Should we build more high speed lines in the UK??

[Goingnorth]

Most of the problems on today's railways are caused by:

1) Lack of capacity
2) Worn out infrastructure
3) Mixed traffic network
4) Lack of diversionary routes

So by building new high speed lines, you could leave the old network free for commuter traffic and freight. This in turn would help to keep trains right time and move some of the freight off the roads and produce less congestion there.

Finance:

Mostly private money. The government would need to assist by a speedy planning process. The rest of the money should come from congestion charging. Schemes such paying extra to use the outside lane, town centre congestion. All the money should be put into extra lanes on motorways and new HSLs. That way the general public wouldn't mind paying so much.


Actually that was a typical Tory response. What's always been needed is long term planning. It's the very fact they botched up planning and privatisation that we are in a mess.

[Goingnorth]

Some well thought-out views here.

The rail industry doesn't have enough money to upgrade the current network (electrification plans for routes binned, upgrades to current ECML electricfication binned for example), so where is the money coming from to build a HSL?

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Conseratives were in power when privatisation started. Well, they can't make much more of a mess of the current rail network than they did back then.

Personally I, like the general train travelling public, am more concerned with how long I have to wait for a late-running service, and what the excuse of the day is than what new lines we may have in the future. Connect London and Edinburgh if you want, but this is a waste of money, which we don't have, seeing as we have the ECML already. I've not travelled along the ECML, so I cannot comment on its current state accurately. An upgrade would be most helpful.

Perhaps the more important issue to be concerned with in the rail industry right now is the replacement of the 43s. What will we replace them with? More importantly, when are plans going to be finalised?

All views written without reading the BBC's report, which is most likely to be filled with inaccuracies.

Do you know why upgrades cos such a huge amount of money?

1. Your upgrading a live railway with all the H&S implications.
2. Your having to pay the TOCs large amounts of money
3. You cause your customers a lot of grief, and lose them the future and have to pay out compensation.

For example, because of the WCML upgrade, the railways have lost a lot of traffic to the airlines. Meanwhile on the ECML, there are only 2 flights per day from Leeds because the service provided by the ECML is so good and faster city centre to city centre.

[FGWDriver929]

should never have been privatised and improvement should be across the board.

But the current problems within the industry date way, way back before privatisation. Decades of under funding in the BR days have left us in the situation we are in now. I'm not saying privatisation is perfect, far from it, but a simple renationalisation is no the solution.

Remember, more money is being spent on the railways nowdays than ever under BR.

[jjules]

Some well thought-out views here.

The rail industry doesn't have enough money to upgrade the current network (electrification plans for routes binned, upgrades to current ECML electricfication binned for example), so where is the money coming from to build a HSL?

Correct me if I am wrong, but the Conseratives were in power when privatisation started. Well, they can't make much more of a mess of the current rail network than they did back then.

Personally I, like the general train travelling public, am more concerned with how long I have to wait for a late-running service, and what the excuse of the day is than what new lines we may have in the future. Connect London and Edinburgh if you want, but this is a waste of money, which we don't have, seeing as we have the ECML already. I've not travelled along the ECML, so I cannot comment on its current state accurately. An upgrade would be most helpful.

Perhaps the more important issue to be concerned with in the rail industry right now is the replacement of the 43s. What will we replace them with? More importantly, when are plans going to be finalised?

All views written without reading the BBC's report, which is most likely to be filled with inaccuracies.

Do you know why upgrades cos such a huge amount of money?

1. Your upgrading a live railway with all the H&S implications.
2. Your having to pay the TOCs large amounts of money
3. You cause your customers a lot of grief, and lose them the future and have to pay out compensation.

For example, because of the WCML upgrade, the railways have lost a lot of traffic to the airlines. Meanwhile on the ECML, there are only 2 flights per day from Leeds because the service provided by the ECML is so good and faster city centre to city centre.

An interesting thought there. To be fair on the WCML upgrades, at least when it is done it SHOULD provide for a far better line. Fingers crossed anyway.

The rail industry will never lose me to air travel, that is for sure. Nor will it lose a lot of commuters, especially in London. The hassle that checking in takes can take a lot out of you, especially if you need to take a fair bit of stuff with you. At least you can chuck the suitcase into a luggage compartment on a 43 and relax for a few hours on IC journeys, not having to waste a lot of time waiting for it to come off a plane like you would by air.

[Goingnorth]

Delays on UK inter-city network

70% of trains arrive on time

Delays on HSLs:

Average:

France: 90% of trains on time

Spain: 98.7% of trains on time

Japan: Average delay 10 seconds

[FGWDriver929]

I should also add, before we all start slagging off the British Rail network and train performance, we would all do well to look abroad and compare what we have.

Ok German, French, Spanish, Japanese, Italian etc High speed lines all perform better than our main lines. Granted.

But.

If you venture off the main high speed lines in these countries (Certainly the Europeans - Not so sure about Japan) you will find railways that are far more neglected than ours, Trains that perform worse than ours, staff that are less helpfull than ours. Generally very, very shabby indeed.

it seems that as with everything in this country, we are just not satisfied with what we've got. i'm not saying our railways are brilliant - they aren't. Yes, our commuter routes are overcrowded, and our high speed main lines are frequently slowed down by infastructure problems due to their age, but the majority of people seem to think that just because some other countries have faster trains than ours on some parts of their network, their railway is infinately better than ours. It isn't

[petermakosch]

well, i dont care, the MML HST's get me from here to London, and CT form here to Brum, I can tell if the train is going to be late or not because of the big long line you see, takes a train 3 mins to get from the distance to stopped in the station.

[Vikingbrit]

i get what u mean driver i think our trains are ok but i did say yes on that poll but if we did have more high speed routes it might be good and bad, good youll get there quicker, bad more chances for the little basket cases to drop bricks over the train bridges which would probly end in a major rail accident cos there so screwed up i think thats what there aiming for when they do acts like that, the authorities would have to do more to stop that

[LucaZone]

No we shouldn't.Instead of wasting billions of pounds connecting a few "selected" destinations,the whole network should be upgraded and revitalised.The railway is a community asset and should never have been privatised and improvement should be across the board.

Thats all well and good, but once the network is upgraded and back to running at its prime, u dont mind the hours it takes to get anywhere? and the slow speeds and too many stations u have to stop at?

What ever the state of the national rail network is in, i want to see dedicated HSL's being built. They would reduce the number of trains on the existing network, or reduce the number of long distance ones at least. This would ease capacity for the growing commuter numbers. It would also mean people could get on lond distance trains and maybe find a seat because the commuter who wants to travel in the comfort of a long haul train wont be there.

[alex2008]

Okay so were all pretty much in agreement that we cannot afford HSLs with the current funding so here’s how we get round it.

Set up the HSL as a state owned network that is completely separate from the rest of the rail network, keep the trains and track as separate as possible. Although this will cause big problems in major cities but otherwise it could be marketed as something completely different to the railways we have today.

I can think of a few right wing ways to obtain the funding too, without starting a war. Also someone said we will follow America (which sadly we are doing) but even they have their HSL between Boston, NY & Washington.

[LucaZone]

How do u think the CTRL and its operation was started out?

[slipdigby]

Also someone said we will follow America (which sadly we are doing) but even they have their HSL between Boston, NY & Washington.

To be fair, the NE corridor is more of an upgraded mainline than a dedicated HSL built along the lines of an LGV or Neubahnstrecke.

Slip

[alex2008]

How do u think the CTRL and its operation was started out?

Prove that my plan that appears to no-longer be my plan would of worked.

Oh, well the Americans bodged the NE corridor togeather, we should not follow in their steps, still they got on with it and did it.

[yorkie2k]

Personally I, like the general train travelling public, am more concerned with how long I have to wait for a late-running service, and what the excuse of the day is than what new lines we may have in the future. Connect London and Edinburgh if you want, but this is a waste of money, which we don't have, seeing as we have the ECML already. I've not travelled along the ECML, so I cannot comment on its current state accurately. An upgrade would be most helpful.

If you do some research you'll discover that it's cheaper to build a new high speed line than do an upgrade on the scale of the WCML.
Yes the ECML should be upgraded but in order for higher speeds to take place the whole signalling would have to be taken out and completely re-signalled so we'd have many weekends of disruption. And, as the WCML upgrade has proved, it still wouldn't be as good as a new high speed line.

London to Edinburgh high speed line would NOT be a waste of money! How the hell can you say that?! The ECML is FULL to capacity and people are ALREADY being priced off trains. Few cheap tickets are available. We've recently abandoned the idea of going to Boston on the train due to the ridiculously high cost of tickets.

If a high speed line was created it would take many new customers (off the roads and the airlines) and also ease the overcrowding on the ECML.

I'm not going to argue further with you, jjules, just do some research.

[Goingnorth]

Okay so were all pretty much in agreement that we cannot afford HSLs with the current funding so here’s how we get round it.

Set up the HSL as a state owned network that is completely separate from the rest of the rail network, keep the trains and track as separate as possible. Although this will cause big problems in major cities but otherwise it could be marketed as something completely different to the railways we have today.

I can think of a few right wing ways to obtain the funding too, without starting a war. Also someone said we will follow America (which sadly we are doing) but even they have their HSL between Boston, NY & Washington.

There's no way the government are going to take on very much, if any, of the cost of building such things. I mean we have wars to fight, immigrants to feed, inquiries to be had, and new decor in MPs offices, not to mention all those administrators in the NHS!