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

[foxy lady 10]

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

 

Indeed they do, but then terrorisn has increased dramatically over the last 3 or 4 years. So who knows what the situation will be in 20 years time. Who would have expected gunmen shooting sunbathers on Tunisian beaches before it happened.

 

Dropping an old Ford Cortina onto the track doesn't require the planning of a terrorist bomb, but you can be pretty sure that a train that requires 7 miles in order to stop will have a job swerving round it, and will fly an awful long way after it does. http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/societe/20130712.OBS9374/les-plus-grands-deraillements-de-train-dans-le-monde.html

 

http://www.rp-online.de/panorama/deutschland/eschede-bilder-der-verwuestung-bid-1.1939931

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34822666

 

Why would I want to bother driving across Sheffield to get a train when I could drive to Chesterfield and get a slower one that would get me to London quicker?

Edited February 19, 2016 by foxy lady

[Annie Bynnol 612]

Indeed they do, but then terrorisn has increased dramatically over the last 3 or 4 years. So who knows what the situation will be in 20 years time. Who would have expected gunmen shooting sunbathers on Tunisian beaches before it happened.

 

Dropping an old Ford Cortina onto the track doesn't require the planning of a terrorist bomb, but you can be pretty sure that a train that requires 7 miles in order to stop will have a job swerving round it, and will fly an awful long way after it does. http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/societe/20130712.OBS9374/les-plus-grands-deraillements-de-train-dans-le-monde.html

 

http://www.rp-online.de/panorama/deutschland/eschede-bilder-der-verwuestung-bid-1.1939931

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34822666

 

Why would I want to bother driving across Sheffield to get a train when I could drive to Chesterfield and get a slower one that would get me to London quicker?

 

The risk of terrorism applies to any structure or building where people congregate which is absolutely no reason not to build anything ever again for all sorts of reasons.

 

As explained "cooker on track" situations are rare and obviously very survivable.

[smiggs 10]

If we are to cancel infrastructure projects because terrorism might happen we might as well dissolve civilisation and go back to living in the trees.

[apelike 10]

Just one question.

 

If Sheffield station is a listed building can it be redeveloped?

 

OK, two then.

 

Is there room for new infrastructure to accommodate an HS2 link; re roads, access and parking at Sheffield station?

Edited February 20, 2016 by apelike

[foxy lady 10]

If we are to cancel infrastructure projects because terrorism might happen we might as well dissolve civilisation and go back to living in the trees.

 

I wasn't refering to terrorism. I was refering to the consequences of the nutters who regularly throw things onto our railway lines. There is a major difference between a train being derailed at 80mph and one at 200 mph. The infrastructure that would need to be put in place to stop it happening is massive.

The cost of HS2 cannot be justified. It is all very well spending £50 billion to shave a few minutes off the journey time between Sheffield and London. The problem is that HS2 won't stop at Chesterfield, or most of the other stops between Sheffield and London. If that time saving is so important they could simply run the current trains through without stopping to save 20 minutes or whatever it is.

That money would be better spent linking Sheffield by road and rail tothe so called Northern Power House, because like it or not HS2 WON'T be coming to Sheffield. It will be by-passing it. The Northern Power House won't include Sheffield but we will all be paying a massive price through our taxes for it to happen.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

... If that time saving is so important they could simply run the current trains through without stopping to save 20 minutes or whatever it is.

 

The Midland Mainline is not just their to provide Sheffielders with a non-stop journey to London, if it was speeding up journey times could and has been done by avoiding Derby.

 

Since then demand has increased dramatically and more trains are needed to carry them.

 

There is also a bigger demand from Nottingham, Derby and everywhere else.

People want to travel between intermediate stops in increasing numbers.

Some need to connect to other routes at Bedford.

Some might even want to fly from Luton Airport.

There is a new route to Corby sharing the tracks.

There are even more commuter trains using the line between Bedford and Brighton which shares some track with MML.

Most of the northern section of the journey is double track.

Different rolling stock have different maximum speeds, acceleration and speed restrictions on certain sections.

 

Very simply this causes a non-stop train to catch up with slow or stopping trains.

This was managed at stations and passing loops and four track sections when demand and train numbers were lower but there comes a point when capacity is so tight that the whole timetable becomes mathematically chaotic and therefore unreliable leading to massive disruption not only of the MML but to other routes as well eg XC between Edinburgh and Penzance which in turn affects other routes. Consequently the timetable planners will structure the route as a set of paths that the train operating companies can use.

 

It would be possible to straighten and four/six track the whole route but the capital cost of rebuilding every station, bridge, tunnel and embankment, demolishing thousands of homes, businesses and other buildings, diverting roads would be far greater than the whole of HS2. This building programme would slow everyone's journey for at least ten years.

 

It is just so much safer, easier and cheaper to increase capacity by building a new line where the trains travel faster and safer.

 

This thread is not about HS2 yes or no, its about the site of the station in Sheffield and I apologize to others for 'derailing' the very important topic but there has to be a response to some claims.

 

---------- Post added 20-02-2016 at 11:10 ----------

 

Just one question.

 

If Sheffield station is a listed building can it be redeveloped?

 

OK, two then.

 

Is there room for new infrastructure to accommodate an HS2 link; re roads, access and parking at Sheffield station?

 

 

The frontage and platform buildings of the current Sheffield (Midland) station is listed(II) and can be and has been altered with consent. This is not the proposed HS2 stop.

Sheffield Victoria station was demolished.

The hotel and approach have a listing(II).

The main Wicker arch is listed.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Annie Bynnol

[geared 319]

Is there realistically even the room to fit the new HS2 and platform in the station.

 

Just looking on the map it doesn't seem like there is the space in the area for it all.

[smiggs 10]

Is there realistically even the room to fit the new HS2 and platform in the station.

 

Just looking on the map it doesn't seem like there is the space in the area for it all.

 

It's not practical. You either have to disrepute the listed frontage of Midland station or take a chunk out of the listed building behind the station (Park Hill) once done you'll need to shift a hell of a lot of earth to get the building in.

[Eater Sundae 12]

It's not practical. You either have to disrepute the listed frontage of Midland station or take a chunk out of the listed building behind the station (Park Hill) once done you'll need to shift a hell of a lot of earth to get the building in.

 

But nobody's suggesting that, are they?

[geared 319]

But nobody's suggesting that, are they?

 

oh you mean the, lets stick it on the old Victoria station site idea??

 

Which technically is in the city centre but at the same time is just far away enough to have crap public transport links.

[SteelCityAle 10]

It's not practical. You either have to disrepute the listed frontage of Midland station or take a chunk out of the listed building behind the station (Park Hill) .

 

the latter is more than acceptable! Win-win, one might say...

[geared 319]

the latter is more than acceptable! Win-win, one might say...

 

It's enough to get my backing :hihi: