Have you seen how the Chinese build high speed rail? It goes in straight lines and the entire process is highly automated, like a 21st century version of the lines across the American West. We don't have the space. Our population density is a lot higher than China or Spain, and inflated land prices are an additional burden.
@@EbenBransome yeah, we invented rail, and we dug a tunnel under the Channel with the French of all people. It would have been trivial to just dig a tunnel from Birmingham to Manchester, and one from Birmingham to London (two or three technically but you get the point). I don't know if you've seen Crossrail in person but it shows that it's perfectly possible for us to do this, and Crossrail was hard since it went within centimetres of existing foundations and had to thread through all sorts of underground lines, rivers (there are river in pipes, going through some train stations, as bonkers as that sounds until someone shows you what the big pipe actually is), gas, electric and internet lines and so on. If we'd just cracked on, it'd have been done by now.
@@EbenBransomeWe literally have the space to do multiple of this. How else would those HS2 routes be defined if it was impossible. However the space we do have is more complicated to build in, which makes it significantly more expensive to do so.
Every single infrastructure project like this should start at the northern end. That way, southern nimbyism can't tank the budget early, and the project has value before it's complete. If they had started HS2 in Manchester, we'd now have high speed rail between Manchester and Birmingham, and we'd have a lot more money available to continue it. By starting in London, the part of HS2 that did get completed is useless.
Spot on. Even as a Londoner myself, I knew that the whole HS2 project should have been started in Manchester or Leeds. Higher land costs in the south (because of closer proximity to London) meant that the budget was reached far quicker than would have been the case, had it been built from north to south. Plus, as you mentioned, fighting 'NIMBY'S' in Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire ate up a larger amount of the budget than people think.
The reason it was started in London isn't directly because of any southern bias. It is simply because the WCML south of Birmingham is at or even over capacity, and needs the relief ASAP. However, only building the southern leg doesn't solve that capacity problem, it merely moves it away from London towards the Stafford area. Yeah, there might be London-centric reasons why that bit of the WCML is the busiest line in the country, but it is because it is busy, not because it goes to London that is why Phase 1 is between London and Birmingham.
As an engineer HS2 is so infuriating - the cost of a major project is led entirely by 1) how much you change it and 2) inflation from delaying it, not by its initial cost. Majority of the cost of the project is chopping and changing and pandering to NIMBYs (when Tories had to do sketchy deals to stay in power), which was massively expensive. Just effing get it done. It’s the only way. Just do it.
@@johnl.7754 except Italy is doing six or seven high speed rail lines at once. Projects like HS2 cost far less in other countries, because they have more efficient planning systems. It's not that we couldn't build HS2 within budget, faster, and better than the pretty bad plan for it.
and there are (for now) hardly any reports about cost overruns on these projects in Italy. Imo, this is because Italy has streamlined the burocracy and cut off almost all overhead costs on these projects. There is one vote in parliament and the burocratic permissions are signed by one person after hearings. Evictions are basically just a formality and there is no stupid compensation scheme for land owners not even close to the new infrastructure (like in the UK)
HS2 is one of those projects where you just have to do it to invest in the future of the country in regards to infrastructure no matter how much it's going to cost that's not to say that the government shouldn't look at saving money where possible but it mustn't be done in a way that negatively impact what is trying to provided through the project, nor increasing life time cost of the infrastructure
@@user-op8fg3ny3j two party system just means no moderation and a fear of pissing off the electorate in the next election cycle. They can't stand the possible idea of short term financial investment for long term gain as it'll affect them at the ballot box. Other democracies are much more representative so it doesn't feel like the 'other guys' are doing stuff to annoy the ones who didn't vote for them.
The expected cost revisions shot up due to NIMBYism. The majority of the costs are in the south where MPs refused to support it without costly unnecessary infrastructure like tunneling where it was not required, because they wanted to protect their leafy constituency. The whole situation is a joke and should be completed in it's entirety. Nothing but the platinum option should be done. The tunnel boring machines are already en route to the site.
NIMBYism and concerns for everything from newts to butterflies while we are trying to compete globally, care for British people and properly funded defence of our country.
It even worst, even without those MPs, Cameron had the votes to get this project through as the majority of Labour MPs were backing the project. But being the coward, spineless leader he was, caved in anyway. He really was one of the worst prime ministers in history.
Just fucking finish it properly. It costs what it costs. Roads aren't expected to make profit or be cheap to maintain but they are essential. It will pay for itself very quickly once operational.
just look at the taxes, middle class can't bear this much taxes. This project isn't exactly free, someone has to pay, that someone is the middle class. Millionaires and billionaires already pack their bag and go somewhere else (usually Australia or dubai). Middle class doesn't have anywhere to go
@@mustyHead6 Isn't this something you would want to pay for? Why wouldn't you want to see many of your countrie's cities thrive and grow because of this link and all the job opportunities it enables by linking together millions of people? It's a good thing to spend money on, something that actually makes a permanent good difference and can be enjoyed by everyone no matter how rich or poor.
@@mustyHead6 no, their children would pay. But since completing high speed rail from Edinburgh to Kent, and across the country, and to Belfast and Dublin, would dramatically increase the economy of the UK, they actually wouldn't pay at all. Much like the Channel Tunnel which carries about half our freight in and out of the country, has paid for itself many times over, or the Severn Crossing. This is not rocket science. It's cheap at twice the price. It'll still be there in a thousand years.
@@R4Z3RHD look, just because infrastructure linking projects like road and rail create massive economic booms for both cities or all if it's multiple cities, and have demonstrable returns in study after study, which most benefits, like all economic improvement, millionaires and billionaires, doesn't mean we should pay for it with entirely fictional money we 'print', loans the grandchildren have to pay of but will be able to handle easily due to their obscene wealth from having it, or fixing literally any waste in the planning system making it cost a third what it does, doesn't mean we should do it! We also shouldn't have a massive NHS program to combat obesity since that would only benefit fat people, and what's wrong with being big boned anyway?! We might as well try and convince a house brick that it's important to vote, as convince these 'finite pot of money' folks how countries really work. I've walked through literal Roman sewers in the UK (well, even as a kid, there was some hunching over but they still exist). This infrastructure will only last hundreds or thousands of years, so it's a bit steep to pay for. I mean, one day they'll probably have to significantly repair the Channel Tunnel... why build another for even faster passenger trains and more freight? It's not like cargo ships ever sink, or are slow and expensive and much harder to electrify. Obviously Crossrail was a massive waste of money too, because that hasn't improved journeys around London or created vast wealth for the country, and those big, comfortable, long, clean, fast, quiet trains until some tourist breaks convention and tries to.... *shudders* speak to you, aren't doing anyone any good!
The Tories had tried to "salt the earth" for Labour with this project, before they left. They had planned to sell all of the land, that was purchased for the project, immediately after Sunak announced that HS2 was being stopped. This would have, 100%, killed HS2 forever. Unfortunately, for the Tories (and, fortunately, for the country) - Sunak called the snap election before the land was actually sold! This put the land sale in a limbo, and it was halted until a new government came in. Now, at least, the government does still own the land (it was purchased for €564 million - it's worth much more now), so this is a small glimmer of hope for the project. I wouldn't expect the whole thing to be seriously considered until they fix the huge black hole in the public finances, though.
If I was the leader of a socialist party at the time I would have just said told any buyers that we would not be respecting the sale or returning there money and see what the fall out was. But Sir Keir wasn't backing the line at the time
A crucial part of the original HS2 plan was to increase frieght capacity on the old (existing) line. This is especially needed between Nuneaton and Crewe, so by cutting HS2 back to Birmingham takes away it's primary benefit. Also the new high speed pasenger trains (with less seating) will have to share tracks with existing ones along that stretch. This will actually reduce passenger capacity from what it is now! And there's lots more but you covered many of those. Incidently there's another story people should know about. There's currently very little long-distance rail freight using the Channel Tunnel. This is partly because the two domestic rail routes up to London can't carry the bigger containers that are now standard. North of London they generally can so the problem is primarily Folkestone-London. According to a study done in 2022 it would cost just £50 million to fix that. There are 35 unused freight paths through the Tunnel which means roughly 2000 containers currently going by lorry could instead go by rail all the way to places like Birmingham etc. Rail uses inland customs facilities which means it by-passes the congetion at the ports. That congetion is why Operation Brock is often in force (including using the motorways as lorry parks) which costs the UK £250 million every day it's needed. Fixing the rail routes would certainly reduce that cost and to me it seems a complete no-brainer but apparently this government has refused to do it! This is a simplified version of what I recon should be a big story. The best full version I've seen is on a webinair by 'The PWI' which is on RUclips.
The Initial phase of the HS2 project should have started in the North to bring benefits the North of England and Scotland rather than waste money tunnelling under the Chilterns to silence the Nimbies and property speculators in predominantly Conservative constituencies.
Whenever this topic is raised we should always remember that a massive amount of the overspend was to reduce fairly minor amounts of noise and to block sightlines for a bunch of wealthy land owners in the south. Literally billions wasted trying to stop NIMBYs complaining. A train line between 2 of the biggest cities in the country that would serve thousands of people a day was cancelled so they had money to put stretches of it in tunnels to stop a dozen people moaning.
Get rid of planning laws such that I can build a house or a factory where ever the market demands. Town and Country planning act of 1948 made some headway to put us in this mess. Naturally it was a Labour innovation.
@@joeblogs6598 If it were a Labour government in charge while this happened they'd just have ignored these NIMBY's anyway because they were in Tory strongholds. The Tories pandered because they didn't want to lose their votes. Boris also pandered to a Tory MP who said he wouldn't vote against him for no confidence if they canned the link up to the West Coast Main Line, which Boris then did. Then left office anyway a few weeks later. So fat lot of good that did for old Bozo.
@@TalesOfWar Doesn't solve the fundamental issue of planning laws. No infrastructure can be built, no houses can be built, no factories can be built. I'm not at all supporting land confiscation/forced purchases. Merely stating that people should be able to do with their land as they choose.
@@joeblogs6598 People can do what they want with their land already, within reason. The problem with the current planning laws is any old idiot can contest pretty much anything regardless of where it is. I could contest to building of a phone mast down in Devon, which would trigger an consultation and delay it. I live in Manchester. This is how the Tories essentially banned the building of onshore wind turbines and solar farms from being built for so lon. They didn't ban them ouright, but made it incredibly easy to challenge them.
