HS2

The little I have heard of HS2 makes me have the gut-reaction of 'I'm agin it", but I may be persuaded otherwise

The full length HS2 will see trains crashing through some of Britain's best scenic views, steamrollering over heritage sites, starting in Scotland (presumably Glasgow), only calling briefly at core area stations which include Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham, while missing out interesting and/or useful places like Carlisle, Wigan, Crewe, Coventry, Milton Keynes, Dunstable and Watford. Typical users will be those people who have no desire whatsoever to stop at, do business or have fun in Carlisle, Wigan, Crewe, Coventry, Milton Keynes, Dunstable and Watford. Kudos for GB will be the only real benefit, and if memory serves me correctly, what we want anyway is Watney's. The costs of HS2 will rise from crazy to insane, and the projected passengers numbers will fall below the level required such that the entire project will ever be economically viable. This concept is not a first for British projects, and I am against it.

I believe HS2 to be a white elephant. I would imagine most business people use their laptops while travelling by train and therefore HS2 cutting 10-15 minutes from the journey is beside the point. And by the time the HS2 project is completed will people be travelling to meetings. The face-to-face argument holds little water even with current communcations technology. I can 'video-chat' with a friend in New Zealand any time I wish. We don't do so because he's usually at his computer in his nightshirt, and neither of us want to see each other's ugly mug. Even I got a wake-up call the other week. My carers two children now do their violin lessons using Skype. (There is no-one in their family who could describe themselves as a computer guru.) They will be joining the workforce at the same time that the HS2 London to Birmingham route comes into operation. I doubt they'll see any sense of getting on a train for the 200-mile round trip just for a business meeting.

I've had another look at the HS2 and it seems to make the London (UK) terminus at Marylebone Station. Why? Surely it should at least connect with HS1

Robin, there is a pdf map on this website which shows why. St Pancras was the natural choice for Eurostar because it follows tracks which cross the Thames and on to Folkestone and the tunnel. It also takes feeds from the east. To the west is Euston which will still take the brunt of WCML, and to the west of Euston is Marylebone, not too busy presently, but which is well placed to take traffic on the new HS2 from Birmingham. It's on the right side of the tracks, so to speak.

I too think the entire thing cannot give any value for money, especially with less need to travel in future. While logistically I can see why the HS2 line stops where it does in London to not attach itself to HS1 and the Chunnel seems utter madness. If it is intended as an alternative to flying from Europe, surely it has to connect to international train services? Having said that though, if it is to go ahead then I think Coventry must be on it. In terms of journey times it won't make a big difference, but the investment from businesses we could lose out on, or could move away so as to use it, could be disastrous. A lot of places not on the original Victorian train lines ended up in a massive spiral of decline as businesses move to places on it, and arguably not having an airport has had a similar effect on others more recently. I don't see why services could not have a line into Coventry off the main HS2 line, with services alternating between stopping at Birmingham and Coventry, especially if Birmingham is to get two stops, one of which is in the centre of the city and will not be able to travel any quicker than the normal service they could get at the BHX stop. In fact the BHX stop worries me greatly, as this could well see a whole new town built around it and Coventry and Birmingham becoming joined in a similar way that the Black Country has. Further north it says it would have stops at smaller stations, such as Stockport, although these stations will only be served by a handful of trains. Anyway, the whole idea this is to spread out wealth from the SE is nonsense. It is designed to get more people into London, with BHX becoming the replacement for the third runway at Heathrow. Get off the plan, get on HS2 and get to London in the same time it'd take you to cross London from Heathrow. That is why the first stage only goes as far as Birmingham, with just that stop. Once they get that far the rest of it will be mothballed.

Whether or not the HS2 makes money or ever gets completed all the way up to Glasgow/Edinburgh, the prime motive is to link the core regional/business centres to London which also has access to European core regional/business centres. France, Germany and Spain have them already, so the UK is playing catch-up. Coventry is NOT the core regional/business centre for the West Midlands, which is why there is no provision for it on the HS2. B'Ham is, just as Leicester is the core regional/business centre for the East Midlands. You have to get over the fact that Coventry has little importance these days, and the people of Rugby, Northampton, Bedford, Aylesbury, Oxford, any place south of B'ham are going to have to do the same.

Upgrading the internet would be a more worthwhile investment - and looking to the future more than to the past. Optical fibre connections to every village in the country might be a start.

As a Commonwealth friend of mine suggests "Only the Brits would think of using 19th century technology to solve 21st century problems."

At completely the opposite side of the world - New Zealand (South Island). He and I chat most evenings (though it is mornings for him) over Skype. We could use our webcams to do one-to-one video link but prefer to type responses as sometimes our mutual friend in Scotland joins us and she is deaf. So, the only thing that is missing in our communications is 'body language' but we do use smilies a lot . If it just myself and the New Zealander then the discussion is very often technical. If there's a slight pause it is often because we are searching the internet to make sure we have our facts right. For example we may discuss whether you get faster transfer rates of information with a hard drive connected by USB 3 or SATA3. The conclusion was that it doesn't matter the speed of the interface, it is more to do with what is delivering and receiving the information rather than the connection between the two. And the same goes for HS2. When the businessmen are gathered around the conference table will they be be able to deliver their 'message' more quickly and will the the audience digest the information any more quickly, The answer to my mind is "No!"

Excellent! So HS2 will look like this then?

With just a few cosmetic upgrades

I said I understood why the stops were where they are, but minor stops further north WILL get some HS2 services stopping. I don't see why it would be so hard to allow some services to stop in Coventry, as they can use current tracks. This is especially nonsensical given Birmingham is getting two stops ten miles apart that cannot benefit from the higher speeds than current services. But specialist track is being laid and a massive station built to service Birmingham, whereas Coventry is told they can get off and get a normal train as it'll take the same time. As Birmingham is the same distance from BHX as Coventry why the disparity? As far as I can see all the central Birmingham stop is doing is slowing down people wanting to head further north/south. Meanwhile we've heard two or three ridiculous plans by this Byng fellow which will cost a great deal and have no appreciable benefits over current services to try and fob off the Coventry dissenters. IF it's built, Coventry HAS to have a direct route onto it. Anything else will be disastrous . And Leicester isn't the E Mids station - Toton (Nottingham/Derby) is.

I think you are missing the point of HS1 and 2. The idea is to have a fast rail link between regional centres and Europe essentially. As it stands, Euro trains can only get as far as St Pancras because the new HS1 lines allow the larger loading gauges which Europe has, and the incumbent lines north of the HS1 don't. Britain has the most restrictive loading gauges of any country. The proposed HS2 plans would place new lines, all of which could accommodate the larger loading gauges, giving major regional locations a direct link to Europe at the same time as giving Europeans a direct link to British regional centres.

So, three trains per day will leave B'ham initially (until the HS2 lines are extended), and they will travel to London Marylebone, no stopping ANYWHERE, and if the proposed link to the Thames tunnel and the HS1 link is made, not all trains will EVEN stop at London Marylebone. If three go out, three have to come back at some point, and the times that the larger gauge trains are NOT using the lines, existing high speed trains of the standard British loading gauges will be able to use them.

In this way, Coventry will NOT be left out as there will be links from existing rail services through Coventry that will join up with the new HS2 lines. In this respect, Coventry will gain far more than any city or town to the East and a good few to the West which will be simply too far away to make links useful in any shape or form. This is why there will be smaller stops along the HS2 lines.

Re Leicester, it is the cultural centre for the East Midlands, not the main centre. My mistake.