Reader Comments:

Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.

• Dr David Hill, Huddersfield, UK

  The WWH has been analysed and developed by eminent engineers and is something that will break this North-South economic divide.
  
  I would like to hear how you would achieve this. i.e. what development would you support that creates perpetual energy for us, transposes heavy transport by nearly 50% and builds new futures for people in the North and their future young? Let's hear from you and what you would spend £33 billion on.
  
  I am sure that it would make fascinating reading -- or just hot air?

• Guy Tallier, Sandton, South Africa

  HS2 is the only way to add capacity to a network which, in some parts, is becoming saturated. In the seventies, when SNCF decided to build the first high speed line between Paris ans Lyon, it was in fact their answer to the saturation of the classic line; 30 years later, RFF (and SNCF) are considering to build a second high speed line between those two cities because the first one is already reaching saturation !!!!!

• Traveller, Plymouth

  Aha! Dr David Hill of the so called "World Innovation Foundation", a mysterious organisation that seems to achieve absolutely nothing, whilst claiming to have many Nobel laureates as members (despite many of them not being aware of this!).
  
  But who is Dr David Hill? Well he does have an honourary doctorate from the National Academy of Kyrgyzstan... He is mentioned in the journal 'Nature', but the article is under the title:
  
  "A very mysterious foundation, Shroud of secrecy surrounds innovation organization."
  
  As one person who he approached described him: “My impression was that Hill had lots of big ideas, but few results,”
  
  But I think we can all see that for ourselves from his comments here!

• Philip Russell, Carlisle, United Kingdom

  Are we really sure we need to spend so much on one line and all the predicted growth really will happen ? , I can remember all the hype leading up to the opening of the channel tunnel regarding rail passanger and freight growth. The reality was somewhat different, billions spent on vastly underused freight yards and servicing depots, Regional Eurostars and sleepers that never saw service and a fleet of electric locomotives that have spent much of their life in store. yes,we have a good healthy rail freight industry but it has always struggled to compete with the lorry on costs outside the large bulk haul sector

• Gordon, Bainbridge Island, USA

  I've ridden the ICE in Germany, the TGV in France and the Shinkansen in Japan - all great, smooth, fast rail systems. I'm a proponent of high speed lines. But in the case of the proposed line from London to Birmingham, I'm not sure that (a) it has the best route and connections for maximum benefit (b) is nothing more than a sop to allowing politicians to make the claim that they built a domestic high speed line (c) is not part of a genuine high speed network that the government has committed to fund as part of a phased roll-out.
  
  It is easy to dismiss the opponents as anti-rail: that is as simplistic as saying that the an area has a motorway or two going through it and those generate more noise and pollution than the proposed line. One can be a rail supporter without blinding accepting that any rail investment is the right investment - there are legitimate doubts about the proposed HS2 line that need to be reasonably considered, not merely rejected because of who is lodging them. A good plan will hold up to informed scrutiny: can HS2 truly do that?

• Lee, Manchester

  Dr Hill and other seem to have missed a fundamental point of the HS2 proposals in that they are intended to transfer long-distance passenger traffic away from the existing WCML, freeing up more paths for shorter distance passenger trians, commuter trains and freight. A proportion of the cost-benefits are attributable to freeing up such paths on the existing network, allowing further expansion of freight and commuter traffic.

• J G, London, UK

  'Dr' David Hill of the World Innovation Foundation complains that the govt is conning people into believing things that are not true. Well, a quick Google of the WIF shows that he's the expert in that.

• Dr David Hill, Huddersfield, England

  Like all NuLabour thought-up plans, HS2 will end up a disaster again and I am highly surprised that the Coalition government is seemingly going forward to construct it. For it will provide little in economic returns for Britain in the long-term other than to give relative prestige with other nations and no more. For we should when looking to the UK’s future, be investing in things that will really change our economics and fix several problems all in one go. A single faster rail-link which will only reduce the time between Birmingham and London by 20 minutes will not do this. Indeed it does not make economic sense just like wind power it has to be said. In this respect we should be investing this near £20 billion (and up to £33 billion if the line extends to Manchester/ Leeds, £40 billion if taking into account the Heathrow link and taking the Scotland link into account, over £50 billion), into the Western Water Highway (WWH), a scheme that will create far more jobs during construction boosting thousands of new jobs, provide in perpetuity up to 10% of Britain’s energy needs through environmentally-friendly non-toxic hydro power (continual free energy at no cost to the British taxpayer) and balance the national roads networks by transposing 49% of heavy goods from the South to the North, thus reducing the high vehicle congestion in the South of England in one intelligent swoop. Indeed the WWH would cost more-or-less the same at £25 billion but where the benefits would be immense and put the UK on a future road of prosperity and new found wealth. HS2 will provide little benefit and only allow industry bosses (who can afford to pay the costly fares, not normal people) to have in reality an extra cup of coffee on the way and no more (for business meetings take far longer than a mere 20 minutes). But the worst thing to the taxpayer is that the HS2 will cost the nation an arm and leg in the process for what? Nothing has really changed therefore between the spending of NuLabour and the Coalition Government who have not again attained any real value-for-money for the British taxpayer and a foundation for the futures for our young. Indeed, before HS2 we should have been thinking of investing in the REBALANCING of our road networks, reducing road congestion through transference, building sustainable projects for our energy needs and rebalancing the North-South divide in economic terms. The WWH would do all this but the HS2 will not. Therefore it appears that our politicians are so blinkered that they will squander again our finite resources on something that will produce little. Put bluntly, deceiving people into believing something that simply is not true.
  
  Dr David Hill
  Chief Executive
  World Innovation Foundation
  
  

• hugo rogers, Newbury, Berkshire

  rebuild the great central and branch it out to birmingham

• A, HARROW, United Kingdom

  Scotland and the West Midlands seem to be in favour of HS2. The Chilterns area already has two major motorways running through it, which cause far more noise, atmospheric and light pollution than HS2 will.
  
  However it is crucial that the design is adapted to be the best for the UK, rather than copying a foreign model. The design speed should based on a cost-benefit analysis rather than headline-grabbing publicity. The trains should be able to travel on the conventional UK network to serve towns not on the HS2 route. The electrification system should allow regenerative braking to minimise energy consumption (like most of the UK network, but unlike the French system and High Speed 1). There should be a convenient interchange station at Birmingham International, and provision for a branch to Heathrow to enable HS2 to replace domestic flights.

• Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, England

  So Has HS1 turned Kent into noisy drty place where nobody would want to live?
  
  Fact is a documentary about HS1 showed how cows still graze in fields that are next to bthe railway as if the line was not there!!
  
  THe real priority is once HS2 is given the go-ahead then Natwork Rail and TFL need to begin the plans for the long overdue re-building of Euston Station together with Euston Square and Warren Street and any other nearby stations affected by the Euston development.
  
  A decision on whether the Midland service should be diverted via Crossrail and on whether the Euston-Watford Overground should either be diverted via the North London Line (Primroase Hill route) or as with Thameslink at St Pancras virted into a sub surface station with provision to extend across Central London as a Thameslink 2 route to Waterloo or Victoria.
  
  Another possibility would be to divert the under used Bakerloo Line to run from Regents Park to Warren Steet and Euston Stations and then back on course to Oxford Circus thus creating more use of the Bakerloo Line.
  
  While Network Rail needs to be able to plan for HS2 in its ongoing upgrades so when bridges are replaced it can install wider bridges which might one day either carry HS2 or allow expansion of existing services when capacity released by hS2 becomes available.
  
  As to those against HS2 well we could offer to build HS2 and remove the M40 motorway!!!!
  
  That could get an interesting response from the Anto brigage who go on about pollution!!
  
  Perhaps just like HS1 became the Channel Tunnel Rail Link perhaps we should rename HS2 into something different - How about "Great Central Railway!!".

• David Scoular, London, United Kingdom

  Don't kid yourself it's the wealthy few - that's knee-jerk politics. It's also the environmental lobby who, all too often it seems, don't seem to like anything that they haven't pre-approved. In addition its also media outlets such as the left-leaning 'Independent' newspaper who came out against it last week advocating the money be spent on upgrading the existing network. And, by the way, what about Christian Wolmar - the BBC were quoting his opposition to HS2 last week.

• James, Sheffield/leeds/newcastle

  HH completely agree, the proposed 6 tracking of the WCML was beyond mental it is was just crazy!!!!
  
  Good to see in my eyes, part of a much wider rail strategy that will eventually lead us to maybe being less reliant on roads.

• Tony Pearce, Reading, UK

  I agree we need more Capacity based on current projections. However that can easily alter. I'm not too sure this line should either be High Speed (eg more than 125 mph) as I have found it difficult working on HS1 because of the frequent vibrations. The line should go via Heathrow or join to HS1 at Ebbsfleet International. The line should attract business users away from Airports but as the proposed line would mean a complicated change in London before going abroad I can't see it working. I still think this scheme is being rushed through without the proper consideration of what its trying to achieve.

• HH, Bham

  Opponents of HS2 have had the pillars of their opposition demolished one by one.
  
  The government should ask HS2L to determine quickest means of delivering the project post haste the nation cannot afford to be held up by the self interest of a wealthy few.