, multiple times over than car infrastructure.
I think they could of saved money if they just built a newer west coast / east coast main line a more direct running ether down the middle or near ether one ya know instead of turns and hills more straight it would probably be slightly cheaper than Hs2
That wouldn't work as both the WCML and ECML go through populated areas, so to build alongside they would have to demolish a lot of properties and cause huge disruption to the existing lines, that HS2 avoids. Only HS2 can double capacity by being segregated and designed for 400m long trains, this simply wouldn't be possible if they had to deal with the constraints of existing infrastructure.
@@Rail_Focus I guess but still I think we are a bit late onto the game had we built this 50 years ago we would of been able to save money and live better also the fact it’s only going to what Birmingham makes it not completely but a little pointless yes reduces congestion but still it would make more sense running from London to Scotland but that would make it a direct competitor to the wcml and ecml I think hs2 has its ups and downs let’s just wait and see if it’s successful
But still what was it 40 odd billion estimated to complete jeer it won’t be making profits for at least a decade
@@peterwilliamallen1063 I see I never knew that maybe the plan isn’t so bad after all
@@Rail_Focus Chiltern Mainline upgrades could work aswell but only in the short term.
There's absolutely no evidence to show better train services will elliviate road usage. especially as the average commute to work which is the biggest factor and commute is about 35 minutes on average and the catchment area's for trains are not usually within ideal distances to homes, they serve commercial/business/economic centre links. the reason train services are being used its purely finincial, but as soon as the threshold is reach people buy cars. its really a non argument.
35 minutes, good thing HS2 frees up capacity on the WCML allowing more Avanti services to stop there rather than flying through non-stop like the majority current do. Also frees up paths on WCML for freight, which will remove thousands of HGVs. Also people do still drive and fly from the North to London, anything than can be done to move those people onto rail is a bonus.
HS2 adds virtually no additional suburban / urban capacity. The Elizabeth line, London Overground, Bakerloo line, and West coast main line, not forgetting the 10 Bus routes, Taxies and Uber, already serve Willesden Junction (or the soon to be rebranded Old Oak Common) to Central London, commuter corridor, and the existing options stop in between and go beyond the Euston road. Add an HS2 ticket between Old Oak Common and Euston will also cost far more than even an Elizabeth line ticket, let alone the TfL Zone 1-2 £1.65 fare needed to commute into central London, on one of the existing services, that depart every 5 mins. The under utilised Elizabeth line also runs to the almost adjacent King's Cross / St Pancras, and almost as quickly as the promised HS2 service, and at £7.70, a fraction of the HS2 fare. The Elizabeth line and platforms can run longer and more frequent trains, if there was the demand, which at present there isn't.
Similarly Birmingham International to Central Birmingham is already served by urban rail, buses, taxies, and uber and aiding bodies, using regional air travel to reach the centre of Birmingham, quicker the the £3.40 train services that depart every 15 mins, from the airport, really undermines the environmental sale pitch.
As to freeing capacity at Rugby, far more frequent commuter services to Coventry and Birmingham, re-opening the Great Central main line between Nottingham, Loughborough, Leicester, Rugby, and Aylesbury, would offer residents of Rugby access to the Chiltern and Midland mainlines, and East West rail, and far more additional work destinations, not forgetting options for freight to bypass the WCML. Allowing more frequent commuter services between Rugby, Coventry and Birmingham. After all the justification HS2 will permit more, long, slow, freight to run on the WCML, in the slots the HST's previously occupied, will offer nothing to the residents of Rugby, Coventry, or Birmingham, in the way of improved sub-urban, commuter rail services, in the West Midland conurbation.
The official, pre pandemic, forecast of 15,439 daily passengers, travelling between London and Birmingham, 7,700 in each direction, every day, on the > £100bn line, with fixed debt servicing and running costs in excess £10bn a year, raises the opportunity cost, as each family of 4 travelling will require a teaching assistants annual salary of taxpayer subsidy, to reduce the price to simply a multiple of a WCML ticket, else a family day return, to visit London Zoo, or some other frivolous, CO2 emitting activity, will exceed £20,000.
Similarly adding capacity between Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, York, and Hull, on the Worlds first, initially pre-Victorian line, that is almost identical in length to the London to Birmingham route, but with an existing 4hr 23min travel time, not the 1hr 22min Avanti offer in the South, would offer more attractive commuter, and coast to coast freight options, on an existing corridor, and likely see far more bodies and freight move to rail.
Other than offering employment to several thousand construction workers, cement factory workers, quarry workers, sand dredgers, tree fellers, steel importers, commodity speculators, architects, ... for decades, at taxpayers expense. That they are sure to be grateful for, with generous donations to the sponsoring political parties. There's really no numerate justification for HS2.
@@AndrewRoberts11Did you listen to a single word that Gareth said?
@@Nick-kz6dg Why listen to a fallacious "false authority" when there's many a published forecast, as summarised in the like of: "EHS0071/EAC/14-15 Alan Andrews-Written evidence".
The HS2 business case, when the construction costs were to be £27bn, not >£90bn, state there will be 300,000 daily riders of HS2, with the forecast DAILY demand for journeys between London and Birmingham increasing between 2008 and 2043: 2008 - 6,600 (No HS2), 2043 (No HS2) - 15,200, 2043 (With HS2) - 20,900 . Which suggests HS2 is expecting 285,000 to 295,000 daily journey's between Old Oak Common and Euston in 2043, to reach the 300,000 daily riders, to justify the then £27bn outlay. The construction costs, as have interest rates, quadrupled since, so to break even HS2 will need over a million passengers travelling between Euston and Old Oak Common daily. Which doesn't seem very likely given the cheaper alternatives.