Share
Stuart Nathan
Features editor
Railroaded
Yesterday’s announcement of the approval of HS2 made sure that an engineering-related topic dominated the news programmes. The news broadcasts, newspaper coverage and television reports sought comment from political observers, environmental campaigners and economists but, oddly, there didn’t seem to be much comment from the people who will actually make the proposals into reality. You know. Engineers.
That’s quite an anomaly, if you think about it. The history of the railways — a very British history — is punctuated by the engineers who made it possible. Trevithick, Watt, Stevenson and, of course, Brunel: the visionary engineers who drove the permanent way and its mighty engines across the country. These days? It seems that the media are more interested in bemoaning the lack of such mighty men of technological wisdom and charisma than actually trying to find someone to comment on it.
It might actually do them some good. The HS2 line has been replanned with more tunnels, including a three-mile one under London and several through the green and pleasant lands of the Chilterns. They’ve pushed the price of the project up, but they’ve mollified some of the concerns of the MPs for those constituencies and the Mayor of London. The cynics among you will notice which party all these politicians belong to.
More to the point, they’ve made the engineering of the line more difficult. More than half the length of the line will pass through tunnels or cuttings. How robust are the costings for these? Are they likely to come in on budget? And who carries the can if they don’t?
Around The Engineer, we remain unconvinced about the benefits of the first stage of HS2. Without that fast link into the North and to Scotland, it’s hard to see where the suggested economic benefits are going to come from. The government costs the entire new high-speed network at £36billion and says it will bring in £47billion over 60 years, but these figures are so mind-bogglingly huge that they’re difficult to grasp and near-impossible to analyse.
But the most important thing to keep in mind is that the project is, in the final analysis, an engineering task. Do we have the skills in place to start the project? Do we have the education and training pipleine in place to make sure we have all the different engineering disciplines to keep the project running through its lifetime and solve the problems which will inevitably arise along the route? Is there someone with the drive and discipline to keep the project going and prevent it becoming an albatross hanging around the neck of subsequent transport ministers?
We haven’t got a Brunel anymore. But it’s engineers who are going to drive this project, and the fact that their voices aren’t being heard — or even sought — doesn’t bode well for the UK’s biggest rail project for more than a century.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (39)
Martin | 11 Jan 2012 10:50 am
As the comment that I made on the previous article for HS2, the politicians & so called experts don't see beyond their noses for other newer technology. They could jump normal rail & opt for a monorail system. This could be built on top of the original rail tracks thereby not taking up any extra space and spoiling the countryside any further. By the time HS2 is built, the rest of Europe will be way ahead on newer systems.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
mr tillier | 11 Jan 2012 12:59 pm
In terms of costs how does those cost compare to a similar project elsewhere? how does it becnhmark? could you add this to the article?
passing through many tunnel does not make a pleasant travel...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
A British European Project Manager Engineer | 11 Jan 2012 1:04 pm
I agree. Why not get the trains to go around the conurbations and thus cut the costs mnassively. the current project is for the benefi of some people in london and Birmingham. Should it not be for the benefit of all the people on this island? If the trains could pick-up and drop carriages off on the fly we would actually get where we want much faster & more economically, as stopping & starting takes an inordinate amount of time & the majority of the energy consumed by trains.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Matt Bailey | 11 Jan 2012 1:07 pm
If engineers were not prominent in the media coverage, it's partly because they are not promoting themselves well enough and making sure they are seen and heard. The media won't seek out engineers; they will speak to those who come forward with comment and opinion. The big engineering firms need to promote their superstar engineers to the world at large, the way that CEOs are promoted. If no one knows their names, they only have themselves to blame.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11 Jan 2012 1:09 pm
I don't think there is any question about whether we our capable of "engineering" this project, we all know ultimately it will be the Europeans that build it!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Derek | 11 Jan 2012 1:10 pm
I live on the continent and I agree with Martin. high speed rail travel is common place over here and they are looking toward the next generation - which won't be HS2
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Neil Dance | 11 Jan 2012 1:22 pm
The engineering skill is probably not available, but we are in the midsts of a recession and the transferable skills of people from other vocations will bring freshness and new thinking to our discipline. Through the scale of this project we will also be able to inspire and develop a new generation of engineers who will generate a wealth of knowledge and skills for our engineering future. We need these skills and expertise to generate wealth in the future. However my one concern is that the project needs a figure head, a leader who is strong enough an engineer to realise this is at its heart an engineering project. Not a socio political experiment, or a business investment, or a Keynesian investment project. No this is an engineering project and needs to be managed as the great engineers of the past would have managed one.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Carolynne Knight | 11 Jan 2012 1:24 pm
Concorde, the Chunnel, every mliitary engineering project ever done, the NHS computer system, what massive government project has the governmant ever done that did not run massively over budget? Better to put it all out to private tender from the start including a design competition and the cost estimation! No politician ever comprehended engineering, so it will all doubtless end in an expensive debacle.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Mayer | 11 Jan 2012 1:34 pm
Seems to me this was going ahead no matter what cases were made against it. So in true major capital project style, it's now time to start the "Real Final Cost" sweepstakes - £45 Billion anyone?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11 Jan 2012 1:48 pm
There is some inference in this article that the country will be worse off with the lack of a London to Birmingham railway line as part of HS2. The "Greats" have already done their bit - there is already a rail link from London to Birmingham. All the money the Government wishes to spend will link two places already linked. That is why I think this phase is meaningless - far better to connect areas not already connected rather than ones already linked. Capacity increase will not be served by this link.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment