@@trainformerd41341000% it’s worth it they definitely need to take it to Manchester but of course that won’t happen anytime soon cos they keep giving money away to Ukraine
The issue is most of the ecological damage has already been done. I don't want that land now in public hands to be given away or sold for a pittance to private (cronies) hands. Supporting HS2 is now Green Party policy. Although personally I feel the benefits we had from those ancient woodlands was more than a privately owned trainline... But now they're stretches of muddy wasteland instead, putting a train line on it is an improvement. We need to renationalise rail, water and energy production. Otherwise the costs of using this new line will be too much for society as a whole to actually gain benefits from it, other than perhaps a bit more capacity on other routes. One of the main benefits to the country as a whole would be the northern section that was abandoned.
I support the construction of HS2. I accept that costs have escalated but we must push on. If necessary safeguard the land north of Birmingham and then reactivate the project once the resources are available. The political objections are disgraceful. What has been achieved so far is terrific and I look forward to seeing the first trains run from Birmingham to London.
I agree safeguarding land is important but the longer the project is paused the further costs will esculate, one examply will be when they try to re-hire all the engineers and constructions experts after they've moved onto other projects, that will be both time consuming and costly. Plus we have reports stating in 10-15 years the WCML and M6 corridors will reach max capacity, if we don't get on with this, we're adding 2 lanes to the whole of the M6 as well as re-starting this line, that won't be cheap.
It’s not about speed at all, that’s just a byproduct of being a new line. It’s all about capacity, current rail network is at capacity and a new line is needed. Largest gain is taking the existing high speed trains off the current network, freeing up those lines for more commuter and leisure travel in the local area such as Birmingham. Phase 2A between Birmingham and Crewe would have had the largest impact as it has lots of junctions and small tunnels which cannot be expanded. A new line going north from Birmingham is needed and has been cancelled. It’s not controversial at all, just a small minority being noisy makes it into the news.
@davidwatson8292 If HS2 is all about capacity and modern Britain, then why is the rest of the UK left out? By the time this project is complete, it’s projected to cost the taxpayer £100 billion. Yet, Birmingham and London only make up 15% of the UK population, while train services across the rest of the country are still suffering. This kind of investment should be more evenly distributed across regions to benefit more people. We should be setting aside £10 billion for renewable energy projects not just £200 million a year. With the current energy crisis and our reliance on imports, it’s clear that the UK must become more self reliant. Recent geopolitical events have shown how vulnerable we are when it comes to energy. By investing in renewables, we could reduce dependence on other countries. HS2 doesn’t benefit the wider population in any significant way. Instead, diversifying this investment could make a much bigger impact on the entire country.
@@ShadowJester-jg2gs There are rail projects happening all over the UK. East - West rail is one example, then there are improvements and new stations opening from Scotland to the south West. Please open your eyes. This project is the first and most important step to a modern Britain that must keep up with the rest of the world.
@@davidwatson8292 My neighbour works for Network Rails, and they're not expecting drastic improvements from the current rail projects. Electrifying lines across the country is important, but it won't solve the issues of capacity, delays, and cancellations. There are even concerns within Network Rail about the Severn Tunnel Junction, which might collapse due to ongoing leaks from the Bristol Channel and a lack of funding for repairs. If this were to happen, it would be absolutely devastating. Meanwhile, the UK government rejected the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon project, with its £1.3 to £1.4 billion cost-yet this is just 1% of the projected costs of the HS2 line. The lagoon could have provided a reliable, predictable energy source, generating power twice daily, enough to support both the newly electrified trains and power over 155,000 homes. London and Birmingham aren’t the entirety of modern Britain, investment needs to be spread more evenly.
People need to let go of the ‘designed to reduce journey times between Birmingham and London’. HS2 would have been so much more and future extensions need to be resurrected to reach its full potential.
Facts: In 1998 HS1 was built using French TGV high-speed tech (line & rolling stock). Dominique" the huge launching girder being used to build HS2 Colne Valley viaduct is French engineering. In 1981 the French built the 1st true HST line in Europe, TGV broke 3 world speed records on rails: 380 kph 1981, 515 kph 1990, 574 kph 2007. French Paris-Bordeaux High Speed Line, last leg 340 km : *January 2012* start of project. *July 2015* end of civil engineering works (500 heavy works including 24 viaducts, 3 million tonnes of ballast, 1.1 million tonnes of concrete sleepers, 13,000 catenary supports) *July 2017* commissioning, *ahead of schedule* (planned: December 2017) Cost 7.8 bn euros
While not initially supporting the building of HS2 the government decision to NOT build the part north of Birmingham assures the project will be a failure and is utterly stupid. The project has started so it should be completed as it was intended.
It's being built because we need more capacity so that we can take filthy lorries off the road - millions of lorry journeys, and short haul aircraft out of the skies. CAPACITY! Clean electricity and, safe Transport AND it will look good!. Speed is a consideration but way down the list
When the details of HS2 were first published in 2010, modal shift from air & car combined maxed out at 16%, but each year this has dropped by 5% & is now just 1% with air & a paltry 4% from car. In fact, its always been expected that more new journeys - currently five times more new journeys, would be undertaken just because HS2 was built, than would shift from non-rail modes of transport. Research shows that even if HS2 had been built in full, traffic on the M40 & M1 would reduce by less than 1%. What’s more, it won’t make space on existing railways for freight trains & may even make freight slower & less attractive. Where existing railways are two tracks, freight trains already have to move out of the way & wait to let fast passenger trains through. On those parts of the railway that HS2 trains will use, this will just add to the numbers of fast trains making the situation a lot worse for freight. The southern end of the WCML up to Rugby is a four track railway, with a pair of “fast lines” used by fast passenger trains & a pair of “slow lines” used by stopping & semi-fast passenger services & freight. Even after HS2 opens there will still be fast passenger services on the WCML, providing trains to Milton Keynes & Northampton & InterCity services to places such as Coventry, Wolverhampton, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Lichfield, Stoke-on-Trent, Chester & North Wales. These will be spread across the hour in each direction to give Milton Keynes a fifteen minute frequency therefore, there are still too many fast services to allow freight trains on to the fast lines. Freight will still have to use the slow line: the motorway analogy is that HGVs are not permitted in the fast lane. Arguments that the WCML is "full to capacity" rely on a discredited & out of date forecasting model which overestimates long distance passenger growth & isn't used for anything anymore except to justify the monstrous vanity project that is HS2. Network Rail's "New Lines Programme Capacity Analysis" shows that WCML capacity is kept artificially low by private operators wanting to maximise profits. A DfT analysis shows that in peak hours leaving Euston, WCML trains were loaded at just 52.2%. In addition, HS2 doesn’t go to the places freight trains are needed: it won’t relieve railways to ports like Liverpool, Southampton & Ipswich. The whole sorry project is an environmental disaster of epic proportions & Britain's biggest infrastructure mistake in half a century.
@@rinkydinkmcrukAgreed I mean technically it will run onto Lichfield so it can connect with the West Coast Mainline and it should go to Leeds to as well for Scotland too.
@@rinkydinkmcruk The City of Manchester is no more a power house than the City of Birmingham, so much hype over the City of Manchester which in size and population is only the sixth largest City in the UK, the City of Birmingham is 3 times the size of the City of Manchester with a population of 1.5 million Citizens on it's own compared the second largest City in the UK and largest City Council in Europe to the City of Manchester's population of just 580,000 citizens and if you are on about Greater Manchester then we have to include the power House of the West Midlands Conurbtion containing 3 great Cities of Birminghm, Coventry and Wolverhampton and the Greater Midlands area
@@CRIMSONANT1 What rubbish again, what has the M40 and M1 got to do with HS2 and what services that will use either HS2 or the existing WCML will be decided by the operator Avanti West Coast trains and the West Midlands Railways train opertor's subsidery London & Northwestern and I bet they said that of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway being an utter disaster of eppic proportions, yet with out it we would not have the Railways of today.
The first bit they cancelled was the 1-mile link from HS1, the Eurostar from Paris, Rotterdam, Brussells etc. this means that Birmingham wont be directly connected to Europe. What a silly idea, truly a missed opportunity.
Not required, we have a perfect Airport that has cheap quick flight to Europe from Birmingham and the link between HS2 at Euston to the HS1 connection at Stratford International is more than a mile
Call it what it is - ENGLAND’S controversial railway project. The only British thing about it is the cost. All the other Nations have to pay for it too.
i would have done leeds to manchester and to birmingham first , which would have been a real committment to the north and then the connection to london later....
Why, it was desighned to improve capacity on the Southern Half of the WCML and speed up trains, not for commuter line betwen Manchester and Leeds, that is for the Metro mayors in this part of the world to sort out.
Well most of Europe have hi speed trains and we haven’t that’s what this is about it’s not needed in the uk the money would have been better spent on the existing system
Our military aid to Ukraine is a relatively petty sum of money in comparison to HS2. I hope and believe that HS2 is completed in full and also that we can extend to Scotland in the foreseeable future
iF you think the UK Government has given Ukraine £100billion I can only conclude that you have been kicked in the head by a horse. As with much of what has been sent to Ukraine it has been almost out of code weapons.
This is the downside of the UK being so woke about everything it takes forever to finish building projects. You think if China wanted to build a railway like this it would take them so long, they would build over the green areas and ignore local peoples criticism and get whole thing done very fast. I understand trying to save the environment but is it worth 68 billion to save a few green areas would’ve been cheaper to just plant new trees. Either ways saving the environment is a scam the world don’t start and end in the UK and majority of countries outside Europe and america do not do their part in recycling and trying to save the environment in fact they do not believe in it or simply don’t care and they make up the majority of the worlds population so our efforts are useless unfortunately
I understand that the UK needs a brand new high speed railway but all that is costing £billions and I just think it’s not worth having a 2nd high speed railway line. But at the same time I think it’s a good idea because it would make train travel lot easier and quicker.
It doest go to Paris, they are leaving out the 1-mile link to Eurostar. What a shame, it would have connected businesses in Paris, Rotterdam and Brussels to Birmingham and Manchester. Now THAT is what we need to get the economy moving.
@@101engineer There is no economical or logical reason due to cost to connect a domestic high speed line to HS1, it s easier to fly from Birmingham and Manchester to Europe than catch the trin, it has ben tried and failed years ago and to connect HS2 to HS1 it is more than a mile
It started because the EU wanted an high speed rail network across europe. The original cost was for the whole project . The latest costings are just to Birmingham. The ridiculous costs would have been better spent upgrading the current Victorian network.
Nothing to do with the EU and billions had already been spent of upgrading the existing lines, only for them to already be over capacity when the work was done. The only way to get extra capacity was to build entirely new lines. It was more expensive to add lines to existing alignments, flanked by existing developments, than to create a new line that could bypass smaller population centres, taking intercity traffic off the existing lines. The High Speed part is nice but isn’t the main benefit - certainly not between Birmingham and London anyway. Cost escalated for a bunch of reasons. Simple inflation, fuelled by the twin messes left by CoVid and the additional costs on everything once we left the EU. Optimism bias at the outset. A quite ridiculous level of environmental mitigation applied to the scheme imposed by political considerations of the conservative areas it was passing through. It may be great to go to this degree given it should stand for 150 years, but it comes at a big cost, and the bar was set far higher than any road scheme seems to have to pass. Almost half the length is in tunnels for example. So all consequences of decisions made here. Nothing to do with the EU.
@@eddaines237 And on top of that, big portions of the west coast main line quite simply cannot be upgraded in place. Old tunnels quite simply cannot be widened.
Haha, honestly the EU have always known the UK's obsessions about borders means a full UK/Europe railway network was never possible, plus the way HS2 has been designed makes connecting it impossible anyway. Regarding upgrading the current "victorian" network. Do you think they didn't look into that? To reach even half Hs2 capacity, it will cost almost the same, require even more house demolitions and result in weekend closures for over 10 years. Great plan Tony.
So much controversy behind this project, is it worth it?
Idk my opinion on hs2 is neutral but it’s better than a motorway
Yes it is worth it and we must push on
The Travel time between London and Birmingham is 1hr 20 minutes, currently on direct route, with 2 stops 49 minutes with HS2
@@trainformerd41341000% it’s worth it they definitely need to take it to Manchester but of course that won’t happen anytime soon cos they keep giving money away to Ukraine
The issue is most of the ecological damage has already been done. I don't want that land now in public hands to be given away or sold for a pittance to private (cronies) hands.
Supporting HS2 is now Green Party policy. Although personally I feel the benefits we had from those ancient woodlands was more than a privately owned trainline...
But now they're stretches of muddy wasteland instead, putting a train line on it is an improvement.
We need to renationalise rail, water and energy production. Otherwise the costs of using this new line will be too much for society as a whole to actually gain benefits from it, other than perhaps a bit more capacity on other routes.
One of the main benefits to the country as a whole would be the northern section that was abandoned.
I support the construction of HS2. I accept that costs have escalated but we must push on. If necessary safeguard the land north of Birmingham and then reactivate the project once the resources are available. The political objections are disgraceful. What has been achieved so far is terrific and I look forward to seeing the first trains run from Birmingham to London.
I agree safeguarding land is important but the longer the project is paused the further costs will esculate, one examply will be when they try to re-hire all the engineers and constructions experts after they've moved onto other projects, that will be both time consuming and costly. Plus we have reports stating in 10-15 years the WCML and M6 corridors will reach max capacity, if we don't get on with this, we're adding 2 lanes to the whole of the M6 as well as re-starting this line, that won't be cheap.
It’s not about speed at all, that’s just a byproduct of being a new line. It’s all about capacity, current rail network is at capacity and a new line is needed. Largest gain is taking the existing high speed trains off the current network, freeing up those lines for more commuter and leisure travel in the local area such as Birmingham. Phase 2A between Birmingham and Crewe would have had the largest impact as it has lots of junctions and small tunnels which cannot be expanded. A new line going north from Birmingham is needed and has been cancelled. It’s not controversial at all, just a small minority being noisy makes it into the news.
Yes, the nimbies and people who can't engage in reality. I want my kids and grandkids to live in a modern Britain
@davidwatson8292 If HS2 is all about capacity and modern Britain, then why is the rest of the UK left out? By the time this project is complete, it’s projected to cost the taxpayer £100 billion. Yet, Birmingham and London only make up 15% of the UK population, while train services across the rest of the country are still suffering. This kind of investment should be more evenly distributed across regions to benefit more people.
We should be setting aside £10 billion for renewable energy projects not just £200 million a year. With the current energy crisis and our reliance on imports, it’s clear that the UK must become more self reliant. Recent geopolitical events have shown how vulnerable we are when it comes to energy. By investing in renewables, we could reduce dependence on other countries.
HS2 doesn’t benefit the wider population in any significant way. Instead, diversifying this investment could make a much bigger impact on the entire country.
@@ShadowJester-jg2gs There are rail projects happening all over the UK. East - West rail is one example, then there are improvements and new stations opening from Scotland to the south West. Please open your eyes. This project is the first and most important step to a modern Britain that must keep up with the rest of the world.
@@davidwatson8292 My neighbour works for Network Rails, and they're not expecting drastic improvements from the current rail projects. Electrifying lines across the country is important, but it won't solve the issues of capacity, delays, and cancellations. There are even concerns within Network Rail about the Severn Tunnel Junction, which might collapse due to ongoing leaks from the Bristol Channel and a lack of funding for repairs. If this were to happen, it would be absolutely devastating.
Meanwhile, the UK government rejected the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon project, with its £1.3 to £1.4 billion cost-yet this is just 1% of the projected costs of the HS2 line. The lagoon could have provided a reliable, predictable energy source, generating power twice daily, enough to support both the newly electrified trains and power over 155,000 homes. London and Birmingham aren’t the entirety of modern Britain, investment needs to be spread more evenly.
I’d say speed and capacity. Both are very important for the future of the country. We have to build it anyway
People need to let go of the ‘designed to reduce journey times between Birmingham and London’. HS2 would have been so much more and future extensions need to be resurrected to reach its full potential.
Facts: In 1998 HS1 was built using French TGV high-speed tech (line & rolling stock). Dominique" the huge launching girder being used to build HS2 Colne Valley viaduct is French engineering. In 1981 the French built the 1st true HST line in Europe, TGV broke 3 world speed records on rails: 380 kph 1981, 515 kph 1990, 574 kph 2007.
French Paris-Bordeaux High Speed Line, last leg 340 km : *January 2012* start of project. *July 2015* end of civil engineering works (500 heavy works including 24 viaducts, 3 million tonnes of ballast, 1.1 million tonnes of concrete sleepers, 13,000 catenary supports) *July 2017* commissioning, *ahead of schedule* (planned: December 2017) Cost 7.8 bn euros
While not initially supporting the building of HS2 the government decision to NOT build the part north of Birmingham assures the project will be a failure and is utterly stupid. The project has started so it should be completed as it was intended.
Brilliant summary.
It's being built because we need more capacity so that we can take filthy lorries off the road - millions of lorry journeys, and short haul aircraft out of the skies. CAPACITY! Clean electricity and, safe Transport AND it will look good!. Speed is a consideration but way down the list
Pointless from London to Birmingham and without the powerhouse that is Manchester
When the details of HS2 were first published in 2010, modal shift from air & car combined maxed out at 16%, but each year this has dropped by 5% & is now just 1% with air & a paltry 4% from car. In fact, its always been expected that more new journeys - currently five times more new journeys, would be undertaken just because HS2 was built, than would shift from non-rail modes of transport.
Research shows that even if HS2 had been built in full, traffic on the M40 & M1 would reduce by less than 1%.
What’s more, it won’t make space on existing railways for freight trains & may even make freight slower & less attractive. Where existing railways are two tracks, freight trains already have to move out of the way & wait to let fast passenger trains through.
On those parts of the railway that HS2 trains will use, this will just add to the numbers of fast trains making the situation a lot worse for freight.
The southern end of the WCML up to Rugby is a four track railway, with a pair of “fast lines” used by fast passenger trains & a pair of “slow lines” used by stopping & semi-fast passenger services & freight. Even after HS2 opens there will still be fast passenger services on the WCML, providing trains to Milton Keynes & Northampton & InterCity services to places such as Coventry, Wolverhampton, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Lichfield, Stoke-on-Trent, Chester & North Wales. These will be spread across the hour in each direction to give Milton Keynes a fifteen minute frequency therefore, there are still too many fast services to allow freight trains on to the fast lines. Freight will still have to use the slow line: the motorway analogy is that HGVs are not permitted in the fast lane.
Arguments that the WCML is "full to capacity" rely on a discredited & out of date forecasting model which overestimates long distance passenger growth & isn't used for anything anymore except to justify the monstrous vanity project that is HS2.
Network Rail's "New Lines Programme Capacity Analysis" shows that WCML capacity is kept artificially low by private operators wanting to maximise profits.
A DfT analysis shows that in peak hours leaving Euston, WCML trains were loaded at just 52.2%.
In addition, HS2 doesn’t go to the places freight trains are needed: it won’t relieve railways to ports like Liverpool, Southampton & Ipswich.
The whole sorry project is an environmental disaster of epic proportions & Britain's biggest infrastructure mistake in half a century.
@@rinkydinkmcrukAgreed I mean technically it will run onto Lichfield so it can connect with the West Coast Mainline and it should go to Leeds to as well for Scotland too.
@@rinkydinkmcruk The City of Manchester is no more a power house than the City of Birmingham, so much hype over the City of Manchester which in size and population is only the sixth largest City in the UK, the City of Birmingham is 3 times the size of the City of Manchester with a population of 1.5 million Citizens on it's own compared the second largest City in the UK and largest City Council in Europe to the City of Manchester's population of just 580,000 citizens and if you are on about Greater Manchester then we have to include the power House of the West Midlands Conurbtion containing 3 great Cities of Birminghm, Coventry and Wolverhampton and the Greater Midlands area
@@CRIMSONANT1 What rubbish again, what has the M40 and M1 got to do with HS2 and what services that will use either HS2 or the existing WCML will be decided by the operator Avanti West Coast trains and the West Midlands Railways train opertor's subsidery London & Northwestern and I bet they said that of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway being an utter disaster of eppic proportions, yet with out it we would not have the Railways of today.
The first bit they cancelled was the 1-mile link from HS1, the Eurostar from Paris, Rotterdam, Brussells etc. this means that Birmingham wont be directly connected to Europe. What a silly idea, truly a missed opportunity.
Not required, we have a perfect Airport that has cheap quick flight to Europe from Birmingham and the link between HS2 at Euston to the HS1 connection at Stratford International is more than a mile
I don’t mind having HS2 being built. As long as it’s to be completed by 2030 and with new trains to handle speeds up to 200mph.
A shame the Northern Parts are now cut.
Great video.
Call it what it is - ENGLAND’S controversial railway project. The only British thing about it is the cost. All the other Nations have to pay for it too.
i would have done leeds to manchester and to birmingham first , which would have been a real committment to the north and then the connection to london later....
Why, it was desighned to improve capacity on the Southern Half of the WCML and speed up trains, not for commuter line betwen Manchester and Leeds, that is for the Metro mayors in this part of the world to sort out.
I am going to guess the video is very out of date I gave up after a couple of minutes.
Well most of Europe have hi speed trains and we haven’t that’s what this is about it’s not needed in the uk the money would have been better spent on the existing system
Il faut la prolonger jusqu'en écosse
How, if Scotland wants it let the SNP cough up the millions of pounds it would cost to build HS2 to Scotland
For what reason !
The truth is that compared to their neighbours across the channel: British railways are a laughing stock.
Utterly pointless without the powerhouse that is Manchester ❤
Manchester is not a power house over rate City and only the sixth largest City in the Uk
Can British finance the project until complete?
It would be easier if British didn't promise the military aids that costs about 100 billion pound.
Our military aid to Ukraine is a relatively petty sum of money in comparison to HS2. I hope and believe that HS2 is completed in full and also that we can extend to Scotland in the foreseeable future
List out how a storm shadow or artillery shell will help build out infrastructure?
iF you think the UK Government has given Ukraine £100billion I can only conclude that you have been kicked in the head by a horse. As with much of what has been sent to Ukraine it has been almost out of code weapons.
This is the downside of the UK being so woke about everything it takes forever to finish building projects. You think if China wanted to build a railway like this it would take them so long, they would build over the green areas and ignore local peoples criticism and get whole thing done very fast. I understand trying to save the environment but is it worth 68 billion to save a few green areas would’ve been cheaper to just plant new trees. Either ways saving the environment is a scam the world don’t start and end in the UK and majority of countries outside Europe and america do not do their part in recycling and trying to save the environment in fact they do not believe in it or simply don’t care and they make up the majority of the worlds population so our efforts are useless unfortunately
I understand that the UK needs a brand new high speed railway but all that is costing £billions and I just think it’s not worth having a 2nd high speed railway line. But at the same time I think it’s a good idea because it would make train travel lot easier and quicker.
HS2 is heading the same way as B.L. , half--arsed , under done , and over priced !
It doesn’t even go into London.
Or Manchester
It will be going into London Euston, Old Oak Copmmon is not desighned as a Terminal Station
It is definately going to London now as the UK Government has now given the go ahead to finnishing the HS2 line to Euston
It doest go to Paris, they are leaving out the 1-mile link to Eurostar. What a shame, it would have connected businesses in Paris, Rotterdam and Brussels to Birmingham and Manchester. Now THAT is what we need to get the economy moving.
@@101engineer There is no economical or logical reason due to cost to connect a domestic high speed line to HS1, it s easier to fly from Birmingham and Manchester to Europe than catch the trin, it has ben tried and failed years ago and to connect HS2 to HS1 it is more than a mile
Phase 2 was cancelled.
They need to rebuild the railway network to the scale of 1960 not build stupid high-speed lines.
They need to build the railway network to the scale of 1960 not build this stupid high-speed lines.
You literally don’t understand anything about this do you?
@@f-86zoomer37 HS2 was the biggest waste of money ever.
I know we should have expended the m6 but another four lanes each way right? Idiots!
Standing joke
It started because the EU wanted an high speed rail network across europe. The original cost was for the whole project . The latest costings are just to Birmingham. The ridiculous costs would have been better spent upgrading the current Victorian network.
Nothing to do with the EU and billions had already been spent of upgrading the existing lines, only for them to already be over capacity when the work was done. The only way to get extra capacity was to build entirely new lines. It was more expensive to add lines to existing alignments, flanked by existing developments, than to create a new line that could bypass smaller population centres, taking intercity traffic off the existing lines. The High Speed part is nice but isn’t the main benefit - certainly not between Birmingham and London anyway.
Cost escalated for a bunch of reasons.
Simple inflation, fuelled by the twin messes left by CoVid and the additional costs on everything once we left the EU.
Optimism bias at the outset.
A quite ridiculous level of environmental mitigation applied to the scheme imposed by political considerations of the conservative areas it was passing through. It may be great to go to this degree given it should stand for 150 years, but it comes at a big cost, and the bar was set far higher than any road scheme seems to have to pass. Almost half the length is in tunnels for example.
So all consequences of decisions made here. Nothing to do with the EU.
@@eddaines237 And on top of that, big portions of the west coast main line quite simply cannot be upgraded in place. Old tunnels quite simply cannot be widened.
Haha, honestly the EU have always known the UK's obsessions about borders means a full UK/Europe railway network was never possible, plus the way HS2 has been designed makes connecting it impossible anyway.
Regarding upgrading the current "victorian" network. Do you think they didn't look into that? To reach even half Hs2 capacity, it will cost almost the same, require even more house demolitions and result in weekend closures for over 10 years. Great plan Tony.
HS2 was never started by the EU, it was started by the UK government to improve capacity and speed on the West Coast route
Littered with mistakes and covered in an American accent 👎
Copi.of.indian.railway..😡😡😡😡😡