Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35356730)

As a country that practically invented the railways we would do well to go with the times rather than rely on antiquated and underfunded infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35356723)

Sorry, I didn't explain myself very well.

I would expect the train driver/bus driver to know the tactical impact of issues (slow trains, hold-ups and delays), but not the strategic reasons for them (major infrastructure refreshes required, the difference in costs between upgrading/making do/completely rebuilding), or the political, economic, and social impact of any of those options, and the prioritisation of those.

It can often cost more to try and upgrade existing lines, with the impact on services whilst those upgrades are happening, than to build new. For instance, we just had to decide between refreshing/upgrading a 12 year old datacentre, or outsource, or build new (we actually built new, and it was cheaper than refreshing, without the risk of the centre upgrade negatively affecting existing systems and services - now we have implemented this, we can refresh the old one for Disaster Recovery).

I see the HS2 as the equivalent of the Motorway system - most people said we didn't need it, but where would we be without it now?

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35356759)

I would question how a couple of high speed lines built at enormous expense would achieve that over a more widespread modernisation and upgrade programme.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35356763)

To be honest, I haven't looked into the details of this. I just think it's a pretty sad state of affairs that the UK has pretty much the most expensive railways in the world, and just one puny high speed rails link when the French, Spanish and Germans have no problems building a high speed rail network. You'd think we could take a bit more pride in our rail network, instead of underinvesting for years and then having to pay megabucks for cobbled together maintenance and 'upgrades'.

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35356827)

Duncan Barkes now debating this on LBC radio with the tag line 32 billion to save 23 minutes on a journey,which he reakons will be nearer 40 billion with the usual over runs.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35356833)

Which is, of course, entirely to miss the point.

Birmingham - London is the foundation of a wider national high-speed rail system. The Preston Bypass achieved little by itself but these days it's right in the middle of the M6. It proved the concept, it set the standards and is today a vital part of our national transport infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35356833)

Which is, of course, entirely to miss the point.

Birmingham - London is the foundation of a wider national high-speed rail system. The Preston Bypass achieved little by itself but these days it's right in the middle of the M6. It proved the concept, it set the standards and is today a vital part of our national transport infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35356860)

It's not either/or....

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35356865)

actually your probably right ,if the new link doesn't get the go ahead the money will be diverted and not into the existing network

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35356836)

Well the debate on the radio is expanding for those that care to listen.

In times of austerity when we are told there is no money where is 32-40 billion coming from surely there must be better things.

Also the butchering of the chiltern countryside.

It will cost many billions for HS2 to be part of any national infrastructure .

Like the present railway system it may never pay for itself due to cost and the taxpayer may for ever more be liable for huge subsidies is a major fear also on this one and the expense of a ticket may mean few will use it..

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35356844)

I think it is the point .Should we use all the money and have one link between London and Birmingham taking 15-20yrs to complete leaving the rest of the network to run into disrepair or do we spread the money over the existing network achieving similar if not better results .I see no point in having a super dooper high speed link between 2 cities if the rest of the network is rubbish