The cost increase is basically down to Government-led delays and changes. Every time they change the project, it requires a change of design that then costs more. All of the costs were also hugely exacerbated by Brexit inflation. In short, they needed to just go with the original plan and stick to it. And, if they don't build HS2, a future Government will have to because the current railways are not adequate to meet the country's needs as everyone who uses trains in the UK knows - so they're going to have to bite the bullet at some point, and the longer they wait the more expensive it will get.
Exactly. I recall multiple redesigns of a station for "cost-cutting", forgetting you need to *pay* designers and engineers to re-develop all those plans, seek approvals, etc they need to just build.
It just needs to get done. As soon as HS2 opens, the benefits will hit like a truck and everyone will realise how necessary it is. It will be extended eventually, it’s just disappointing that we have to wait several decades for a simple train
@@lighting7508 I agree. It's because of the Tory"gravy train of corruption" (pun intended) that has bled the investment and given it to corporate share holders.
@@lighting7508there are even benefits coming from it being built. There are 4400 parts to the London to Birmingham line, all of which with have federated BIM models. These will be integrated into the largest digital twin project in the world. HS2 is offering BIM training to the public and construction industry for free as a part of this. Then there are the economic benefits of investing in infrastructure projects and increased employment and stability in the construction industry, which suffered from Covid and Brexit.
Thank you for the clear explanation of the main purpose behind HS2 - so many commentators get hung up on reducing journey times and completely ignore the fact that it would allow us to more than double capacity on those overcrowded corridors.
@@FrozenDungno. Had enough disruption caused by cycle paths in rotherham and sheffield. I see a cyclist using them once in a blue moon. We need shut of them
@@aaroncousins4750what's the quality of these cycle paths? Do they abruptly end? Are there obstacles in the way? Any requirements to dismount? Are they even comfortable to use? If any one of these are true then ultimately it isn't fit for purpose and certainly not safe. It also needs to be a whole network before it starts to see proper ridership too.
@@blazikem they are perfectly fine. But no one cycles in rotherham or sheffield. We dont live in a flat area. It would take hours to get anywhere. And we can all afford to drive or catch a bus. Cycling is for if you live in a big city like london. Not a town where work is a 30min drive away, nevermind cycling
Railway projects are one of those things where if you aren’t going to do it properly then don’t bother. The current HS2 plan will only serve to create a bottleneck just north of Litchfield just south of an existing bottleneck at Colwich. If they aren’t going to do North and Euston (properly) they’d be better off stopping work tomorrow and taking all the contractors and equipment and putting to work on correcting railway bottlenecks caused by ‘cost saving’ in the British Railways days.
There's no hope for additional grow in the UK without massive rail investment in the UK. City wages and city housing costs are becoming hugely out of proportion. We need people able to get to high growth areas while having cheap housing and transport, as well as fast journey times.
As an American, I wish we could get our HSR line to Houston done. It’s been dragging its feet for over 15 years, and construction still hasn’t even started yet
@@metroidnerd9001if it makes you feel any better, at least your economy is strong enough that it can withstand dumb decisions like not investing in HSR. Here in the UK though, every decision like this makes the avg Briton noticeably poorer compared to what we could be and so, so, so many of these terrible decisions have been made over the last decade of conservatives mismanagement
@@peterwilliamallen1063 it's not more convenient, its cheaper that's it. If trains in the UK were as cheap as mainland Europe more people would use them
It should be brought back to its original scope, all contracts re-tendered, most of the consultants for consultants for consultants fired, and strong anti-NIMBY laws passed. And don't obsess about whether the construction phase is Net Zero friendly, because the finished product WILL be VERY Net Zero friendly. Bring in French engineers and project managers, since the French are able to build HSR for cheaper and much faster than the US or UK can build conventional rail. The US and UK need to learn to build rail projects like France does.
The Italians ans Spanish are actually even cheaper, and doing a pretty good job (I only don't understand the Spanish love for new stations at the edge of town instead of using their central stations, like in Burgos, Seville, Zaragoza...).
@@Joesolo13 I'm not convinced. Combined with some other things the Spanish do, it feels like they treat HS rail as air travel, while arriving in the city centre is the main advantage of rail over flying.
France fully built the Al Boraq line in Morocco along with the high speed trains. Even provided loans to the moroccans to pay for it and it seems to be quite successful so far.
Why isn't the government addressing why British infrastructure is so expensive in the first place? The rest of Europe has constructed high-speed infrastructure much cheaper than we have... Otherwise, these kinds of financial issues will continue.
Partly because a lot of European countries have dedicated companies that build large infrastructure, partly because they break it up into parts with short term deadlines that are more achievable and partly because planning costs and red tape in this country are an absolute joke. Look at the Thames Tunnel, 800 million spent and not 1 spade stuck into the ground it probably won't even happen now
It’s not just express trains catching up commuter trains. It’s freight. the West Coast main line has seen a huge boom in container traffic and they simply can’t path any more down the West Coast main line without reducing the amount of Passenger trains on the line. The environmental advantages of HS2 by removing so many lorries off the road has never been Front centre of the public marketing but it is actually its main reason for construction.
@@ExoticDoll-ct3ud Tesco move most of their products for the north of England and Scotland from the distribution centre in Crick in Northamptonshire up the West Coast main line. Crick is near junction of M1, A14 and M6. Tesco estimate they’ve removed 29 million lorry miles a year by switching to freight trains. We need more railways and intermodal points around the UK so that more and more freight can be moved on the railways.
@@Locomattive8572 I agree totally. I gave up my car last yr so back to public transport for me. I also wish to moe up north to Gainsborough or Doncaster. Do U know the HS2 LEEDS route plz? PS- i h8 Tesco but i have been shopping in Lidl, Boots & Superdrug. Where are their distribution centres I wonder?
Is there a study or something that shows if new train lines reduce truck traffic on the roads? I haven't looked for one, but anecdotally, I know about Germany's experiment with the 49 euro ticket (that gives you the option of using all public transport in all Germany for the whole month). It was supposed to reduce traffic cause people were supposed to prefer taking the public transport rather than cars. But more than a year in, it hasn't reduced traffic at all. There's basically the same amount of cars on the road. The only difference is that public transport became even more crowded and unreliable than it already was.
@@Notsogoodguitarguy Comparing apples and oranges there, aren’t you? Discount incentives to use public transport vs building out more capacity. A better analogy would be if you upgrade or build a new road to reduce congestion. Many studies of doing that show it usually increases demand, and so has a much smaller congestion reduction effect than predicted. If you apply the same to rail, for example a line that is already at capacity such as WCML, then if more capacity is added it almost certainly will get taken up to some extent. You can argue the toss about how much if you like. Still the fact remains WCML is at capacity and nothing practical that can be done to improve the situation, as all the easy fixes (longer trains and platforms, etc) have already been tried in the last 150 odd years.
The only irreversible legacy of a government is the infrastructure that it leaves behind - The HS2 Railway needs to be completed no matter the cost - And more projects of its kind wouldn't hurt either!
Call me a cynic, but I've come to the conclusion over time that the Northern leg of HS2 was cheap land purchasing through compulsory purchasing and building of road infrastructure (ostensibly to service the HS2 construction)to then sell off to developers who otherwise wouldn't have had a hope in hell of purchasing the green belt land. Constant changes of the plan allowed the costs to spiral, no new Northern infrastructure was delivered and it caused uncertainty for business that may have been considering moving out of the South-East to save money.
HS2 trains would have served Newcastle and Edinburgh, by running on existing lines. Newcastle trains would have run on HS2 from London to just outside York and then on the ECML. Edinburgh trains would have run on HS2 from London to Golborne (near Warrington) and then on the WCML. Further extensions of the high speed network to reach those cities could have happened at a later date, and it's very likely that demand for it would have followed quickly. Harder to integrate Cardiff in this network, but entirely possible that we could then have seen a high speed line from London to Bristol with branches to South Wales and the West Country coming next.
@@stevieinselby how would it connect to Cardiff. Cardiff to London is a separate line it would have not connected as H2 would have been a separate line as H2 would have been a high speed and electrified which Cardiff is not . and bearing mind they classed it a England and Wales project even though no track of it would be in Wales or near Wales so Wales would not have had any benefit from it and also mind Scotland and Northern Ireland had money off the government because of it where Wales did not and it was also have to pay some money to it
@@paulheader100 I said very clearly that you wouldn't connect to Cardiff from HS2 and it would be a completely new line. Beyond that, I haven't got a clue what you're saying, so come back and have another go when you've learned what punctuation is and then I'll answer it.
@@stevieinselby if you couldn't understand what I said that's a you problem not my problem. the fact you manage to understand it what I put because you clearly responded to it says a lot there was no need for being rude it just shows you up
I thought the original plans were to extend the European high speed network to northern England and later to Scotland. No wonder people in northern England and Scotland feel neglected while politicians keep focussing on the capital London.
Yep. Eurostar was originally supposed to terminate in Manchester. They built a big depot for it and everything, which is now used for the Metrolink Trams instead. It was supposed to go up the West Coast Main Line, not sure if it was ever supposed to get its own track under the original plan. Also I'm pretty sure the original plan for HS2 or what it became was to link with HS1 under Euston, Kings Cross St Pancras in some mega underground super station which would interface with all the Tube lines already under there.
Imagine a country where they do decide to downsize it, but they keep the parts connecting Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds to provide people in the North with the opportunity to be in either one of the other two cities in less than 30 minutes. But no, of course if it's not about London, it's not worth doing.
From what I had understood the main problem of HS2 was that everyone who complained HS2 was going near them had a tunnel given to calm them down... Even in the middle of nowhere
Meanwhile when we complain about the UK government invading our basic privacys, we get shutdown. "Everyone who complained" must be a very special group of everyones.
Euston End should be completed to the 11 platforms needed. An it should be completed up to Crew for the Northern End. Once those two are complete rebrand the Leeds lines and manchest lines to something else and build them. West to East high speed 1 for he Leeds segment, high speed North for the section from Crew to Manchester. for example.
Especially considering the country is pretty small and flat as European countries go. Utterly embarrassing. But ofc the Brexit folk will "clap back" with Britain inventing rail. As if that doesn't make it worse.
Terminal stations in inner city areas are a huge waste of money. It would be better to tunnel under central London with through platforms under Euston and Waterloo and perhaps another one, and HS2 should also directly connect to HS1.
TDLR: what everyone has forgotten is the original purpose of the high speed rail connection was to link Heathrow and Birmingham airports, the project was expanded when the UK applied to the EU to have the line included in the trans European rail netowrk: Ten-T. When the UK dropped out of the EU the funding was also dropped and the UK government was faced with a huge bill to complete the HS2 connection from Central London to Birmingham then onto Manchester, Leeds, etc. which it had to drop. You Know the rest: Birmingham to Ickenham Junction, Hillingdon :)
Why don't UK just give the project to China or Japan whole-handed-ly and let them do it😂? China will finish the whole thing from London to Manchester in 2 or 3 years- Japan will take a bit longer but they have better trains. both much better options then doing it yourself
The British have the technica capabilities to do it themselves, the problem is largely political and we´ve chosen to do it with a really crap conglomerate instead of just getting the state to do it.
Anyone who's travelled on the Shinkansen knows how revolutionary that form of travel would be for democratising work, leisure, and improving the environment in the UK. London to Glasgow in 2 hours! The fact the Japanese built it in the 1960s and we're still struggling with Victorian infrastructure is an embarrassing show of political short-termism, corporate greed, and the UK's decline.
There’s currently a massive great scar in the landscape through the Chiltern Hills at Wendover as they have cleared the land for the HS2 line. With the environmental damage already done they better get on and finish it.
It’s easy to say (I get that) - BUT - just build what we need! A HS2 going through the backbone of the country to as many major city’s as feasibly possible. Yes it will cost more, but one day, when it’s inevitably extended, it’ll cost way more anyway Mortgage it up for a 100 years!
64bn for nothing at the moment, i never understood scrapping the most important leg of the journey that gets you to London. Either tear up the line and sell it for scrap to countries investing in growth and infrastructure, or finish at least the part of the job that is 95% done.
Personally I feel that NSIPs such as this should have a special designated power over interest groups etc. whereby it just gets built. Yes some people will be upset, some badgers will be moved etc; just get it built and people will get used to it being there!
I think you will find the cost includes for refurbishing the existing station. Putting a new roof on the existing station will cost more than 1 billion which would need smoke curtains to fire compartmentalise the roof, smoke extractors, cleaning cradles inside and outside to clean the roof and scaffolding the entire roof. When they re roofed Kibgs Cross I think it cost 800 million. And that was some years ago.
Heathrow terminal 5 cost £4 billion and that was a decade ago and wasn't in central London and was privately funded. Terminals of all kinds are horribly expensive to build in city centres, so the quoted cost to rebuild Euston and add HS2 is about what I expected. It's a big site and I would rather it was built correctly and future proofed regardless of the cost.
It would be completely stupid not to extend HS2 into Euston. We are told that the West Coast Main Line will reach capacity by 2030 so it is essential to at east restore HS2 to Crewe as this would solve some bad bottlenecks on the existing line.
Bluntly, the tunnels to Euston must be dug now. Because, the TBMs have been ordered for a while and arrive this year (as the delivery time can be quite long) hence the 1bn injection in May, and because they tunnel from Old Oak Common. Which means soil is extracted through Old Oak Common. Which means it can't be opened unless the tunnels are dug. Euston can come later if needed, but the tunnels will be dug. It would be rather idiotic to have tunnels to Euston and not build the station as soon as possible, but we're talking the UK here, so god knows. In short, Sunak's cuts to Euston and Phase 2B are completely idiotic and make no logistical or future operational sense.
At least thatcher was competent she had a goal and a vision for the uk and had principles she was always honest about what she was going to do and she always fought for what she believed in during an election you always new what you were getting with thatcher because she would tell you unlike the current tories and labour who don’t have principles, always u turn and people have no idea what they stand for because they don’t tell you or the u turn on their policies at least with thatcher you knew what you would get if you voted for her and she at least had a vision
Missed massive chunk of the narrative about either the reinstatement of 2a to Crewe as per hs2 design or the northwest rail link proposal from Street and Burnham
It's super helpful that you guys bothered to point out that the train, and not the person, is the HS2 in the thumbnail! I was confused there for a moment.
@@Alex-ll3ig I’m sorry, but according to world standards 200 km/h is not considered High Speed train. Regards from Spain. We do have the ‘know how’ to build HS with more than 4000 km HS network in the second highest country in Europe after Switzerland, including hundreds of tunnels and long bridges and connecting over 25 major cities. Pretty soon there will be 35 cities and 5000 km network when the Mediterranean corridor and the Basque corridor will be finished before 2030. All that infraestructure is completed at one of the lowest cost per mile in Europe.
@@St0rrrmoh! I’m so sorry. I forgot I was writing where picky British are refusing how foreigners use their language. So I say it in Spanish, it doesn’t sound snobbish at all. Saludos desde España 🇪🇸
Surely completing HS2 has to be inevitable? What I mean is that in another half a century we’ll still not have high speed rail? (And still want it). How long will it take to connect the whole country with high-speed rail? I’m only 30 but already thinking now probably not in my life time!
They should stop this stupid cost plus thing entirely. A company agrees to a price they do it for that price and no more. As it is they just make up whatever price they want to get the bid knowing they can increase whenever. If they bid an lose money so be it. Though I imagine we also need to make whichever company actually has the money liable rather than letting them get away with oh our subsidiary which actually owns nothing is the one with the contract not us so it so it just vanishes doing us no harm BS ultimately leaving the taxpayer with the bill and no benefit.
Contractors can only put a fixed price all risk offer in place if the full scope of work is known. It still isn't. And even if they could they wouldn't on a Contract in the billions because their profit margins of about 2% wouldn't cover them if the job went wrong and if a billion plus contract did go wrong it would wipe them out.
But then it's also built as it was planned. Since, new tunnels have been added so some NIMBYs don't have to change their dog walk, detours are made to avoid felling some trees, etc.
Cant we just have a government owned rail line building company that will continually improve the rail network. Its not a case of if but when. We will need phase 2b, we will need it to go to Scotland at some point, so just build it in the most logical way possible.
HS2 as is may actually reduce rail capacity, as when HS2 trains continue on to existing lines, they'll be slower than the commuter trains currently there, because HS2 trains dont tilt. Amazingly stupid. Green Signals podcast Ep2 and 6 cover a huge amount of detail. Ep2 is over an hour with the Technical Director of HS2 explaining the madness of the cuts.
here's a bold idea: why stop at euston? why not build the line to stratford international so that eurostar trains can go on to the north and transform the station into what it was intended to be
This is a very good video but it's not entirly accurate to say the cost of the tunnel to Euston will fall on taxpayers. Even under Labour's restrictive fiscal rules, the government is allows to borrow to invest in major projects. This implies that eventually the taxpayer will have to pay for it, but as we've already seen the costs of NOT investing become higher over time because eventually you will have to solve the capacity problems
At the complete bear minimum, it must go to Euston, and it must go to Crewe, for any chance of actually increasing capacity. And the Crewe leg was pocket change compared to the rest of the project, so why it was cut, I don't know
Im assuming thats a throughrunning station? A terminus functions very differently from a throughrunning station. A very busy throughrunning station can do with way less platforms then a terminus station as a terminus station simply needs the space for trains to stand still for their next departure, or stable to the yard, and overall turnaround times are simply longer then a train entering a throughrunning station and leaving 3 minutes later.
euston has 16 platforms already and most of them are empty, i have no idea why expanding it with more platforms is needed. its running on the same width track as everything else and its not going to be doing 100+mph into the station. the avanti trains are 11 cars long and still have space at the end of the platforms so it doesent need lengthening either and they were awarded the contract to run it so its probably going to be the same trains too. it makes 0 sense.
@@sheeple04 Nope, it was Tokyo Shinkansen terminus for Tohoku, Joetsu and Hokuriku lines/trains - youtube ID was 8Ge81gKqtvE - every four minutes a train left and another one pulled in and they had, at most, 12 minutes at station for turn around. Video itself is like 23 minutes but they most likely ran for more than half an hour.
@@NuSpirit_ According to most sources I see Tokyo station has 10 platforms. They are in different sections so it's possible that video is of a section of the station.
@@Joesolo13 those 4 platforms were 20, 21, 22 and 23 and are for lines to the north of Japan (by JR East). Separate Shinkansen platforms (not connected to those 4) are platforms 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and are for central/west of Japan (by JR Central). They are next to each other, but not connected (directly) to each other nor used as a through rails.
Scotland and northern Ireland don't have to pay for HS2 so why should Wales. The whole project is entirely in England and gives no benefit to Wales. It is even a detriment to Wales as the building works will disrupt trains between Cardiff and London.
It's a benefit only to London, leveling up don't make me laugh it always was just a feeder project so the vampire can suck more blood from the rest of the UK.
Should Wales pay for HS2? No. Are you undermining a very valid point with the "HS2 doesn't go to Wales"? Yes. Wales will benefit from HS2, more so than Scotland and N.I., because Wales has trains that go to HS2-affected cities without sharing tracks with the new HS2 services. Cardiff, Aberystwyth, and Holyhead all have services to either London Euston, Birmingham or Manchester along lines that will have massive capacity boosts from HS2, meaning those Welsh services can run more frequently and more reliably. Scotland would have these same benefits if HS2 didn't dump trains onto the WCML north of Manchester. So, while no new track will be built in Wales, Wales will benefit, and I must ask that you stop undermining your very valid point with worse-than-useless reasoning.
@@MasterTramsRUclips by that logic England should pay for rail infrastructure in France in case an English person wants to use it after they get off the Euro Star. It makes no sense for wales to pay for HS2 which is obviously a railway line between London and Birmingham. Why should Wales pay for our larger neighbour to build their railway line?
Being an Irish person that grew up with all my male family members working in England and making their money there, and being interested in Victorian history....its so crazy to see how crappy, poor, and what a mess the UK has become
I really hope they will build it in full and stop this obsession with cost. This is an investment. Rachel needs to change this mindset of the treasury. They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing
It would be nice to have another new line running along the route of the M1 motorway as well as HS2. You could also have a connection from Swindon via Oxford to the half way point on HS2. The lines going out of Euston and Paddington pass quite closely and could benefit from a link.
The government are impossibly shit at estimating cost. The way budgets are distributed are flawed and unhealthy, all those estimates are stupidly low and/or ismanaged.
@kb4903 That's not the whole truth, it's because companies are encouraged to lie at the start. After all, the government will always go for the "cheapest" cost, so if you can lie your way to being cheaper than the other liars, you've basically got yourself a free project and license to go massively overbudget.
In this case, the significant scope changes and delays are the lions share of the increases. I'm not suggesting the project way planned flawlessly, bus scope changes are the commonest killer of any project regrdless of scale.
just stop giving power to NIMBY's and explain to people the actual reasoning behind HS2 most people seem to think the project is just to have a slighlty faster railway to london which is why they dont want it because it doesn't seem worth it. Unless the UK can begin to fix its insane beaurocracy issues it will never be able to build proper infrastructure.
The name was a terrible piece of "political branding". If it had been called something like "North-South Rail Capacity Upgrade" then I'm convinced it wouldn't have been cancelled.
@peterwilliamallen1063 Aye, more major infrastructure for the South who complain and block every stage until it's 20 times the cost. Meanwhile we "pander" to the North who still run diesel trains on victorian track 6 times a day.
@@MrSamuelHorton So it does in Birmingham, unlike trains from Manchester and Liverpool that have a 4 to 6 line wide railway from Crewe to London , from Birmingham with the line running from Stafford through Birmingham and Coventry to Rugby it is a two line track with a speed of 90 mph with a totl over load of passenger services dcausing grid lock at te Uk's busiest Sttion out side of London, Birmingham New Street, tht is why HS2 is being built to provide more capacity on the existing major WCML route through the Trent Valley to London Euston.
@peterwilliamallen1063 Which travels through Stoke and Tamworth, close to Birmingham which is on a line which reconnects with Crewe-London at Rugby. Vast majority of it is southern infrastructure serving the south west. Connections within the north are more or less unchanged since the 50s, and many major northern lines aren't even electrified yet.
In France and Germany a lot of High Speed lines was build without any great problems and discussion in the past. Now UK tries to build an own HS-Line and is overcharged from this problem. Looks similar to the California HS-Project which also sucks heavily. And China builds ten thousands Km HS-Lines per year. What goes wrong in UK, USA etc. ? Germany sucks currently too. Germany should build the connections to Gotthard and Brenner base tunnels. But nothing happens in lazy Germany too.
But those two tunnels are not German. One is Swiss and the other Austrian. They are not going to agree to connect to the German network unless both countries benefit as well.
@@philipdouglas5911 The swiss and austrian tunnels are part of the Trans European train Network. This means, that the lines going through swiss and austria don't end at swiss and austrian borders. And the continuation through Germany from this Alps Tunnels to middle and north Europe make no advancements. I do not know how Italy and France works on linking in the new Transalpin tunnels into their national lines network. But in Germany it sucks like HS2 in Britain. Nevertheless Germany has tracks which can serve Gotthard and Brenner tunnel supply. They do this for over 150 years. But this is not the expected performance lines for an trans european High Speed network. But perhaps it will make small continuation. Currently Germany spent 20 Billion for Stuttgart 21 project. This contains beside the new train station around 100 Km new High Speed tracks around Stuttgart, which is also part of the TEN project.
I don't see why a lot of HS2 couldn't just be implemented incrementally, e.g. Focus on the line to old oak then if in demand and effective develop the Line to Euston and again if in high demand and useful develop the Euston station. Finally, perhaps look to develop the northan aspects of the line in the further future if it was very successful in the south.
Yeah that'll work cos everyone wants to go to old oak common 😂 oh look no ones using it, no demand, so no point building the rest. Wonder why they aren't using it 🤔
This will be a great idea, if it was coming off the back of legislation that broke down all the barriers that made the first attempt so costly. We need to get to the stage where we can build as a country at comparable speed and costs to our economic rivals. At the current rate, we are always losing.
The uk only does huge projects and then does nothing for years. Other countries simply continually keep building stuff. That creates a steady experience base and a lof of efficienty that makes everything much more streamlined and cheaper then always starting everything from scratch.
Build the entire thing, stations and all as it was originally planned. Whatever it takes, I don’t care. It’s ridiculous that this has been done so many times in other countries of similar size and we, one of the most heavily taxed countries in Europe cannot even build one rail line.
The HS2 team need to take a good, hard look at how HS1 was project managed and try to emulate it. I believe the main Project Manager basically hid as much of the budgeted amounts as he could to prevent private contractors from over-quoting.
The tunnel boring machines for Old Oak Common to Euston already exist and are in the ground at OOC at the start of the tunnel to Euston. They had to be installed this year as if not they wouldn't have been able to continue building OOC so are now building the station around them.
The problem is if they were to build it faster like other countries manage to do. The cost wouldn't have spiked so much would have had it don't way before COVID and inflation issues
Thank you for the content!! All we need is the right advice on how to invest in crypto and we will be set for life, I’ve made huge figures from trading regardless of the market conditions😊
I feel the same way. I believe the approval of Bitcoin ETFs will be a life-changing opportunity for us. With my current portfolio, managed by my personal financial advisor, Audrey Lauren , I completely agree with you.
If you don't want to crash and burn, you should seek the advice of a fiduciary counselor when you first start out. Because their entire skill set is based on going long and short at the same time, they employ a profit-driven strategy based on individual risk tolerance.
A lot of people still make massive profit from the crypto market, all you really need is a relevant information and some < professional advice. ‹ it's totally inappropriate for investors to hang on while suffering from dip during significant
Despite being one of the few even handed looks at the project this still spreads misinfo about the project. All budgets prior to 2018 were for incomplete versions of the project. Meaning without trains, without stations, without any real world estimates.
Since HS2 was proposed, China has built 25,000 miles of high-speed rail. Spain has added 1,200 miles. But, somehow we can’t build just 336 miles?
Have you seen how the Chinese build high speed rail? It goes in straight lines and the entire process is highly automated, like a 21st century version of the lines across the American West. We don't have the space.
Our population density is a lot higher than China or Spain, and inflated land prices are an additional burden.
In China it is just steamrollered in and objections get you put into prison.
@@EbenBransome yeah, we invented rail, and we dug a tunnel under the Channel with the French of all people. It would have been trivial to just dig a tunnel from Birmingham to Manchester, and one from Birmingham to London (two or three technically but you get the point).
I don't know if you've seen Crossrail in person but it shows that it's perfectly possible for us to do this, and Crossrail was hard since it went within centimetres of existing foundations and had to thread through all sorts of underground lines, rivers (there are river in pipes, going through some train stations, as bonkers as that sounds until someone shows you what the big pipe actually is), gas, electric and internet lines and so on. If we'd just cracked on, it'd have been done by now.
@@EbenBransomeWe literally have the space to do multiple of this. How else would those HS2 routes be defined if it was impossible.
However the space we do have is more complicated to build in, which makes it significantly more expensive to do so.
@@EbenBransomerailways go in generally straight lines or very gentle curves because they have to.
Every single infrastructure project like this should start at the northern end. That way, southern nimbyism can't tank the budget early, and the project has value before it's complete. If they had started HS2 in Manchester, we'd now have high speed rail between Manchester and Birmingham, and we'd have a lot more money available to continue it. By starting in London, the part of HS2 that did get completed is useless.
@@yurisei6732 good shout
Wasn't it supposed to go to Scotland? BTW, I think you've the right approach!
Spot on. Even as a Londoner myself, I knew that the whole HS2 project should have been started in Manchester or Leeds.
Higher land costs in the south (because of closer proximity to London) meant that the budget was reached far quicker than would have been the case, had it been built from north to south.
Plus, as you mentioned, fighting 'NIMBY'S' in Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire ate up a larger amount of the budget than people think.
Absolutely. As much as I love a London rail connection, we really should be focusing on better connecting the north as a priority
The reason it was started in London isn't directly because of any southern bias. It is simply because the WCML south of Birmingham is at or even over capacity, and needs the relief ASAP. However, only building the southern leg doesn't solve that capacity problem, it merely moves it away from London towards the Stafford area.
Yeah, there might be London-centric reasons why that bit of the WCML is the busiest line in the country, but it is because it is busy, not because it goes to London that is why Phase 1 is between London and Birmingham.
As an engineer HS2 is so infuriating - the cost of a major project is led entirely by 1) how much you change it and 2) inflation from delaying it, not by its initial cost. Majority of the cost of the project is chopping and changing and pandering to NIMBYs (when Tories had to do sketchy deals to stay in power), which was massively expensive.
Just effing get it done. It’s the only way. Just do it.
Seems like the problems you state is also why big transportation projects also fail or go way over budget in other developed countries as well.
NIMBYIsm is a particularly bad British disease
@@johnl.7754 except Italy is doing six or seven high speed rail lines at once. Projects like HS2 cost far less in other countries, because they have more efficient planning systems. It's not that we couldn't build HS2 within budget, faster, and better than the pretty bad plan for it.
and there are (for now) hardly any reports about cost overruns on these projects in Italy. Imo, this is because Italy has streamlined the burocracy and cut off almost all overhead costs on these projects. There is one vote in parliament and the burocratic permissions are signed by one person after hearings. Evictions are basically just a formality and there is no stupid compensation scheme for land owners not even close to the new infrastructure (like in the UK)
@@jonevansauthor was thinking of the Los Angeles to San Francisco project. Of course maybe failures are reported more than successes.
HS2 is one of those projects where you just have to do it to invest in the future of the country in regards to infrastructure no matter how much it's going to cost that's not to say that the government shouldn't look at saving money where possible but it mustn't be done in a way that negatively impact what is trying to provided through the project, nor increasing life time cost of the infrastructure
Doesn't make sense when our government can only think in 5 year election cycles.
@@themasqueradingcow91 yet other democracies still are able to get it done. There's something about UK politics
@@user-op8fg3ny3j two party system just means no moderation and a fear of pissing off the electorate in the next election cycle. They can't stand the possible idea of short term financial investment for long term gain as it'll affect them at the ballot box. Other democracies are much more representative so it doesn't feel like the 'other guys' are doing stuff to annoy the ones who didn't vote for them.
@@themasqueradingcow91 nno wonder America has the same problem as us then
Facts
The expected cost revisions shot up due to NIMBYism. The majority of the costs are in the south where MPs refused to support it without costly unnecessary infrastructure like tunneling where it was not required, because they wanted to protect their leafy constituency. The whole situation is a joke and should be completed in it's entirety. Nothing but the platinum option should be done.
The tunnel boring machines are already en route to the site.
NIMBYism and concerns for everything from newts to butterflies while we are trying to compete globally, care for British people and properly funded defence of our country.
It even worst, even without those MPs, Cameron had the votes to get this project through as the majority of Labour MPs were backing the project. But being the coward, spineless leader he was, caved in anyway. He really was one of the worst prime ministers in history.
@@gdok6088 I think they care less about the environment and more about their property value
@@user-op8fg3ny3j Which is still ridiculous because rail access increases value.
@@Joesolo13 true, but we're talking about people who thinks trains look ugly
Just fucking finish it properly. It costs what it costs. Roads aren't expected to make profit or be cheap to maintain but they are essential. It will pay for itself very quickly once operational.
just look at the taxes, middle class can't bear this much taxes. This project isn't exactly free, someone has to pay, that someone is the middle class. Millionaires and billionaires already pack their bag and go somewhere else (usually Australia or dubai). Middle class doesn't have anywhere to go
@@mustyHead6 millionaires and billionaires can go wherever they want, their business's cannot
@@mustyHead6 Isn't this something you would want to pay for? Why wouldn't you want to see many of your countrie's cities thrive and grow because of this link and all the job opportunities it enables by linking together millions of people? It's a good thing to spend money on, something that actually makes a permanent good difference and can be enjoyed by everyone no matter how rich or poor.
@@mustyHead6 no, their children would pay. But since completing high speed rail from Edinburgh to Kent, and across the country, and to Belfast and Dublin, would dramatically increase the economy of the UK, they actually wouldn't pay at all. Much like the Channel Tunnel which carries about half our freight in and out of the country, has paid for itself many times over, or the Severn Crossing. This is not rocket science. It's cheap at twice the price. It'll still be there in a thousand years.
@@R4Z3RHD look, just because infrastructure linking projects like road and rail create massive economic booms for both cities or all if it's multiple cities, and have demonstrable returns in study after study, which most benefits, like all economic improvement, millionaires and billionaires, doesn't mean we should pay for it with entirely fictional money we 'print', loans the grandchildren have to pay of but will be able to handle easily due to their obscene wealth from having it, or fixing literally any waste in the planning system making it cost a third what it does, doesn't mean we should do it! We also shouldn't have a massive NHS program to combat obesity since that would only benefit fat people, and what's wrong with being big boned anyway?!
We might as well try and convince a house brick that it's important to vote, as convince these 'finite pot of money' folks how countries really work.
I've walked through literal Roman sewers in the UK (well, even as a kid, there was some hunching over but they still exist). This infrastructure will only last hundreds or thousands of years, so it's a bit steep to pay for. I mean, one day they'll probably have to significantly repair the Channel Tunnel... why build another for even faster passenger trains and more freight? It's not like cargo ships ever sink, or are slow and expensive and much harder to electrify.
Obviously Crossrail was a massive waste of money too, because that hasn't improved journeys around London or created vast wealth for the country, and those big, comfortable, long, clean, fast, quiet trains until some tourist breaks convention and tries to.... *shudders* speak to you, aren't doing anyone any good!
If it was started in Leeds or Manchester, none of it would be cancelled.
The Tories had tried to "salt the earth" for Labour with this project, before they left. They had planned to sell all of the land, that was purchased for the project, immediately after Sunak announced that HS2 was being stopped. This would have, 100%, killed HS2 forever. Unfortunately, for the Tories (and, fortunately, for the country) - Sunak called the snap election before the land was actually sold! This put the land sale in a limbo, and it was halted until a new government came in. Now, at least, the government does still own the land (it was purchased for €564 million - it's worth much more now), so this is a small glimmer of hope for the project.
I wouldn't expect the whole thing to be seriously considered until they fix the huge black hole in the public finances, though.
Is there any links to the source of where this came from?I’d like to research more about this
An the Tories would have flogged the land off at bargain basement prices, like they did to several prison sites.
If I was the leader of a socialist party at the time I would have just said told any buyers that we would not be respecting the sale or returning there money and see what the fall out was.
But Sir Keir wasn't backing the line at the time
The minecraft rails are a nice touch haha.
Explains why HS2 budget went so high with all those powered rails needing gold to craft.
@@mkedzier123 They need to get some enchanted picks.
I was looking for this comment
A crucial part of the original HS2 plan was to increase frieght capacity on the old (existing) line. This is especially needed between Nuneaton and Crewe, so by cutting HS2 back to Birmingham takes away it's primary benefit. Also the new high speed pasenger trains (with less seating) will have to share tracks with existing ones along that stretch. This will actually reduce passenger capacity from what it is now! And there's lots more but you covered many of those.
Incidently there's another story people should know about. There's currently very little long-distance rail freight using the Channel Tunnel. This is partly because the two domestic rail routes up to London can't carry the bigger containers that are now standard. North of London they generally can so the problem is primarily Folkestone-London. According to a study done in 2022 it would cost just £50 million to fix that. There are 35 unused freight paths through the Tunnel which means roughly 2000 containers currently going by lorry could instead go by rail all the way to places like Birmingham etc. Rail uses inland customs facilities which means it by-passes the congetion at the ports. That congetion is why Operation Brock is often in force (including using the motorways as lorry parks) which costs the UK £250 million every day it's needed. Fixing the rail routes would certainly reduce that cost and to me it seems a complete no-brainer but apparently this government has refused to do it!
This is a simplified version of what I recon should be a big story. The best full version I've seen is on a webinair by 'The PWI' which is on RUclips.
No the last government refuse. We don't know what this government plan to do.
Should have been called High Capacity West or something
The Initial phase of the HS2 project should have started in the North to bring benefits the North of England and Scotland rather than waste money tunnelling under the Chilterns to silence the Nimbies and property speculators in predominantly Conservative constituencies.
Whenever this topic is raised we should always remember that a massive amount of the overspend was to reduce fairly minor amounts of noise and to block sightlines for a bunch of wealthy land owners in the south. Literally billions wasted trying to stop NIMBYs complaining. A train line between 2 of the biggest cities in the country that would serve thousands of people a day was cancelled so they had money to put stretches of it in tunnels to stop a dozen people moaning.
Get rid of planning laws such that I can build a house or a factory where ever the market demands.
Town and Country planning act of 1948 made some headway to put us in this mess. Naturally it was a Labour innovation.
@@joeblogs6598 If it were a Labour government in charge while this happened they'd just have ignored these NIMBY's anyway because they were in Tory strongholds. The Tories pandered because they didn't want to lose their votes. Boris also pandered to a Tory MP who said he wouldn't vote against him for no confidence if they canned the link up to the West Coast Main Line, which Boris then did. Then left office anyway a few weeks later. So fat lot of good that did for old Bozo.
@@TalesOfWar Doesn't solve the fundamental issue of planning laws.
No infrastructure can be built, no houses can be built, no factories can be built.
I'm not at all supporting land confiscation/forced purchases. Merely stating that people should be able to do with their land as they choose.
Also, in 50 years time, everyone would have been glad you got such a nice view from the train.
Rather than concrete tunnel walls...
@@joeblogs6598 People can do what they want with their land already, within reason. The problem with the current planning laws is any old idiot can contest pretty much anything regardless of where it is. I could contest to building of a phone mast down in Devon, which would trigger an consultation and delay it. I live in Manchester. This is how the Tories essentially banned the building of onshore wind turbines and solar farms from being built for so lon. They didn't ban them ouright, but made it incredibly easy to challenge them.
The cost increase is basically down to Government-led delays and changes. Every time they change the project, it requires a change of design that then costs more. All of the costs were also hugely exacerbated by Brexit inflation. In short, they needed to just go with the original plan and stick to it. And, if they don't build HS2, a future Government will have to because the current railways are not adequate to meet the country's needs as everyone who uses trains in the UK knows - so they're going to have to bite the bullet at some point, and the longer they wait the more expensive it will get.
Exactly. I recall multiple redesigns of a station for "cost-cutting", forgetting you need to *pay* designers and engineers to re-develop all those plans, seek approvals, etc
they need to just build.
If they do, I'll eat my hat, both shoes, and shut up and sit on the naughty step for the next 5 years.
Can I sell tickets. We can broadcast it to selected cinemas. I baggies the front row.
It just needs to get done. As soon as HS2 opens, the benefits will hit like a truck and everyone will realise how necessary it is. It will be extended eventually, it’s just disappointing that we have to wait several decades for a simple train
@@lighting7508 I agree. It's because of the Tory"gravy train of corruption" (pun intended) that has bled the investment and given it to corporate share holders.
@@lighting7508there are even benefits coming from it being built. There are 4400 parts to the London to Birmingham line, all of which with have federated BIM models. These will be integrated into the largest digital twin project in the world. HS2 is offering BIM training to the public and construction industry for free as a part of this.
Then there are the economic benefits of investing in infrastructure projects and increased employment and stability in the construction industry, which suffered from Covid and Brexit.
Honestly, I think I'd get bored after the eating is finished. I'm not watching someone sit on the stairs for five years. @@j.j.1064
Residents of Buckinghamshire did not want to see a fast train on surface. Hence, made HS2 to hide the track by building “green” tunnels on ground.
Utter bollocks, connect 20 million people using HS2 or piss off a few thousand OAPs in Bucks?
@@mildlydispleased3221 worst even, as an engineer I had to work on design of those fucking green tunnels.
Thank you for the clear explanation of the main purpose behind HS2 - so many commentators get hung up on reducing journey times and completely ignore the fact that it would allow us to more than double capacity on those overcrowded corridors.
If they want to lessen the dependency on London they need to connect more to Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds & even further
That's HS3, mate, which is apparently still happening.
Just remember that the British rebuilt 5/6 of the entire London in 10 years back in 1666.
It was somewhat smaller at the time. Why do you think you can walk around to all of Wren's sites in a matter of minutes?
...Of 1666's London, after a fire had burned a significant amount of it down.
most of the city was burnt down so they could start from scratch
NIMBYism ceases to be an issue when the whole city is already burned down.
give the north some treats please just a little infrastructure or investment
Money for cycle paths, trains and buses with bus lanes pls
@@FrozenDungno. Had enough disruption caused by cycle paths in rotherham and sheffield. I see a cyclist using them once in a blue moon. We need shut of them
@@aaroncousins4750what's the quality of these cycle paths?
Do they abruptly end? Are there obstacles in the way? Any requirements to dismount? Are they even comfortable to use?
If any one of these are true then ultimately it isn't fit for purpose and certainly not safe. It also needs to be a whole network before it starts to see proper ridership too.
Plenty of empty railway land ere in tees valley, enough to do a metro on the cheap.
@@blazikem they are perfectly fine. But no one cycles in rotherham or sheffield. We dont live in a flat area. It would take hours to get anywhere. And we can all afford to drive or catch a bus. Cycling is for if you live in a big city like london. Not a town where work is a 30min drive away, nevermind cycling
Railway projects are one of those things where if you aren’t going to do it properly then don’t bother. The current HS2 plan will only serve to create a bottleneck just north of Litchfield just south of an existing bottleneck at Colwich. If they aren’t going to do North and Euston (properly) they’d be better off stopping work tomorrow and taking all the contractors and equipment and putting to work on correcting railway bottlenecks caused by ‘cost saving’ in the British Railways days.
There's no hope for additional grow in the UK without massive rail investment in the UK. City wages and city housing costs are becoming hugely out of proportion. We need people able to get to high growth areas while having cheap housing and transport, as well as fast journey times.
According to the subtitles HS2 will go all the way up to Houston. That would explain the extra costs. 😁
As an American, I wish we could get our HSR line to Houston done. It’s been dragging its feet for over 15 years, and construction still hasn’t even started yet
@@metroidnerd9001if it makes you feel any better, at least your economy is strong enough that it can withstand dumb decisions like not investing in HSR. Here in the UK though, every decision like this makes the avg Briton noticeably poorer compared to what we could be and so, so, so many of these terrible decisions have been made over the last decade of conservatives mismanagement
That's real ambition
Euston we have a problem!
@@TryDiy Brilliant!
Connect HS2 with HS1!
That would be amazing.
Based and tunnelpilled
For what reason, empty trains from Birmingham and Manchester because every one found it more convienient to fly, what utter rubbish
@@peterwilliamallen1063 it's not more convenient, its cheaper that's it. If trains in the UK were as cheap as mainland Europe more people would use them
The Tories have already profited from buying and selling properties along the proposed routes.
And just as many labour property owners
Please just complete a major infrastructure project without conservative era policy fucking it up.
It should be brought back to its original scope, all contracts re-tendered, most of the consultants for consultants for consultants fired, and strong anti-NIMBY laws passed. And don't obsess about whether the construction phase is Net Zero friendly, because the finished product WILL be VERY Net Zero friendly. Bring in French engineers and project managers, since the French are able to build HSR for cheaper and much faster than the US or UK can build conventional rail. The US and UK need to learn to build rail projects like France does.
The Italians ans Spanish are actually even cheaper, and doing a pretty good job (I only don't understand the Spanish love for new stations at the edge of town instead of using their central stations, like in Burgos, Seville, Zaragoza...).
@@barvdw Much cheaper to build, and if the city has a decent metro or bus network it's not too much of an issue.
@@Joesolo13 I'm not convinced. Combined with some other things the Spanish do, it feels like they treat HS rail as air travel, while arriving in the city centre is the main advantage of rail over flying.
France fully built the Al Boraq line in Morocco along with the high speed trains. Even provided loans to the moroccans to pay for it and it seems to be quite successful so far.
Why isn't the government addressing why British infrastructure is so expensive in the first place? The rest of Europe has constructed high-speed infrastructure much cheaper than we have... Otherwise, these kinds of financial issues will continue.
Whereas we publish the costs of everything the Europeans only publish the cost of the track and trains. So a cost comparison is not possible.
Partly because a lot of European countries have dedicated companies that build large infrastructure, partly because they break it up into parts with short term deadlines that are more achievable and partly because planning costs and red tape in this country are an absolute joke. Look at the Thames Tunnel, 800 million spent and not 1 spade stuck into the ground it probably won't even happen now
It’s not just express trains catching up commuter trains. It’s freight. the West Coast main line has seen a huge boom in container traffic and they simply can’t path any more down the West Coast main line without reducing the amount of Passenger trains on the line. The environmental advantages of HS2 by removing so many lorries off the road has never been Front centre of the public marketing but it is actually its main reason for construction.
Good point, the A1 and M1 are terrible.
@@ExoticDoll-ct3ud Tesco move most of their products for the north of England and Scotland from the distribution centre in Crick in Northamptonshire up the West Coast main line. Crick is near junction of M1, A14 and M6. Tesco estimate they’ve removed 29 million lorry miles a year by switching to freight trains.
We need more railways and intermodal points around the UK so that more and more freight can be moved on the railways.
@@Locomattive8572 I agree totally. I gave up my car last yr so back to public transport for me. I also wish to moe up north to Gainsborough or Doncaster. Do U know the HS2 LEEDS route plz?
PS- i h8 Tesco but i have been shopping in Lidl, Boots & Superdrug. Where are their distribution centres I wonder?
Is there a study or something that shows if new train lines reduce truck traffic on the roads? I haven't looked for one, but anecdotally, I know about Germany's experiment with the 49 euro ticket (that gives you the option of using all public transport in all Germany for the whole month). It was supposed to reduce traffic cause people were supposed to prefer taking the public transport rather than cars. But more than a year in, it hasn't reduced traffic at all. There's basically the same amount of cars on the road. The only difference is that public transport became even more crowded and unreliable than it already was.
@@Notsogoodguitarguy Comparing apples and oranges there, aren’t you? Discount incentives to use public transport vs building out more capacity.
A better analogy would be if you upgrade or build a new road to reduce congestion. Many studies of doing that show it usually increases demand, and so has a much smaller congestion reduction effect than predicted. If you apply the same to rail, for example a line that is already at capacity such as WCML, then if more capacity is added it almost certainly will get taken up to some extent. You can argue the toss about how much if you like.
Still the fact remains WCML is at capacity and nothing practical that can be done to improve the situation, as all the easy fixes (longer trains and platforms, etc) have already been tried in the last 150 odd years.
The only irreversible legacy of a government is the infrastructure that it leaves behind - The HS2 Railway needs to be completed no matter the cost - And more projects of its kind wouldn't hurt either!
Call me a cynic, but I've come to the conclusion over time that the Northern leg of HS2 was cheap land purchasing through compulsory purchasing and building of road infrastructure (ostensibly to service the HS2 construction)to then sell off to developers who otherwise wouldn't have had a hope in hell of purchasing the green belt land.
Constant changes of the plan allowed the costs to spiral, no new Northern infrastructure was delivered and it caused uncertainty for business that may have been considering moving out of the South-East to save money.
Certainly seems like it was the torie intent.
Using Minecraft minecarts as a demo at 2:18 is so based
HS2 was a great opportunity to connect the whole UK. Cardiff, Newcastle and Edinburgh should’ve had a station.
How would it connect them places they would be connected by it
HS2 trains would have served Newcastle and Edinburgh, by running on existing lines.
Newcastle trains would have run on HS2 from London to just outside York and then on the ECML.
Edinburgh trains would have run on HS2 from London to Golborne (near Warrington) and then on the WCML.
Further extensions of the high speed network to reach those cities could have happened at a later date, and it's very likely that demand for it would have followed quickly.
Harder to integrate Cardiff in this network, but entirely possible that we could then have seen a high speed line from London to Bristol with branches to South Wales and the West Country coming next.
@@stevieinselby how would it connect to Cardiff. Cardiff to London is a separate line it would have not connected as H2 would have been a separate line as H2 would have been a high speed and electrified which Cardiff is not . and bearing mind they classed it a England and Wales project even though no track of it would be in Wales or near Wales so Wales would not have had any benefit from it and also mind Scotland and Northern Ireland had money off the government because of it where Wales did not and it was also have to pay some money to it
@@paulheader100 I said very clearly that you wouldn't connect to Cardiff from HS2 and it would be a completely new line. Beyond that, I haven't got a clue what you're saying, so come back and have another go when you've learned what punctuation is and then I'll answer it.
@@stevieinselby if you couldn't understand what I said that's a you problem not my problem. the fact you manage to understand it what I put because you clearly responded to it says a lot there was no need for being rude it just shows you up
I thought the original plans were to extend the European high speed network to northern England and later to Scotland.
No wonder people in northern England and Scotland feel neglected while politicians keep focussing on the capital London.
Yep. Eurostar was originally supposed to terminate in Manchester. They built a big depot for it and everything, which is now used for the Metrolink Trams instead. It was supposed to go up the West Coast Main Line, not sure if it was ever supposed to get its own track under the original plan. Also I'm pretty sure the original plan for HS2 or what it became was to link with HS1 under Euston, Kings Cross St Pancras in some mega underground super station which would interface with all the Tube lines already under there.
I can piss further than HS2's progress
Imagine a country where they do decide to downsize it, but they keep the parts connecting Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds to provide people in the North with the opportunity to be in either one of the other two cities in less than 30 minutes. But no, of course if it's not about London, it's not worth doing.
From what I had understood the main problem of HS2 was that everyone who complained HS2 was going near them had a tunnel given to calm them down... Even in the middle of nowhere
Meanwhile when we complain about the UK government invading our basic privacys, we get shutdown. "Everyone who complained" must be a very special group of everyones.
Private Investment is the cornerstone of public failure.
hs2 should be completed as a matter of principle. embarrassing this country doesn't have high speed rail across the country already.
Euston End should be completed to the 11 platforms needed. An it should be completed up to Crew for the Northern End.
Once those two are complete rebrand the Leeds lines and manchest lines to something else and build them. West to East high speed 1 for he Leeds segment, high speed North for the section from Crew to Manchester. for example.
Especially considering the country is pretty small and flat as European countries go.
Utterly embarrassing. But ofc the Brexit folk will "clap back" with Britain inventing rail.
As if that doesn't make it worse.
Country has zero money. Worse it has negative money. There is no ability to finance this.
@@joeblogs6598 this is what you do borrow money for. Actual investment.
@@LoisoPondohva Britain inventing rail is why the state of HS2 is such an utter embarrassment. We were the first, but now we're the worst.
Terminal stations in inner city areas are a huge waste of money. It would be better to tunnel under central London with through platforms under Euston and Waterloo and perhaps another one, and HS2 should also directly connect to HS1.
To short term thinking, things like HS2 pays dividends not over years but decades and centuries.
TDLR: what everyone has forgotten is the original purpose of the high speed rail connection was to link Heathrow and Birmingham airports, the project was expanded when the UK applied to the EU to have the line included in the trans European rail netowrk: Ten-T. When the UK dropped out of the EU the funding was also dropped and the UK government was faced with a huge bill to complete the HS2 connection from Central London to Birmingham then onto Manchester, Leeds, etc. which it had to drop. You Know the rest: Birmingham to Ickenham Junction, Hillingdon :)
Why don't UK just give the project to China or Japan whole-handed-ly and let them do it😂?
China will finish the whole thing from London to Manchester in 2 or 3 years- Japan will take a bit longer but they have better trains.
both much better options then doing it yourself
The British have the technica capabilities to do it themselves, the problem is largely political and we´ve chosen to do it with a really crap conglomerate instead of just getting the state to do it.
Really? China is joint owner of the South Western Railway franchise. It has not gone very well and its predecessor Southwest Trains was better.
we already are using japanese trains...
And they got the same capability as an engine we built 30 years ago...
So you want British workers to lose their jobs and the Chinese to set up a bunch of sleeper cells?
haha as if they haven't already @mappingshaman5280
Scotland was supposed to be connected but was the first leg to be axed. Japan and most of Europe have had their high speed trains running for years
HS2 was never going to Scotland in the first place
Anyone who's travelled on the Shinkansen knows how revolutionary that form of travel would be for democratising work, leisure, and improving the environment in the UK. London to Glasgow in 2 hours! The fact the Japanese built it in the 1960s and we're still struggling with Victorian infrastructure is an embarrassing show of political short-termism, corporate greed, and the UK's decline.
As a German, it's comforting to know that next to us, there is a similarly developed country with even worse railway infrastructure
There’s currently a massive great scar in the landscape through the Chiltern Hills at Wendover as they have cleared the land for the HS2 line. With the environmental damage already done they better get on and finish it.
If all the bridges over rural areas diversions around conservative towns and tunnels under conservative countryside, it wouldn’t have gone over budget
Minecraft in TDLR befor GTA 6 😂
It’s easy to say (I get that) -
BUT - just build what we need! A HS2 going through the backbone of the country to as many major city’s as feasibly possible.
Yes it will cost more, but one day, when it’s inevitably extended, it’ll cost way more anyway
Mortgage it up for a 100 years!
64bn for nothing at the moment, i never understood scrapping the most important leg of the journey that gets you to London.
Either tear up the line and sell it for scrap to countries investing in growth and infrastructure, or finish at least the part of the job that is 95% done.
Personally I feel that NSIPs such as this should have a special designated power over interest groups etc. whereby it just gets built. Yes some people will be upset, some badgers will be moved etc; just get it built and people will get used to it being there!
How the hell does Euston train station end up costing £4bn+
Absolute madness
What do you think the cost should be ?
I think you will find the cost includes for refurbishing the existing station. Putting a new roof on the existing station will cost more than 1 billion which would need smoke curtains to fire compartmentalise the roof, smoke extractors, cleaning cradles inside and outside to clean the roof and scaffolding the entire roof. When they re roofed Kibgs Cross I think it cost 800 million. And that was some years ago.
Heathrow terminal 5 cost £4 billion and that was a decade ago and wasn't in central London and was privately funded. Terminals of all kinds are horribly expensive to build in city centres, so the quoted cost to rebuild Euston and add HS2 is about what I expected. It's a big site and I would rather it was built correctly and future proofed regardless of the cost.
@@PesmogAgreed. The architectural feature of the proposed roof will cost billions.
It would be completely stupid not to extend HS2 into Euston. We are told that the West Coast Main Line will reach capacity by 2030 so it is essential to at east restore HS2 to Crewe as this would solve some bad bottlenecks on the existing line.
You know, 100 years ago, this project (all of it, not just this span) would have been planned, funded, and finished in 2-3 years. Just sayin'...
Bluntly, the tunnels to Euston must be dug now. Because, the TBMs have been ordered for a while and arrive this year (as the delivery time can be quite long) hence the 1bn injection in May, and because they tunnel from Old Oak Common. Which means soil is extracted through Old Oak Common. Which means it can't be opened unless the tunnels are dug. Euston can come later if needed, but the tunnels will be dug. It would be rather idiotic to have tunnels to Euston and not build the station as soon as possible, but we're talking the UK here, so god knows. In short, Sunak's cuts to Euston and Phase 2B are completely idiotic and make no logistical or future operational sense.
2:20 no way they are using Minecraft as an example 😂😂
In a video about politics they’re using Minecraft rail animations. This is the content I’m here for 😂
They’re more likely to revive Thatcher
That already happened.
Reeves is Thatcher but much duller
As much as I hate thatcher. Honestly I’m up for her revival at this point.
Someone from that time would look around and go “what the f*ck!?!”
At least thatcher was competent she had a goal and a vision for the uk and had principles she was always honest about what she was going to do and she always fought for what she believed in during an election you always new what you were getting with thatcher because she would tell you unlike the current tories and labour who don’t have principles, always u turn and people have no idea what they stand for because they don’t tell you or the u turn on their policies at least with thatcher you knew what you would get if you voted for her and she at least had a vision
Don’t give them ideas
@@evan why hello there.
Did not expect you in the comments of TLDR
you can say what you want about truss and sunak but you have to hand it to them, they did a great job at fucking up in record time
Missed massive chunk of the narrative about either the reinstatement of 2a to Crewe as per hs2 design or the northwest rail link proposal from Street and Burnham
It's super helpful that you guys bothered to point out that the train, and not the person, is the HS2 in the thumbnail! I was confused there for a moment.
Serbia has built 200km high speed railway 200km'h ,for about 8-9 billion $ for period of 7 years if you need help ask us.
Yes please. Fix this embarrassing mess
@@Alex-ll3ig I’m sorry, but according to world standards 200 km/h is not considered High Speed train. Regards from Spain. We do have the ‘know how’ to build HS with more than 4000 km HS network in the second highest country in Europe after Switzerland, including hundreds of tunnels and long bridges and connecting over 25 major cities. Pretty soon there will be 35 cities and 5000 km network when the Mediterranean corridor and the Basque corridor will be finished before 2030. All that infraestructure is completed at one of the lowest cost per mile in Europe.
Bruh even Morocco has 323 km of HSR that goes to 320km/h that was built years ago lol
@@felixcanas9446 you sound so snobbish with all that flexing "regards from spain" lmao
@@St0rrrmoh! I’m so sorry. I forgot I was writing where picky British are refusing how foreigners use their language. So I say it in Spanish, it doesn’t sound snobbish at all. Saludos desde España 🇪🇸
I supported HS2 the whole time.
Governments try not to have unsuccessful rail projects challenge (impossible) Be it HS2 or Europe with Rail Baltica.
Rail baltica is substantially more successful than HS2 has ever been. As corrupt as it has been (because it's the baltic nations afterall)
Surely completing HS2 has to be inevitable? What I mean is that in another half a century we’ll still not have high speed rail? (And still want it). How long will it take to connect the whole country with high-speed rail? I’m only 30 but already thinking now probably not in my life time!
They should stop this stupid cost plus thing entirely. A company agrees to a price they do it for that price and no more. As it is they just make up whatever price they want to get the bid knowing they can increase whenever. If they bid an lose money so be it. Though I imagine we also need to make whichever company actually has the money liable rather than letting them get away with oh our subsidiary which actually owns nothing is the one with the contract not us so it so it just vanishes doing us no harm BS ultimately leaving the taxpayer with the bill and no benefit.
Contractors can only put a fixed price all risk offer in place if the full scope of work is known. It still isn't. And even if they could they wouldn't on a Contract in the billions because their profit margins of about 2% wouldn't cover them if the job went wrong and if a billion plus contract did go wrong it would wipe them out.
But then it's also built as it was planned. Since, new tunnels have been added so some NIMBYs don't have to change their dog walk, detours are made to avoid felling some trees, etc.
Cant we just have a government owned rail line building company that will continually improve the rail network. Its not a case of if but when. We will need phase 2b, we will need it to go to Scotland at some point, so just build it in the most logical way possible.
HS2 as is may actually reduce rail capacity, as when HS2 trains continue on to existing lines, they'll be slower than the commuter trains currently there, because HS2 trains dont tilt. Amazingly stupid.
Green Signals podcast Ep2 and 6 cover a huge amount of detail. Ep2 is over an hour with the Technical Director of HS2 explaining the madness of the cuts.
i don't know how anyone who worked on this or test and trace or worked as a Tory MP in the past parliament will ever find employment again.
@@simonwilliams567Don't worry, the Old Boys Club will look after them
here's a bold idea: why stop at euston? why not build the line to stratford international so that eurostar trains can go on to the north and transform the station into what it was intended to be
This is a very good video but it's not entirly accurate to say the cost of the tunnel to Euston will fall on taxpayers. Even under Labour's restrictive fiscal rules, the government is allows to borrow to invest in major projects. This implies that eventually the taxpayer will have to pay for it, but as we've already seen the costs of NOT investing become higher over time because eventually you will have to solve the capacity problems
At the complete bear minimum, it must go to Euston, and it must go to Crewe, for any chance of actually increasing capacity. And the Crewe leg was pocket change compared to the rest of the project, so why it was cut, I don't know
6 platforms isn't enough? There's a video on RUclips where Shinkansens leave every 3-4 minutes from 4 platforms in Japan.
Im assuming thats a throughrunning station? A terminus functions very differently from a throughrunning station. A very busy throughrunning station can do with way less platforms then a terminus station as a terminus station simply needs the space for trains to stand still for their next departure, or stable to the yard, and overall turnaround times are simply longer then a train entering a throughrunning station and leaving 3 minutes later.
euston has 16 platforms already and most of them are empty, i have no idea why expanding it with more platforms is needed. its running on the same width track as everything else and its not going to be doing 100+mph into the station. the avanti trains are 11 cars long and still have space at the end of the platforms so it doesent need lengthening either and they were awarded the contract to run it so its probably going to be the same trains too. it makes 0 sense.
@@sheeple04 Nope, it was Tokyo Shinkansen terminus for Tohoku, Joetsu and Hokuriku lines/trains - youtube ID was 8Ge81gKqtvE - every four minutes a train left and another one pulled in and they had, at most, 12 minutes at station for turn around. Video itself is like 23 minutes but they most likely ran for more than half an hour.
