|
Title: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: RED-DOG on March 25, 2015, 08:18:12 AM I'm usually fairly decisive, but I've been really dithery over this one so I though I would canvass a few opinions on here.
Are you pro or anti HS2 and why? (http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/65542000/jpg/_65542357_65542356.jpg) Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: tikay on March 25, 2015, 08:40:32 AM I'm in favour. Why? Trains are cool. Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: neeko on March 25, 2015, 08:52:33 AM Against
Even govt figures show that it does not justify the ROI I would build every bypass, fill evey pothole, improve other train lines and then when that is done still not build it. HS3 is a good idea, I would build an uber fast link between gatwick and Heathrow as well. Who cares that it would take 20 mins less to get to London from Birmingham, more people would just commute to London. Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: Jon MW on March 25, 2015, 08:57:07 AM Having improved modern rail infrastructure in place is a good idea.
The problem is the value. The cost of HS2 - as evidenced by HS1, and every single piece of analysis on it - is just massively out of proportion to the benefit. The general principle I'm in favour of - the specific way it's being implemented I'm against. Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: DaveShoelace on March 25, 2015, 09:02:36 AM Against Even govt figures show that it does not justify the ROI I would build every bypass, fill evey pothole, improve other train lines and then when that is done still not build it. +1 million I'm against, only for the quite selfish reason that its going to take so long to do. IMO money would be much better spent making existing trains more enjoyable to ride on so you dont care they take a little longer (comfier chairs, decent food, free high speed internets etc) Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: Woodsey on March 25, 2015, 09:07:57 AM No problem with it, but I'd delay it until the UK debt is paid off.
Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: redsimon on March 25, 2015, 09:12:40 AM No problem with it, but I'd delay it until the UK debt is paid off. delay it forever then? I was in favour, but the more I read about it the more I think the cost involved could be better used on improving signalling, rolling stock etc. than cutting a few minutes off travelling times. Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: Skippy on March 25, 2015, 09:15:03 AM The point is (I think) that the current trains between London and Birmingham are taking up space on the local Birmingham lines that could be used for other local Birmingham trains. Firstly the fast train to London is on the same tracks. Also you can't run a fast service if your train is on the same tracks as Thomas the Tank Engine stopping at every stop because it gets stuck behind and isn't a fast train any more.
If you build HS2, it frees up lots of tracks to be used by local Birmingham infrastructure. The other point is it makes longer journeys more feasible. Sure it's only 20 minutes of to Birmingham, but it's more off to Manchester. Imagine getting a direct train from Manchester to Paris. Imagine getting the sleeper from Leeds to Marseille. Title: Re: Does blonde back HS2? Post by: mulhuzz on March 25, 2015, 10:37:13 AM There are heaps of better infrastructure projects we could do, like free to access nationwide high speed wireless broadband. That would be a much greater fillip for the economy than some railway stuff with an admittedly shocking and unjustifiable roi.
|