Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

HS3 - the high speed madness gets worse

Reports are that Chancellor George Osborne is pushing a proposal for a high speed line, "HS3", between Manchester and Leeds. This is conclusive proof that the man is clueless. This is a typical politician's response.

There is no advantage in running faster than 100 mph between destinations less than 50 miles apart. There are no further useful time savings to be made. Frequent trains and good local connections are needed. That means a programme of platform-lengthening, junction improvements, and possibly, new routes, but high speed does not come into this. Loading-gauge enhancements to take double-deck trains would be nice to have but the trouble is that the routes on which they could operate would be badly restricted.

Equally important in this context is the need to improve local connections through the development of bus and light rail services, as well as park-and-ride facilities.

Kommentarer

Anonymous sa…
The high-speed rail link between Manchester and Leeds will never be high a true speed, aka 220mph. You need new high-speed track for that and the line needs to be as straight as possible, which cannot be the case crossing the Pennines with major money being spent having the line in tunnel most of the way. The best they can get is 130-140mph even with boring the odd tunnel here and there to straighten up the curved line running up and down through the Pennine hills. That means they will use existing track most of the way and existing rail stock - probably tilting Pendolino trains. The currently twisting line puts 100mph trains averaging 50mph.

The current Manchester to Leeds line is underpowered diesel trains. Electrifying the existing line would increase the journey time from 50 minutes to 30 minutes alone, new tunnels removing bottlenecks will improve it a little further, tilting trains further again.

The existing near dead-straight and level Liverpool to Manchester line is being electrified right now being operational at the end of the year. Electrify the existing Liverpool to Leeds line, Manchester is between, and this is just the normal under planning trans-Pennine route. A "hub" at Manchester is being created to enable Liverpool trains to run right through at near full line speed. A few of Osborn's tunnels would help.

This Osborne announcement is not high-speed rail at all, it cannot be using existing track, and is clearly a political ploy to gain points in an election year from the north of England. It is clearly electioneering.

I hope no HS2 track gets above the proposed Crewe hub and the fast trans-Pennine line is completed ASAP. This is the best outcome for the north of England as it will be linked up easily and fast. It will help Liverpool, the big loser in high-speed rail, as it stands. The Liverpool and Manchester time to London would be the same, instead of Manchester being 40 minutes faster. Even KPMG predicted Liverpool economically would lose out. To economically curtail a region is totally wrong.
24 juni 2014 kl. 12:54
Skicka en kommentar

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

The dreadfulness of British governance

I wrote to my MP on two entirely separate issues recently. The first was to do with the replacement for the Inter City 125 train, which at £2.6 million per vehicle, is twice as expensive as it ought to be. The second concerned the benefits of a switch from business rate and Council Tax to a tax based on site values. In both cases, the replies were full of spurious, unsubstantiated assertions and completely flawed arguments. This is typical. You will not get an iota of sense from the government on any area of public policy at all - finance, economics, trade and employment, agriculture, housing, health, transport, energy. All junk. If you write to your MP you will invariably receive answers that are an insult to your intelligence, no matter what subject you are writing about. Of course they cannot understand statistics. They are innumerate. Whitehall is staffed with idiots with a high IQ. Look at their IT projects. And mind your purse, they will have that too.
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer