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

[smiggs 10]

Not allowing for any slippage in the building of the new rail system the network should be finished in 2034, 18 years from now. How has the world changed in the last 18 years? Will there still be a need for it 18 years time or will it be outdated before it is finished?

 

The advance of information technology has not stopped the the need for train travel so assuming

 

a) The advance of automation has not made all human labour entirely obsolete

b) We have not yet developed teleportation

 

We'll still be travelling by train, better that it's cutting edge train travel from the 2020s than cutting edge train travel from the 1950s.

 

---------- Post added 19-02-2016 at 10:41 ----------

 

Couldn't Sheffield use a station at Meadowhall as a driver to regenerate the lower Don Valley and over towards Catcliffe (as well as Rotherham being able to regenerate as well).

 

Does Sheffield's development have to be concentrated in the city centre? Couldn't the city centre become more of a University area?

 

As I see it, the station could be in either place. The key will be the links from there. A terminal near Victoria Station is still not very handy for someone who needs to be at, say, the Town Hall or the University, and so transfer links are still required. Once you're beyond 400 to 500 m from the station, there will be a need/demand for further transport, so it all comes back to links.

 

Possibly but the council did a study and found that the not quite city centre location would bring more growth, than the Meadowhall location. If you have figures that contradict that then let's see 'em.

[geared 303]

As it seems that as all Sheffield can do is argue where the station is going to instead of being thankful that they are being given a station perhaps they should miss Sheffield out altogether and put the station in Barnsley

 

At this rate there won't be any station, the pig-headed council will cause such a fuss the government just won't bother building one here.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

Possibly but the council did a study and found that the not quite city centre location would bring more growth, than the Meadowhall location. If you have figures that contradict that then let's see 'em.

 

The Council bought a private company in.

There is no comparable study that shows the effect on the growth of the region if the station was moved to the Nunnery Victoria site.

 

Although it is quite natural and right for Sheffield Council to protect our interests in Sheffield and develop a depressed zone, I feel that Sheffield people would benefit more by the much better current links available at Meadowhall and pushing for new fast links to other parts of Sheffield and City Area.

[smiggs 10]

The Council bought a private company in.

There is no comparable study that shows the effect on the growth of the region if the station was moved to the Nunnery Victoria site.

 

Although it is quite natural and right for Sheffield Council to protect our interests in Sheffield and develop a depressed zone, I feel that Sheffield people would benefit more by the much better current links available at Meadowhall and pushing for new fast links to other parts of Sheffield and City Area.

 

Page 29 of this document admittedly by a private company. Shows huge economic benefits for the whole region not just Sheffield or indeed the Wicker area in Sheffield.

 

You're right to point out that the rest of South Yorkshire would have a small reduction in convenience for connecting to HS2 but the economic benefits for the whole region are far greater if the station is located in Sheffield.

[DnAuK 10]

Like I said before, I never mentioned level crossings. It seems to interest you but has nothing to do with anything I posted.

 

---------- Post added 18-02-2016 at 17:48 ----------

 

I'm struggling with the whole concept of HS2. If I want to tavel to London for a meeting at 9.45, the most important details are what time the train arrives and where. Not how long the journey takes.

 

It is of little interest saving 10 minutes off the train time if it arrives an hour too early or 5 minutes too late. It is also no use saving an hour off the train jorney if you have an hour's extra travel before or after the journey.

 

The crux of the matter is for many in Sheffield it would be better to travel to Chesterfield and get on the slow train and avoid the hassle of a commute that involved crossing Sheffield in the first place, particularly if you arrived in London at a place where you needed to be.

 

Given the choice I'd abandon HS2 altogether and spend the money on a better Trans-Pennine rail route to Manchester, a decent Trans-Pennine motorway between Sheffield and Manchester and improvements to decongest the existing main North South rail routes.

 

Hear Hear! Completely agree.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

Hear Hear! Completely agree.

 

London destination.

The vast majority of London travellers who just catch one of the 2 per hour EMT trains to St Pancras and do not consider that one change gives them a choice of arrival Liverpool Street, Kings Cross, Marylebone, Euston, Paddington, Farringdon, City Thameslink or Blackfriars.

 

London arrival time.

If arrival time in London is a concern they could have another two arrival times if they used Doncaster or Retford connetions. It isn't a concern to most as they will catch the train before their appointment/connection.

 

Chesterfield.

Chesterfield stoppers are irrelevant as there are none as all Sheffield to London trains stop there.

 

Manchester route.

Road connection essential and the planned railway work will reduce travel time to about 45 minutes. Any new tunnel would be to West Yorkshire.

 

Decongestion.

Sheffield, Derby, Leicester remodelling. Re aligning. Re signalling and electrification already planned. The law of diminishing return means the more money ( and more disruption) will have less and less effect.

 

The money?

Boris and his successors will be rubbing their hands on the prospect of getting Crossrail2 and the new Thameslink on top of the £28 billion of infrastructure money currently allocated fo the next four years.

 

HS2 will release paths on MML and ECML and enable the possibility of many more direct services to many more destinations in the London and South.

 

To rubbish HS2 on money grounds is acceptable as there are consequences either way and we and our politicians must accept that. I will challenge erroneous claims about current railway operation and future claims.

[smiggs 10]

It should be noted that there's also a scheme called Northern Powerhouse Rail (yes they really have called it that) to be delivered after HS2 completes, initial studies to completed by next month apparently. I'd love to have both, we should be buidling modern infrastructure not just trying to patch up Victorian Railways.

[dacrlit 18]

Just cancel the HS2 Scheme.

[foxy lady 10]

 

Chesterfield.

Chesterfield stoppers are irrelevant as there are none as all Sheffield to London trains stop there.

 

 

Chesterfield stoppers are not irrelevant as HS2 won't stop there. So that is the question for commuters in the south of Sheffield (or Dronfield, or Chesterfield or Mansfield etc). Is it worth the hassle of crossing Sheffield to get on HS2 when you could simply drive to Chesterfield and get the "slow" train from there.

 

This whole HS2 is hocum. We are talking of jorney times in 20 years time. Over 20 years the regular trains will improve and will probably be 20 minutes faster themselves.

 

My concern is that on our crowded island there are thousands of idiots, terrorists and vandals who will think it great to chuck an old cooker off a bridge onto the line. Now a train travelling at 200 miles per hour takes 4 times as long to stop as one travelling at 100 miles per hour, and even one travelling at 100 miles per hour couldn't react to a cooker landing on the line a mile ahead.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

My concern is that on our crowded island there are thousands of idiots, terrorists and vandals who will think it great to chuck an old cooker off a bridge onto the line. Now a train travelling at 200 miles per hour takes 4 times as long to stop as one travelling at 100 miles per hour, and even one travelling at 100 miles per hour couldn't react to a cooker landing on the line a mile ahead.

 

Train derailments are very survivable and very, very rare.

 

 

The last fatal high speed train derailment (passenger death of any kind in a train crash) was 9 years ago next week when one elderly passenger was killed at Grayrigg WCML -track fault.

The last high speed train derailment with multiple fatalities was 12 years ago when 7 where killed at Ufton Nervet GWML -car on line.

Previous to that, 15 years ago next week when 10 people killed at Great Heck ECML -car on line.

 

A train travelling at full speed is unlikely to see a cooker at a distance within which it can stop HS2 or otherwise. Although frequent incidents occur (April peak) there has been a 40% drop in 10 years of deliberate track obstruction.

No cooker incidents on HS1 since opening in 2003/7.

 

Terrorist have targeted densely packed trains in enclosed urban environments.

On the HS lines in UK, France and Belgium etc vulnerable points have CCTV.

 

Risk of death on a train is far lower than any other form of transport so moving people to rail will save lives. 2000 vehicle drivers and passengers are killed a year.

[foxy lady 10]

Train derailments are very survivable and very, very rare.

 

 

The last fatal high speed train derailment (passenger death of any kind in a train crash) was 9 years ago next week when one elderly passenger was killed at Grayrigg WCML -track fault.

The last high speed train derailment with multiple fatalities was 12 years ago when 7 where killed at Ufton Nervet GWML -car on line.

Previous to that, 15 years ago next week when 10 people killed at Great Heck ECML -car on line.

 

A train travelling at full speed is unlikely to see a cooker at a distance within which it can stop HS2 or otherwise. Although frequent incidents occur (April peak) there has been a 40% drop in 10 years.

No cooker incidents on HS1 since opening in 2003/7.

 

Terrorist have targeted densely packed trains in enclosed urban environments.

On the HS lines in UK, France and Belgium etc vulnerable points have CCTV.

 

Risk of death on a train is far lower than any other form of transport so moving people to rail will save lives. 2000 vehicle drivers and passengers are killed a year.

 

How many 200 mph trains did you include in your statistics?

[Annie Bynnol 612]

How many 200 mph trains did you include in your statistics?

 

 

Extrapolating just by factoring speed and momentum is possible and globally is cancelled out by the much safer track formations and technology that high speed lines have- ln exactly the same way motorways are the safest roads.

 

In fact the most dangerous places on HS lines are regarded as being the low speed sections approaching junctions and stations where there is an increase in things to go wrong.

 

Millions of people travel every day on HS lines as they do on planes. People accept the risks