HS3 has been proposed

[Denny Crane!]

So a while back we were discussing HS2. It was supposed to link the North and South together.



Now I think you will agree that some people have a loose version of what the "north" is. Some people would say that is about halfway up the map. There is this part of the country, rumour has it, called the North East. Someone even told me that the North West does not actually stop at Manchester too though I laughed in his face.

HS3 has now been proposed to link the North up. And this is what it is going to look like:



Again with what can be called a very loose meaning of the word North. It certainly is North of London! But it is also troubling and makes you wonder why there is no effort to link up a relatively small island. If Japan can do it through mountains, China can do it over vast distances you would think that the UK could link up a small number of Cities from Calais to Edinburgh to Glasgow. The North East particularly Tyneside though is seemingly invisible. I personally blame this at least partially on the tyranny of safe seats - it is and always has and will be a Labour safe zone.

Now I can only imagine that the politicians were planning this up and at least someone would have popped up and said,



"excuse me sir are we sure that we are considering all of England, is there not some other cities like Newcastle or Carlisle to consider? I mean creating links up there would be a great step in tying all of the cities in the country together, if we really want to rebalance the country surely we must consider linking in the poorest region?"



"What you talking about bro?"



"Please sir it is true there are entire sections of the country you are not even considering, can you please look at this map and you will see very clearly and perhaps change your plans"



"No way bro how about you look at my map, no more problems, conservatives represent!"





And Ed is thinking, I've got their votes anyway, screw em!

[Azog 150]

I was going to post something on HS3, although being from Liverpool (that's midlands to you, North to me!!) I had a slightly different take on things.


1) Why is HS3 not the priority? Travel times down to London are already pretty good. Travel times from West to East however are pretty atrocious. As it stands, the worlds first rail line (Liverpool-Manchester) is still running on diesel trains which is one hundred year old technology and I remember reading that the only other EU nation that uses diesel trains on its national rail is Bulgaria. The travelling times from Manchester to Leeds (which HS3 is supposed to remedy), a distance of around 40 miles, takes an hour on the train. It is clear that if sufficient and sustainable growth is to be achieved in the 'North' then these cities need to be much better connected.

2) The HS3 line drawn on that map is not strictly accurate. So far the only thing being proposed is a line from Manchester to Leeds, missing out Liverpool, Sheffield and Hull. What is the point in a big infrastructure project that is only going to serve two of the five main cities in this region?

3) I agree that the North East is a very much forgotten about region (went to uni in Newcastle by the way- loved it). However I would argue that (in my experience anyway) rail links to the North East are already pretty good, and certainly better then the East-West links further south. What the North East is certainly in need of, however, is at the very least a bloody dual-carriageway up to Edinburgh. I can't comment on Carlisle's train links, but I'd say its road links are already pretty satisfactory. However if we are talking about priorities, the population that would be served by HS3 is far bigger in number and it makes sense that it would take precedence. That does not mean I don't also think North East links should also take priority over HS2.

4) Meanwhile, down in that London, the £15 billion Crossrail was approved years ago and is already well under construction

[Denny Crane!]

I was going to post something on HS3, although being from Liverpool (that's midlands to you, North to me!!) I had a slightly different take on things.

Bloody sassenach.

1) Why is HS3 not the priority? Travel times down to London are already pretty good. Travel times from West to East however are pretty atrocious. As it stands, the worlds first rail line (Liverpool-Manchester) is still running on diesel trains which is one hundred year old technology and I remember reading that the only other EU nation that uses diesel trains on its national rail is Bulgaria. The travelling times from Manchester to Leeds (which HS3 is supposed to remedy), a distance of around 40 miles, takes an hour on the train. It is clear that if sufficient and sustainable growth is to be achieved in the 'North' then these cities need to be much better connected.

Liverpool to Manchester is a very small project as well and very easy to complete on budget due to its size, why are they always in a hurry to do the biggest first?

2) The HS3 line drawn on that map is not strictly accurate. So far the only thing being proposed is a line from Manchester to Leeds, missing out Liverpool, Sheffield and Hull. What is the point in a big infrastructure project that is only going to serve two of the five main cities in this region?

Well I thought Hull was in there definitively as a proposal but I'm deeply hurt you don't like my MS Paint line drawing skills

3) I agree that the North East is a very much forgotten about region (went to uni in Newcastle by the way- loved it). However I would argue that (in my experience anyway) rail links to the North East are already pretty good, and certainly better then the East-West links further south. What the North East is certainly in need of, however, is at the very least a bloody dual-carriageway up to Edinburgh. I can't comment on Carlisle's train links, but I'd say its road links are already pretty satisfactory. However if we are talking about priorities, the population that would be served by HS3 is far bigger in number and it makes sense that it would take precedence. That does not mean I don't also think North East links should also take priority over HS2.

I'd settle for none of it and full scale electrification across the country to be perfectly honest. Its cheaper and it would benefit more people per pound. Our main rail link is pretty good but we have a fair few diesel train links around here.

But its also if we are talking faster times, we are as far from London as it gets! But I'd happily take your argument that its pointless getting Manchester to London quickly if it takes an age to get from Liverpool to Manchester.

What worries me though is that the easier it gets to get from Manchester to London the deeper that divide will get as the North East just edges away in time over distance.

4) Meanwhile, down in that London, the £15 billion Crossrail was approved years ago and is already well under construction

Yeah! I mean I suppose good capital transport has to be a priority. I just wish the other priorities wasn't a high speed rail line that is shown in other countries to drag even more business into the capital.

[Sphere]

A new rail project should be awarded based on whoever wins the Premier League. Make things interesting.

[Denny Crane!]

A new rail project should be awarded based on whoever wins the Premier League. Make things interesting.

I'd rather make all mayors of individual cities play rush and roulette, survivor gets the project.

[Sphere]

I'd rather make all mayors of individual cities play rush and roulette, survivor gets the project.

Surely their music isn't that bad...

http://www.reverbnation.com/rushandroulette

[hellheaven1987]

Highlands, Wales, South-West England, Northern Ireland are all excluded, very nice Cameron.

[Denny Crane!]

Highlands, Wales, South-West England, Northern Ireland are all excluded, very nice Cameron.

Wales and Northern Ireland have devolved economies and manage infrastructure projects on their own, this is why when they finally proposed to build a dual carriageway from Newcastle to Edinburgh extending our A1 road the Scottish government has not committed to finishing its end of it leading to delays (though has led to widening of the A1 just south of Newcastle instead which isn't the worst thing, nastiest choke point in the North). I'm not quite sure how you'd run a rail line to NI or for what purpose either mind. Hasn't been one before.

[Bobz]

Blooming northerners! At least you actually have a railway line...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The rail network west of Exeter is practically stuck in the Victorian Age. We're reliant on one vulnerable line that travels through Dawlish, that was closed for two months after being destroyed in the storms earlier this year. The trains themselves are slow and often delayed, and frankly it's often quicker and easier to drive.

I think the HS2 project is important, even with full electrification the existing lines will be at full capacity in the coming decades, but there are other rail schemes that should get the go ahead first. An expanded HS3 sounds like a decent proposal as the journey times east to west are absolutely atrocious, as Azog rightly said you're not going to get growth in the north if the only transport links are with London. We also need electrification across the country. Upgrading the whole network is a job that will likely take decades, but for now we should at least be concentrating on the main lines.

Finally, in the South-West we seriously need an alternative to the Dawlish coastal line, either a new inland route or reopening the old Tavistock line. It may not sound that important compared to these schemes in the north, but I do believe it is appalling that in the 21st century an entire region of this country can be cut off from the public transport network due to a single storm.

[nemgod]

Blooming northerners! At least you actually have a railway line...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The rail network west of Exeter is practically stuck in the Victorian Age. We're reliant on one vulnerable line that travels through Dawlish, that was closed for two months after being destroyed in the storms earlier this year. The trains themselves are slow and often delayed, and frankly it's often quicker and easier to drive.

I think the HS2 project is important, even with full electrification the existing lines will be at full capacity in the coming decades, but there are other rail schemes that should get the go ahead first. An expanded HS3 sounds like a decent proposal as the journey times east to west are absolutely atrocious, as Azog rightly said you're not going to get growth in the north if the only transport links are with London. We also need electrification across the country. Upgrading the whole network is a job that will likely take decades, but for now we should at least be concentrating on the main lines.

Finally, in the South-West we seriously need an alternative to the Dawlish coastal line, either a new inland route or reopening the old Tavistock line. It may not sound that important compared to these schemes in the north, but I do believe it is appalling that in the 21st century an entire region of this country can be cut off from the public transport network due to a single storm.

To be fair a lot of the Rail network is stuck in the victorian age one way or another. When replacing tracks they keep to the same old style so they don't have to replace som crumbling old bridge or because the trains are not up to standard as our far eastern or european counterparts.

HS is something we need, and need more of. And we should be going into more modern tech with it. If Japan/China/Korea can go into Monorail or Mag Lev style rail system then so can we. If we have to start from London then have them going to Glasgow from London Via Birmingham and either Liverpool or Manchester and then Carlisle. For Edinburgh go up via east midland and yorkshire cities, Newcastle and then ending at Edinburgh. Both cities could be linked to each other and Inverness, Dundee and Aberdeen.

Also Yorkshire coast to Liverpool Via Yorkshire cities and Manchester, as well as Newcastle to Carlisle route should also be planned.

You could also have Swansea to London with stops at Cardiff, Bristol, Swindon, Reading. Not sure if Liverpool Street to Norwich would be a priority but would be one in the later wave. Then have a true HS link from London to Paris and beyond.

Will these cost money, sure. But what they could also bring in is construction work long term and jobs related to it on an even longer time scale.

[Denny Crane!]

To be fair a lot of the Rail network is stuck in the victorian age one way or another. When replacing tracks they keep to the same old style so they don't have to replace som crumbling old bridge or because the trains are not up to standard as our far eastern or european counterparts.

HS is something we need, and need more of. And we should be going into more modern tech with it. If Japan/China/Korea can go into Monorail or Mag Lev style rail system then so can we. If we have to start from London then have them going to Glasgow from London Via Birmingham and either Liverpool or Manchester and then Carlisle. For Edinburgh go up via east midland and yorkshire cities, Newcastle and then ending at Edinburgh. Both cities could be linked to each other and Inverness, Dundee and Aberdeen.

Also Yorkshire coast to Liverpool Via Yorkshire cities and Manchester, as well as Newcastle to Carlisle route should also be planned.

You could also have Swansea to London with stops at Cardiff, Bristol, Swindon, Reading. Not sure if Liverpool Street to Norwich would be a priority but would be one in the later wave. Then have a true HS link from London to Paris and beyond.

Will these cost money, sure. But what they could also bring in is construction work long term and jobs related to it on an even longer time scale.

And yet look at the figures for what electrification costs, it is minute fractions in comparison. You are talking about needing spaceships when often we don't even have roads. Of teleporting water between London and Leeds when Glasgow to Manchester doesn't have a pipe. Daft analogies but you get the ideas. For less than the cost of one HS line I daresay you could electrify every line in the country which would do good work towards reducing carbon targets we are set to miss.

Obviously I'm making an assumption here all diesel tracks are all still viable based on feasability studies - otherwise they would be closed anyway.

[Pielstick]

Norven munkees!

Seriously though Denny, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head.

[Denny Crane!]

Bah Bobz out in the wilds of wanny so you are. Thought you were still in horse and cart out there!

But I mean what you say sounds sensible, focusing on the main lines and High Speed does sound that way until you run some numbers. It costs about £250,000 per single-track kilometre to electrify a line, to build a high speed line costs £126 million per kilometer. Now when you realise that running an electrified train is not only quicker but 40% cheaper in comparison as infrastructure projects go there is no argument here. It is 504 times cheaper to electrify than to build new infrastructure. It often accomplishes the same goal in terms of increasing capacity though admittedly not headline raising still just as necessary and they are more reliable.

It is a fact that the opinions swing back and forth plans come and go for electrification, the current proposal I just read does actually include Liverpool to manchester namely:



So I hope it keeps going but it should definitely go further. Just look at the enormous mass that awaits, that is still third world rail.

[nemgod]

I have no doubt they are feasible, just I don't see why we should just have to remain behind the more high tech countries just because we're a few steps behind. We know the tech is there it is just about implementing them sometimes you don't need to take the step to car when you can pay someone to help build your spaceship. And new tracks would need less overall servicing than old ones since the lack of wear and tear.

[Denny Crane!]

I have no doubt they are feasible, just I don't see why we should just have to remain behind the more high tech countries just because we're a few steps behind. We know the tech is there it is just about implementing them sometimes you don't need to take the step to car when you can pay someone to help build your spaceship. And new tracks would need less overall servicing than old ones since the lack of wear and tear.

So we shouldn't have to remain behind the times by having diesel trains? OK no I see your point. And I also see the sky is purple and I drop a rock and it just falls towards the sky!

[Azog 150]

You're right about the electrification of the Liverpool-Manchester line. Didn't realise it was originally due to be finished so soon in December, but like everything else it has of course been delayed until next year:

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/...elayed-8036457

But progress is progress I guess. Incidentally there is also going to be a new direct route from Liverpool to Newcastle which bypasses the notorious Manchester Piccadilly.

I would agree that electrification of existing rail probably should be the priority. I don't know quite how much electrification cuts journey times however, but I of course understand the argument that we should bring our rail network into the 20th Century before we start bringing it into the 21st Century.

However if the claims for HS3 are to be believed, it could cut Manchester to Leeds journey times from 55 minutes to 25 minutes, which is a massive improvement and could make inter-city commuting a lot more viable for a great number of people. I am not sure electrification would have the same effect. If we are serious about connecting these major cities and bringing our rail network into the 21st Century, high-speed rail does seem like it will be a necessity sooner or later.

[Adar]

I think it is important to keep electrification and high speed rail as two separate issues.

High speed railways are an excellent solution to tie large cities together. Otherwise it is far from cost efficient.

Electrification is a brilliant way to increase trade and communication between and inside regions.

High speed railways should be built with care and only in a few places. Electrification should be encouraged pretty much everywhere due to it's low cost and major benefits.

However if the claims for HS3 are to be believed, it could cut Manchester to Leeds journey times from 55 minutes to 25 minutes, which is a massive improvement and could make inter-city commuting a lot more viable for a great number of people. I am not sure electrification would have the same effect. If we are serious about connecting these major cities and bringing our rail network into the 21st Century, high-speed rail does seem like it will be a necessity sooner or later.

25 minutes for a railway seem optimistic but doable.

Old but electrified railway in Sweden does the same distance through populated areas (and 2 stops) in 38 minutes.

[Denny Crane!]

It does increase journey times and save costs by 40% but I mean on that proposed route its already electric so HS3 is the only next option. And I'll agree that is a very short journey time between the two cities. I probably wouldn't have as big a beef if there was an option to tick both boxes. What simply blows my mind though is the cost of High Speed Rail vs electrification.

When you have (£250,000 per single-track kilometre to electrify a line, to build a high speed line costs £126 million per kilometer) then the option really should be both or I question what the heck they are thinking. There is currently 12320 KM of track in the UK of which 4928 has already been electrified leaving 7392 to do (multiplied by quarter of a mil per KM) is 1.85 billion pounds to finish the UK completely a project that started around 1890 I might add!

Just phase one of HS2 alone (not the whole project) has had a cost projection accelerating up to 22 billion pounds. I really think the option for both should be there!

[Denny Crane!]

But here is a thing and this is where my knowledge gets hazy.

Should it be electrification and High Speed or Electrification and Maglev?

[Adar]

But here is a thing and this is where my knowledge gets hazy.

Should it be electrification and High Speed or Electrification and Maglev?

I have absolutely no idea either.