UKC

http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/hs2-alternative-high-sp...

Given the face that meetings can be (and are increasingly) held via the internet, and that we don't know how communication technology is going to progress, on the face of it this seems like quite a sensible alternative to HS2, in being cheaper, and perhaps less environmentally damaging too.

In reply to Timmd:

Face? I mean fact.

In reply to Timmd:

I say build it. Our Victorian rail network needs updating.
What's £55B over 10 years? Just stick it on the £1.5TRILLION debt

In reply to Lusk:
It has wider scope and (I think) seems more useful because of that than HS2.

In reply to Timmd:

Hmmmm - it is really sad that I am so cynical these days, but who is this team of railway engineers? I am not sure a group of people with a pram and a tractor are portraying the right image. We need bearded men with elbow patches to give an authoritative and viable alternative on such a large and complex project.

Nice idea though.

In reply to Timmd:

Its a nice idea, but the reality is they should be doing both!

In reply to Timmd:

Since HS2 is supposedly to increase capacity, I propose we take a leaf out of the Swiss rail book.
They went for double decker trains, there by doubling their capacity, tunnels and bridges were raised or the track lowered in some places, much of it through rock. While I realise this might be a difficult job and it's sometimes harder to work in mediums that aren't rock surely it's not beyond our engineering skills to do the same.

The work was carried out over night mainly and disruption to the existing system was minimal, as far as I know.

Getting to Manchester 30 minutes earlier isn't going to make that much difference to anyone, being able to get there at a time that suits you is much better.

In reply to Lusk:



About a third of renewing trident. So if we sack that in (and we should) then we can have HS3,4 and 5 as well. Fewer people will drive up and down the country. Everyone is happy, excluding those who think we need a nuclear deterrent.

In reply to ByEek:



It may be a lack of sleep on my part, so apologies just in case, but this post makes no sense to me at all.

In reply to ByEek:


It may be a lack of sleep on my part, so apologies just in case, but this post makes no sense to me at all. Pardon?

In reply to Timmd:

Fair dos. I was off on one. My point was why should we take a group of anonymous railway engineers (???) seriously? There is no link to their plans, no names and only a vague outline of what the plan is. It seems to be a news article about hot air.

In reply to Timmd:

Totally impractical I'm afraid.

In this country it is impossible to get government support for a project unless the right people are allowed to skim vast amounts of money during the construction phase and then live on taxpayer subsidies forever.

If there are no directorships for ex ministers and civil servants at the end of play then forget it.

In reply to davidbeynon:

Maybe we could sell it off to the Chinese....