Share
Sam Shead
Sam Shead
Reporter
Talking transport
The Engineer is eagerly anticipating the controversial decision for the £32bn High Speed 2 (HS2) rail project that is set to be announced this week by Justine Greening.
The Transport Secretary is expected to give the go-ahead on the project, which would run in two phases from 2016 - 2033, intially cutting journey times from London to Birmingham to 49 minutes, then spreading further north to serve Leeds and Manchester. Scotland’s ruling SNP have urged the UK government to ensure the line also serves Edinburgh and Glasgow.
A report in yesterday’s Sunday Times suggests that double-decker trains with glass viewing ceilings could run on the line. Consultants have drawn up blueprint plans for 400m long trains capable of carrying more than 1,000 passengers.
This week is going to be popular with those who have a passion for all things automotive with a clutch of motor shows expected to provide an insight into the future of the car industry.
Firstly, the Autosport International Racing Car Show starts on Wednesday at the NEC in Birmingham and continues until the end of the week, with the public being granted access from Saturday.
The exhibitors range from specialist engineering companies to major manufacturers and they will be covering everything from karting to F1.
Several conferences worthy of note will be taking place throughout the course of the show, with Wednesday’s International Low Carbon Racing Conference catching the eye. The conference will discuss how clean motor racing technologies are advancing and will see the unveiling of the new Lola-Drayson B12/69EV all-electric prototype racing car.
On the other side of the Atlantic, the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS) starts today at the Cobo Centre in Detroit, Michigan. Visitors can expect to see several vehicle premieres, including the new Bentley Continental GT and Volvo’s concept petrol plug-in hybrid, the XC60, which allows drivers to control how much power is derived from each engine at the touch of a button.
From cars of the future to cars of the year and news that the Car of the Year 2012 award, judged by a panel of European motoring journalists, is set to release a shortlist of seven nominees today, which will be reduced to a single winner on March 5, 2012. Those in the running at this stage include the likes of the BMW 1 series and the Mercedes SLK.
Furthermore, What Car? magazine is announcing its reader’s car of the year award on Wednesday, a title that was claimed last year by the Audi A1.
From the motorway to the runway and news that BAA is set to announce their stats for the Christmas getaway period today. The results are unlikely to be on a par with those from Christmas 2010, when the travel disruption caused as a result of the snow and ice was far more obvious.
However, it wasn’t all plane sailing, as several transport services were affected towards the back end of the Christmas period due to the storms that the UK experienced last week. My own flight from the Isle of Man to London City Airport had to divert to Luton Airport after two failed landing attempts at London City due to the severe gales.
Finally, the Manufacturing Advisory Service (MAS) is teaming up with the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP (GBSLEP) to provide an insight into manufacturing support and future opportunities in the region.
The interactive event will be held at the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce on Friday and will feature presentations from key figures from LEP and MAS, in addition to a host of local companies who have already benefited from tapping into expert strategic advice and guidance.
Readers' comments (32)
Andy Borucki | 9 Jan 2012 2:36 pm
If Parliament approves the HS2 project, Cameron has ensured a Tory defeat at the next local and General elections, probably scuppered Boris Johnson's re-election as the Mayor of London, and ensured that the Tories remain unelectable for the next decade. When will "call-me-Dave" realise you don't screw your own people. Labour know this basic rule, but Cameron, in his ignorance, is turning into another John Major!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Harold Birtwistle | 9 Jan 2012 2:39 pm
As far as HS2 is concerned I see that the north / south divide is alive and well as usual. Interesting to note that there are no plans for extension north of Birmingham and that the supposed creation of 1000000 new jobs has been rubbished by many well informed organisations.
Don't you see a parallel between this and Concorde v Jumbo? (Any relationship between Jumbos and white elephants is purely coincidence)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9 Jan 2012 2:40 pm
By all means build it, but don't say it increases capacity, since that can be done on the existing line; don't say it's an economic benefit; we've already seen the level of effective subsidy that will apply to each ticket for the businessmen who'll generally use it; don't harp on about reduced journey times, when the train time is likely the middle one third of an overall journey time where two thirds sees no benefit.
Do it to stimulate cionstruction, fine; do it as a vanity project to keep the UK up with other countries, but don't sell it under the false pretences we've seen to date.
We treat the railways with the sort of nostaglia we treat the NHS with, and for much the same reasosn; sadly both are now about 100% overstaffed and 100% overcost and need serious restructuring before throwing good money after bad.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Davey | 9 Jan 2012 2:53 pm
Peterborough Straight, 1939 a regular steam train (not a tricked-up record breaking gimmick special) with fare-paying passengers runs at 125 mph and achieves the World Record for a train hauled by a steam engine. Looks like Moore's Law doesn't apply to railways!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Terry Taylor | 9 Jan 2012 3:04 pm
HS2 will do as much for increasing capacity as the M6 Toll roll has done to alleviate congestion on the M6 in the midlands
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Steve Greatwood | 9 Jan 2012 3:28 pm
We already have three rail companies competing train services to Birmingham (Euston, Paddington & Marylebone). Surely we can introduce more capacity by adding more coaches, in British Rail days 10 to 12 coaches were used.
How can the HS2 ever be competitive? This is the Concord vs. Jumbo jet situation again. A direct service Manchester / Birmingham to Brussels, Lille or Paris, now that would make sense.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rob Hill | 9 Jan 2012 3:30 pm
It is very interesting to note that the case for HS2 is now being made on the grounds of overcoming capacity contraints. When the project was first launched it was all about the economic value of the time saved. This is surely a sign that the decision was made to have it at any cost regardless of the justification and the arguments were made up later. All the pro-HS2 arguments are either made by obvious vested inetrests or amount to "we are embarrased that other countries have it and we don't". It is almost as if the possession of high speed rail is the right of entry into some elite club of nations. Therefore we have to have it whether it is needed in the UK or not. My view is that we do not need it. Any high speed line only benefits those at the ends of the line which is perfect for countries with centres of population hundreds of miles apart and with sparsley-populated areas in between. We have cities relatively close together and with fairly dense population between the cities. We certainly need improvements to our rail infrastructure but an elitist one line system is not it. Unfortunately, in recent media coverage, the anti HS2 argument is presented as being about the spoiling of pretty rural England. This neatly portrays all the objectors as NIMBY's and, as such, are easily dismissed. The truth is much different. The arguments are about the business case or rather the lack of one.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
richard annett | 9 Jan 2012 3:55 pm
What is the opportunity cost of HS2?
Personally I would prefer to see all the money go on moving to a carbon free economy. Then one can start to think about transport infrastructure again once we are not killing the planet. As the UK was the key developers of the modern industrial world we have a duty to show the rest of the globe that we can now develop a sustainable industrial one. Lets be the first ones there.
Second point - only when the opportunity cost and time of rail = air will I even begin to think about buying a rail ticket. At the moment rail is pricing itself out of existence.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert Freer | 9 Jan 2012 4:04 pm
HS2 will be the new Concorde: clever engineering which no one can afford.
If we have to have it why not build it to a broader gauge to ensure a more comfortable ride?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Graeme Turner | 9 Jan 2012 6:07 pm
I absolutely agree with previous comments. The analogy to Concorde is a very relevant one - a very fast service which hardly anyone can afford between 2 points which you can only get to and from very slowly.
There is also great truth in the comment regarding "antis" being accused of NIMBY-ism, when the business case for the project is founded on a time before video-conferencing, Skype, and e-mail when the only way for a group of people to simultaneously view and discuss original documents was for them all to be in the same room. I certainly spend a lot less time than I did 20 years ago trekking round the country to meetings - I let the technology - not the train - take the strain.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9 Jan 2012 6:42 pm
Funny you should mention Concorde. The days of throwing lots of public money and excessive ammounts of energy at a project to enable the few to travel faster passed with Concorde. As an engineer I was excited by Concorde and I am equally excited by the idea of high speed rail. The problem is I cannot see economic justification in either. Surely the future will not be in more people travelling to meetings. Rather I expect to do more meetings by video conferencing etc. That must be "lower carbon" (how I hate that phrase!) and more productive.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
E.W. Lawrence.. | 9 Jan 2012 6:43 pm
I agree with the sentiments that HS2 is unnecessary and a waste of money. There are lines which were closed in the 1960s linking London with the Midlands and the North that could be reopened for far less. Why not reopen the Great Central Main Line from Marylebone which was built to a high standard and was the last main line built to London, only opening in 1899. The Midland Main Line from St Pancras through the Peak District is another that could be reopened to the north. The Great Western Route from Paddington to Birmingham is another. The West Country has been completely overlooked in terms of improvement to rail services. Should not consideration be given to reopening the old Southern Railway Route from Exeter to Plymouth via Okehampton and Tavistock? It would provide an alternative route when train services are disrupted by adverse weather along the coastal route via Dawlish and Teignmouth. In addition it would provide an urgently needed commuter service from Tavistock to Plymouth and Okehampton to Exeter. I agree HS2 should not be built and what money is available used more wisely to improve a number of routes.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter Lovering | 9 Jan 2012 7:14 pm
I agree with comments from both Harold Birtwhistle and Rob Hill. I live north of Newcastle and can see no benefit when I can spend the time on the train working on my laptop, or having a well deserved rest away from the office! Given the massive cost, there is a significant danger in that successive Governments may fail to extend the line beyond Birmingham, and then there is the east-west argument; Leeds or Manchester next? The money would be better spent improving the current infrastructure, transport integration and better timetabling to reduce overall journey times, not just the bit in the middle.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Alan | 9 Jan 2012 8:09 pm
Ideal for quickly delivering cheap imports to our manufactureing centers , while we still have the money to buy them ok
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10 Jan 2012 12:34 pm
Lets have HS2. But make sure it is connected to HS1 for through travel to France and Belgium.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John MacKinnon | 10 Jan 2012 12:42 pm
This decision is purely political dogma, trying to show the UK can also have high speed trains, at whatever cost. There is no economic case for this investment. If this sort of finance is available it should be used to improve the existing rail systems (including electrification), improve and increase rolling stock and use technology to improve reliability, such a few leaves on the lines or cross winds don't bring the system to a halt. All of these, if UK sourced and supplied, would improve the quality of life for many as well as significant employment. When will politicians start to look after the general electorate rather than their own ego's.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robin Colclough | 10 Jan 2012 12:49 pm
Can the UK afford £32,000 Million at the moment? Is there really solid proof that the investment will yield rapid benefits? Spain spent 16,000 Million euros on their fast train, and all its done so far is left them even more strapped for cash. I'd vote against it if I could, and invest the money in developing advanced software and biotech industries, which generate 100s of billions for the USA and other.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ralf | 10 Jan 2012 12:50 pm
Go Compare!
How much did the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya cost and what did we get for it?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Graeme Morpeth | 10 Jan 2012 1:18 pm
Is this a case of Keynsian economics applied to a less than deserving project?
There is a great deal of data about the cost of the project and the projected economic benefits (one is almost known, but will certain overrun before the end of the project; the other is a best guess based on a required outcome), but not much about the option of upgrading the existing lines and services - or did I miss that somewhere?
The project will benefit the country overall, in terms of creating employment, and maintaining the technical skills required to make it all work. As for the rest; it will be with us for a long time (our current network still uses a route structure developed about 150 years ago) and will, I think, eventually generate a return on the investment.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10 Jan 2012 1:42 pm
Surely the mian benefit is that the home counties can now be extended into midlands, so that all of those poor bankers from London (the only people who will be able to afford the season tickets) can now buy up all the decent housing in the midlands countryside.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Patrick Sudlow | 10 Jan 2012 2:26 pm
As mentioned by E.W. Lawrence, the Midland Mainline should of been upgraded, along with the rest of the network. When the West Coast Mainline was shut, Midland Mainline ran a much more reliable service than Virgin does on the West Coast. This is just a vanity project, that is diverting much needed investment from the railway network.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John James | 10 Jan 2012 3:43 pm
I live near Watford and can get to Euston in 30 Minutes. Then HS2 to B'ham? If I take the existing train direct from Watford Junction I will be in B'ham before my HS2 train gets there so only London and SE England will get the benefit.
Will there be any stops en route Euston to B'ham?
If the train was Maglev I might be able to understand the fuss. Still... ...It all makes work for the working man to do ...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Leigh Gubb | 10 Jan 2012 3:51 pm
How much of this technology and the construction services required will be provided by UK owned businesses? Will it be another wind farm fiasco where all the finance goes overseas and the UK engineering industry suffers from it. So often these days we see the 'smart' engineering coming from overseas even when we have excellent engineers that can do the work in this country.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mike | 10 Jan 2012 4:49 pm
The Country is in debt, or so we are told, and yet this Government can throw £32 Bn at this, as a starting cost, (it will rise) and yet this muppet PM expects us to all accept it is better for the country to have a limited expensive service between London and Birmingham of all places.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Martin | 10 Jan 2012 7:40 pm
The problem I see is that this is something that should have been built twenty years ago. It is time to move on to the next technology such as a monorail system that won't impact on peoples properties or damage the countryside. By the time this hs2 is built the French & Germans will be going much faster on Monorail systems, and the UK will be left way behind again!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Allan Price | 10 Jan 2012 8:41 pm
Yet another folly to add to the list along with wind turbines, hybrid cars, solar energy, heat pumps and carbon trading. None of these things are economically or environmentaly viable. For anyone hoping to park their car in Birmingham to catch a train, would you like to hazard a guess as to just how much it costs to park a car for a day in Brum? Assuming you can find somewhere to park at all that is.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Stephen Mosley | 10 Jan 2012 9:13 pm
A very interesting set of statements (with it being so one-sided one can hardly call it a debate!) However there are a number of assumptions that can be questioned and at least two points that can be dismissed. To start with the easy stuff, Mallard was not only working a special train when the steam record was set but she also ran the inner big end bearing whilst doing it. This was not a speed that could be achieved except under special conditions. Secondly you can only re-open previous routes, now shut, if you can find a way of dealing with all the houses, trading estates, roads and nature reserves that generally cover significant sections of them. So, on to points where a view has been put which I think can be realistically questioned. If there are no plans to go further North than Birmingham, all be it branching out to Manchester and Leeds from what I’ve seen, then one must question whether it is required? This is not to say that the North is any less important but to reinforce that an arterial route is exactly that. If we are looking at London as the primary hub then as you move further outwards surely the density of passengers will decrease as people branch off towards their destinations? This works as a concept even with a purely hub to hub system. Then there is the oft typed “I’ll stay at home and just use my computer” argument. When U.K. companies stop paying to fly people out to China then I will believe you do not need to travel. Equally if this is what we find working in the U.K. it is also true for businesses based in Europe, America and the Far East. In support of this general view is the fact that the current lines are running to capacity, if there were no need to travel HS2 would never have even made it this far. Finally there is an aspect which has only been touched on but which I believe is fundamental to any argument for this project to go ahead. How many times have we seen “it only cuts a few minutes from London to Birmingham” and “do that many people want to travel between London and Birmingham?” I cannot help but wonder how many engineers who have posted such comments have also complained about the myopia of politicians? It is not London to Birmingham that is the key but rather Rome to Birmingham, Madrid to Birmingham or Strasbourg to Birmingham. More than this though, as stated above Birmingham isn’t necessarily the destination for people who will travel on this route but rather it will be a hub to the Midlands and the North. So then it becomes Rome to Hull, Madrid to Leeds or Rome to Macclesfield. For success it must better the package of cost and point to point times offered by the airlines, but encouraging international businessmen to come to us and build a face to face working relationship is surely something we cannot ignore?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Editor Crankshaft | 11 Jan 2012 8:59 am
Please tell me that "However, it wasn’t all plane sailing, as several transport services ... " is an intentional pun and not a result of the sad state of our education system.
I agree that HS2 is not going to deliver enough widespread improvement for the money. The money would be far better spent on improving rural lines into local towns and cities - I have a 30 minute, 20 mile drive to the station to catch a train to take me to the mainline town, where to change I have to talk 20 minutes across town to the mainline station and catch another train to London.
As mentioned by other posters, integrating all forms of transport is vital to making a change to our behaviour. Has anyone given consideration to how one is expected to get a week's worth of shopping home on public transport that entails several changes and a long walk at the end?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Editor's comments | 11 Jan 2012 8:59 am
'Plane sailing' is indeed a pun.
Ed C | 11 Jan 2012 1:29 pm
My relief is palpable! ;o)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Helen | 11 Jan 2012 1:41 pm
@Stephen Mosley
Rome to Hull via Birmingham? Really?
The Brum-Hull leg is over 3 hours with a change at Sheffield. London to Hull is 2.5 hours with no change.
What about places off the mainline like Lincoln? How are they served by HS2?
A trip to Birmingham for a two hour meeting means leaving home at 0600 and returning at 2300.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Stephen Mosley | 11 Jan 2012 4:25 pm
Mea culpa - I wrote at night after a couple of glasses of a particularly insolent red so didn't feel particularly disposed to looking up times. However I would say that I intended to high-light that HS2 stands or falls as a part of a pan-European high speed network and how it affects the ability - and willingness - for international businessmen to visit our companies North of London. Please also note that I do not argue that it is viable (unlike others I feel the subject too complex to dismiss or support with a smattering of words) but rather seek to establish that talking purely of those who travel between London and Birmingham misses the point somewhat.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
geoff | 12 Jan 2012 2:11 pm
Railways are over 150 years old... surely we can improve on them.... 2 rails no redundancy.... use one above and one below (tethererd; any rail may be redundant). Now the carrages can be lightweight and power connection is available built in.... But a rail system is nothing without points, so do you want to know how to do that too?
Secondly, spend the money on getting us all glassed up (fibre that is). Why go to meetings if you don't need to get physical? There are solutions to such links that will make you feel that you really are there; we just need the bandwidth!
It's all do-able now, but just needs investment.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment