|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 4, 2022 11:44:35 GMT
So the Tory Government is to u-turn again and cancel the Northern Powerhouse trans-pennine link so crucial to "levelling-up".
This reverses the recent Tory Government u-turn to build it after all.
That decision reversed the Tory Government u-turn not to build it
That U turn of course reversed the commitment to build it.
All in the last three years.
Absolutely fecking shambles.
Perhaps in the end they will decide whether or not to build it by flicking a coin??
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 4, 2022 12:25:30 GMT
As I understand the decision being taken is to scrap the construction of a complete new high-speed line through the Pennines linking Liverpool and Hull. The government is proposing instead to revert to the original plan to upgrade the existing line between Manchester and Huddersfield including, crucially, its electrification.
To me it makes more sense to invest in electrification of Britain's existing main-line network than to pour billions into 'marquee' projects like the 'Northern Powerhouse' line.
In terms of percentage of track mileage that has been electrified Britain stands almost at the bottom of the European league, along with Greece and Macedonia. This has long been a national scandal.
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Nov 6, 2022 21:54:53 GMT
As I understand the decision being taken is to scrap the construction of a complete new high-speed line through the Pennines linking Liverpool and Hull. The government is proposing instead to revert to the original plan to upgrade the existing line between Manchester and Huddersfield including, crucially, its electrification. To me it makes more sense to invest in electrification of Britain's existing main-line network than to pour billions into 'marquee' projects like the 'Northern Powerhouse' line. In terms of percentage of track mileage that has been electrified Britain stands almost at the bottom of the European league, along with Greece and Macedonia. This has long been a national scandal. The UK has the world's oldest railway, which has to led to a massive legacy problem of a very narrow loading gauge. ie all our tunnels and bridges are too narrow, and the tracks are too close together. This is why upgrading costs an absolute fortune. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 6, 2022 22:00:10 GMT
As I understand the decision being taken is to scrap the construction of a complete new high-speed line through the Pennines linking Liverpool and Hull. The government is proposing instead to revert to the original plan to upgrade the existing line between Manchester and Huddersfield including, crucially, its electrification. To me it makes more sense to invest in electrification of Britain's existing main-line network than to pour billions into 'marquee' projects like the 'Northern Powerhouse' line. In terms of percentage of track mileage that has been electrified Britain stands almost at the bottom of the European league, along with Greece and Macedonia. This has long been a national scandal. The UK has the world's oldest railway, which has to led to a massive legacy problem of a very narrow loading gauge. ie all our tunnels and bridges are too narrow, and the tracks are too close together. This is why upgrading costs an absolute fortune. I can remember when the Flying Scotsman was sent over to the USA, amtrac etc had to put a third rail inbetween their lines to narrow the gauge for it to run. I think the Germans ran into the same problem in WW2 when the invaded Russia. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 6, 2022 22:11:06 GMT
To me it makes more sense to invest in electrification of Britain's existing main-line network than to pour billions into 'marquee' projects like the 'Northern Powerhouse' line. And HS2. Scrapping HS2 would free up £130 Billion to reduce the need for tax increases and invest on the network. ...or we can save 20 minutes on the London to Birmingham route. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Nov 6, 2022 22:13:59 GMT
The UK has the world's oldest railway, which has to led to a massive legacy problem of a very narrow loading gauge. ie all our tunnels and bridges are too narrow, and the tracks are too close together. This is why upgrading costs an absolute fortune. I can remember when the Flying Scotsman was sent over to the USA, amtrac etc had to put a third rail inbetween their lines to narrow the gauge for it to run. I think the Germans ran into the same problem in WW2 when the invaded Russia. Yeah, there are different rail gauges, but I am talking about the loading gauge, which is the width / height of the rolling stock. Our loading gauge is very small, so there is very little clearance, which means we cannot import trains, have double-deck carriages, or electrify without costly adjustments to bridges, tunnels etc. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 6, 2022 22:43:54 GMT
I can remember when the Flying Scotsman was sent over to the USA, amtrac etc had to put a third rail inbetween their lines to narrow the gauge for it to run. I think the Germans ran into the same problem in WW2 when the invaded Russia. Yeah, there are different rail gauges, but I am talking about the loading gauge, which is the width / height of the rolling stock. Our loading gauge is very small, so there is very little clearance, which means we cannot import trains, have double-deck carriages, or electrify without costly adjustments to bridges, tunnels etc. Sorry Dave I misunderstood. Wasn't there an issue some while back where they had to remove a certain amount from station platforms as the later rolling stock was too wide and would have collided with the platform edge. I think they had to remove a certain amount using angle grinders.
Edit.. I just looked it up it was the French who screwed up...
France pays $20 billion for trains that don't fit its stations
|
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Nov 7, 2022 9:29:39 GMT
Yeah, there are different rail gauges, but I am talking about the loading gauge, which is the width / height of the rolling stock. Our loading gauge is very small, so there is very little clearance, which means we cannot import trains, have double-deck carriages, or electrify without costly adjustments to bridges, tunnels etc. Sorry Dave I misunderstood. Wasn't there an issue some while back where they had to remove a certain amount from station platforms as the later rolling stock was too wide and would have collided with the platform edge. I think they had to remove a certain amount using angle grinders.
Edit.. I just looked it up it was the French who screwed up...
France pays $20 billion for trains that don't fit its stations
That reminds me of a story from the BBC where they needed to move a grand piano between studios. Not being sure whether it would go through the doors they created a full size model from polystyrene which was too big to get out of the workshop.  |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Nov 7, 2022 12:12:16 GMT
Sorry Dave I misunderstood. Wasn't there an issue some while back where they had to remove a certain amount from station platforms as the later rolling stock was too wide and would have collided with the platform edge. I think they had to remove a certain amount using angle grinders.
Edit.. I just looked it up it was the French who screwed up...
France pays $20 billion for trains that don't fit its stations
That reminds me of a story from the BBC where they needed to move a grand piano between studios. Not being sure whether it would go through the doors they created a full size model from polystyrene which was too big to get out of the workshop. I think we had a similar problem here before BR was privatised where a number of trains and rolling stock rotted away in fields in Livepool where our usual inept civil sevants oredered the worong size to fit into the London tubes. |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Nov 13, 2022 20:24:05 GMT
That reminds me of a story from the BBC where they needed to move a grand piano between studios. Not being sure whether it would go through the doors they created a full size model from polystyrene which was too big to get out of the workshop. I think we had a similar problem here before BR was privatised where a number of trains and rolling stock rotted away in fields in Livepool where our usual inept civil sevants oredered the worong size to fit into the London tubes. There's tonnes of examples of stuff like that even recently This bus station you'll notes even in the pictures the busses are all out back - This is because the roof was made too low so they don't actually fit under the canopy at the front North Greenwich Bus Station
Despite that the station won a design award. |
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Nov 13, 2022 20:32:55 GMT
I went to Manchester earlier this year think the only trains was Aventi and my train was cancelled waited an hour and got on the next train and had to stand for 2 hours. There was no other carrier, no choice.
Even worse was they were asking for travellers not to get on the next train unless they had seat reservations.
I personally don't use the rail much yet think that was very poor, no competition and poor service from the sole provider.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 13, 2022 21:19:15 GMT
To me it makes more sense to invest in electrification of Britain's existing main-line network than to pour billions into 'marquee' projects like the 'Northern Powerhouse' line. And HS2. Scrapping HS2 would free up £130 Billion to reduce the need for tax increases and invest on the network. ...or we can save 20 minutes on the London to Birmingham route. Reading it like that it sounds too stupid to be true. But the most stupid thing is, it is true. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 13, 2022 21:42:19 GMT
It might well be the case that high-speed rail, by which is normally meant speeds of 300 km/h or more, make sense in large and sparsely populated countries like France or Spain, where land prices are cheap and few people will be discomfited by a high-speed line passing through their area.
But for densely-settled countries like England surely the model to adopt is the Swiss one, where the national rail network is 100% electrified and high-speed lines are limited to 200 km/h (as in England) while the widespread use of double-decker trains means that the capacity of existing lines is optimised.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 13, 2022 22:05:41 GMT
You are of course correct Dan, in England high speed rail makes no commercial or economic sense. But that was always irrelevant. A high speed rail link between major UK cities and Europe was an EU plan as dictated in various treaties and directives. Other than to nod in subservient agreement the British government had little indeed nothing to do with it. UK high speed rail was planned from Brussels.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 13, 2022 22:21:10 GMT
Could you provide some evidence to support your theory Red.
It seems a little unlikely not least because HS2 doesn’t connect to. Europe.
|
|
