HS2 will ‘destroy’ six walks (From The Oxford Times)
When It Happens Panel Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting 'OXFORD NEWS' to 80360 or email
HS2 will ‘destroy’ six walks
12:00pm Saturday 21st July 2012 in News
Anti High Speed Rail campaigners have created a leaflet of walks “highlighting the consequences of building the proposed” rail link.
Produced by Brackley firm Global Mapping and South Northamptonshire Council, the idea is to show people a series of six walks, which would be destroyed if the rail scheme goes ahead.
The £6bn London-Birmingham link would cut across north-east Oxfordshire between Finmere and Mixbury.
Alan Smith, Global Mapping’s managing director, said: “I thought it would be useful for walkers to know where the line was going and also residents and visitors just how much of an impact HS2 was going to have.”
Fellow walker Tim Pridmore, a warden for the Wildlife Trust, said: “This is so sad. On some walks you hear literally nothing. Trains every four minutes are going to ruin that.”
Comments(56)
Oflife
says...
12:30pm Sat 21 Jul 12
IE, HS2 will be a stop gap, if it ever 'gets off the ground' before alternative methods of transportation really do take the skies.
#ccbb
Lord Palmerstone
says...
1:01pm Sat 21 Jul 12
chriseaglen
says...
1:37pm Sat 21 Jul 12
The UK is educating more people but has a massive competence gap.
No one has any authority to remedy this pooly planned scheme.
Andrew:Oxford
says...
2:05pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Lord Palmerstone wrote:Video-conferencing is dull. First used it at work in the early 90s, and still use it regularly.
I don't think that this monstrosity (which was after all only a Labour Larf-"let's 'ave a go at them toffs like Bernie Ecclestone and Lakshmi Mittal who are Big Tories"-what might be called the Andrew:Oxford view) will run but I'm amazed by the naivety of its proponent, whoever that is, who doesn't believe video conferencing will develop in any way in the next 20 years. Perhaps this gump is so busy working on his/her new sidevalve engine as not to have considered that possibility.
Yes, the person is on the big screen, and yes there is the 2nd screen with the power-point presentation all lovely, techy, worthy and jolly.
But the person isn't there... It makes a massive difference. I don't buy from people who don't make the effort.
(Now, if anyone were able to confirm that Teleport would available in 20 years - that would be something! Albeit would cause a great deal of anxiety for border control...)
West Oxon Webwatcher
says...
4:09pm Sat 21 Jul 12
padav
says...
6:15pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon
says...
6:58pm Sat 21 Jul 12
We already have high speed lines - 125mph, could go up to 140mph. Thats sufficient for the UK.
The issue is capacity. The "electric spine" will help with that, but the Rugby-Aylesbury railway could be rebuilt on existing trackbed, relieving the busiest stretch of the Euston line. We would still get people complaining about loss of this and loss of that though.
EricTheRed
says...
7:08pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Video conferenceing in our land with our quality of Broadband - Get a grip! there is a higher chance of HS2 being steam powered than that happening..
One has to wonder how France has managed to build its high speed rail links (and indeed is still doing so) without the degree of little england nimbyism this country seems to create every time something is mooted that could actually benefit the country. The negativity that surrounds such large and beneficial developments is astonishing and is sadly one of the reasons the UK will rapidly become the economic and social backwater to developing Asian nations.
EricTheRed
says...
7:09pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon wrote:Yep hit the nail there, people love a good moan in this country
The business case for HS2 is getting weaker by the day. Most experts believe greater investment in local and regional transport is what this country really needs.
We already have high speed lines - 125mph, could go up to 140mph. Thats sufficient for the UK.
The issue is capacity. The "electric spine" will help with that, but the Rugby-Aylesbury railway could be rebuilt on existing trackbed, relieving the busiest stretch of the Euston line. We would still get people complaining about loss of this and loss of that though.
kingsnewclothes
says...
8:57am Sun 22 Jul 12
That doesn't include the cost of Natural Capital ( the impact of losing walks etc which this article is about ) which the government did at one stage promise to include.
£ 36 bn, a completely bonkers amount to spend when we have a slash and burn policy on everything else.
Lord Palmerstone
says...
9:08am Sun 22 Jul 12
padav
says...
10:24am Sun 22 Jul 12
Attack Dog
says...
