High Speed UK (HSUK) advocacy group proposals for HS2 alternative scheme

[Shrop]

Now that the Eastern Arm of HS2 is no longer going ahead, what are people’s thoughts about HSUK?

The HSUK strategy is to:

• Build new trunk high speed lines where they’re needed.
• Upgrade existing main lines where necessary and link these to the new high speed lines.
• Restore abandoned lines to fill in gaps in the network.
• Develop improved hub stations in all major cities.
• Achieve all of this at minimised cost, CO2 emissions and environmental impact.
• Ensure all these lines and stations work together as a single integrated national network.
• Make sure HSUK works for every UK region and nation.

Some pointers …

In many ways HSUK made a lot more sense than HS2 ever did, but it was widely misunderstood. While HS2 had huge resources thrown at it, HSUK was developed by a very small team, and sadly it had some aspects that doom-mongers preferred to find fault with. But had HSUK been developed with the resources that HS2 had, then perhaps things might have been very different, not least that it could, perhaps, have been made into something very realistic.

Some say it had its chance to compete and it lost, but the comparison might be a bit like asking a couple of mechanics sitting at home to design a new type of car, and to compete against a team with the resources of BMW or Tesla. The easy oversight to make is that the two mechanics might actually be highly skilful, with a great deal to offer, IF they had been taken more seriously (no disrespect intended to anyone or any company in this example!)

It would be interesting to note people’s thoughts about HSUK now that HS2 has become a vastly expensive scheme which will achieve little more than making relatively small journey time improvements, between a very small number of town/city pairs, which already see some of the fastest journeys in the country. In other words the initial scorn that some poured on HS2 but which was defended by many, is increasingly becoming painfully close to reality.

So out of interest, even if somewhat academic now that the Chiltern route is well underway, was HSUK really viewed with fairness and given the credibility it perhaps should have had? See highspeeduk.co.uk

 

[HST43257]

I think that HS2 and NPR would have been the overall the best route solutions, if they’d both built in full (let’s hope such a thing happens in the future).

However, HSUK’s York to Glasgow idea is something I can completely agree with. A combination of that and NPR/HS2 East means journey times for all of London, Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool to Edinburgh and Glasgow see improvements of between 20 and 75 minutes on HS2 plans. Obviously cost is a major issue but in time I think that’s the best way to benefit the most people, including those in places like
Leeds, York and Newcastle - all notable losers in High Speed in the IRP.



I don’t think the southern part of HSUK was realistic or feasible, with less benefits for WCML locations. The Eastern Leg of HS2 makes HS2 Phase 1 so far from the ECML ok for those in Yorkshire and the North East in my view.


Note: I am a York resident, with likely biased views. I do try and look for better overall soltuoj

 

[yorkie]

The organisation appears to be based in Poppleton, only a couple of miles from me, but I am also not convinced that their claims are realistic.

 

[NoRoute]

There's a question about how you even approach projects like HS2, I'm not sure you can approach them with conventional economic or engineering logic or reason because they are basically political projects, they are not governed by it, they become tied up in national politics, in the plans of Government departments and their programmes and once set in motion largely continue on their course.

Any discussion about alternatives to HS2 is now largely pointless because the ship has sailed, and the UK will be locked into building it and paying for it now and for decades to come, though doubtless there were better value and more effective alternatives possible.

 

[Shrop]

The organisation appears to be based in Poppleton, only a couple of miles from me, but I am also not convinced that their claims are realistic.

That's precisely my point as made above. Their claims were easy to question, but as I understand it they were largely early stage proposals intended for development, and in that they had a lot of potential.

 

[The Planner]

Done before on here, huge amounts of it are laughable.

 

[MattRat]

Well, since the Government is set on not delivering HS2 in full, I guess the next best option is this.

 

[tbtc]

I don't know how genuine they were in terms of wanting to solve the problems, or whether they were just an astroturf organisation with a mischievous attempt to bog us down in arguments over some of their optimistic/"brave" suggestions, so that the momentum for HS2 would be punctured by quibbling over some of their headline grabbing ideas that promised we could deliver tens of thousands of seats per hour with a budget more similar to the kind of things that the A-Team could rustle up in a shed

By the time I was on board with HS2 (I was initially sceptical), I felt like it was the only realistic option (i.e. "HS2 or nothing") and that all of the alternatives that people kept trying to bring up were distractions (the kind of "but we could provide several London - Manchester services per hour with a sixty minute journey time if only we re-opened the GCR and ran via Woodhead" stuff) - there was no point in worrying too much about these kind of alternatives because they weren't ever going to be an alternative to HS2

 

[swt_passenger]

Well, since the Government is set on not delivering HS2 in full, I guess the next best option is this.

HSUK have no funding. It’s fantasy that can be ignored.

 

[Shrop]

Done before on here, huge amounts of it are laughable.

As were aeroplanes once, and mobile phones, and computers, as seen by the scornful

 

[NoRoute]

As were aeroplanes once, and mobile phones, and computers, as seen by the scornful

But those are largely produced and provided by the private sector, sold to consumers and businesses for a profit without government support, so new products emerge to compete with the existing ones, competition selects the winners.

Building a new railway is largely a political project because it is funded by public money, so it depends on political and government support and it isn't open to the same competitive commercial forces.

 

[Shrop]

I don't know how genuine they were in terms of wanting to solve the problems, or whether they were just an astroturf organisation with a mischievous attempt to bog us down in arguments over some of their optimistic/"brave" suggestions, so that the momentum for HS2 would be punctured by quibbling over some of their headline grabbing ideas that promised we could deliver tens of thousands of seats per hour with a budget more similar to the kind of things that the A-Team could rustle up in a shed

By the time I was on board with HS2 (I was initially sceptical), I felt like it was the only realistic option (i.e. "HS2 or nothing") and that all of the alternatives that people kept trying to bring up were distractions (the kind of "but we could provide several London - Manchester services per hour with a sixty minute journey time if only we re-opened the GCR and ran via Woodhead" stuff) - there was no point in worrying too much about these kind of alternatives because they weren't ever going to be an alternative to HS2

This sounds unnecessarily cynical, and defensive of HS2 which itself has little credibility left. My intention was to ask whether there might have been more merit in the potential for HSUK than might have been recognised at first, if the primary focus hadn't been to rubbish it ...

Building a new railway is largely a political project because it is funded by public money, so it depends on political and government support and it isn't open to the same competitive commercial forces.

In some ways, more's the pity!

 

[MattRat]

HSUK have no funding. It’s fantasy that can be ignored.

It's something to support that isn't HS2 Eastern Leg. Another avenue that the government might listen to. They might not, but it's worth a shot.

 

[tbtc]

As were aeroplanes once, and mobile phones, and computers, as seen by the scornful

....and a long long list of things that were rightly scorned

Being laughed at doesn't mean that something should have been taken seriously

This sounds unnecessarily cynical, and defensive of HS2 which itself has little credibility left. My intention was to ask whether there might have been more merit in the potential for HSUK than might have been recognised at first, if the primary focus hadn't been to rubbish it ...

...as above, I didn't feel that it was worth particularly assessing something that never stood a chance of being built - there were a lot of people coming up with alternative uses for the money and some pretty heroic assumptions (I remember being told that we could accommodate lots of fast and slow trains on the same two track line if only we had "smart signalling")

I never thought that HS2 was perfect but it was the only option on the table, so it became a case of either HS2 or nothing - and the various proposals to somehow fit lots of new trains on existing lines with just a handful of tweaks (and a strange obsession with re-opening nineteenth century alignments that were closed many years ago - e.g. London to Liverpool via Woodhead!)

 

[SynthD]

They don't include a Brighton Main Line 2 going through Canary Wharf! With due respect, I feel like HSUK would love and have included that.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

The organisation appears to be based in Poppleton, only a couple of miles from me, but I am also not convinced that their claims are realistic.

Gareth Dennis will explain that the problem is the plans are not possible from an operational perspective

 

[Shrop]

Gareth Dennis will explain that the problem is the plans are not possible from an operational perspective

I don't think the plans were supposed to be fully operational, just possibilities for development, and 8n that respect they had a lot going for them, most notably on route options. But yes, it all needed development, and offered a lot more than HS2, not in its headlines, but in the actual route possibilities

 

[SynthD]

In what way? It looks like HS2 but ignoring Birmingham, choosing to relieve the east rather than west coast main line. What am I missing.

 

[MattRat]

In what way? It looks like HS2 but ignoring Birmingham, choosing to relieve the east rather than west coast main line. What am I missing.

Well doesn't that make it a 'decent' alternative to the Eastern leg?

 

[30907]

Well doesn't that make it a 'decent' alternative to the Eastern leg?

Only if you build it through to London, which is 100+ miles further.
Given that HS2 is already building, if you wanted a second HS route from London you might not choose the M1 corridor as they have.

 

[MattRat]

Only if you build it through to London, which is 100+ miles further.
Given that HS2 is already building, if you wanted a second HS route from London you might not choose the M1 corridor as they have.

I meant if they built it North of EMP and also connected into it, when then ties HS2 and HSUK together.

 

[D365]

Once HS2 eventually gets dedicated tracks between EMP and LDS (with spurs to Clay Cross and York), how much will be missing from the previous Phase 2b plans?

 

[snowball]

Once HS2 eventually gets dedicated tracks between EMP and LDS (with spurs to Clay Cross and York), how much will be missing from the previous Phase 2b plans?

If it does, and if the Golborne link or some variant goes ahead on the west side of the country, then there would be no missing part.

 

[D365]

If it does, and if the Golborne link or some variant goes ahead on the west side of the country, then there would be no missing part.

So nothing is preventing a filler job at a future date then.