Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 38 replies
  • Subscribers 14 subscribers
  • Views 2765 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Will HS2 Fail or Succeed?

Dave Perton
I believe it will do both, it just depends on the measure you use. In an project there are three measures of success or failure, cost, time-scale and outcome and I believe it will fail on two but succeed on the most important and have set out my argument in a blog post here https://communities.theiet.org/groups/blogpost/view/27/231/6920


The project is so complex to think costs will not overrun or timing slip is to be naive, as it is impossible to predict them when the timescales are so long and the complexity so great, but the outcome will be a success
Parents
  • 0
    The key to making this work is a properly integrated transport system. Andy mentioned the pleasure of using the ticket machine on the Oslo Metro which simply did what was required. That should work everywhere. Here in Switzerland I can either at the station or online buy one ticket for a journey that can include buses, trams, trains, ferries and mountain railways. The timetables will generally be planned to minimise tranfer times (except for some obscure routes). A single route from A to B is not much use without the feeder networks. This was one of the problems with Beeching's report. The feeder lines may not have been directly profitable but they delivered passengers to the trunk routes to allow them to run profitably. Remove the feeders and the passenger numbers on the trunks drop. Once I have to drive some distance to a central railway station and then have to pay for parking I might as well make the whole journey by car.

    I am stil not convinced by the Maglev system. The line in Shanghai is fun but not actually very helpful as it adds further transfers. Even the Chinese were not able to cut a path for it to Shanghai Central so you have to go to another station and use the metro or a taxi for the transfer. The great benefit of conventional rail is that it already has a pathway into most town and city centres which can also be used by the high speed rolling stock.


    Best regards


    Roger
Reply
  • 0
    The key to making this work is a properly integrated transport system. Andy mentioned the pleasure of using the ticket machine on the Oslo Metro which simply did what was required. That should work everywhere. Here in Switzerland I can either at the station or online buy one ticket for a journey that can include buses, trams, trains, ferries and mountain railways. The timetables will generally be planned to minimise tranfer times (except for some obscure routes). A single route from A to B is not much use without the feeder networks. This was one of the problems with Beeching's report. The feeder lines may not have been directly profitable but they delivered passengers to the trunk routes to allow them to run profitably. Remove the feeders and the passenger numbers on the trunks drop. Once I have to drive some distance to a central railway station and then have to pay for parking I might as well make the whole journey by car.

    I am stil not convinced by the Maglev system. The line in Shanghai is fun but not actually very helpful as it adds further transfers. Even the Chinese were not able to cut a path for it to Shanghai Central so you have to go to another station and use the metro or a taxi for the transfer. The great benefit of conventional rail is that it already has a pathway into most town and city centres which can also be used by the high speed rolling stock.


    Best regards


    Roger
Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines