Almost 1,500 Warrington homes could be affected by HS2

Almost 1,500 Warrington homes could be affected by HS2

Almost 1,500 Warrington homes could be affected by HS2

First published in News
Last updated

A TOTAL estimated 1,452 houses could be affected in Warrington by the proposed HS2 route, according to latest figures.

Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman for Warrington North Paul Campbell said the statistics have found an ‘alarming impact’ with 30.6 per cent of a total of 4,750 houses in the whole country being in the Warrington area.

Mr Campbell added: “This impact would be devastating not just for the loss of jobs and the reduction in value of property prices but the immense damage it will inflict on the whole community.

“The proposed route will bring no benefit to the people of Warrington and this proposal as it stands cannot be supported.

“I continue to support the campaigns of local groups such as CADRAG in challenging this proposed route and calling on our MPs, the Transport Minister and HS2 to listen to the residents and move the route to the current West Coast Mainline, upgrading the line, and with services stopping in Warrington.

“This would be easier and cheaper to do with little effect on the people of Warrington whilst providing HS2 with the route it needs, and at the same time bringing all the economic benefits to Warrington that HS2 was set up to do.”

Comments (37)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:26am Mon 28 Jul 14

fedster says...

dont see the point even now its cheaper to get a taxi to JL airport and jump on a plane to london than it is to get the train.

so can only imagine how much of price increase we will see when this pos is built
dont see the point even now its cheaper to get a taxi to JL airport and jump on a plane to london than it is to get the train. so can only imagine how much of price increase we will see when this pos is built fedster
  • Score: -7

8:46am Mon 28 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Much as I think HS2 is an incredibly badly thought out project, Paul Campbell needs to get his facts right because the trans will stoop in Warrington, albeit that they use the current WCML North of Crewe (and thereby restricting rather than increasing as claimed the capacity of the line for freight and passenger services).
Much as I think HS2 is an incredibly badly thought out project, Paul Campbell needs to get his facts right because the trans will stoop in Warrington, albeit that they use the current WCML North of Crewe (and thereby restricting rather than increasing as claimed the capacity of the line for freight and passenger services). grey_man
  • Score: -27

9:20am Mon 28 Jul 14

Freeborn John says...

Those figures look very odd, over 30% of the UK total, what is it about the High Speed White Elephant that affects Warrington homes but leaves others undisturbed?
The HS2 project is quite capable of digging its own grave without dubious claims like that.
Those figures look very odd, over 30% of the UK total, what is it about the High Speed White Elephant that affects Warrington homes but leaves others undisturbed? The HS2 project is quite capable of digging its own grave without dubious claims like that. Freeborn John
  • Score: -31

1:30pm Mon 28 Jul 14

Tulyar says...

Warrington already has a rail service that meets EU criteria for High Speed Rail - WBQ-EUS in 1h 46m - average speed stopped to stopped 105mph. With an effective local network to make the connection with places people live & work you get real high speed travel.

I use this to cut 30 minutes off my Glasgow-Liverpool trips - with a 6 minute bike ride (in all traffic conditions) from WBQ to WRC.

What would make a difference - restore dive-under 2 tracks South of WBQ, the sections of former 4 track currently reduced to 2 and get better links with CLC and Acton Bridge-Liverpool lines
Warrington already has a rail service that meets EU criteria for High Speed Rail - WBQ-EUS in 1h 46m - average speed stopped to stopped 105mph. With an effective local network to make the connection with places people live & work you get real high speed travel. I use this to cut 30 minutes off my Glasgow-Liverpool trips - with a 6 minute bike ride (in all traffic conditions) from WBQ to WRC. What would make a difference - restore dive-under 2 tracks South of WBQ, the sections of former 4 track currently reduced to 2 and get better links with CLC and Acton Bridge-Liverpool lines Tulyar
  • Score: -15

1:47pm Mon 28 Jul 14

grey_man says...

fedster wrote:
dont see the point even now its cheaper to get a taxi to JL airport and jump on a plane to london than it is to get the train.

so can only imagine how much of price increase we will see when this pos is built
If there are four of you travelling and you've been unable to book in advance, it would be cheaper to get a taxi to London and back.
[quote][p][bold]fedster[/bold] wrote: dont see the point even now its cheaper to get a taxi to JL airport and jump on a plane to london than it is to get the train. so can only imagine how much of price increase we will see when this pos is built[/p][/quote]If there are four of you travelling and you've been unable to book in advance, it would be cheaper to get a taxi to London and back. grey_man
  • Score: -14

5:12pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl
ogspot.co.uk/2014/07
/east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.
Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl ogspot.co.uk/2014/07 /east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all. flypie
  • Score: 8

5:34pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

Tulyar wrote:
Warrington already has a rail service that meets EU criteria for High Speed Rail - WBQ-EUS in 1h 46m - average speed stopped to stopped 105mph. With an effective local network to make the connection with places people live & work you get real high speed travel.

I use this to cut 30 minutes off my Glasgow-Liverpool trips - with a 6 minute bike ride (in all traffic conditions) from WBQ to WRC.

What would make a difference - restore dive-under 2 tracks South of WBQ, the sections of former 4 track currently reduced to 2 and get better links with CLC and Acton Bridge-Liverpool lines
Not sure what you mean by the dive under but retoring WBQ low level would provide a quick and relitively cheap fast connection to Liverpool. Extending the Mersyrail service from Ellsmere port through t bank Quay would provide a goo link for eveyone on the south bank of the river.
[quote][p][bold]Tulyar[/bold] wrote: Warrington already has a rail service that meets EU criteria for High Speed Rail - WBQ-EUS in 1h 46m - average speed stopped to stopped 105mph. With an effective local network to make the connection with places people live & work you get real high speed travel. I use this to cut 30 minutes off my Glasgow-Liverpool trips - with a 6 minute bike ride (in all traffic conditions) from WBQ to WRC. What would make a difference - restore dive-under 2 tracks South of WBQ, the sections of former 4 track currently reduced to 2 and get better links with CLC and Acton Bridge-Liverpool lines[/p][/quote]Not sure what you mean by the dive under but retoring WBQ low level would provide a quick and relitively cheap fast connection to Liverpool. Extending the Mersyrail service from Ellsmere port through t bank Quay would provide a goo link for eveyone on the south bank of the river. flypie
  • Score: 7

6:32pm Mon 28 Jul 14

Karlar says...

flypie wrote:
Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl

ogspot.co.uk/2014/07

/east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.
HS2 has never made business sense since it was first mooted. Noticeably each of the alleged benefits once trumpeted in justification have withered on the vine as they has been examined in detail. Whether the Liverpool Spur is included or not will not make the overall scheme anymore viable.
[quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl ogspot.co.uk/2014/07 /east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.[/p][/quote]HS2 has never made business sense since it was first mooted. Noticeably each of the alleged benefits once trumpeted in justification have withered on the vine as they has been examined in detail. Whether the Liverpool Spur is included or not will not make the overall scheme anymore viable. Karlar
  • Score: -13

7:17pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

Karlar wrote:
flypie wrote:
Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl


ogspot.co.uk/2014/07


/east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.
HS2 has never made business sense since it was first mooted. Noticeably each of the alleged benefits once trumpeted in justification have withered on the vine as they has been examined in detail. Whether the Liverpool Spur is included or not will not make the overall scheme anymore viable.
You obviously didn't understand what I said. These 1500 homes are just another StopHS2 fantasy. As long as the Commons and Business support HS2 it will go ahead. The only people claiming it is a white elephant are those worried about their house prices. STopHS2 has failed to make even the smallest honest claim.
[quote][p][bold]Karlar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl ogspot.co.uk/2014/07 /east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.[/p][/quote]HS2 has never made business sense since it was first mooted. Noticeably each of the alleged benefits once trumpeted in justification have withered on the vine as they has been examined in detail. Whether the Liverpool Spur is included or not will not make the overall scheme anymore viable.[/p][/quote]You obviously didn't understand what I said. These 1500 homes are just another StopHS2 fantasy. As long as the Commons and Business support HS2 it will go ahead. The only people claiming it is a white elephant are those worried about their house prices. STopHS2 has failed to make even the smallest honest claim. flypie
  • Score: 7

7:43pm Mon 28 Jul 14

grey_man says...

flypie wrote:
Karlar wrote:
flypie wrote:
Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl



ogspot.co.uk/2014/07



/east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.
HS2 has never made business sense since it was first mooted. Noticeably each of the alleged benefits once trumpeted in justification have withered on the vine as they has been examined in detail. Whether the Liverpool Spur is included or not will not make the overall scheme anymore viable.
You obviously didn't understand what I said. These 1500 homes are just another StopHS2 fantasy. As long as the Commons and Business support HS2 it will go ahead. The only people claiming it is a white elephant are those worried about their house prices. STopHS2 has failed to make even the smallest honest claim.
That's not true. While you are right that it will go ahead because politicians like the idea of it, major doubts have been raised about the project at various stages by the National Audit Office, Major Projects Authority, the Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the Parliamentary Accounts Committee and Professor Henry Overman at the London School of Economics.

Meanwhile the case has passed through various iterations as a coach and horses have been driven through each one including speed, the environment, economic rebalancing and - to some extent - capacity. What we are left with is an argument based on capacity (partly true) and economic benefits limited primarily to property developments in places like Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and Euston. But, then again, it would have to be a really bad project that could spend between 35 - 50 billion pounds without doing something, so it's not much of an argument.

It will go ahead but don't think anybody who knows what's behind this scheme is unaware of its flaws.
[quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Karlar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: Unless the Liverpool spur that 20Miles more or myself have proposed the nearest HS2 will get to Warrington is about a mile East of Lymm. See http://peterirate.bl ogspot.co.uk/2014/07 /east-of-lymm.html pehrpas he know that the Liverpool Spur is being considered or that HS2 is being rerouted otherwise doesn't make sense at all.[/p][/quote]HS2 has never made business sense since it was first mooted. Noticeably each of the alleged benefits once trumpeted in justification have withered on the vine as they has been examined in detail. Whether the Liverpool Spur is included or not will not make the overall scheme anymore viable.[/p][/quote]You obviously didn't understand what I said. These 1500 homes are just another StopHS2 fantasy. As long as the Commons and Business support HS2 it will go ahead. The only people claiming it is a white elephant are those worried about their house prices. STopHS2 has failed to make even the smallest honest claim.[/p][/quote]That's not true. While you are right that it will go ahead because politicians like the idea of it, major doubts have been raised about the project at various stages by the National Audit Office, Major Projects Authority, the Confederation of British Industry, the Institute of Directors, the Parliamentary Accounts Committee and Professor Henry Overman at the London School of Economics. Meanwhile the case has passed through various iterations as a coach and horses have been driven through each one including speed, the environment, economic rebalancing and - to some extent - capacity. What we are left with is an argument based on capacity (partly true) and economic benefits limited primarily to property developments in places like Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and Euston. But, then again, it would have to be a really bad project that could spend between 35 - 50 billion pounds without doing something, so it's not much of an argument. It will go ahead but don't think anybody who knows what's behind this scheme is unaware of its flaws. grey_man
  • Score: -14

8:11pm Mon 28 Jul 14

grey_man says...

PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.
PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'. grey_man
  • Score: -13

9:01pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

grey_man wrote:
PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.
As far as I know the only paid for stuff done without acknowledgement is that by JoeRudkin and https://twitter.com/
stophs2
I'm actually a Computer Science guy who sees the railways as a kind of large and primitive network conjealed over 200 years, and at least until recently run by people who were stuck in the 1890s.
[quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.[/p][/quote]As far as I know the only paid for stuff done without acknowledgement is that by JoeRudkin and https://twitter.com/ stophs2 I'm actually a Computer Science guy who sees the railways as a kind of large and primitive network conjealed over 200 years, and at least until recently run by people who were stuck in the 1890s. flypie
  • Score: 14

9:27pm Mon 28 Jul 14

grey_man says...

OK fair enough, but you're wrong about it only being Joe Rukin who is paid to campaign. In fact the Government has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money lobbying itself and mounting an astroturfing campaign, as described in Anna Minton's book on lobbying. You can read this extract on Construction Manager. http://www.construct
ion-manager.co.uk/co
mment/where-astrotur
fing-means-more-leve
l-playing-field/

It all makes Joe with his t-shirt and placards look small time. The biggest scandal is the sight of a Government lobbying itself of course, and that's not restricted to HS2.
OK fair enough, but you're wrong about it only being Joe Rukin who is paid to campaign. In fact the Government has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money lobbying itself and mounting an astroturfing campaign, as described in Anna Minton's book on lobbying. You can read this extract on Construction Manager. http://www.construct ion-manager.co.uk/co mment/where-astrotur fing-means-more-leve l-playing-field/ It all makes Joe with his t-shirt and placards look small time. The biggest scandal is the sight of a Government lobbying itself of course, and that's not restricted to HS2. grey_man
  • Score: -17

9:59pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

If you look at the list of organisation say no. Countryside Alliance, Tax Payeers Alliance and the members of http://www.51m.co.uk
/ there is a lot of support from the "elite" for stop HS2 and a fair amount of public money being put in.
Runkin's best stunt was to turn up in Liverpool and on the regional news announce Manchester was going to benefit from HS2 but Liverpool wasn't Then the next day go to Manchester and say Manchester wasn't going to benefit. I don't think he realised both have the same nightly news.
If you look at the list of organisation say no. Countryside Alliance, Tax Payeers Alliance and the members of http://www.51m.co.uk / there is a lot of support from the "elite" for stop HS2 and a fair amount of public money being put in. Runkin's best stunt was to turn up in Liverpool and on the regional news announce Manchester was going to benefit from HS2 but Liverpool wasn't Then the next day go to Manchester and say Manchester wasn't going to benefit. I don't think he realised both have the same nightly news. flypie
  • Score: 16

10:15pm Mon 28 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Whatever. He's not funded to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds. And he's not part of a campaign paid for by a Government aimed at itself as a way of diverting tens of billions of pounds to private companies who support the project, but not enough to invest in it themselves.

It's a mediocre to poor project for the money, as all independent reports conclude. I don't want to get into an endless discussion about it, because it's all been done to death and it's going ahead anyway.
Whatever. He's not funded to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds. And he's not part of a campaign paid for by a Government aimed at itself as a way of diverting tens of billions of pounds to private companies who support the project, but not enough to invest in it themselves. It's a mediocre to poor project for the money, as all independent reports conclude. I don't want to get into an endless discussion about it, because it's all been done to death and it's going ahead anyway. grey_man
  • Score: -18

10:24pm Mon 28 Jul 14

Karlar says...

flypie wrote:
grey_man wrote:
PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.
As far as I know the only paid for stuff done without acknowledgement is that by JoeRudkin and https://twitter.com/

stophs2
I'm actually a Computer Science guy who sees the railways as a kind of large and primitive network conjealed over 200 years, and at least until recently run by people who were stuck in the 1890s.
As a Computer Science sort of guy you will readily appreciate how budget costs rise significantly when the actual schemes are implemented. Exponentially in the case of several high profile IT projects run by whizz kids stuck in a 21st century mindset. The costs for HS2 will exceed its budget, perhaps not exponentially but significantly, as has almost every major infrastructure project undertaken in this country. So making the business case for HS2 all more flawed.
The basic problem with our railways is that no one political party has had the foresight to invest in them, until the idea of HS2 came to mind. They have been underfunded and ignored for decades and decimated by Beeching - a chemist, who was only doing what the government of the day wanted him to do.
The money earmarked for HS2 should be spread across the primitive congealing network to bring it all up to date, so as to benefit the whole country. That could be justified as a proper business case of improvement.
[quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.[/p][/quote]As far as I know the only paid for stuff done without acknowledgement is that by JoeRudkin and https://twitter.com/ stophs2 I'm actually a Computer Science guy who sees the railways as a kind of large and primitive network conjealed over 200 years, and at least until recently run by people who were stuck in the 1890s.[/p][/quote]As a Computer Science sort of guy you will readily appreciate how budget costs rise significantly when the actual schemes are implemented. Exponentially in the case of several high profile IT projects run by whizz kids stuck in a 21st century mindset. The costs for HS2 will exceed its budget, perhaps not exponentially but significantly, as has almost every major infrastructure project undertaken in this country. So making the business case for HS2 all more flawed. The basic problem with our railways is that no one political party has had the foresight to invest in them, until the idea of HS2 came to mind. They have been underfunded and ignored for decades and decimated by Beeching - a chemist, who was only doing what the government of the day wanted him to do. The money earmarked for HS2 should be spread across the primitive congealing network to bring it all up to date, so as to benefit the whole country. That could be justified as a proper business case of improvement. Karlar
  • Score: -13

10:56pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

Karlar wrote:
flypie wrote:
grey_man wrote:
PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.
As far as I know the only paid for stuff done without acknowledgement is that by JoeRudkin and https://twitter.com/


stophs2
I'm actually a Computer Science guy who sees the railways as a kind of large and primitive network conjealed over 200 years, and at least until recently run by people who were stuck in the 1890s.
As a Computer Science sort of guy you will readily appreciate how budget costs rise significantly when the actual schemes are implemented. Exponentially in the case of several high profile IT projects run by whizz kids stuck in a 21st century mindset. The costs for HS2 will exceed its budget, perhaps not exponentially but significantly, as has almost every major infrastructure project undertaken in this country. So making the business case for HS2 all more flawed.
The basic problem with our railways is that no one political party has had the foresight to invest in them, until the idea of HS2 came to mind. They have been underfunded and ignored for decades and decimated by Beeching - a chemist, who was only doing what the government of the day wanted him to do.
The money earmarked for HS2 should be spread across the primitive congealing network to bring it all up to date, so as to benefit the whole country. That could be justified as a proper business case of improvement.
The projects that spiral are those that combine novel technologies. HS2 is built on proven technologies and there is nothing at all novel.
There a several heuristics in software projects such as "if you have to rewrite more than 10% of the code, it is quicker to start again from scratch". The big projects that don't work are usually the ones that get interfered with because non engineering management knows best. Take Nimrod MR4, some bean counter decided that if the body of old Nimrods were used, then they didn't have to fund it as new kit. So the main fuselage was kept. BAe didn't like this, but were forced to do it, in the end it is what killed the project and made it overrun, it would have been cheaper to do all new build aircraft.
Big changes are being made to the system such as the GSM(R) installation followed by the move to various levels of ETCS. There is very little that can be done to improve the WCML updating legacy system, while keeping them running is a nightmare.
Once we have HS2 up and running and perhaps HS3 or at least a decent transpennine line, we will be in a position to upgrade the rest of the railway without causing massive disruption. It will be possible to close sections of WCML down for months and upgrade them to GC gauge, while rerouting stuff using HS2.
Crossrail seems to be on budget. http://www.construct
ionenquirer.com/2014
/01/16/crossrail-hit
s-mid-way-mark-on-ti
me-and-budget/
In the long run HS2 will make the system maintainable and the chances of it coming in on time and on budget are far greater than doing a patch up job. Just look at the cost for the proposed 140 mph upgrade, how the spiralled before cancelation.
The reason I originally started looking at this was ETCS level 3, it was only when I realised what a **** self check train integrity is and how unreliable axle counters are that you being to appreciate who simple HS2 will be compared with the WCML now.
[quote][p][bold]Karlar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: PS A quick Google check shows you have been a busy boy on this subject. Are you part of the paid for astroturf campaign or merely 'somebody with a layman's interest in HS2'.[/p][/quote]As far as I know the only paid for stuff done without acknowledgement is that by JoeRudkin and https://twitter.com/ stophs2 I'm actually a Computer Science guy who sees the railways as a kind of large and primitive network conjealed over 200 years, and at least until recently run by people who were stuck in the 1890s.[/p][/quote]As a Computer Science sort of guy you will readily appreciate how budget costs rise significantly when the actual schemes are implemented. Exponentially in the case of several high profile IT projects run by whizz kids stuck in a 21st century mindset. The costs for HS2 will exceed its budget, perhaps not exponentially but significantly, as has almost every major infrastructure project undertaken in this country. So making the business case for HS2 all more flawed. The basic problem with our railways is that no one political party has had the foresight to invest in them, until the idea of HS2 came to mind. They have been underfunded and ignored for decades and decimated by Beeching - a chemist, who was only doing what the government of the day wanted him to do. The money earmarked for HS2 should be spread across the primitive congealing network to bring it all up to date, so as to benefit the whole country. That could be justified as a proper business case of improvement.[/p][/quote]The projects that spiral are those that combine novel technologies. HS2 is built on proven technologies and there is nothing at all novel. There a several heuristics in software projects such as "if you have to rewrite more than 10% of the code, it is quicker to start again from scratch". The big projects that don't work are usually the ones that get interfered with because non engineering management knows best. Take Nimrod MR4, some bean counter decided that if the body of old Nimrods were used, then they didn't have to fund it as new kit. So the main fuselage was kept. BAe didn't like this, but were forced to do it, in the end it is what killed the project and made it overrun, it would have been cheaper to do all new build aircraft. Big changes are being made to the system such as the GSM(R) installation followed by the move to various levels of ETCS. There is very little that can be done to improve the WCML updating legacy system, while keeping them running is a nightmare. Once we have HS2 up and running and perhaps HS3 or at least a decent transpennine line, we will be in a position to upgrade the rest of the railway without causing massive disruption. It will be possible to close sections of WCML down for months and upgrade them to GC gauge, while rerouting stuff using HS2. Crossrail seems to be on budget. http://www.construct ionenquirer.com/2014 /01/16/crossrail-hit s-mid-way-mark-on-ti me-and-budget/ In the long run HS2 will make the system maintainable and the chances of it coming in on time and on budget are far greater than doing a patch up job. Just look at the cost for the proposed 140 mph upgrade, how the spiralled before cancelation. The reason I originally started looking at this was ETCS level 3, it was only when I realised what a **** self check train integrity is and how unreliable axle counters are that you being to appreciate who simple HS2 will be compared with the WCML now. flypie
  • Score: 16

11:39pm Mon 28 Jul 14

Karlar says...

Many many infrastructures in this country based on proven technologies have all significantly exceeded their budgets. HS2 will be no different. There is always a "plausibly good reason' for spending more than planned, however you choose to word it. The trick is to come up with a suitable form of words and reasons for doing so.
The construction industry has an army of people whose job description should include 'justifying cost overruns'. These people, some in-house some appointed, will be closely involved in HS2 in all its guises.
By the way has happened to the internal government report critical of HS2 that was apparently being suppressed and the disclosure of which was to be the subject of a judicial review?
Finally, it's all too easy to blame bean counters for the gross financial flaws of our politicians. It wasn't the beans counters who introduced PFI which is fast becoming a financial straight jacket for an increasing number of NHS Trusts to name but a few. The misconception of PFI was introduced by politicians, who in turn asked the bean counters (and their external advisers) to come up with a way of justifying its use. Some of which came to light when Enron bit the dust and justly so.
Many many infrastructures in this country based on proven technologies have all significantly exceeded their budgets. HS2 will be no different. There is always a "plausibly good reason' for spending more than planned, however you choose to word it. The trick is to come up with a suitable form of words and reasons for doing so. The construction industry has an army of people whose job description should include 'justifying cost overruns'. These people, some in-house some appointed, will be closely involved in HS2 in all its guises. By the way has happened to the internal government report critical of HS2 that was apparently being suppressed and the disclosure of which was to be the subject of a judicial review? Finally, it's all too easy to blame bean counters for the gross financial flaws of our politicians. It wasn't the beans counters who introduced PFI which is fast becoming a financial straight jacket for an increasing number of NHS Trusts to name but a few. The misconception of PFI was introduced by politicians, who in turn asked the bean counters (and their external advisers) to come up with a way of justifying its use. Some of which came to light when Enron bit the dust and justly so. Karlar
  • Score: -16

11:45pm Mon 28 Jul 14

flypie says...

Karlar wrote:
Many many infrastructures in this country based on proven technologies have all significantly exceeded their budgets. HS2 will be no different. There is always a "plausibly good reason' for spending more than planned, however you choose to word it. The trick is to come up with a suitable form of words and reasons for doing so.
The construction industry has an army of people whose job description should include 'justifying cost overruns'. These people, some in-house some appointed, will be closely involved in HS2 in all its guises.
By the way has happened to the internal government report critical of HS2 that was apparently being suppressed and the disclosure of which was to be the subject of a judicial review?
Finally, it's all too easy to blame bean counters for the gross financial flaws of our politicians. It wasn't the beans counters who introduced PFI which is fast becoming a financial straight jacket for an increasing number of NHS Trusts to name but a few. The misconception of PFI was introduced by politicians, who in turn asked the bean counters (and their external advisers) to come up with a way of justifying its use. Some of which came to light when Enron bit the dust and justly so.
Which infrastructure projects?
[quote][p][bold]Karlar[/bold] wrote: Many many infrastructures in this country based on proven technologies have all significantly exceeded their budgets. HS2 will be no different. There is always a "plausibly good reason' for spending more than planned, however you choose to word it. The trick is to come up with a suitable form of words and reasons for doing so. The construction industry has an army of people whose job description should include 'justifying cost overruns'. These people, some in-house some appointed, will be closely involved in HS2 in all its guises. By the way has happened to the internal government report critical of HS2 that was apparently being suppressed and the disclosure of which was to be the subject of a judicial review? Finally, it's all too easy to blame bean counters for the gross financial flaws of our politicians. It wasn't the beans counters who introduced PFI which is fast becoming a financial straight jacket for an increasing number of NHS Trusts to name but a few. The misconception of PFI was introduced by politicians, who in turn asked the bean counters (and their external advisers) to come up with a way of justifying its use. Some of which came to light when Enron bit the dust and justly so.[/p][/quote]Which infrastructure projects? flypie
  • Score: 12

7:02am Tue 29 Jul 14

grey_man says...

The Olympics. Three and a half times over original budget under the management of David Higgins. Wonder what he's doing now.

And - surprise! - HS2. Which is already 86 percent over budget on its advisers.

Of course, HS2 may come in on budget over the longer term, but that would still mean it represents a poor return on its investment according to the independent reports that have assessed it.
The Olympics. Three and a half times over original budget under the management of David Higgins. Wonder what he's doing now. And - surprise! - HS2. Which is already 86 percent over budget on its advisers. Of course, HS2 may come in on budget over the longer term, but that would still mean it represents a poor return on its investment according to the independent reports that have assessed it. grey_man
  • Score: -16

7:43am Tue 29 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Actually I got my facts wrong. The original cost of the Olympics was put by ARUP (currently working on HS2) at £1.8 billion, much of it privately funded. Final cost to the taxpayer was £9.8 billion. So five and a half times over budget.
Actually I got my facts wrong. The original cost of the Olympics was put by ARUP (currently working on HS2) at £1.8 billion, much of it privately funded. Final cost to the taxpayer was £9.8 billion. So five and a half times over budget. grey_man
  • Score: -14

10:23am Tue 29 Jul 14

Dr Beeching says...

Perhaps if the proponents of HS2 chose to look closely at the current levels of passenger traffic on the WCL they might wish to rethink the plan for this ridiculous waste of money. Admittedly, I say this from my own experience but having commuted weekly between Bank Quay and Euston for the past 18 years I would put the evidence of my own eyes beyond some back office report commissioned by vested interests.

For some time, the peak services I use have rarely been half full (to the extent that I no longer need a reservation) yet we are led to believe that all trains (not just the relatively local ones) are arriving into Euston at near capacity. If it is the peak services from which HS2 hope to make their money I doubt much of it will come from north of Birmingham.
Perhaps if the proponents of HS2 chose to look closely at the current levels of passenger traffic on the WCL they might wish to rethink the plan for this ridiculous waste of money. Admittedly, I say this from my own experience but having commuted weekly between Bank Quay and Euston for the past 18 years I would put the evidence of my own eyes beyond some back office report commissioned by vested interests. For some time, the peak services I use have rarely been half full (to the extent that I no longer need a reservation) yet we are led to believe that all trains (not just the relatively local ones) are arriving into Euston at near capacity. If it is the peak services from which HS2 hope to make their money I doubt much of it will come from north of Birmingham. Dr Beeching
  • Score: -15

10:46am Tue 29 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Actually Network Rail's own stats back you up. There are capacity issues south of Milton Keynes but that is because London has its own economy and gravitational pull, something that HS2 will strengthen according to those economists not paid by HS2 Ltd.

The only trains full leaving Euston (like you I've spent years on them) are the ones immediately after off peak tickets become valid (which means typically a 70-80 percent price reduction) so any overcrowding could be dealt with in the short term with more intelligent pricing structures.

I can see why Birmingham wants HS2. It then becomes a suburb of London. That is not the case for towns in Yorkshire and the North West. Indeed Doncaster already has a high speed link to London and it has seen few benefits from it. Most of the economic benefits are derived from property developments in the regenerated areas around the stations, which is a good thing but not enough to justify the cost. It's why so many City Councils, property developers and local Chambers of Commerce are for it, but they would be, wouldn't they?

What I always ask myself is this: if you gave ten British cities £5 billion each to invest in infrastructure, would they all opt to increase the number of trains going to London? The answer to that is pretty straightforward.
Actually Network Rail's own stats back you up. There are capacity issues south of Milton Keynes but that is because London has its own economy and gravitational pull, something that HS2 will strengthen according to those economists not paid by HS2 Ltd. The only trains full leaving Euston (like you I've spent years on them) are the ones immediately after off peak tickets become valid (which means typically a 70-80 percent price reduction) so any overcrowding could be dealt with in the short term with more intelligent pricing structures. I can see why Birmingham wants HS2. It then becomes a suburb of London. That is not the case for towns in Yorkshire and the North West. Indeed Doncaster already has a high speed link to London and it has seen few benefits from it. Most of the economic benefits are derived from property developments in the regenerated areas around the stations, which is a good thing but not enough to justify the cost. It's why so many City Councils, property developers and local Chambers of Commerce are for it, but they would be, wouldn't they? What I always ask myself is this: if you gave ten British cities £5 billion each to invest in infrastructure, would they all opt to increase the number of trains going to London? The answer to that is pretty straightforward. grey_man
  • Score: -11

11:50am Tue 29 Jul 14

Karlar says...

grey_man wrote:
The Olympics. Three and a half times over original budget under the management of David Higgins. Wonder what he's doing now.

And - surprise! - HS2. Which is already 86 percent over budget on its advisers.

Of course, HS2 may come in on budget over the longer term, but that would still mean it represents a poor return on its investment according to the independent reports that have assessed it.
To add to your list:
HS1 eventual cost was almost double the original estimate.
The Channel Tunnel went from £4.9 bn to £12.0 bn
The British Library was three times over budget
Guys Hospital cost twice as much.
Portcullis House also cost twice as much.
The Scottish Parliament building went from £90m to £230m
The Welsh Assembly building exceeded its budget by £13m.
And presumably because of heuristic influences the NHS IT scheme has overrun by £10.4 bn. equivalent to an increase of £450%.
The list could easily be added to by including several PFI School and hospital schemes etc.
I'd be interested to know when a technology becomes novel. IT has been around now for several years, when will it be regarded as proven technology?
Little wonder David Higgins advisers budget is out of synch, he was recently reported as saying he would pay excessive salaries "in order to get the right people on board". How often have we heard that mantra with little to show when the pudding is actually eaten?
[quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: The Olympics. Three and a half times over original budget under the management of David Higgins. Wonder what he's doing now. And - surprise! - HS2. Which is already 86 percent over budget on its advisers. Of course, HS2 may come in on budget over the longer term, but that would still mean it represents a poor return on its investment according to the independent reports that have assessed it.[/p][/quote]To add to your list: HS1 eventual cost was almost double the original estimate. The Channel Tunnel went from £4.9 bn to £12.0 bn The British Library was three times over budget Guys Hospital cost twice as much. Portcullis House also cost twice as much. The Scottish Parliament building went from £90m to £230m The Welsh Assembly building exceeded its budget by £13m. And presumably because of heuristic influences the NHS IT scheme has overrun by £10.4 bn. equivalent to an increase of £450%. The list could easily be added to by including several PFI School and hospital schemes etc. I'd be interested to know when a technology becomes novel. IT has been around now for several years, when will it be regarded as proven technology? Little wonder David Higgins advisers budget is out of synch, he was recently reported as saying he would pay excessive salaries "in order to get the right people on board". How often have we heard that mantra with little to show when the pudding is actually eaten? Karlar
  • Score: -11

12:10pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Karlar says...

Apologies one sentence should have read - I'd be interested to know when a technology ceases to be novel"..
Apologies one sentence should have read - I'd be interested to know when a technology ceases to be novel".. Karlar
  • Score: -11

12:29pm Tue 29 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Fair point about the NHS IT system fiasco because one of the men responsible for it is now head of strategy at HS2.

What could possibly go wrong?

We now have the Government committed to spending tens of billions of public money over a period of decades and they're not even asking the private sector to put its own money where its mouth is. And does anybody, including the companies who are the main beneficiaries of this largesse, think for one moment that the Government will call it all off if the costs do start to spiral? When the politicians making the decisions now will, by the time it's finished, be either retired or working as non-execs for construction and engineering firms?

Everything about this project says bottomless money pit.
Fair point about the NHS IT system fiasco because one of the men responsible for it is now head of strategy at HS2. What could possibly go wrong? We now have the Government committed to spending tens of billions of public money over a period of decades and they're not even asking the private sector to put its own money where its mouth is. And does anybody, including the companies who are the main beneficiaries of this largesse, think for one moment that the Government will call it all off if the costs do start to spiral? When the politicians making the decisions now will, by the time it's finished, be either retired or working as non-execs for construction and engineering firms? Everything about this project says bottomless money pit. grey_man
  • Score: -10

12:54pm Tue 29 Jul 14

Karlar says...

grey_man wrote:
Fair point about the NHS IT system fiasco because one of the men responsible for it is now head of strategy at HS2.

What could possibly go wrong?

We now have the Government committed to spending tens of billions of public money over a period of decades and they're not even asking the private sector to put its own money where its mouth is. And does anybody, including the companies who are the main beneficiaries of this largesse, think for one moment that the Government will call it all off if the costs do start to spiral? When the politicians making the decisions now will, by the time it's finished, be either retired or working as non-execs for construction and engineering firms?

Everything about this project says bottomless money pit.
The title of Head of Strategy for HS2 is meaningless to the point of being oxymoronic. What strategy is involved when the driver for the scheme is political and amounts to "we're going ahead come what may." Where have they been for the past 30/40 years when the railways across the country have been crying out for an upgrade?
[quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: Fair point about the NHS IT system fiasco because one of the men responsible for it is now head of strategy at HS2. What could possibly go wrong? We now have the Government committed to spending tens of billions of public money over a period of decades and they're not even asking the private sector to put its own money where its mouth is. And does anybody, including the companies who are the main beneficiaries of this largesse, think for one moment that the Government will call it all off if the costs do start to spiral? When the politicians making the decisions now will, by the time it's finished, be either retired or working as non-execs for construction and engineering firms? Everything about this project says bottomless money pit.[/p][/quote]The title of Head of Strategy for HS2 is meaningless to the point of being oxymoronic. What strategy is involved when the driver for the scheme is political and amounts to "we're going ahead come what may." Where have they been for the past 30/40 years when the railways across the country have been crying out for an upgrade? Karlar
  • Score: -11

2:11pm Wed 30 Jul 14

flypie says...

Been to a funeral so missed the above.

Over the last 30/40 years there have been big upgrades. In the 70 it took 3 hours Liv-London now it it nearer 2.

Every train may not be full but you cannot put freight containers into the empty seats. The line is nearly full in terms of the number of trains that can be run.

Compared with the NHS IT HS2 is simple. The British Library was a one off build as where things like the Scottish Parliament and both were heavily interfered with.
IT may have been around a long time as an abbreviation but the actual technology is radically different, if we were still using 640K MS-DOS PCs then things would be a lot more predictable.
I don't think you understand what a heuristic is.
Technology stops being novel when there are well establish industry standards, that have remained unchanged for many years.
Been to a funeral so missed the above. Over the last 30/40 years there have been big upgrades. In the 70 it took 3 hours Liv-London now it it nearer 2. Every train may not be full but you cannot put freight containers into the empty seats. The line is nearly full in terms of the number of trains that can be run. Compared with the NHS IT HS2 is simple. The British Library was a one off build as where things like the Scottish Parliament and both were heavily interfered with. IT may have been around a long time as an abbreviation but the actual technology is radically different, if we were still using 640K MS-DOS PCs then things would be a lot more predictable. I don't think you understand what a heuristic is. Technology stops being novel when there are well establish industry standards, that have remained unchanged for many years. flypie
  • Score: 11

3:50pm Wed 30 Jul 14

grey_man says...

What we know is that this is an overly expensive way of solving the wrong problem. Not only that, it will be out of date by the time it reaches / bypasses Warrington.

Birmingham will benefit, the centres of Manchester, Leeds and Meadowhall as well as a field near Derby will benefit. Everybody else will see wealth sucked to London.
What we know is that this is an overly expensive way of solving the wrong problem. Not only that, it will be out of date by the time it reaches / bypasses Warrington. Birmingham will benefit, the centres of Manchester, Leeds and Meadowhall as well as a field near Derby will benefit. Everybody else will see wealth sucked to London. grey_man
  • Score: -16

4:07pm Wed 30 Jul 14

flypie says...

grey_man wrote:
What we know is that this is an overly expensive way of solving the wrong problem. Not only that, it will be out of date by the time it reaches / bypasses Warrington.

Birmingham will benefit, the centres of Manchester, Leeds and Meadowhall as well as a field near Derby will benefit. Everybody else will see wealth sucked to London.
We don't know that at all. The idea that it will be out of date is ridiculous.
The calls for the HS2 spur to Liverpool call for either reusing Warrington BQ low level or building a new station near the M62.

http://peterirate.bl
ogspot.com/2013/12/h
s2-phase-2-liverpool
.html
[quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: What we know is that this is an overly expensive way of solving the wrong problem. Not only that, it will be out of date by the time it reaches / bypasses Warrington. Birmingham will benefit, the centres of Manchester, Leeds and Meadowhall as well as a field near Derby will benefit. Everybody else will see wealth sucked to London.[/p][/quote]We don't know that at all. The idea that it will be out of date is ridiculous. The calls for the HS2 spur to Liverpool call for either reusing Warrington BQ low level or building a new station near the M62. http://peterirate.bl ogspot.com/2013/12/h s2-phase-2-liverpool .html flypie
  • Score: 9

4:38pm Wed 30 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments.

As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet.

Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.
Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments. As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet. Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby. grey_man
  • Score: -11

5:20pm Wed 30 Jul 14

flypie says...

grey_man wrote:
Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments.

As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet.

Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.
I'm old enough to remeber the promise of the 80s paperless office. If you just sit and do nothing waiting for the future to become certain then you miss it.
Driverless cars hold more promise in cities than outside them simply because of the lack of internal space, toilets, room for a walk. The internet has shown us several things and they seem to be if you show people pictures of things they will want to go their and you sell them things which have to be moved, and while 3D printing has lots of promise, it first use will be/is to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper elements for things like planes and trains. It will be a very very long time untill stuff is local manufacted using the technique, production line methods are cheap and quick compared with 3d printing. Using a titanium added manfacturing system is very power intensive. http://3dprint.com/1
0345/3d-printed-tita
nium-bicycles/
[quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments. As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet. Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.[/p][/quote]I'm old enough to remeber the promise of the 80s paperless office. If you just sit and do nothing waiting for the future to become certain then you miss it. Driverless cars hold more promise in cities than outside them simply because of the lack of internal space, toilets, room for a walk. The internet has shown us several things and they seem to be if you show people pictures of things they will want to go their and you sell them things which have to be moved, and while 3D printing has lots of promise, it first use will be/is to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper elements for things like planes and trains. It will be a very very long time untill stuff is local manufacted using the technique, production line methods are cheap and quick compared with 3d printing. Using a titanium added manfacturing system is very power intensive. http://3dprint.com/1 0345/3d-printed-tita nium-bicycles/ flypie
  • Score: 9

5:20pm Wed 30 Jul 14

flypie says...

grey_man wrote:
Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments.

As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet.

Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.
I'm old enough to remeber the promise of the 80s paperless office. If you just sit and do nothing waiting for the future to become certain then you miss it.
Driverless cars hold more promise in cities than outside them simply because of the lack of internal space, toilets, room for a walk. The internet has shown us several things and they seem to be if you show people pictures of things they will want to go their and you sell them things which have to be moved, and while 3D printing has lots of promise, it first use will be/is to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper elements for things like planes and trains. It will be a very very long time untill stuff is local manufacted using the technique, production line methods are cheap and quick compared with 3d printing. Using a titanium added manfacturing system is very power intensive. http://3dprint.com/1
0345/3d-printed-tita
nium-bicycles/
[quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments. As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet. Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.[/p][/quote]I'm old enough to remeber the promise of the 80s paperless office. If you just sit and do nothing waiting for the future to become certain then you miss it. Driverless cars hold more promise in cities than outside them simply because of the lack of internal space, toilets, room for a walk. The internet has shown us several things and they seem to be if you show people pictures of things they will want to go their and you sell them things which have to be moved, and while 3D printing has lots of promise, it first use will be/is to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper elements for things like planes and trains. It will be a very very long time untill stuff is local manufacted using the technique, production line methods are cheap and quick compared with 3d printing. Using a titanium added manfacturing system is very power intensive. http://3dprint.com/1 0345/3d-printed-tita nium-bicycles/ flypie
  • Score: 11

5:38pm Wed 30 Jul 14

grey_man says...

flypie wrote:
grey_man wrote:
Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments.

As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet.

Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.
I'm old enough to remeber the promise of the 80s paperless office. If you just sit and do nothing waiting for the future to become certain then you miss it.
Driverless cars hold more promise in cities than outside them simply because of the lack of internal space, toilets, room for a walk. The internet has shown us several things and they seem to be if you show people pictures of things they will want to go their and you sell them things which have to be moved, and while 3D printing has lots of promise, it first use will be/is to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper elements for things like planes and trains. It will be a very very long time untill stuff is local manufacted using the technique, production line methods are cheap and quick compared with 3d printing. Using a titanium added manfacturing system is very power intensive. http://3dprint.com/1

0345/3d-printed-tita

nium-bicycles/
Actually I work with companies that already use 3D printing in manufacturing. So it won't be a long time, and certainly not in the 2030s.

The future is uncertain but we do know that disruptive technology will change things in unforeseen ways. And that is where HS2 falls down - it lacks optionality to deal with uncertainty. It's so rigid a piece of infrastructure that in order for it to work properly (ie at high speed - not high capacity) it has to serve Derby and Nottingham via a field some distance from those cities, will need a whole new tram system to connect it to the existing network at Sheffield and Birmingham (obviously this is all magically not in the HS2 'budget') .

Even then, many of the notions that underpin the business case rely on an assumption that the world in 2033 will be largely as it is now and that passenger numbers will continue to grow indefinitely over that period, up 79 percent from a 2010 base. What this means in practice is we must assume that in twenty years time a completely full 500 seat high speed train will travel between London and Leeds/Manchester every 4 minutes in each direction for 15 hours, 350 days per year.

Complete and utter nonsense.
[quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grey_man[/bold] wrote: Actually we pretty much do know that. That is what the experience of other countries and the models of independent economists tell us. I understand why Liverpool wants its spur, because not only would the city like the regeneration opportunities for the city centre, HS2 trains travelling on the WCML between Crewe and Liverpool will reduce the number of paths available on the line including for freight and so will hamper connectivity, including for Liverpool's own infrastructure investments. As somebody involved in IT, you should know that the world will be changing dramatically over the next 20 years with the advent of driverless vehicles (on British roads from next year), car sharing such as blablacar, 3D printing, telepresence systems and so on, not to mention the ongoing disruptive influence of the Internet. Disruptive technology won't make travel unnecessary, but it will make all the predictions about HS2 look silly before it even reaches Birmingham, never mind Manchester and a field near Derby.[/p][/quote]I'm old enough to remeber the promise of the 80s paperless office. If you just sit and do nothing waiting for the future to become certain then you miss it. Driverless cars hold more promise in cities than outside them simply because of the lack of internal space, toilets, room for a walk. The internet has shown us several things and they seem to be if you show people pictures of things they will want to go their and you sell them things which have to be moved, and while 3D printing has lots of promise, it first use will be/is to produce lighter, stronger and cheaper elements for things like planes and trains. It will be a very very long time untill stuff is local manufacted using the technique, production line methods are cheap and quick compared with 3d printing. Using a titanium added manfacturing system is very power intensive. http://3dprint.com/1 0345/3d-printed-tita nium-bicycles/[/p][/quote]Actually I work with companies that already use 3D printing in manufacturing. So it won't be a long time, and certainly not in the 2030s. The future is uncertain but we do know that disruptive technology will change things in unforeseen ways. And that is where HS2 falls down - it lacks optionality to deal with uncertainty. It's so rigid a piece of infrastructure that in order for it to work properly (ie at high speed - not high capacity) it has to serve Derby and Nottingham via a field some distance from those cities, will need a whole new tram system to connect it to the existing network at Sheffield and Birmingham (obviously this is all magically not in the HS2 'budget') . Even then, many of the notions that underpin the business case rely on an assumption that the world in 2033 will be largely as it is now and that passenger numbers will continue to grow indefinitely over that period, up 79 percent from a 2010 base. What this means in practice is we must assume that in twenty years time a completely full 500 seat high speed train will travel between London and Leeds/Manchester every 4 minutes in each direction for 15 hours, 350 days per year. Complete and utter nonsense. grey_man
  • Score: -11

5:45pm Wed 30 Jul 14

flypie says...

Yes companies work with 3D printing but it is a long way from main streem. You assumptions really on the idea that in 2033 things will be so different that we cannot guess what they will be like. There are no periods in history where over 20 years sutch radical chnages have been made.

There is plenty of nonsense around and you talking a lot of it.
Yes companies work with 3D printing but it is a long way from main streem. You assumptions really on the idea that in 2033 things will be so different that we cannot guess what they will be like. There are no periods in history where over 20 years sutch radical chnages have been made. There is plenty of nonsense around and you talking a lot of it. flypie
  • Score: 4

8:49pm Wed 30 Jul 14

grey_man says...

Oh right. So now we get personal do we? INevitably for somebody who has run out of arguments.

No period in history where we've seen that much change? How about the last 20 years? It was only in 1993 that the last protocol barriers to the widespread adoption and commercialisation of the Internet. Now there is no aspect of our lives that are untouched by it - in terms of culture, education, democracy, personal relationships, work, commerce, data processing and gathering, communications, publishing, surveillance and on and on and on. Nobody 20 years ago was making wholly accurate predictions about the world in which we now live. So the idea that a company looking to persuade politicians to cough up tens of billions of pounds over 20 years knows what's around the corner is laughable.

We really haven't seen anything yet and we haven't even mentioned all the other things that are either part of our lives already, imminent or will be part of our lives years and years before HS2 Phase 2 is complete. Quantum computing, nanotechnology, GM, artificial intelligence, robotics....

For somebody who works in IT, you don't have much imagination or awareness of the potential for our lives to undergo further transformations, just as they have over the past two decades.
Oh right. So now we get personal do we? INevitably for somebody who has run out of arguments. No period in history where we've seen that much change? How about the last 20 years? It was only in 1993 that the last protocol barriers to the widespread adoption and commercialisation of the Internet. Now there is no aspect of our lives that are untouched by it - in terms of culture, education, democracy, personal relationships, work, commerce, data processing and gathering, communications, publishing, surveillance and on and on and on. Nobody 20 years ago was making wholly accurate predictions about the world in which we now live. So the idea that a company looking to persuade politicians to cough up tens of billions of pounds over 20 years knows what's around the corner is laughable. We really haven't seen anything yet and we haven't even mentioned all the other things that are either part of our lives already, imminent or will be part of our lives years and years before HS2 Phase 2 is complete. Quantum computing, nanotechnology, GM, artificial intelligence, robotics.... For somebody who works in IT, you don't have much imagination or awareness of the potential for our lives to undergo further transformations, just as they have over the past two decades. grey_man
  • Score: -6

4:44pm Thu 31 Jul 14

Karlar says...

flypie wrote:
Been to a funeral so missed the above.

Over the last 30/40 years there have been big upgrades. In the 70 it took 3 hours Liv-London now it it nearer 2.

Every train may not be full but you cannot put freight containers into the empty seats. The line is nearly full in terms of the number of trains that can be run.

Compared with the NHS IT HS2 is simple. The British Library was a one off build as where things like the Scottish Parliament and both were heavily interfered with.
IT may have been around a long time as an abbreviation but the actual technology is radically different, if we were still using 640K MS-DOS PCs then things would be a lot more predictable.
I don't think you understand what a heuristic is.
Technology stops being novel when there are well establish industry standards, that have remained unchanged for many years.
As I said "The trick is to come up with a suitable form of words and reasons for" the cost overrun, and you haven't disappointed me here.
Other examples of CO are Millennium Dome, Humber Bridge and Edinburgh's trams. Moreover, there are so many others they are far too numerous to list in this abbreviated exchange. Are you admitting that as IT becomes more novel it becomes more unreliable or are you hamming? You're certainly plugging an optimistic heuristic, because they never overestimate the anticipated cost just like HMG is trying to persuade us on HS2. There was nothing admissible about the National Programme for IT because the PAC said it was one "of the worst and most expensive contracting fiascos" in the history of government contracts; yet we continue to fork out for it.
I am not going to be drawn into an exchange on the intellectual merits or otherwise of each other's knowledge. I come from the school of respecting each other's point of view whilst debating an issue. The issue here is the flawed business case of HS2.
[quote][p][bold]flypie[/bold] wrote: Been to a funeral so missed the above. Over the last 30/40 years there have been big upgrades. In the 70 it took 3 hours Liv-London now it it nearer 2. Every train may not be full but you cannot put freight containers into the empty seats. The line is nearly full in terms of the number of trains that can be run. Compared with the NHS IT HS2 is simple. The British Library was a one off build as where things like the Scottish Parliament and both were heavily interfered with. IT may have been around a long time as an abbreviation but the actual technology is radically different, if we were still using 640K MS-DOS PCs then things would be a lot more predictable. I don't think you understand what a heuristic is. Technology stops being novel when there are well establish industry standards, that have remained unchanged for many years.[/p][/quote]As I said "The trick is to come up with a suitable form of words and reasons for" the cost overrun, and you haven't disappointed me here. Other examples of CO are Millennium Dome, Humber Bridge and Edinburgh's trams. Moreover, there are so many others they are far too numerous to list in this abbreviated exchange. Are you admitting that as IT becomes more novel it becomes more unreliable or are you hamming? You're certainly plugging an optimistic heuristic, because they never overestimate the anticipated cost just like HMG is trying to persuade us on HS2. There was nothing admissible about the National Programme for IT because the PAC said it was one "of the worst and most expensive contracting fiascos" in the history of government contracts; yet we continue to fork out for it. I am not going to be drawn into an exchange on the intellectual merits or otherwise of each other's knowledge. I come from the school of respecting each other's point of view whilst debating an issue. The issue here is the flawed business case of HS2. Karlar
  • Score: -5

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree