PowerSwitch

If I recall there's already been a report that said a "London to Birmingham" link wouldn't tempt enough people to be financially viable - it needs to go on to Manchester and/or Leeds, at least.

A worthless Labour promise, but glad a rail link is considered sexy.

Labour to promise high-speed rail link in election manifesto

A multi-billion pound pledge to build a high-speed rail link is set to be included as a key measure in Labour's manifesto for the next election ... Work looks likely to begin on a new high-speed track between London and Birmingham in 2017, with the first trains running on the line by 2025. The Transport Secretary, Lord Adonis, is also keen to firm up a wider commitment to extend the track to Scotland, which could almost halve journey times between London and Glasgow.

The costs involved in constructing the line, which will involve a new station in Birmingham, are enormous. The Independent understands that Lord Adonis has been warned that Network Rail's £34bn calculation for a London to Scotland line was "a bit light". However, officials believe it can be afforded as costs would be spread over several years.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 25913.html

Good good, especially as I believe the Tories are also supportive.
Unfortunately, as we all know, any Manifesto pledge should carry a Health Warning as standard........

Short-haul flying is one of the issues that high-speed rail is meant to address, so I'd be looking for the proposals to include a link to Heathrow.
My gut feeling though is that the resources & timescales involved to build even a basic network could well strangle it birth.....

...a new high-speed track between London and Birmingham in 2017, with the first trains running on the line by 2025.

la la la... won't we be back on the moon by then?
[/quote]

Even reinstating the slow speed line to Louth (and many other places formally served by the rail network) would be more sensible.

(Why are folk so obsessed with getting there quickly when to travel is better than to arrive?)

clv101 wrote:

...a new high-speed track between London and Birmingham in 2017, with the first trains running on the line by 2025.

la la la... won't we be back on the moon by then?

[/quote]

Yeah quite. London's Crossrail link was going to be started a few years after I arrived in London. I left London twenty years later and they still haven't started it.

I would be very surprised if this happens in my lifetime. As Biff says, it would be great if they could do some of the less glamorous links, like the Louth one.

The link between Exeter and Plymouth is very picturesque now but a section of the line runs along the coast so close to the sea that you feel like you are sailing when you are in the train. Clearly that link won't survive a few CC-fuelled extreme weather events X years post peak when the resources needed to re-build it will be scarce. An inland route, which would also be faster has been mooted (or was it just rumour) but I doubt it will ever happen. Then there'll be no rail link to London west of Exeter.

Doubt if there will be any money for rail improvements to Louth or Plymouth or......

Meanwhile, we can still find £1billion to replace Terminal 2 at Heathrow in order to provide a better experience for passengers.........
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8373630.stm

biffvernon wrote:Even reinstating the slow speed line to Louth (and many other places formally served by the rail network) would be more sensible.

(Why are folk so obsessed with getting there quickly when to travel is better than to arrive?)

I agree that many smaller re-opening or upgrading schemes would be more sensible.

There are 2 main arguments in favour of a new high speed line to Birmingham and beyond.
The first one is that a quicker journey time would attract people on to the railway out of aircraft and cars, this may well be true as the French have demonstrated.
The other argument is that existing lines are full, and that additional tracks will be required in any case, whether adjacent to existing or via a new route.
This argument is only partialy true, the existing tracks are indeed virtually full at peak times with very little opportunity for additional services.
However the existing tracks could convey at least twice the present number of passengers by simply useing longer trains.
This would require some expensive platform lenghtening, but should be cheaper than a complete new line.
In recent years there has been a regretable trend towards shorter trains, often so short that they dont even fully utilise the existing platforms.
We dont need a train every 10 minutes between major cities, longer ones every 20 or 30 minutes would suffice.

I consider a comfortable seat with ample legroom and luggage space, and on longer trips, a proper restaurant, to be higher priorities than a faster journey.

What about demand side? We talk about conserving energy but what about not travelling? Can we not find better ways of organising a society with fewer people wanting to be somewhere else later today?

Why do these dickheads go on about the big sexy projects when what needs to be solved is the last ten miles?

It drives me to despair.

It's the last ten miles that is most heavily dependent on oil and this won't be solved by a high speed rail link.

What we need is more cycle lanes, more electric short range train lines, more tram lines, more electric buses and more electric trucks.

Adam1 wrote:The link between Exeter and Plymouth is very picturesque now but a section of the line runs along the coast so close to the sea that you feel like you are sailing when you are in the train. Clearly that link won't survive a few CC-fuelled extreme weather events X years post peak when the resources needed to re-build it will be scarce. An inland route, which would also be faster has been mooted (or was it just rumour) but I doubt it will ever happen. Then there'll be no rail link to London west of Exeter.

The route was planned, and the land acquired, by the Great Western Railway in the 1930s, cancelled due to WW2, and the land sold not that long ago . There was also the Teign Valley branch from Exeter to Heathfield on the Newton Abbot - Moretonhampstead branch that was used as a diversionary route, but was single track, slow and windy. All closed now of course.

The only other potential route is the old LSWR line from Exeter to Plymouth. Exeter to Okehampton is kind of open, and Plymouth to Tavistock is going to be reopened. Joining the two bits has been mentioned.

Not much use if you live in Totnes though!

Totnes needs no steenking railway ... it needs isolation.

It is, after all, going to be The Final Redoubt when the mutant zombie hoards sweep the land.

Vortex wrote:Totnes needs no steenking railway ... it needs isolation.

It is, after all, going to be The Final Redoubt when the mutant zombie hoards sweep the land.

Ha ha. It won't take the zombie hoardes from all over the land, just those from Paignton should do it as they flee their houses sliding into the sea.

Edut: For 'hoardes' read 'hordes'. Don't need the spillchick brigade chasing me 2.

The Paignton uber-rich had planned well - when the oceans rose they simply move to their new home.

High speed trains use as much fuel as short haul planes do but they don't put it in such a bad place.

It's about time that the International Agreement on not taxing aviation fuel was repealed and VAT slapped on the stuff. That would stop short haul flying.

High speed trains use as much fuel as short haul planes do but they don't put it in such a bad place.

It's about time that the International Agreement on not taxing aviation fuel was repealed and VAT slapped on the stuff. That would stop short haul flying.