Shrop
On Moderation
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 649
Now that the Eastern Arm of HS2 is no longer going ahead, what are people’s thoughts about HSUK?
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
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
Last edited by a moderator: