High speed rail versus domestic UK air travel

May take 15,20 years and a LOT of money ,but it will happen.

Yeah exactly why I don’t see this happening anytime in the near future. Lot of money which Alistair darling went and spent bailing out Banks last year.

Should of been done 15-20 years ago, but we invested in Motorways. I don’t see it happening because we have to build on current lines which will disrupt services.

15-20 years, I would multiply that by 2 as were English and cant build anything to time. Look how long it took to build Wembley. If it does get built then great, but I see something along the lines of terminal 5 happening a total fiasco.

Again am English, but I have a very pessimistic view of things when we say were going to build something. To be honest if they are wanting a HSR then it needs to link the whole country up instead of one side.

Not often i agree with MOL, i cant stand the guy anyway, but this time i actually agree with him. HSR= insane http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/05/high-speed-rail-airline-flights

So London to Yorkshire/Newcastle/Edinburgh in under 3 hours, London to Birmingham/Manchester/Glasgow in under 3 hours, London to Bristol in under 3, London to Cardiff in under 3, London to Penzance in under 4, Leeds to Manchester/Liverpool in under 1 (and under hour and half for Liverpool) etc.

• Impose significant tax increases on UK domestic flights that fall into the high speed rail catchment area – i.e. huge flight tax increases on all flights between LHR/LGW/STN/LTN/MAN/EDI/GLA/PIK etc, in order to incentivise traffic from air to rail, thus ultimately freeing LHR slots to aleviate need for LHR 3rd runway and also constraining growth at the other airports

Andy

Not sure what O’Leary would have to say about that suggestion Andy, but I can only assume that the second word would be “off”…?

In all seriousness though, I welcome the possibility of high-speed rail links, no matter where they serve, and I completely agree with points 2 & 5 also made in Andy’s post. The thing that amazes me with this though, is that National Rail have announced this today, but even if its approved, it wont be operational until at least 2030.

Just think, the Olympics will have been held in London, and a further 18 years will have passed after this event before we even get to see it!

(And just to put it into even worse perspective, I will be 44 years of age…now thats a scary thought!):D:diablo:

So, I suppose my ultimate question is why does it have to take so long from the initial announcement to the actual delivery and implementation of these things?

All i can do is laugh.

UK with HSR, yeah and i see myself as a billionaire in the future :diablo:

An odd comment Nick? Not so long ago you could have substituted “UK with HSR” with “London to New York in under 4 hours” or “Human in space” “London to Paris by train in under 2 1/2 hours” etc… I don’t see HSR in any way fantastic/impossible. A “mere” matter of building new tracks, as was done in many other countries long ago, HSR will be a reality in the UK.
May take 15,20 years and a LOT of money ,but it will happen.

All i can do is laugh.

UK with HSR, yeah and i see myself as a billionaire in the future :diablo:

I’m being a bit naughty with this response as I have simply taken it from an earlier post, but updated it a touch to reflectthe new information, but basically copied and pasted to save my poor fingers.

I wonder though Andy whether R3 at LHR would still be a better alternative to R2 at STN? We’re likely to need one or the other either way and I’d have thought, despite it’s environmental concerns, LHR would make more sense? I don’t know what you think?

For a start it would be a planning nightmare, if anyone thinks any inquiry for LHR will be a pig, imagine the inquiry dealing with all the protesters and local authorities involved in a 400 mile rail line (or two, because one would need to go up the west of the country, and one up the east). Again, the French have achieved this because they decide they want to build a TGV track, and they do it. One of the main advantages they have is space, they have a population of similar size to the UK, but with a country substantially bigger, therefore building a relatively straight track there is going to come across less conurbations than an equivelant in the UK.

What is often forgotten about rail is that it does have environmental impact. The system would need to be electric, so residents living close to the rail line would not be subjected to large air quality issues, but they would suffer badly on noise. Think how many properties a 350 mile rail track to Glasgow (on the STRAIGHEST line on a map, so in truth add a fair few miles to that) would pass. If you accept that rail is less polluting per passenger km than air then you will need to recognise that trains travelling at higher speeds will require more energy, and therefore will require higher outputs from polluting powerstations.

There would be substantial land take and associated Compulsory Purchase Orders making it a legal nightmare. Properties would be cut in half and there would be Human Rights issues left right and centre. Infact I suspect a plan for such a link would never make it beyond a Judiciary Review from anyone that challenged a political decision, and there would be a lot more challenges than any Heathorw decision would generate.

I don’t even know where to begin with regards to the effects on Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, National Parks and all the other ways in which we protect our natural landscape and habitats. I should think Swampy’s little head would explode with the decision of where to set up camp to prevent the building of such a track…..he’s just too busy opposing Rwy3 at LHR to have considered this yet. If the environmentalists got their way and were offered two direct, ultra high speed lines, they’d freeze and panic……instead of campaigning against aviation, they should be campaigning against travel full stop!!!!

The actual cost would be huge too, and could probably never be operated profitably given the CAPEX just to get the system up and running, let alone maintaining it. GLA, BA and LHR are all profit making organisations, ok the airlines get a tax break on fuel, but there is a tax income to the government from air travel. The CAPEX to build these rail links, along with the ongoing maintenance and the actual operating costs would probably lead to a situation as presently seen with the railways where the government would need to substantially subsidise the system. Don’t forget, the current train operating companies don’t take much actual revenue from ticket sales (except on specialised tickets they sell), overall they give all the money to the Govt. and then the government gives them money back based on how much they tendered to operate various services. The pot into the govt. is smaller than the pot out, so the taxpayer is already subsidising every rail user, and with a high speed rail link this burden would only get worse, even accepting that a small number of long distance trains could be cut from the current network.

On the basis of ‘polluter pays’ then is a high speed rail line through Cumbria really fair on those living there? The chances are such a link wouldn’t stop in Carlisle, so to take advantage of this the Cumbrians would have to travel to Glasgow or Manchester (it’s not worth having lots of stops because it would add time, and remove the advantage of direct rail links). However, the Cumbrians who are affected by the track would gain no advantage for their suffering of noise, and if there is a reduction in stopping Glasgow – London trains then the frequency of services from Carlisle to London would be reduced potentially affecting the local economy, either existing, or its ability to attract inward investment. I’m not saying everyone affected by a third runway will be a ‘user’ and therefore ‘polluter’, but my guess is most of them will have flown from there at some point in their life, many will work there, and many will profit from the economy that is London which is propped up on the world economic stage by LHR.