Latest Rail News

Graham Nalty   13/08/2013 at 15:46

The conference is an excellent idea. From what I have learned about high speed rail from 10 years' study, best practice in high speed rail includes: Through stations in the major city centres, rather than terminals. High speed platforms within the main city centre station, not about quarter of a mile away as proposed for Leeds and Birmingham. Stations in city centres to provide fast local distribution of the benefits of high speed, not out of town 'parkway' stations such as the three between London and Leeds. High speed trains to access city centre stations of as many cities as possible, including those off the high speed line, so that people visit those cities to do business. That is how high speed rail becomes a catalyst for economic growth outside London. Route designed to follow existing transport corridors to minimise environmental damage and opposition. My impression of the plans for HS2 is that it fails to meet any of the objectives of achieving best practice in any of these criteria. I hope the delegates to this conference will appreciate these points.

Lesf   13/08/2013 at 21:00

I would add to Graham Nalty's list of features needed for HS2 to qualify as best practice: 1. Connecting a large number of communities together rather connecting a few of them separately to London, 2. Coming into use incrementally as the demand increases rather than taking 10 years of construction before it's of any use, 3. Making a meaningful contribution to our committed 80% reduction in CO2 emissions rather than being "CO2 neutral" as per HS2, 4. Making it easier to get into cities rather than making it easier to get out of them via parkways. 5. Including sensible plans to connect to HS1 and Heathrow. It is something of a mystery why HS2 has progressed for so long along a false path. Remember, HS1 was not built to the route first put forward by the rail industry. It finished up with 85% of it beside motorway or older railway, or in tunnel. We don't seem to have learned the lesson.

Chris Belk   15/08/2013 at 14:52

To the previous comments I would also add the importance of not treating HS rail design in isolation to other transport modes. For example there is a clear need for “joined-up” air/rail connectivity planning so that the HS network has "passenger friendly" direct connectivity with the UK’s principal airports The design parameters for the resulting HS stations at the airports include - a close location to the airport terminals - easy platform to platform connectivity with the national inter-city network (including other airports not on the HS network); - airside check-in at the HS station which is quickly and easily accessed from the HS train's arrival platform, - free "passenger friendly" access to a frequent rapid transit vehicle to/from all airport terminals (with plenty of convenient, secure on-board baggage space) - flight arrivals connectivity arrangements onto the HS & inter-city network to be similarly "passenger friendly"

John Emanuel   16/08/2013 at 16:37

I hope that HS2 will not become the UK rail industry's Concorde-style fiasco. While the UK built Concorde, a vanity project, the US built the Jumbo Jets with their economic justification and future. As published the economic case for HS2 seems very weak. What other rail or major transport projects could we build for these £tens of billions?

Lesf   16/08/2013 at 19:54

John Emanuel is right to be concerned that HS2 could be a commercial failure similar to Concorde. But if the need for more capacity arises, we will have to provide for it somehow. The weakness of HS2 is that it is such a poor solution to a genuine problem while better solutions were overlooked in the rush to get a plan into the public domain before the last general election. There is a rich prize for the first leader of a major party to have the courage to say, "Hold on, there must be a better way".