HS2 Explained! (ft. Gareth Dennis) 

Ur voice does me in

Please put this in the description for chapter breaks.

They'll not be forgiving you quickly 😂😭

LOL

We do forgive it is ok

That is absolutely fine 😄! You made a brilliant video for the HS2 and I am thankful

It’s all good boo boo

And soon it'll technically be Hitachi and Alstom because Bombardier will most likely be merging with Hitachi

00:57 You annoyed A LOT of S Scots... Good lad! Glasgow is on the West and Edinburgh on the East.

@@firepowerg A truly monumental cock-up!

Hitachi depot is near by Old Oaks anyway.

There is heavy speculation that the eastern section of HS2 will not be built - the existing ECML and uprated Birmingham to East Midlands line and MML, will do the job just as well. Also that it will not get further north than Crewe, giving one *slow* line from London to Crewe. Then only classic compatible trains will need to be bought.

a late start, but welcome, imo, but this is a small part of what the UK should have had by now...

@@ce1834 If we had gone the way of Japan instead of the way of Beeching, who knows what kind of rail network we would have now?

We're not a country where the government is willing to invest in long term planning/spending. Housing crisis anyone?

@@hairyairey Maybe ICE 3 UK version

Gonna take America more than that

As soon as the Continental link was scrapped and the London to B'ham section was slow, takes 52 mins, averaging 116mph, the *whole HS2 scheme should have been canned.*

There should be 3 main lines. One from London to Edinburgh via Cambridge Peterborough, York and Newcastle. Another from London to Leeds via Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield. And the last from London to Glasgow via Birmingham and Manchester. This really isn’t an unrealistic ask

@@scottwhitley3392 We already have them called the WCML, ECML and MML. Greengauge21 consultants, Beyond HS2: _"Upgrading the East Coast Main Line to 140 mph operation as a high priority alongside HS2 and to be delivered without delay. Newcastle London timings across a shorter route_ *_could closely match those achievable by HS2."_* www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/Beyond_HS2WEB.pdf

@@johnburns4017 The problem with "beefing up the existing mainlines" is that the Train Operating Companies demand paths for express trains that blow the possibility of having more stopping services out of the water. All UK railways need to be renewed (with electric power and modern signalling) but we also need to move intercity services onto a new high speed network, to: • Get them out of the way of local commuters (and freight) and • Give people a viable alternative to domestic airlines, so that we can start to kill off the air industry.

@@DavidShepheard Having *two* _dedicated_ fast tracks on mainlines means that express trains only run on those two fast tracks, leaving slow traffic alone. It is quite simple. They are separated. Hydrogen fuel cell and battery trains will preclude mass line electrification. Fare paying hydrogen trains are operational in Germany.

Noooooo! That's super embarrassing 😖

@@DavidFrankal RIP

You can never visit Scotland again

Yeah, I even noticed despite being a knuckle dragging American who pronounces Edinburgh as Ed-in-beRg. But the video is great despite that minor mistake we all get to tease you for. Looking forward to more content.

They look alright to me. Edin on the right, Glas on the left.

Eurostar trains were due to run North to Manchester, but the plan was to use the West Coast Mainline, not to build a dedicated line just for the Eurostar!

Depends if the demand is there or not for through services. There is already a rail line between Kings Cross and Euston that's used for freight. Which bizarrely means a lot of freight goes from Felixstowe into London and back out because of the shortage of cross-country lines - something that Beeching completely overlooked as an issue. The varsity line should have been protected, if only it was just the trackbed.

@@hairyairey Look at the Gt.Central.

Yes, much of this project is moronic. But that is because Tories insist on privatization.

It just wouldn't be a (modern) British engineering project, if it did. (It's a good thing we've left the EU. All that joined-up European logical thinking has spoiled you. :P)

@@misterjei there are many very pro train people who voted against the EU because of forced privatization.

I remember seeing that the _Tokaido Shinkansen_ uses conventional ballast instead of concrete trackbeds/ballastless designs though

You raise some good points but that is not necessarily what people mean when they talk about up-grading the existing network. They could be referring to signalling or level crossing equipment, improving track layout or geometry, doubling or adding passing loops to tracks, re-opening lines that have been closed or moth-balled. The list goes on...

Thank you! Indeed the Tring terminators would make sense once HS2 is completed (making use of some of the freed up capacity). Hopefully it gets revisited in the future.

@@DavidFrankal Tring is pretty unique as having six platforms so ideal for terminating more services (I used to work in Kings Langley). I can't think of a more remote station that has as many!

It really helps to have a good video to make sense of it all, but I am concerned that HS2 won't do much for Leeds and the Pennine route. There is definitely a lot of free platform space at Leeds, with packed 2-4 carriage commuter trains that the new TP trains don't begin to solve. I hope to see either longer or more frequent trains on what would really be a profitable route if managed right. (Time to watch your video on why Northern is failing now.... *groan* I hope not more misery from the pacers)

Nah, that would be too easy for people 😅

Absolutely not.

But it would completely abandon the East Midlands, preventing Midlands Connect from ever happening, and crippling the number of services that would be able to run on HS3/NPR when its built

Thank you!