@@NuSpirit_ According to most sources I see Tokyo station has 10 platforms. They are in different sections so it's possible that video is of a section of the station.
@@Joesolo13 those 4 platforms were 20, 21, 22 and 23 and are for lines to the north of Japan (by JR East). Separate Shinkansen platforms (not connected to those 4) are platforms 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and are for central/west of Japan (by JR Central). They are next to each other, but not connected (directly) to each other nor used as a through rails.
It should be reinstated but run by the French , German or Japanese or Chinese as they know how to build Hight speed lines !
Scotland and northern Ireland don't have to pay for HS2 so why should Wales. The whole project is entirely in England and gives no benefit to Wales. It is even a detriment to Wales as the building works will disrupt trains between Cardiff and London.
It's a benefit only to London, leveling up don't make me laugh it always was just a feeder project so the vampire can suck more blood from the rest of the UK.
@@ZuulGatekeeper Leeds
Should Wales pay for HS2? No. Are you undermining a very valid point with the "HS2 doesn't go to Wales"? Yes.
Wales will benefit from HS2, more so than Scotland and N.I., because Wales has trains that go to HS2-affected cities without sharing tracks with the new HS2 services. Cardiff, Aberystwyth, and Holyhead all have services to either London Euston, Birmingham or Manchester along lines that will have massive capacity boosts from HS2, meaning those Welsh services can run more frequently and more reliably. Scotland would have these same benefits if HS2 didn't dump trains onto the WCML north of Manchester. So, while no new track will be built in Wales, Wales will benefit, and I must ask that you stop undermining your very valid point with
worse-than-useless reasoning.
@@MasterTramsRUclips Rubbish. Wales would benefit more if it didn't have to give Billions for the HS2 project.
@@MasterTramsRUclips by that logic England should pay for rail infrastructure in France in case an English person wants to use it after they get off the Euro Star.
It makes no sense for wales to pay for HS2 which is obviously a railway line between London and Birmingham.
Why should Wales pay for our larger neighbour to build their railway line?
Probably. It will be 1/72 scale though and cost the same.
How dare RUclips show me this uploaded 1 second ago instead of 0 seconds ago.
HS2's full implimentation will make a drastic difference in England and will allow projects that aren't as feasible to become more practicle.
Being an Irish person that grew up with all my male family members working in England and making their money there, and being interested in Victorian history....its so crazy to see how crappy, poor, and what a mess the UK has become
I really hope they will build it in full and stop this obsession with cost. This is an investment. Rachel needs to change this mindset of the treasury. They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing
The Victorians wouldn't believe how far we've fallen at building rail infrastructure. Embarrassing.
Brunel would be able to build it all in 7ft gauge...
And 7ft requires alot more space....
It would be nice to have another new line running along the route of the M1 motorway as well as HS2. You could also have a connection from Swindon via Oxford to the half way point on HS2. The lines going out of Euston and Paddington pass quite closely and could benefit from a link.
The government are impossibly shit at estimating cost. The way budgets are distributed are flawed and unhealthy, all those estimates are stupidly low and/or ismanaged.
Its because companies lie at the start to get the contracts, get started and then its too late to change.
@kb4903 That's not the whole truth, it's because companies are encouraged to lie at the start. After all, the government will always go for the "cheapest" cost, so if you can lie your way to being cheaper than the other liars, you've basically got yourself a free project and license to go massively overbudget.
In this case, the significant scope changes and delays are the lions share of the increases. I'm not suggesting the project way planned flawlessly, bus scope changes are the commonest killer of any project regrdless of scale.
Get the contractors to do it. Keep the specification cast in concrete and make contracts fixed price.
You should get a job with a conractor snd then you will see how it's really done.
just stop giving power to NIMBY's and explain to people the actual reasoning behind HS2 most people seem to think the project is just to have a slighlty faster railway to london which is why they dont want it because it doesn't seem worth it. Unless the UK can begin to fix its insane beaurocracy issues it will never be able to build proper infrastructure.
The name was a terrible piece of "political branding". If it had been called something like "North-South Rail Capacity Upgrade" then I'm convinced it wouldn't have been cancelled.
Cancel London to Birmingham. Connect Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, York and Newcastle with a high-speed line instead.
congrats you have now put forward an idea which can be called northern powerhouse rail
The whole idea of HS2 is to ease congetion on the Southern Hlf of the WCML from Crewe to London Euston no to pander to Northerners
@peterwilliamallen1063 Aye, more major infrastructure for the South who complain and block every stage until it's 20 times the cost. Meanwhile we "pander" to the North who still run diesel trains on victorian track 6 times a day.
@@MrSamuelHorton So it does in Birmingham, unlike trains from Manchester and Liverpool that have a 4 to 6 line wide railway from Crewe to London , from Birmingham with the line running from Stafford through Birmingham and Coventry to Rugby it is a two line track with a speed of 90 mph with a totl over load of passenger services dcausing grid lock at te Uk's busiest Sttion out side of London, Birmingham New Street, tht is why HS2 is being built to provide more capacity on the existing major WCML route through the Trent Valley to London Euston.
@peterwilliamallen1063 Which travels through Stoke and Tamworth, close to Birmingham which is on a line which reconnects with Crewe-London at Rugby. Vast majority of it is southern infrastructure serving the south west. Connections within the north are more or less unchanged since the 50s, and many major northern lines aren't even electrified yet.
Government doesn't understand the sunk cost fallacy
In France and Germany a lot of High Speed lines was build without any great problems and discussion in the past. Now UK tries to build an own HS-Line and is overcharged from this problem. Looks similar to the California HS-Project which also sucks heavily. And China builds ten thousands Km HS-Lines per year. What goes wrong in UK, USA etc. ? Germany sucks currently too. Germany should build the connections to Gotthard and Brenner base tunnels. But nothing happens in lazy Germany too.
But those two tunnels are not German. One is Swiss and the other Austrian. They are not going to agree to connect to the German network unless both countries benefit as well.
@@philipdouglas5911 The swiss and austrian tunnels are part of the Trans European train Network. This means, that the lines going through swiss and austria don't end at swiss and austrian borders. And the continuation through Germany from this Alps Tunnels to middle and north Europe make no advancements. I do not know how Italy and France works on linking in the new Transalpin tunnels into their national lines network. But in Germany it sucks like HS2 in Britain. Nevertheless Germany has tracks which can serve Gotthard and Brenner tunnel supply. They do this for over 150 years. But this is not the expected performance lines for an trans european High Speed network. But perhaps it will make small continuation. Currently Germany spent 20 Billion for Stuttgart 21 project. This contains beside the new train station around 100 Km new High Speed tracks around Stuttgart, which is also part of the TEN project.
probably has to do with common law.
Meanwhile Spain built 400km of high speed rail in the last 10 yrs alone.
I don't see why a lot of HS2 couldn't just be implemented incrementally, e.g. Focus on the line to old oak then if in demand and effective develop the Line to Euston and again if in high demand and useful develop the Euston station. Finally, perhaps look to develop the northan aspects of the line in the further future if it was very successful in the south.
Yeah that'll work cos everyone wants to go to old oak common 😂 oh look no ones using it, no demand, so no point building the rest. Wonder why they aren't using it 🤔
Sure, but that will take about 20 years longer and cost twice as much.
Infrastructure is expensive but worth it in the long rung
This will be a great idea, if it was coming off the back of legislation that broke down all the barriers that made the first attempt so costly.
We need to get to the stage where we can build as a country at comparable speed and costs to our economic rivals. At the current rate, we are always losing.
I can't see it happening. The people in charge sold off all the land bought once the project was cancelled.
Very deliberate.
The uk only does huge projects and then does nothing for years. Other countries simply continually keep building stuff.
That creates a steady experience base and a lof of efficienty that makes everything much more streamlined and cheaper then always starting everything from scratch.
@@JasonAtlas The land hasnt been sold off...
@@kumaran8923 You're right. I was mistaken after seeing newspaper headlines about Rishi Sunak intending to do it. It was advised against.
Build the entire thing, stations and all as it was originally planned. Whatever it takes, I don’t care. It’s ridiculous that this has been done so many times in other countries of similar size and we, one of the most heavily taxed countries in Europe cannot even build one rail line.
Probably not, but they'll still not give Cymru the funding Scotland and NI got for it
Fine. Take my thumbs up for the Minecraft mine-cart animation.
Labour needs to revive itself first.
How many revivals do we need? can we just commit and get on with something for once
@@bopndop2347 Apparently not!
The HS2 team need to take a good, hard look at how HS1 was project managed and try to emulate it. I believe the main Project Manager basically hid as much of the budgeted amounts as he could to prevent private contractors from over-quoting.
The tunnel boring machines for Old Oak Common to Euston already exist and are in the ground at OOC at the start of the tunnel to Euston. They had to be installed this year as if not they wouldn't have been able to continue building OOC so are now building the station around them.
wait it's done in tunnel?
No wonder it costs so much...
To anyone who does not believe in HS2 I ask, are you happy with having our current trains for the next 50 years?
The problem is if they were to build it faster like other countries manage to do. The cost wouldn't have spiked so much would have had it don't way before COVID and inflation issues
Exactly, the cost will just keep going up and up the quicker it's done, the less it will cost in the long run. It's already gone on far too long.
Before any government contracts are given out, it is essential that they have on time, on budget clauses, the backbone of the contract.
Thank you for the content!! All we need is the right advice on how to invest in crypto and we will be set for life, I’ve made huge figures from trading regardless of the market conditions😊
I feel the same way. I believe the approval of Bitcoin ETFs will be a life-changing opportunity for us. With my current portfolio, managed by my personal financial advisor, Audrey Lauren , I completely agree with you.
YES!!! That’s exactly her name (Audrey Lauren ) so many people have recommended highly about her from Doncaster
….Long term investor, I withdrew my profits of over $£61,000 during the Covid-19 pandemic……
If you don't want to crash and burn, you should seek the advice of a fiduciary counselor when you first start out. Because their entire skill set is based on going long and short at the same time, they employ a profit-driven strategy based on individual risk tolerance.
A lot of people still make massive profit from the crypto market, all you really need is a relevant information and some < professional advice. ‹ it's totally inappropriate for investors to hang on while suffering from dip during significant
Despite being one of the few even handed looks at the project this still spreads misinfo about the project. All budgets prior to 2018 were for incomplete versions of the project. Meaning without trains, without stations, without any real world estimates.