SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The construction of HS2, a high speed rail link between London and the north of England, has been approved. The announcement was made by Boris Johnson yesterday. Phase 1, due for completion in 2028 at the earliest, will be between London and Birmingham; Phase 2, due in 2035 at the earliest, will be two separate lines onwards to Manchester and Leeds.
The trains will travel at up to 250 mph. They will otherwise be conventional, and will take electrical power from overhead catenary. The line will have connections with existing ones, enabling some trains to continue at lower speeds to further destinations, such as Liverpool and Scotland.
The routes will be broadly parallel with existing ones, which are generally running at full capacity. Rail passenger travel in the UK has greatly increased in recent years and this, rather than the reduction in journey times, is the main driver for the project.
Note : It is called HS2 because it is the second high speed line in the UK, HS1 being the link from St. Pancras International railway station in central London to the Channel Tunnel.
(Score: 2) by ledow on Thursday February 13 2020, @04:52PM (1 child)
Trains are one of the most expensive ways to travel in the UK.
I can get from London to Leeds for far less than £100 by car, including parking, and it'll likely take not much more time on average - especially when you consider that you have to get to the station, wait for the train, get out of the other end, get to your final destination, etc. (Google says 4h by care, the train average is "from 3h 6m"). And a car can carry 4/5 people for that price.
Gimme an electric car with a decent range and you could do it for pence.
I drive from London to Cornwall and Scotland purely because trains are too goddamn expensive, even for a holiday. They only make any kind of economic sense inside the city itself (Metro-like / Underground / subway services). Long train-trips are a nonsense, oft-delayed (ironically because of things like the works for the HS2 interfering with the normal timetable for the last 10 years!), and draining. The companies that do them are losing their franchises all the time because the service is so dire.
I can get to damn France quicker than I can get to Leeds.
Ticket prices are far above inflation EVERY SINGLE YEAR, and still the services suck.
Trains aren't big business in the UK - not while they're run on basically state-controlled tracks and franchises. That's why they have such a terrible reputation. There are literally an entire class of jokes about the quality of British Rail from the 60's and they're still used today. They can't afford to maintain the track, they can't afford to buy new fleets (some trains are still from the 60's), they can't even afford to refund when there are delays.
Sure, states should be putting in the infrastructure at great expense, but HS2 is ALREADY over-time, over-budget, and doesn't exist yet, 11 years after first planning. They are literally talking number 4-5 times the original budget, even accounting for inflation. That's why this is *news*. They've literally looked at it *yet again*, when the budget has doubled *yet again*, and the progress is minimal *yet again* and decided to carry on rather than lose face *yet again*. It comes up every couple of years.
Cut your losses, or build the thing at any damn expense as quickly as you can. All we have at the moment is a lot of destroyed countryside, compulsory-purchased houses, and a very, very, very expensive contract for people to dig holes.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday February 14 2020, @02:10PM
Almost everything you've written is wrong
> I can get from London to Leeds for far less than £100 by car, including parking
Parking in central london, plus congestion charge, will set you back nearly that much, unless you're parking someone miles from your destination and relying on the tube
Train from London to Leeds is 2h10 to 2h20 every 30 minutes. It used to take me 2h10 to drive 35 miles into London in the rush hour when I used to drive in daily.
> Gimme an electric car with a decent range and you could do it for pence.
Again ignoring the cost of the vehicle. Even if you had a £10k electric car that needed no maintenence at all (types, batteries, insurance, etc), and lasted 100,000 miles, that's still 10p/mile, that's a £40 round trip. At 3 miles per KWH that's about 4p/mile so another £15. You're assuming the cost of the road is £0
(You're also ignoring the cost of your time)
> oft-delayed (ironically because of things like the works for the HS2 interfering with the normal timetable for the last 10 years!),
I travel long distance every week or two, I haven't managed to claim delay repay (i.e >30 minute delay) for over a year. HS2 works haven't added any delay to any journey
> Ticket prices are far above inflation EVERY SINGLE YEAR
Ticket prices increase by RPI
> not while they're run on basically state-controlled tracks and franchises
You are literally proposing driving on state controlled roads, paid for not by the user, but by the state
> All we have at the moment is a lot of destroyed countryside, compulsory-purchased houses, and a very, very, very expensive contract for people to dig holes.
No we don't have a lot of destroyed countryside. The total amount of "destroyed countryside" is the same as that for a new 10 mile motorway belng built east of London.