Comments on: ICE warns that Britain can’t afford more infrastructure failure after HS2 cancellation

By: Philip Alexander

Philip Alexander — Fri, 13 Sep 2024 07:24:22 +0000

In reply to John Porter. Restoring confidence? Did anyone ever have any confidence in this bizarre project?

By: John Porter

John Porter — Thu, 12 Sep 2024 13:33:00 +0000

Once the fate of HS2 Euston is clearer, a published plan showing how HS2 fits into the wider transport network is still needed. That would be a useful start towards restoring confidence in the HS2 project and participants.

An Affordable, Conditional, Incremental Decisions (ACID) test and process is needed to replace the short lived Integrated Rail Plan, which had similar aims and annoyed everyone by not setting out options for debate before decisions were finalised.

So far HS2 has put programme before mission and purpose. HS2 could still be as significant as the first Motorways, but with rail farebox revenue depressed by Covid, and several poor operators, the previous full HS2 was a much too risky step – in the right direction.

HS2 ought to have started as a Manchester to Warrington quick scheme with reversing platforms at HS2’s Piccadilly station, and better exploited the opportunities at Birmingham Curzon Street and Interchange (BI) stations. Any enhancements to scaled back HS2 must be phased and conditional to minimise risk.

By: Philip Alexander

Philip Alexander — Thu, 12 Sep 2024 07:24:42 +0000

The real failure was going ahead with a totally flawed project in the first place. As Mr Smith points out, if HS2 is now trying to solve a capacity problem on the WCML, then the project would have been scoped differently. The initial (and still, it seems) reason for this twig of a route is to provide high speed travel between and obscure location in outer London to an obscure suburb of Birmingham. If the project had been presented as that at the start, it would hardly have been seen as a very attractive investment and would never have got off the ground. If the (now) real reason is to provide additional capacity for the WCML then re-scope HS2 into a fully conventional part of the network so that all trains can run on it and there is no need to procure vastly expensive one-off ultra high speed rolling stock for a journey of 160km. That really is complete and utter madness.

By: jeffrey.smith315@btinternet.com

jeffrey.smith315@btinternet.com — Thu, 12 Sep 2024 07:10:50 +0000

I cannot help thinking that, without wishing to show a lack of ambition, the Project’s aims should have concentrated more on increasing rail capacity rather than pushing the boundaries of high speed rail.