biffvernon
Member
- Messages
- 4,607
- Location
- Lincolnshire
- Thread starter biffvernon
- Start date
JohnB
Member
- Messages
- 493
- Location
- Beautiful sunny West Wales!
I assume someone has, even if it's only Biff :lol:. I haven't, but assume it's bad news, and a lot of historic buildings will be lost. If there's money to chuck about building railways, re-opening Carmarthen to Aberystwyth would be much better, so we could have a nice leisurely ride through some lovely countryside, and reconnect the two parts of Wales. It would be cheaper too.
It never ceases to amaze me that we have the technology to be in instant communication with people all over the world, and people feel the need to rush about meeting each other at an even faster rate. What's the point of saving a few hours travelling across the country, when it still takes a few hours to get there, but they could have an instant video conference whenever they want it? Then when they have time off, they can go out into the country and look at lovely old buildings!
It never ceases to amaze me that we have the technology to be in instant communication with people all over the world, and people feel the need to rush about meeting each other at an even faster rate. What's the point of saving a few hours travelling across the country, when it still takes a few hours to get there, but they could have an instant video conference whenever they want it? Then when they have time off, they can go out into the country and look at lovely old buildings!
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,201
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
I've read some things about HS2 but since the first trains are not due to run for 15 years (and that's before all the inevitable delays to the current pie-in-the-sky plans) and that it will only save about 35 minutes for a trip from London to Birmingham or 40 minutes to Manchester (assuming they ever build beyond Birmingham), I can't honestly get too excited about it or see it'll be of any great benefit.
But I presume the public consulation and enquiry process over the next seven years will explain everything.
I tend to agree with JohnB about modern communications though. Wouldn't it be better to spend the money on connecting every home and business to a country-wide optical fibre network and, hopefully, reduce the need for much of this, presumably business, travel? I'm sure the remaining travellers won't be too inconvenienced by not saving 30-40 minutes.
As for Camarthen station, the last time I tried to travel there by train there was no service at all (this was about 12 years ago) and the closest I could get was Swansea, which was a little surprising as I used to regularly travel by train to Camarthen in my teens (rather more than 12 years ago!). In those days, BR also ran a wonderful steam service along the Rheidol valley from Aberystwyth.
But I presume the public consulation and enquiry process over the next seven years will explain everything.
I tend to agree with JohnB about modern communications though. Wouldn't it be better to spend the money on connecting every home and business to a country-wide optical fibre network and, hopefully, reduce the need for much of this, presumably business, travel? I'm sure the remaining travellers won't be too inconvenienced by not saving 30-40 minutes.
As for Camarthen station, the last time I tried to travel there by train there was no service at all (this was about 12 years ago) and the closest I could get was Swansea, which was a little surprising as I used to regularly travel by train to Camarthen in my teens (rather more than 12 years ago!). In those days, BR also ran a wonderful steam service along the Rheidol valley from Aberystwyth.
JohnB
Member
- Messages
- 493
- Location
- Beautiful sunny West Wales!
It's still running, but not owned by BR or its successors.Flyfisher said:
FamilyWiggs
Member
- Messages
- 3,452
- Location
- Flintshire, N Wales.
I'd rather they spent the money on a decent dual carriage-way road connection between North and South Wales. I can get to London quicker than I can to Cardiff.
LadyArowana
Member
- Messages
- 3,687
FamilyWiggs said:
That doesn't seem like a problem, just go to London :lol:
Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
I knew that Gaul was divided into three parts, but I didn't realise that the Pays De Galles is also split. Perhaps a simple group hug would solve the problem.JohnB said:
As Flyfisher suggests, I suspect that HS2 will have a considerable number of modifications during its gestation period - as is invariably the case with such projects in this country. So any concerns that may be expressed today about threatened historic architecture could prove to be misplaced, as the route decisions are changed and changed again. I'm afraid that some buildings may ultimately be threatened - the problem today is divining which buildings.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,201
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
If only we could run our railways as well as they do in Europe - or perhaps we will if we also have more HST lines.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12085167
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12085167
Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
I wonder how much architectural devastation was wrought in order to build the TGV network in France. I know that their current plan to extend the high-speed line from Aix-en-Provence eastwards to Nice is meeting with a lot of local opposition, because of the environmental damage that it will cause.
One has the impression that the French have a rather more dictatorial approach to land requisition for such infrastructure projects.
One has the impression that the French have a rather more dictatorial approach to land requisition for such infrastructure projects.
Gareth Hughes
Member
- Messages
- 2,741
- Location
- In the wilds of East Anglia
The French certainly do have more of a can-do attitude to these things.
Cornerstone didn't make the Christmas journey with me so I've only glanced briefly at it - as I understand it the London-Birmingham section will require the demolition of about 400 homes, most near Euston, a few in pockets elsewhere. 9 Grade II and possibly 1 Grade II*.
If my glance at the Cornerstone article is correct, the opposition comes from people living in very large houses in the Chilterns who may have a rail line running 500 yards from their homes, and in one case, cutting off one of their drives. I despaired slightly of the dear old SPAB when I saw it.
I don't understand why the line can't, largely, make use of existing (underused or closed) routes.
Cornerstone didn't make the Christmas journey with me so I've only glanced briefly at it - as I understand it the London-Birmingham section will require the demolition of about 400 homes, most near Euston, a few in pockets elsewhere. 9 Grade II and possibly 1 Grade II*.
If my glance at the Cornerstone article is correct, the opposition comes from people living in very large houses in the Chilterns who may have a rail line running 500 yards from their homes, and in one case, cutting off one of their drives. I despaired slightly of the dear old SPAB when I saw it.
I don't understand why the line can't, largely, make use of existing (underused or closed) routes.
biffvernon
Member
- Messages
- 4,607
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Penners said:
A point highlighted in the Cornerstones article is that little modifications don't really work. The line has to be almost straight and is 75 metres wide and so any historic building on the way is doomed. It will see the biggest destruction of listed buildings since the idea of listing started.
FamilyWiggs
Member
- Messages
- 3,452
- Location
- Flintshire, N Wales.
75m seems awfully wide for a railway.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,201
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
It's interesting to compare the HS2 with extra runways for Heathrow or Stansted airports. Railways seem to be automatically accepted as a 'generally good thing' whereas airports seem regarded as the work of the devil.
Yet airport expansion requires only a couple of miles of tarmac plus a few acres for extra terminal buildings and can be built economically with private money and then run at a profit and provide additional passenger capacity to any destination in the world.
In contrast, HS2 will cut a 75m swath of total destruction through 100 miles of the country, will require huge amounts of taxpayer subsidy and will only provide additional passenger capacity between two fixed points.
So, flexible, economic and minimally invasive versus inflexible, highly subsidised and hugely destructive . . . . and all for a 30 minute saving on a specific journey.
Hmm.
Yet airport expansion requires only a couple of miles of tarmac plus a few acres for extra terminal buildings and can be built economically with private money and then run at a profit and provide additional passenger capacity to any destination in the world.
In contrast, HS2 will cut a 75m swath of total destruction through 100 miles of the country, will require huge amounts of taxpayer subsidy and will only provide additional passenger capacity between two fixed points.
So, flexible, economic and minimally invasive versus inflexible, highly subsidised and hugely destructive . . . . and all for a 30 minute saving on a specific journey.
Hmm.
JohnB
Member
- Messages
- 493
- Location
- Beautiful sunny West Wales!
I'm anti flying/airport expansion and pro railways, but not ones like HS2.
skier-hughes
Member
- Messages
- 3,414
- Location
- Staffs, UK
30 minutes on a 2 hour journey is quite a saving, will no doubt take some strain off the overloaded housing market in and around London as more people can commute from further afield.
biffvernon
Member
- Messages
- 4,607
- Location
- Lincolnshire
That is the worst of all arguments. Build transport infrastructure so that folk can commute further so that the demand for transport infrastructure increases. Bonkers.
skier-hughes
Member
- Messages
- 3,414
- Location
- Staffs, UK
That's me ......... I also think that we need to work on our economy, which if the people who are required to do it can't find anywhere to live in or around London may move elsewhere and turn our country into a backwater.............. or the demand for housing drives prices continually ever higher, we extend further into the countryside around London to build more houses......... personally I'd rather people commuted further and left the countryside alone, but I do appreciate it is my opinion and others will not share it.
FamilyWiggs
Member
- Messages
- 3,452
- Location
- Flintshire, N Wales.
Graham - I subscribe to your logic. It is a fine balance - but building transport infrastructure in order not to overload other infrsatructure locally/drive up house prices/build on more green land seems sensible to me.
I still can get over the fact that the width of the HS2 railway is 75 metres. Let's assume that (despite the gauge only being 1.43m and the clearance between inner rails of twin-track is 1.82m), that the width of a train plus clearance each side is a generous 6m and the HS2 is a 4 track line - that is still only 24m width for the rails. What are the other 50m used for?
I still can get over the fact that the width of the HS2 railway is 75 metres. Let's assume that (despite the gauge only being 1.43m and the clearance between inner rails of twin-track is 1.82m), that the width of a train plus clearance each side is a generous 6m and the HS2 is a 4 track line - that is still only 24m width for the rails. What are the other 50m used for?
skier-hughes
Member
- Messages
- 3,414
- Location
- Staffs, UK
I found this piece, not sure on accuracy, as it is a forum posting 
To say HS2 will destroy the chilterns is quite misleading, The chilterns are 47km wide, HS2 will be be 25m wide fence to fence with additional 25m tree free zone. as a % that doesnt sound like total devastation to me. (maybe we should go back to building motorways instead...that would certainly have more of an impact)
To say HS2 will destroy the chilterns is quite misleading, The chilterns are 47km wide, HS2 will be be 25m wide fence to fence with additional 25m tree free zone. as a % that doesnt sound like total devastation to me. (maybe we should go back to building motorways instead...that would certainly have more of an impact)
skier-hughes
Member
- Messages
- 3,414
- Location
- Staffs, UK
or
It will absolutely destroy and lead to further development of the unspoilt countryside it goes through, and it mostly goes through unspoilt countryside. Where the trains will be at top speed, the tracks are planned to be 25 metres apart, with a 25 metre ‘vegetation free zone’ (i.e. concrete) on either side. At 75 metres, that’s a runway, not a railway. The pitch at Wembley is only 69 metres wide.
It will absolutely destroy and lead to further development of the unspoilt countryside it goes through, and it mostly goes through unspoilt countryside. Where the trains will be at top speed, the tracks are planned to be 25 metres apart, with a 25 metre ‘vegetation free zone’ (i.e. concrete) on either side. At 75 metres, that’s a runway, not a railway. The pitch at Wembley is only 69 metres wide.