Comments on: U.K.'s High Speed Two Fleshed Out

By: Hotels in Ebbsfleet

Hotels in Ebbsfleet — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 15:57:06 +0000

I think there are better rail plan’s that could be made in term’s of the route. I agree that past Manchester no one would really benefit, and I think that once you combine the money and energy used for people to travel the final leg on a normal train they may as well use two line’s going north instead of one ‘S’ shaped one.

Nikki

By: NickB

NickB — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 10:29:00 +0000

Unfortunately these plans have now been updated and significantly scaled back, at least for the parts of the plan that might be delivered in the next 20 years. H1 will get the line to the midlands and won’t start until 2017. H2 will extend it to Manchester / Liverpool and York, creating a Y shaped line, and will not be delivered until 2026. When it will be extended beyond this has yet to be announced.

By: Yonah Freemark

Yonah Freemark — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 09:54:47 +0000

This article says that the journey times would be:
- 1h22 to Manchester from London
- 2h42 to Glasgow from London
Project cost would total 39 billion pounds.

By: Martin

Martin — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:41:40 +0000

There is plenty of demand for rail to these cities already. Manchester already has three trains an hour to London, Birmingham is already at 4 an hour. Leeds has at least two an hour. The problem is that the line might be swamped as soon as it opens. That’s why they are looking at leaving provision for four tracks at the southern end of the line.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 03:31:37 +0000

Paris-Lyon serves Paris. So do Paris-Marseille, Paris-Lille, Paris-Tours, etc. Once the lines are present it’s sometimes useful to spend a little more money improving the connections of the satellite cities to each other, as with the Interconnexion Est. But you don’t build a whole line for these markets until you know there’s demand.

By: Christopher Parker

Christopher Parker — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:19:30 +0000

What?! What about Paris – Lyon, the original TGV and a smaller market than anything mentioned above. These are not insignificant markets here or small cities.

If the line is already there, are you going to not stop any trains? It may be that there isn’t the density to support hourly non-stops between each point, but add up all the cities and it’s enough of a market to fill two tracks.

The point is it’s easier to get density by serving multiple stations than by a few massive point to point markets. The TGV going south of Paris has trains leaving every 5 minutes, and serves scores and scores of markets, but only Paris – Lyon has the density to run hourly.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:10:31 +0000

British cities with the exception of London aren’t large enough to support HSR travel to one another. Scotland to Leeds, or Manchester, or Birmingham, will be a very small market.

By: Christopher Parker

Christopher Parker — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:37:00 +0000

3:30 from London to Scotland will compete with air, however don’t forget all the people going from Scotland to Leeds, Scotland to Manchester, Scotland to Liverpool, Scotland to Birmingham, etc. That probably adds up to more just Scotland to London.

By: Ray

Ray — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:57:56 +0000

You’ve left out an important “peer”. With 1,064 km of High Speed Lines I’d count Italy among the leading countries with HSR…

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 02:26:49 +0000

That might make completing the line to Glasgow worthwhile, with emphasis on might. It’s hard to say exactly, because Britain uses an exceptionally strict definition for urban areas (though its metro area definition is more standard). For example, figures for the number of people in Greater Glasgow range from 1.1 million to 2.3. In terms of ridership and revenue per pound spent on construction, it’s probably more cost-effective to terminate in Liverpool and build another line to Bristol and Cardiff.