HS2

Quoting sforshaw: Quoting Jonathan Kay: Christian Wolmar has updated his opposition and linked to "High Speed UK", a completely different approach. Jonathan Exactly. The ideas behind High Speed UK would benefit the whole nation, not a London centric commuter belt along the HS2 route. Stu. Much as I do like high speed rail for holidays (once you've trundled to St Pancras, getting from there to the south of France in just a few hours is brilliant) and just generally "getting there sooner", and believe as a nation we've long neglected our railways, I have massive misgivings about HS2. From a personal perspective in Sheffield, it offers something like a 30 minute shaving off trips to London - except, it doesn't, because getting to Meadowhell adds 5-15 minutes additional actual travel, plus by adding in another change you have to allow more time for potentially being delayed on the way. So from the house, the whole thing *might* save 5 or 10 minutes. Woo. Really? HSUK appeals much more as a concept, but it seems unlikely that anyone in power would be brave enough to say "You know what? This HS2 thing is a badly thought-out first stab, we could do much better".

Quoting AntonyH: From a personal perspective in Sheffield, it offers something like a 30 minute shaving off trips to London - except, it doesn't, because getting to Meadowhell adds 5-15 minutes additional actual travel, plus by adding in another change you have to allow more time for potentially being delayed on the way. So from the house, the whole thing *might* save 5 or 10 minutes.HS2 are claiming: Sheffield Meadowhall to London Current: n/a HS2 69 min Sheffield Midland (via Sheffield Meadowhall) Current: 129 min HS2 79 min Wikipedia says that the standard journey time is currently 129 min and after HS2 phase 2 will be 70 min. That looks like more saving than you estimate. What's your route, and is there an explanation for the different figures? Thanks Jonathan Edited by - Jonathan Kay on 18 Mar 2014 12:11:57

Oops. I was using old / inaccurate data, my bad. However, the estimate of 10 minutes additional from Midland is just not realistic when you add in the time you'll inevitably give yourself to change trains (a <5 minute change time from 'old' trains subject to all the usual delay risks, when aiming for an expensive pre-booked HS2 seat? Not likely...). My options would be: Tram to Midland (one every ten minutes): Plus time to travel to MH, plus time to allow for delay of 'old' train, plus allow sensible change time at MH including fighting your way through the throng of shoppers trying to go the other way down the 'old' platforms. Or, stay on the tram to MH (about 15 minutes), plus allow change time at MH, ditto re shoppers. More realistically, compared to getting to a train from Midland, you'd allow about 30 minutes extra, outbound at least, so more like 99 minutes. On the way back, +10 minutes is possible assuming your ticket allowed you to hop on the first train of any company that happened to be passing. East Midlands currently offer 121 minute journey times and I would imagine that by the time HS2 arrives, further enhancements will have happened. So, OK, 20-ish minutes quicker (now; possibly more like 10-15 by the time HS2 actually opens), but also potentially more hassle with more changes. And only if I want to go to London. Doesn't give any benefit if I want to go to pretty much anywhere else in the UK (I very rarely want to go to Leeds!).

As a non-Britain who does not have a horse in this race. I thought the idea of HS2 was to simply increase the capacity of the current system without disrupting said system. Thus relieving some of the rail & road grid lock as opposed to the shortening of travel time as the only goal. As i understand it. Britain hasn't built a new rail line in over one hundred years. Even though we have a good system in Germany. I don't use it as it's so bloody expensive. High speed Eurostar roundtrip to London from Kaiserslautern for a weekend trip would have cost over 1200 Euro per person. Yikes! No thanks, I'll gladly deal with Ryan air at 100 Euro PP to Stansted. If one was a city dweller that didn't have an auto payment, Insurance, Road tax, Maintenance. Then rail travel might be an OK deal. Edited by - bigdog on 18 Mar 2014 16:18:07

Why would I want to 'let the train take the strain'? If I left my home now and headed for London the following times and costs would apply; Car, 2hrs 56mins, £90 fuel, £40 parking in London, total cost for 1 person travelling £130, 2 people travelling £65 p/p Train, 2hrs 41mins, 1 person travelling cattle class £72.40, 2 people £144.80, 1 person travelling 1st class £279, 2 people £558 I'm not going to do the maths for 3 and 4 people travelling but you can soon see why I never use the train, before you say it, I would never travel to London on my own. Dave Edited by - Smithy7 on 18 Mar 2014 14:11:02

I suppose that just like in America. Most are supportive of the basic idea just so long as it's NIMBY. We have that same issue concerning wind turbines in the area of America that I own a home. (Walla Walla Wa) Edited by - bigdog on 18 Mar 2014 16:22:29