11:51am Sun 22 Jul 12
The £9.4bn investment in the network is based around HS2, not instead of it. HS2 makes investment in electric infrastructure on the traditional routes more cost effective allowing more interchange between the routes. In turn the unit costs come down and allow the electrification system to be "beefy" enough to handle 8000hp locomotives pulling inter-modal trains around 1000 tonnes heavier than those currently handled and on a par with the European standard.The anti-HS2 people would love everyone to believe that this is simply a vanity project to allow a few rich people to shave a few minutes off their trips to and from Birmingham, it is not. This is a long term and absolutely essential addition to the infrastructure of the UK that in reality needs to be built in a much faster timeframe. In the early 1960s the need for the M25 was foreseen, it took until the late 80s to be built. Imagine what the economy would be like if it wasn't there. HS2 is no different, the business case is no different from the M25s, except it will end up serving far more centres of population and it's positive economic effects will be felt right across the UK. By adopting the Labour proposal of having a 2013 hybrid bill to encompass both Northern and Southern sections in one go, Parliament could shave a few years and several billion off the cost and get those benefits sooner. The recently announced HLOS makes such a move easier and we have urged the Coalition to re-examine the Labour proposal.
Attack Dog
says...
11:58am Sun 22 Jul 12
Attack Dog
says...
12:02pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Oflife wrote:I hate to break it to you, but Gerry Andersons puppet show "Supercar" was early 1960s fiction for children
The irony of all this is that within the next two decades (quote me on it), a revolution in airborne PERSONAL transport will gradually reduce the need for railways (and roads), enabling us to free up huge swathes of land.
IE, HS2 will be a stop gap, if it ever 'gets off the ground' before alternative methods of transportation really do take the skies.
#ccbb
kingsnewclothes
says...
12:52pm Sun 22 Jul 12
I'm afraid you gave your Vested Interest away though when you said the studies WE have done. Is this the much vaunted PR offensive.
Patrick in Devon
says...
1:33pm Sun 22 Jul 12
I agree that extra rail capacity is needed now for freight, hence a simple freight by-pass along the old GC route (Rugby-Aylesbury-Lon
don) would be far cheaper and quicker, along with "no brainers" such as more second class carriages added to passenger trains.
Attack Dog
says...
2:25pm Sun 22 Jul 12
To cope with the demand which is known to exist and will exist in the future, all major ports are building facilities to take the ULCVs. The largest ships ever built. Liverpool, Avonmouth, Southampton, London Gateway, Felixstowe, Harwich are the first few. Other ports are building the facilities for the feeder ships, Grimsby, Hull, and others which will move containers across the North Sea and up the European canals. The traffic through the Channel Tunnel is now building with services direct to places as far afield as Spain and Poland direct from ships docking in Liverpool. Then there is the other stuff, specialist steel from the UK to Germany and Slovakia, completed goods such as cars, a big two way traffic. The ports' expansion plans are dependent on railway access as a condition. The only way to fit all this revenue earning freight onto the network and off the motorways without expansion is cutting passenger services so you could end up on some lines with a peak only service. The financial case is simple. the UK will end up paying far more through not building it. We cannot afford not to. The financial penalties are huge. Motorway network is ageing far faster than anticipated because the UK underestimated the amount of heavy lorries using it. How do i know that? I'm a civil engineer who has surveyed much of the M6 and M40 in recent years. The cost of future proofing just those two routes is in the region of £14bn. A taste has been provided by the M4 crack near Junction 2. Logistics companies want to move to rail and the demand is outstripping supply. Even supermarkets are running their own trains these days. Stobarts and Tesco expanding in this area. As far as HS2 is concerned we know what will happen if it is not built. The chaos and congestion will worsen, the costs will mount and the UK will become a less attractive place for business. The benefits for building it are less strain on the existing road and rail network and like the M25 I'd challenge anyone to quantify in cost terms the amount it has contributed to the economy. It's impossible, but one thing is sure it's well in excess of £2.40 for every pound if we can get another 20-25 years out of the various elevated sections of motorway along the north / south axis. The work we did on the M6 in the 1990s through the West Midlands has already started to crumble, we thought it would last 50 years, it lasted less than 20. That's what happens when three times the number of 44 tonners than was anticipated uses elevated motorways.
Attack Dog
says...
2:35pm Sun 22 Jul 12
kingsnewclothes wrote:My vested interest is prolonging the life of the motorway network. We need a massive reduction in HGV traffic to achieve that. HS2 allows that to happen. If I believe that an elevated section, such as that near Beaconsfield or Walsall is unsafe, I'm the one who signs the paper and my boss is the one who tells the Minister that the motorway is shut. In other countries swap bodies, road railers and the like are used. Our loading gauge is too restrictive, but we can shift millions of containers a year to rail, if HS2 is built, and built soon.
Attack Dog ( nice name by the way ) I'm glad that you seem to be agreeing with me that the financial benefits aren't there ( at least we have got past the £ 2.40 for every £ spent nonsense ). The financial case is as easy to see through as the New Clothes the King is wearing.
I'm afraid you gave your Vested Interest away though when you said the studies WE have done. Is this the much vaunted PR offensive.
padav
says...
5:20pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Andrew:Oxford
says...
6:53pm Sun 22 Jul 12
padav wrote:Oh, I'm not sure.
@Attack Dog - glad to have someone on a forum like this who actually knows what they are talking about - makes a difference from the ill-informed claptrap that often masquerades as reasoned debate. I work in the freight forwarding industry and I can vouch for many of the points you've made - Shipping Lines, such as Maersk, MSC and CMA/CGM have all invested in the super large carriers (18000 TEU capacity) to reduce individual container handling costs. Many of our specialist market clients are committed to reducing their overall carbon footprint by transferring from internal road haulage to rail and even look at things like bringing containers along the Manchester Ship Canal on barges! The anti-brigade know they have lost the argument bout HS2 on a strategic level so they are going for the only game they have left in town, which is the BCR value - this is driven essentially by two factors; a) The headline budget and b) the intangible and therefore unmeasurable nature of many of the benefits (such as those you have described in detail) accruing from schemes like HS2 - the naysayers demand (because they know it can't be satisfied) an instant cash return on the (very long term by its very nature) massive investment required for HS2 - then they claim; look it can't pay its way so we shouldn't go ahead - this is like comparing apples with pears - the only fair comparison would be to demand that extra transport capacity should be charged at the point of use - this would require all new major road schemes (the only credible alternative) to be private toll funded - but look at the response to the new toll road A14 scheme (just announced) - condemnation from all sides - so we need to counter these bogus claims from the anti-HS2 brigade for an "instant" return by illustrating just what it would mean for future UK transport policy - somehow I don't think the UK public is up for a raft of new Private Toll Eight Lane Freeways, USA style?
An 8 lane private toll route running from say Hemel following the A41 through the Chilterns and on to Coventry would have some merit.
As would an Outer Motorway Arc running from Didcot to Stevenage connecting the A34, M40, M41, M1 & A1M via Aylesbury.
padav
says...
7:29pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Lord Palmerstone
says...
10:01am Mon 23 Jul 12
padav wrote:It's not really an area of interest for most people and I doubt that anyone's voting was influenced by the inclusion of a pledge in each manifesto to flush our cash down the sewer on this stuff. I doubt that many voted to give £110 bn to people who don't do anything either. You are all experts so you can tell me whether GWR was insolvent when it was expropriated by the 1945-50 regime. I don't live anywhere near where this spiteful joke is intended to devastate but I did read some poems by John Donne and as best I recall there was a line"Ask not for whom the bell tolls: it tolls for thee". Let the vandals get away with this one and they'll be back for more.
Yes @Lord Palmerstone - it was Victorian private entrepreneurs who began the railway revolution in Britain and their legacy today is a still relatively fragmented network (it also led to corners being cut, which is why the UK rail network has a smaller gauge than Continental Europe - now costs us billions to make the transition upwards) - you also conveniently forgot to mention that they all went bust as well !!! So please quit with the bogus arguments about private capital funding the railways - you know very well that private capital will never sucessfully fund investment in the rail network - go and look up what happened to the original plans for HS1 if you need anymore evidence - the timescales (ten years plus at a minimum) involved preclude direct private capital, which will get involved indirectly, via sale of renewable leases - your stance on this matter is clear for all to understand - you're happy to sit in a traffic jam (in your "new motor") on the M1, M40 etc but the prospect of public investment in a 21st century rail network is beyond the pale - particularly when its coming through your backyard?
kingsnewclothes
says...
10:26am Mon 23 Jul 12
It's basically the same argument that we have had concerning passenger journey times. High Speed Rail might be needed in Spain to cut the journey time from Madrid to Barcelona from something like 6 hours to just under 3, but it isn't such a big deal when London to Birmingham is only about 80 minutes ( half an hour less than Paris to Lyon on Eurostar ) and even London to Manchester is only just over 2 hours.
I'll remind you that every other form of government spending is being slashed and burned, the government debt isn't coming down as expected and Cameron is suggesting austerity could be around until the next decade,
King Joke
says...
12:31pm Mon 23 Jul 12
You can't visit your Auntie Maureen by videoconference, you can't go up to the Lake District by videoconference, you can't go to see a gig in Manchester by videoconference, you can't go to an away footer match by vidoeconferenceand it isn't even suitable for some work applications, like sales calls for instance.
We will always need to travel, and we need more railways to allow people to do so.
steve1955
says...
9:23am Tue 24 Jul 12
Lord Palmerstone
says...
6:37pm Tue 24 Jul 12
Don't kid yourself mate;unless you are way into Higher Rate Tax bands you won't be able to afford to do these things (which you can already do by coach or the existing rail system ) on Home Smashing 2.
Scourge of Ilfracombe
says...
6:42pm Tue 24 Jul 12
If Padav’s comment was regarding loading gauge, then he is right. It is an awkward fact that Europe’s railways are bigger than ours, something that can be seen by comparing British OO scale model trains with those of European trains made to the smaller H0 scale; they are much the same size. But to see REALLY BIG trains you need to go to the former Soviet Union.
Obviously it is now costing the British rail industry huge sums of money to increase the loading gauge of lines to take the larger containers, but it’s not fair to accuse the UK rail network of cutting corners. When we invented and built our railways, containers and the Channel Tunnel were more than a century away. Our systems were fit for purpose (though Brunel with his 7 ft gauge might not have agreed). At least we are responding to changed circumstances. It is very unlikely that the change of rail and loading gauges between Europe and the former Soviet Union will be as easy to deal with.
padav
says...
8:04pm Tue 24 Jul 12
Scourge of Ilfracombe
says...
9:09pm Tue 24 Jul 12
King Joke
says...
6:29am Wed 25 Jul 12
kingsnewclothes
says...
7:12am Wed 25 Jul 12
We may well see passenger numbers rise in the future but not necessarily at the rates in recent years which have seen a sharp increase in petrol prices ( that's the point about videoconferencing and broadband - not that people will stop travelling ). .....
So extra capacity does need to be added across the entire network ( and electrification completed as a priority with vast sections still running diesel trains ) and longer trains and platforms and the sort of improvements advocated by 51M do add a lot of capacity.
The question is really whether we can afford to spend £ 36 bn on this project when we are in the worst depression for 80 years. A project whose financial and ( until the Greens and the TSC poured cold water on the claims ) environmental claims have been massively and deliberately exaggerated. If the Deutsche Bahn lobby want the scheme to go ahead let them pay for it -- not the poor old taxpayer.
King Joke
says...
7:43am Wed 25 Jul 12
Lord Palmerstone wrote:Yes you can do these things on the classic network, but as passenger numbers are growing at 6% pa, even in a recession and even with high fares, clearly we need more capacity. Sooner or later the railways will be turning people away because they are full.
"You can't visit your Auntie Maureen by videoconference, you can't go up to the Lake District by videoconference, you can't go to see a gig in Manchester by videoconference, you can't go to an away footer match by vidoeconference" Don't kid yourself mate;unless you are way into Higher Rate Tax bands you won't be able to afford to do these things (which you can already do by coach or the existing rail system ) on Home Smashing 2.
THere may be a bit spare here and there now, but by the mid-2020s I doubt there will be.
Scourge of Ilfracombe
says...
10:01am Wed 25 Jul 12
I have also been on trains in other parts of the country where the crush inside was so bad, people on the platform made no attempt to get on.
Patrick in Devon
says...
12:39pm Wed 25 Jul 12
I have been told that the existing through services would remain, but its clear that if you dont have direct access to HS2 then you will be on a second rate service, which commentators here have suggested will be slower, due to the freight taking precedence.
Wouldnt it be far more sensible to build a new freight line, with good loading gauge and all, using a stretch of existing, but closed, trackbed, i.e the old Great Central, which ran from Sheffield to Aylesbury?
padav
says...
1:42pm Wed 25 Jul 12
padav
says...
1:49pm Wed 25 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon
says...
2:07pm Wed 25 Jul 12
I am sure that HS2 will carry some international passengers, but most will use Euston, which is why it has to double in size for HS2.
Sorry, still not convinced.
King Joke
says...
3:32pm Wed 25 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon wrote:Express passenger movements on the classic network will be slower not in order to accommodate freight, but because they will stop at more places. THere will be no need, for instance for the first-stop-Preston Euston-Glasgow classic service. HS2 will cater for that end-to-end flow, so the classic express passenger trains will be able to call at more places like Rugby, Nuneaton and Stafford. With fewer virtually non-stop passenger services there will be more capacity as speed differentials between the various train types, freight included.
What concerns me most about HS2 is the lack of integration with the existing network. At Birmingham, a stand alone terminus is proposed. Not only will there be no through trains from Wolverhampton, or anywhere else, but to use HS2 a change of stations is required. I have been told that the existing through services would remain, but its clear that if you dont have direct access to HS2 then you will be on a second rate service, which commentators here have suggested will be slower, due to the freight taking precedence. Wouldnt it be far more sensible to build a new freight line, with good loading gauge and all, using a stretch of existing, but closed, trackbed, i.e the old Great Central, which ran from Sheffield to Aylesbury?
the wizard
says...
9:53pm Wed 25 Jul 12
After seeing first hand the railways of France, Spain, Germany and Italy, I shudder when I return to the uk.
Out dated, often dirty, seldom on time and suffering from no modern infra structure, and therefore totally uninviting.
It is high time we caught up with the rest of the world. Our railways suffered from lack of comparative investment from nationalisation up till privatisation, and we are still playing at catching up. The problem is , many still think we are the best in the world, WRONG, very WRONG.
Now we have a chance, we need to seize it and go forward, or this will be yet another component in us becoming second best, AGAIN.
Patrick in Devon
says...
10:32pm Wed 25 Jul 12
Continental Europe would be giving far more priority to modernising urban transport. Most passenger journeys are short distance.
The "grand project" of HS2 has built up a head of steam (no pun). Exactly as predicted by the Eddington report. Every fact is used to justify it as an end in itself, when there are better ways of increasing rail capacity and getting people around.
padav
says...
10:40pm Wed 25 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon
says...
11:45pm Wed 25 Jul 12
What you are saying is thats all an external benefit which doesnt count. Why doesnt it count? Who is doing the counting?
I know the WCML is very busy and all railways are growing passengers by 6% pa. A relief line for the busiest section (Rugby-London) could be provided much more quickly and cheaply than HS2, which would also provide a passenger route with a couple of intermediate stops. That would turn the NIMBYs along the route into supporters!
It would appear that the justification for HS2 is its potential fares revenue from pivileged potential users? Or is it the external benefit on saving time for business travellers?
How does that time saving , an external benefit, get into the cost benefit analysis, while savings on motorway repairs dont?
padav
says...
12:11am Thu 26 Jul 12
kingsnewclothes
says...
1:37pm Thu 26 Jul 12
As for a dedicated freight line, I'm fairly lukewarm. I suspect the convenience and cost of road transport within our small country would mean the potential internal market is not as big as is claimed and making it easier and cheaper to bring containers into the UK has a downside. Our Balance of Payments deficit is the route cause of most of our problems ( wouldn't be helped by spending billions on HS2 trains from Germany / Japan ). No doubt I'd take a different view if we were a net exporter.
But your point about the cash benefit to the cost of maintaining our motorways is fair enough. At least that is a cash benefit , not the purely notional and intangible benefit of "time saved" on which the dwindling Economic Case for HS2 very largely depends.
the wizard
says...
9:52pm Thu 26 Jul 12
I'm sure the Ramblers etc are all up in arms, shame as some of the walks they insist on keeping are nonsensical .
However, the amount of pollution this scheme sets out to reduce is surely worth it on the balance of things ecologically and there fore goes some way to preserving the country side with cleaner air. One correspondent much earlier in the debate raises the point of a train every 4 minutes or so, that I heavily doubt I just don't know where that figure was raised from but to me it seems very unlikely and more likely to be a mis interpretation of a statement somewhere. Time waits for no man, and sometimes progress comes at a price. It just seems a shame that some reject said progress at every stage. Seems to me they need to venture away from Oxon and go to France and see what a wonderful network is available there to the travelling public and the high standards,reliabilit
y and cleanliness employed, not only on the trains but also along the tracks as well. Electrification may look like a ball of spaghetti, but it works, usually amazingly well. Clean, modern, swift, safe and on time at an affordable cost . So its usually boiled down to what "they" want, and what "they" should do. In this instance "they" are us the public, time for us to grasp our chance, and be modern for a change, as opposed to travelling on tracks that Brunnel and his buddies built, a hundred years ago, time for change and change for the better, rather than just for the sake of it.
Patrick in Devon
says...
10:59pm Thu 26 Jul 12
The diference is that this "motorway" brings no direct benefit to the affected areas between the M25 and Birmingham. Is it any wonder that they dont like it?
HS2 will deliver no benefits for at least another 15 years. In the meantime the affected areas will be blighted, while our overcrowded roads and railways continue to struggle.
Consider an alternative. Relieve the busiest part of the WCML, south of Rugby, within the next 5 years, by rebuilding on an existing abandoned track. This could take all the freight currently using that corridoor, and provide a passenger service too.
I am glad Padav mentioned Wendover. I used the station there recently - 2 trains per hour and no freight. It has a busy road right next to it. You could route 50 freight trains a day and nobody would notice.
The only exrta infrasrtucture needed would be on the stretch near the M25 shared with the metropolitan line, and a connection to the north London line.
Also, during the next 5 years, our existing high speed lines (the ones which currently run trains at 125mph) could be upgraded to 140 mph. Longer trains and, in some places, longer platforms.
But, of course, that would mean spending some money now, not in the 2020s.
All at a fraction of the cost of HS
Scourge of Ilfracombe
says...
11:46pm Thu 26 Jul 12
I recalled with amusement my ICE bombing across Germany and Poland at 220 kph on 2 July 2010 in temperatures similar to ours now, and wondered if having built our fast new railways, we would actually be able to run trains on them?
the wizard
says...
7:31am Fri 27 Jul 12
In all honesty I cannot see that frequency being reached for quite a while, as I cannot see enough units being available or afforded by the relevant train companies. The other side to that is that the passenger traffic needs to be developed, the full capacity is not there yet, but it has to be made inviting and building something like this now lays down foundation for the future, before we are painted into a corner at some point and unable to do such a project.
On the noise issue front you are assuming the same level of noise as existing rolling stock and loco's. Electric lococ's are much quieter and no doubt the passenger carriages will also run on newer more refined wheels etc.
As goes Bicester to Rugby, I know many people in Bicester and they have all commented that the line suggested would offer little or no benefit to any of them, which is probably why it was closed in the first place anyway. What would be of use is a light rail system which connected them to Kidlington and Oxford, running through as many villages as possible to cut down the congestion on the A34.
Patrick in Devon
says...
7:56am Fri 27 Jul 12
There was a proposal a few years ago to build a wide loading guage freight line along this former central spine, but it didnt get Govt backing. More recently, Chiltern wanted to extend Aylesbury passenger services to Rugby and beyond.
HS2 takes part of that route and would prevent its use.
Scourge of Ilfracombe
says...
8:40am Fri 27 Jul 12
I mentioned my journey in an ICE in my last posting. As well as the high speed, I was intrigued by the row coming from the motor units whilst I was standing on the platform. Even though standing still, they sounded like a massive diesel on full throttle. Electric trains quiet? No way!
Patrick in Devon
says...
9:21am Fri 27 Jul 12
Whats the betting that this together with the rest of the massive electrification program, including Oxford to Bedford, will mean that HS2 just gets delayed indefinitely?
the wizard
says...
9:43am Fri 27 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon wrote:My apologies, but in going from Leicester onwards, is there going to be the option of Nottingham or Derby on route to Sheffield, and would that route then be extended to Leeds and beyond, therefore being in competition with the M1 ?
Not "Bicester to Rugby", Wizard, - Aylesbury to Rugby. And, beyond Rugby to Leicester and Sheffield.
There was a proposal a few years ago to build a wide loading guage freight line along this former central spine, but it didnt get Govt backing. More recently, Chiltern wanted to extend Aylesbury passenger services to Rugby and beyond.
HS2 takes part of that route and would prevent its use.
Patrick in Devon
says...
10:52am Fri 27 Jul 12
Closed by Beeching 50 years ago, as there was then far too much rail capacity.
the wizard
says...
11:52am Fri 27 Jul 12
Patrick in Devon wrote:Sounds like a good option to me, push it on to Leeds and then you have a good viable modern competition to the M1. Fast, lean and mean, cutting the car journey time considerably, reducing traffic pollution on the motorway, less delays, leaving passengers arriving fresh and on time. Do It.
Its the old Great Central line, Wizard, ran from London to Sheffield, via Nottingham, the last main line to be built. It was built for speed too.
Closed by Beeching 50 years ago, as there was then far too much rail capacity.
Andrew:Oxford says...
12:23pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Perhaps it would be more useful to sell maps that will show the re-routed walks *when* the HS2 link is built?