Road rules0 min ago
Is This Really The Best Use Of £50Bn?
45 Answers
http://
"In the vote on the bill itself there was a comfortable victory for the Government of 452 votes to 41, a majority of 411."
So I guess all parties want it. I could back it if more freight was to move by rail, but it wont and I really cannot see that it will regenerate the North. The fares will be out of the reach of most people and companies these days have tight budgets so the only people we will see on it will be Government officials and civil servants probably
"In the vote on the bill itself there was a comfortable victory for the Government of 452 votes to 41, a majority of 411."
So I guess all parties want it. I could back it if more freight was to move by rail, but it wont and I really cannot see that it will regenerate the North. The fares will be out of the reach of most people and companies these days have tight budgets so the only people we will see on it will be Government officials and civil servants probably
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
by the time its built, parts of the area around Euston will be demolished, many businesses gone, and homes, that are much needed in the capital, not to mention the ports along the route that will lose land, homes, you name it, its not a good project and will likely be defunct by the time the whole thing is finished.
notwithstanding last night's "bang goes the theory" which suggests a tweak to the signaling system will somehow magic capacity from a creaking system (it won't), the only way to make room for more trains is to build more railway. moving the fast passenger trains to a dedicated track is one way of doing it.
of course, if you really don't want that, then you must lobby the government to introduce 60t and 80t trucks to our roads. these extra large hgvs will sound the death knell for rail freight in this country - even bulk commodities will be more economically moved by truck - and will provide all the capacity the rail network needs. simples.
of course, if you really don't want that, then you must lobby the government to introduce 60t and 80t trucks to our roads. these extra large hgvs will sound the death knell for rail freight in this country - even bulk commodities will be more economically moved by truck - and will provide all the capacity the rail network needs. simples.
it won't do that either. as soon as any new route like this one is built its generally full to capacity, much like the time when the M25 was built, to ease congestion is always the argument, this won't ease the congestion, our trains are only full in capacity time, commuter times, fares are massively high, and those who pay full whack aren't guaranteed a seat on the train, shame. I have commuted, it not much fun. This is a vanity project and 50b is not what it will cost in the long term, and those who will be shoved out, displaced, won't get the kind of compensation to buy elsewhere, nor will the businesses, especially those down here.
Camden Council have wavered back and forth on this, there position seems to be that it should be revised>
Camden Council have wavered back and forth on this, there position seems to be that it should be revised>
//Camden Council have wavered back and forth on this, there position seems to be that it should be revised//
on the basis that Camden council won't permit TFL to redevelop Camden town station despite the enormous obvious benefits for the users of the entire northern line, I can't imagine them supporting HS2 in any form whatsoever.
on the basis that Camden council won't permit TFL to redevelop Camden town station despite the enormous obvious benefits for the users of the entire northern line, I can't imagine them supporting HS2 in any form whatsoever.
One fast link from London to the North wont remove that many trucks from the roads - if any.
I am sure the money could have been put to better use improving the current infrastructure enabling both freight and passengers across the country not just a select few.
Fare for high speed trains in this country are a joke. Ordinary people cannot afford it.
I am sure the money could have been put to better use improving the current infrastructure enabling both freight and passengers across the country not just a select few.
Fare for high speed trains in this country are a joke. Ordinary people cannot afford it.
we use to have an excellent rail network
http://
http://
I commuted over 100 miles a day each way for 5 years.
It is a joke. 2 hours to do 100 miles on a packed unreliable journey. It is invariably either the infrastructure or a jumper that hold you up, not the train.
Commuter fares have a major discount but try travelling on a high speed or not on a Monthly or Annual and you will get caned for it.
It is a joke. 2 hours to do 100 miles on a packed unreliable journey. It is invariably either the infrastructure or a jumper that hold you up, not the train.
Commuter fares have a major discount but try travelling on a high speed or not on a Monthly or Annual and you will get caned for it.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.