Beer

[Paddingtonwolf]

Those of us who know London Pubs will be saddened to hear that the Bree Louise is closing. Compulsory purchase for HS2 building at Euston. My favourite watering hole in that part of town.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

One more reason to despise the concept of HS2.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Damn right.

 

[Parkins left foot]

Those of us who know London Pubs will be saddened to hear that the Bree Louise is closing. Compulsory purchase for HS2 building at Euston. My favourite watering hole in that part of town.

One more reason to despise the concept of HS2.

Damn right.

Quite right Paddy - another reason (if another was needed) as to why that investment is a pointless one

 

[MARKakaJIM]

I'm quite apathetic about HS2 now, shock I know, after originally being dead against it. All the talk of journey times and unremarkable savings make it seem like a massive waste of time but I saw something a while back that looked at in a different light and showed me at least a little logic in the decision. Rather than viewing the time saving as a primary driver behind the decision it looked at the expansion in capacity for the network as the main reason to build a new line. However, in this day and age it makes little sense to build a new line that isn't a high speed line so the time saving becomes and consequence rather than a cause of the decision to build HS2.

Still have my reservations but it's the only way I've seen any positive light shed on the scheme.

 

[Tredman]

I'm quite apathetic about HS2 now, shock I know, after originally being dead against it. All the talk of journey times and unremarkable savings make it seem like a massive waste of time but I saw something a while back that looked at in a different light and showed me at least a little logic in the decision. Rather than viewing the time saving as a primary driver behind the decision it looked at the expansion in capacity for the network as the main reason to build a new line. However, in this day and age it makes little sense to build a new line that isn't a high speed line so the time saving becomes and consequence rather than a cause of the decision to build HS2.

Still have my reservations but it's the only way I've seen any positive light shed on the scheme.

Exactly this, journey times are by the by (takes me 1hr 14 mins to London from stafford, any quicker than that and I wouldn't have time to eat my breakfast) - what should make a difference is the ability to get more freight on the railway. Helps improve productivity, helps with carbon targets by removing lorries from roads and helps our creaking road infrastructure.

 

[Parkins left foot]

Exactly this, journey times are by the by (takes me 1hr 14 mins to London from stafford, any quicker than that and I wouldn't have time to eat my breakfast) - what should make a difference is the ability to get more freight on the railway. Helps improve productivity, helps with carbon targets by removing lorries from roads and helps our creaking road infrastructure.

That's assuming that any lorries come off the road with this though

A lorry goes door to door - the train still needs a lorry to collect at the final depot to get it to the last destination. Won't be a quick fix unless increased duty makes it a financial decision.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

That's assuming that any lorries come off the road with this though

A lorry goes door to door - the train still needs a lorry to collect at the final depot to get it to the last destination. Won't be a quick fix unless increased duty makes it a financial decision.

But your lorry that's running from hub to hub at opposite ends of the country isn't the same one doing individual customer collections or deliveries. If a considerable number of those long haul journeys can be offset then it'll make a noticeable difference.

 

[Parkins left foot]

But your lorry that's running from hub to hub at opposite ends of the country isn't the same one doing individual customer collections or deliveries. If a considerable number of those long haul journeys can be offset then it'll make a noticeable difference.

Don't have any problem with the principle, just not sure that HS2 on it's own will achieve that.

If the same amount of investment was being made in the whole rail network rather than one line which only connects a limited part of it with this intent to remove long distance carriage off the roads then it might make sense. Not really sure that this does.

 

[Tredman]

Pure guesstimate (from time spent in my home office staring out the window at the west coast main line) but I would say no more than 1 in 20 trains are freight. Could make a huge different in just doubling that number. You'd have to make it economically viable - could probably use Brexit and put massive tariffs on foreign lorries using UK roads to incentivise use of the railway

 

[Parkins left foot]

Pure guesstimate (from time spent in my home office staring out the window at the west coast main line) but I would say no more than 1 in 20 trains are freight. Could make a huge different in just doubling that number. You'd have to make it economically viable - could probably use Brexit and put massive tariffs on foreign lorries using UK roads to incentivise use of the railway

Not a fan overall of State interference, but you will need to 'incentivise' a change in behaviour. Whether that is by financial means (additional tax) or legislation is another question.

 

[Tredman]

Not a fan overall of State interference, but you will need to 'incentivise' a change in behaviour. Whether that is by financial means (additional tax) or legislation is another question.

Definitely (no idea how to spell incentivise though!). In this case, where a big benefit will be reducing carbon produced, I think it needs state interference. With a selfish government entirely focused on the now, reducing impact on global warming is one of the few useful things they could do.

 

[Parkins left foot]

Definitely (no idea how to spell incentivise though!). In this case, where a big benefit will be reducing carbon produced, I think it needs state interference. With a selfish government entirely focused on the now, reducing impact on global warming is one of the few useful things they could do.

Spelling for 'incentivise' is fine unless you want to go American and replace the s with a z

Plus fewer foreign lorries who try & wipe you out as you join the M5 (have had 2 close encounters) would be no bad thing

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Don't have any problem with the principle, just not sure that HS2 on it's own will achieve that.

If the same amount of investment was being made in the whole rail network rather than one line which only connects a limited part of it with this intent to remove long distance carriage off the roads then it might make sense. Not really sure that this does.

Got to start somewhere though haven't you? If it proves a success then maybe further lines are succeeded by high speed alternatives in similar fashion, I can't imagine it'll revolutionise anything in isolation but could be the first step in a bigger plan.

 

[Parkins left foot]

Got to start somewhere though haven't you? If it proves a success then maybe further lines are succeeded by high speed alternatives in similar fashion, I can't imagine it'll revolutionise anything in isolation but could be the first step in a bigger plan.

Just a massive bill to do that though - not sure that that money couldn't be better used to achieve a result

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Spelling for 'incentivise' is fine unless you want to go American and replace the s with a z

ize isn't American

It is perfectly correct in "British English" to spell both "ise" and "ize". The Americanism is just the lack of an "ise" option. Check OED for confirmation. (I only remember this as it came up in an episode of Morse...)

 

[Boozad]

Does Morse drink DIPAs?

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

No - pints of real ale, usually fairly bog standard stuff as I remember. Saying that, a couple of the pubs used in the series are very decent hostelries indeed.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Just a massive bill to do that though - not sure that that money couldn't be better used to achieve a result

As the article I sort of referenced in my first post intimated, there's little point in this day and age of any major rail investment that isn't high speed rail. Sure you could lay a whole lot of extra track at the current spec for the same money but why would you invest in already outdated technology? It'd be a massive short term fix and just be kicking the can down the road for a future generations to pick up and even bigger bill to modernise a larger network built with inferior technology.

 

[Langers]

Those of us who know London Pubs will be saddened to hear that the Bree Louise is closing. Compulsory purchase for HS2 building at Euston. My favourite watering hole in that part of town.

It's now closed I think - last day was yesterday. It was a fantastic pub - I've spent many a happy day in there over the years.

Fuck HS2.