Campaign grows to switch the building of HS2 station to Sheffield city

[Annie Bynnol]

Individuals are already seeing  better journey times, more frequent trains, better arrival/departure times and services that are more reliable. This is directly  evidenced in the timetable which changes twice a year.

These timetable changes rely on the completion of projects and bedding down so are not instant but on-going.

As well as electrification and new trains:

Crossrail work completed from Paddington to Reading providing increased line speed, reliability, capacity and frequency.

Reading station being re built,

Reading junctions and new flyover and lines to Didcot. 

Other projects at Bath, Bristol -Bristol Parkway, Seven Tunnel.

On going work on  reliability and resilience  of services beyond Bristol.

Increasingly unreliable HST fleet replaced by new Bi-modes. 

 

It is not all bad news for us as when electrification is planned all future improvements like signalling and infrastructure projects are brought forward and completed and the current situation with the MML  is:

Completion of the wiring to Kettering (and soon to Market Harborough).

Signalling, track re alignment and bridge re building to electrification standard and plan.

Re built stations and re introduction of removed 4 track sections.

Upgrading supply and wiring between London and Bedford for longer/heavier and more frequent trains.

 

A Government announcement soon about environment issues will probably indicate that the MML will be electrified in stages to Leicester, Nottingham, Derby then Sheffield.  

 

 

 

[sedith]

Come on, get real, its never going to happen is it? All those people in the south wanting to get up north? I don't think so.

[Annie Bynnol]

42 minutes ago, sedith said:

Come on, get real, its never going to happen is it? All those people in the south wanting to get up north? I don't think so.

The Government have built the M5, M40, M1/6, M6(toll), A1(M), M11 and many more 'A' roads to meet a seemingly insatiable demand.

Flights North include, Manchester, East Midlands, Liverpool, Humberside, Newcastle, and Leeds Bradford with taxation used to suppress demand.

Railways companies to the North have to agree to Government policies on high fares and increases to suppress demand.

 

As HS2 construction has already started even the Government believes that the railway is a part solution to the demand for 

"All those people in the south wanting to get up north"?

 

 

 

[geared]

Things are looking real good.

 

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/leeds-leg-hs2-axed-imminently-21371342?fbclid=IwAR0IUeXqILXnL9SIbSh7Y1kwd9Cn0LHrHLJquAu1VuHLvSTg_uuift_UHwg

[BigAl1]

there have been numerous and regular leaks that it will be cancelled so nothing new there. As with most projects in the UK the estimates for the work go up once approval has been given and as work begins.

 

Should have asked the Chinese to quote

[Anna B]

Sheffield is something of a backwater because the Duke of Norfolk refused to have the railway track over his land back in the 1830's the early days of railways. Consequently the line went via Doncaster and all the railway engineering went there. 

Beeching didn't help with all the lines he cut in the 1960's. 

 

It looks like HS2 will never get past Birmingham anyway. If it ever reaches Sheffield (as a continuous line rather than an offshoot) it will take so long it will probably be ancient technology and everyone will have moved onto a hyperloop system or somesuch.....

 

1 hour ago, Bigal1 said:

there have been numerous and regular leaks that it will be cancelled so nothing new there. As with most projects in the UK the estimates for the work go up once approval has been given and as work begins.

 

Should have asked the Chinese to quote

Indeed. What is wrong with this country that everything is hugely priced and  moves at a snails pace? 

Edited August 24, 2021 by Anna B

[nightrider]

9 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Sheffield is something of a backwater because the Duke of Norfolk refused to have the railway track over his land back in the 1830's the early days of railways. Consequently the line went via Doncaster and all the railway engineering went there. 

Beeching didn't help with all the lines he cut in the 1960's. 

 

It looks like HS2 will never get past Birmingham anyway. If it ever reaches Sheffield (as a continuous line rather than an offshoot) it will take so long it will probably be ancient technology and everyone will have moved onto a hyperloop system or somesuch.....

 

Indeed. What is wrong with this country that everything is hugely priced and  moves at a snails pace? 

I'd rather we did not do business with a country committing genocide personally, even if does cost more money.

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

Sheffield is something of a backwater because the Duke of Norfolk refused to have the railway track over his land back in the 1830's the early days of railways. Consequently the line went via Doncaster and all the railway engineering went there. 

Beeching didn't help with all the lines he cut in the 1960's. 

 

It looks like HS2 will never get past Birmingham anyway. If it ever reaches Sheffield (as a continuous line rather than an offshoot) it will take so long it will probably be ancient technology and everyone will have moved onto a hyperloop system or somesuch.....

 

Indeed. What is wrong with this country that everything is hugely priced and  moves at a snails pace? 

Doesn't sound too far away from what is happening now with all the NIMBYs and naysayers trying to stall, delay and cancel this project at every single opportunity.  In fact not just this project, these days it seems to be any sort of large-scale projects. It's almost inevitable that as soon as anything gets merely hinted at, it's all suddenly.....      waaaa how many nurses could that pay for.....  waaaaa it's all too expensive......   waaaaa I don't like the look of it...... waaaaa the construction is all too noisy....... waaaaa I don't want it in my neighborhood.......

 

It's no surprise the budget is spiralling out of control because so is the amount of red tape,  legal challenges and litigation.

 

At least back in the day these now revered great innovators that dragged this country into the 20th century could just plough through land, smash down houses and pull-down forestry completely unopposed.  They knew it was for the greater good and necessity.  We also had politicians who are not ashamed to be elitist. They were not ashamed of their educated and quite frankly higher status above others. They brought in laws which they knew would be generally thought unpopular by the masses but plowed on anyway because they knew it was "good for them". That will never happen now because no politician is ever going to risk damaging their public image in the great popularity contest of elections,  which has created this populist sensationalized world of politics we have today.  Something the opposition party still hasn't properly learnt and we will never now get back from.

 

These past-day elitist, often hated leaders of industry built great big things, employed hundreds or thousands of men, with little or no irritation from protesters, disruptors or serial complainers.

 

They got away with it because they had the money. They had the influence. They had the power.

 

Now I'm sure well up for debate is whether that was a good thing. Should it be right for someone or somewhere to simply come along and cause massive disruption to residents, populations and the natural environment??    I'm sure there will be plenty on here who will think of course not and will defend absolutely the right to protest or even totally disrupt.

 

But can't have it both ways.

 

God help anyone trying to do any sort of ambitious,  expensive, controversial but world changingly initiative development these days.  The backlash and criticism is already pre-prepared and ready to go before it even gets off the drawing board.

 

Its an obvious fact that advanced progress, construction, development and infrastructure comes with great sacrifice and turmoil.  But far too many out there wont face up to the realities of that and take some deluded childish view that they can have it both ways.....  They demand these great progresses. They expect it tomorrow. They want urbanisation and mass great housing projects and superior transport infrastructure but seemingly only as long as it isn't visible or audiable from their own personal backyard or god forbid it disrupts countryside or causes problems to the little birdies or hedgehogs....  Oh of course it's not got to cost more than 14 pence and you must not use any cheap foreign labour or unfair wages and all employees must be paid at least a fair rate with 60 days holiday and a free car each.....  

 

Round and round it goes.

Edited August 24, 2021 by ECCOnoob

[altus]

41 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Doesn't sound too far away from what is happening now with all the NIMBYs and naysayers trying to stall, delay and cancel this project at every single opportunity.  In fact not just this project, these days it seems to be any sort of large-scale projects. It's almost inevitable that as soon as anything gets merely hinted at, it's all suddenly.....      waaaa how many nurses could that pay for.....  waaaaa it's all too expensive......   waaaaa I don't like the look of it...... waaaaa the construction is all too noisy....... waaaaa I don't want it in my neighborhood.......

 

It's no surprise the budget is spiralling out of control because so is the amount of red tape,  legal challenges and litigation.

 

At least back in the day these now revered great innovators that dragged this country into the 20th century could just plough through land, smash down houses and pull-down forestry completely unopposed.  They knew it was for the greater good and necessity.  We also had politicians who are not ashamed to be elitist. They were not ashamed of their educated and quite frankly higher status above others. They brought in laws which they knew would be generally thought unpopular by the masses but plowed on anyway because they knew it was "good for them". That will never happen now because no politician is ever going to risk damaging their public image in the great popularity contest of elections,  which has created this populist sensationalized world of politics we have today.  Something the opposition party still hasn't properly learnt and we will never now get back from.

 

These past-day elitist, often hated leaders of industry built great big things, employed hundreds or thousands of men, with little or no irritation from protesters, disruptors or serial complainers.

 

They got away with it because they had the money. They had the influence. They had the power.

 

Now I'm sure well up for debate is whether that was a good thing. Should it be right for someone or somewhere to simply come along and cause massive disruption to residents, populations and the natural environment??    I'm sure there will be plenty on here who will think of course not and will defend absolutely the right to protest or even totally disrupt.

 

But can't have it both ways.

 

God help anyone trying to do any sort of ambitious,  expensive, controversial but world changingly initiative development these days.  The backlash and criticism is already pre-prepared and ready to go before it even gets off the drawing board.

 

Its an obvious fact that advanced progress, construction, development and infrastructure comes with great sacrifice and turmoil.  But far too many out there wont face up to the realities of that and take some deluded childish view that they can have it both ways.....  They demand these great progresses. They expect it tomorrow. They want urbanisation and mass great housing projects and superior transport infrastructure but seemingly only as long as it isn't visible or audiable from their own personal backyard or god forbid it disrupts countryside or causes problems to the little birdies or hedgehogs....  Oh of course it's not got to cost more than 14 pence and you must not use any cheap foreign labour or unfair wages and all employees must be paid at least a fair rate with 60 days holiday and a free car each.....  

 

Round and round it goes.

Of course there were NIMBYs around stopping things getting constructed during the railway boom - Anna B gave an example of one. It wasn't some far sighted visionary MPs that allowed the railways to be built, it was that the people most affected didn't have the vote and so could be safely ignored. That the MPs were making laws that they would personally benefit from didn't hurt either.

 

Whilst I think we can sometimes be a bit too precious about protecting things in this country, those wanting to build things can be too miserly when it comes to compensating those affected. e.g. People would object far less about a project needing to knock their house down if they were offered far above the market rate their house would have had rather than something that barely matches it. The same goes for destroying habitats. Just think how much smoother and quicker projects would go if instead of taking the attitude of 'what's the minimum we can get away with' developers thought 'what can we do to ease/speed the approval'.

[ECCOnoob]

39 minutes ago, altus said:

Of course there were NIMBYs around stopping things getting constructed during the railway boom - Anna B gave an example of one. It wasn't some far sighted visionary MPs that allowed the railways to be built, it was that the people most affected didn't have the vote and so could be safely ignored. That the MPs were making laws that they would personally benefit from didn't hurt either.

 

Whilst I think we can sometimes be a bit too precious about protecting things in this country, those wanting to build things can be too miserly when it comes to compensating those affected. e.g. People would object far less about a project needing to knock their house down if they were offered far above the market rate their house would have had rather than something that barely matches it. The same goes for destroying habitats. Just think how much smoother and quicker projects would go if instead of taking the attitude of 'what's the minimum we can get away with' developers thought 'what can we do to ease/speed the approval'.

That's all well and good, but it comes back to the money problem I referred to earlier.

 

They could pay well above market rate to compensate those losing their homes. They could pay vast amounts of money to find alternatives to minimise disruption to the environment but of course by doing so increases the overall cost. Given that many of these projects are funded solely or a large majority by public purse we can all know what the reaction is going to be by the masses if a project could have been done for X but instead they spend Y.   It's been complained about this very moment.

 

In my opinion just shows another example of people demanding the world and expecting to pay peanuts. Can't have both ways.

Edited August 24, 2021 by ECCOnoob