But... China... Oh my farm and house have gone but on the upside there's a lovely quick connection to Chengdu!

@@djlondon7956 And a lot of compensation money in the bank.

@@John_259 did they?

But note: the railway is run at a loss, with heavy subsidy from the government. This has to make money over the next 100 years.

No need to go china. Italy and Spain, two of the most corrupt western european countries have somehow managed to build some of the fastest railways in the world, I think even faster than Japan. One reason why Italy, Spain China can do this is cuz the density between cities isnt as high as in the UK or Germany or the Benelux for example. But there are many other reasons of course, every country is different in many ways.

And rather exhausting !

The bit about capacity is false.

@@johnburns4017 How?

@@TheWkc19 Easy to understand. *The bit about capacity is false.*

And yet a senior director has left HS2 and moved to Crossrail to help them open. It’s the same Middle Aged Men hoping from one failing to the other.

Does this include constant worker's?

fm 1055 Not sure what a “constant worker” is? Mainly refers to anyone with management responsibility of Crossrail huge overspend and delay. Comment would not relate to the chaps physically doing the work. Please explain. J

Boxing Fan Musical Chairs, sums up British economy. To have a thriving car industry required Japanese Management and structures, British workforce on the line, says a lot. J

@@jeanjacques9980 damn auto correct I meant construction.

Absolutely, China definitely has the best High Speed Trains, Japan's best with commuter and local trains.

I recall China saying previously that it'd be able to build HS2 in 5 years

China is not the best comparison to the UK though. The state have far more powers to build what they like, where they like because there is no private land ownership in China.

How can passengers be moved to the High Scandal 2 line when it goes so fast it cannot stop at the existing intercity station they might want to get off at?! You will still need the intercity trains, won't you? So what is the point of High Scandal 2?

@@timweller9830 You have buses too don’t you? And more than a few cities have metro systems too.

What HS2 Ltd are saying is that transfer intercity trains to HS2, then there is more capacity on the exiting network. The point is that the UK doe not have a capacity problem. Any future problem can be dealt with by the exiting network and that includes reusing closed line. High speed rail is not worth when the distance are too short, or too long. The only distances worth it are to Scotland. But HS2 only runs to about half way to Scotland before they train then runs onto existing tracks. They run on the existing tracks _slower,_ as classic compatible trains do not tilt. But Scotland is well served by air to London already - and faster than rail, and HS2. We are moving towards hybrid electric planes for short trips. So, this 50 year old French technology will be obsolete before it is fully operational.

@@johnburns4017 You have never watched the WCML between Rugby and London then! That line is completely saturated with trains and capacity has run out. Other lines will go the same way soon. It's not just the WCML that's helped, it's the ECML and MML too.

@@hairyairey ♦ The bottlenecks can be removed. Look at my post telling you where they are; ♦ Currently the 110mph trains hold up the faster 125mph trains; ♦ Have fast trains running at least 140mph; ♦ Remove points leaving only essential points to maintain speeds; ♦ The WCML can have two extra tracks south of Rugby, by reopening the 40 mile Gt.Central trackbed from Rugby to the Aylesbury bypass giving two extra fast tracks into Old Oak Common. orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/42580/wcml-capacity-report-2020.pdf

@@johnburns4017 125mph is the sight limit for drivers being able to stop at the furthest light they can see. Trains going above that speed use in cab signalling (only HS1 has that ability). But everything on the line would have to use that signalling. Even then, with the two other competing demands on our lines (local commuter trains and freight) increasing the speeds only reduces capacity for other trains. Your two extra tracks south of Rugby are going exactly where? Through infrastructure already being built for HS2 of course. And relieving the pressure on the WCML, ECML and MML? Hardly.

@@hairyairey Look up the Gt.Central. The WCML and ECML do not have dedicated fast tracks for 140mph. If so, and it can be done, HS2 is not needed at all.

Why would a Steam engine run on the HS2 line, for a start the signaling on HS2 is not compatible with signalling equipment on the Flying Scotsman Steam Loco, on Flying Scotsman it uses signal detection equipment for semaphore signalling and colour light signalling, but HS2 is being built using in cab signaling which does not have signals at the side of the track like conventional Railways but uses radio technology lie on TGV lines in France and HS1 in Kent.

He definitely said dialect, lol!

Without those tunnels NYC will partially grind to a halt.

Thats a negatory. NY and NJ cant agree on it. I, as a taxpayer of the proud state of Oklahoma, can't figure why am I suppose to pay for a tunnel so a buncha liberals can go to their fancy glassy offices at fuck-know-how-many-storied building to make wage higher, than an honest working christian American, by doing absolutely nothing of value.

@@johnburns4017 Good. There will finally be a good reason to evac NYC to Wyoming and bulldoze this cesspit into the waters of Atlantic.

@@a4yster I assume you vote for Trump.

@@johnburns4017 Trolling aside - I'm actually not sure why an average american suppose to pay for a tunnel in ONE city out of their tax money. NY and NJ should pay for this.

I think the USA also has a cultural hurdle to overcome in the next decade of getting people out of cars and onto trains, outside of the large cities its not that common compared with Asia and Europe.

@@danielcoward3469 Absolutely. That is another major factor regarding rail transportation in the US. I also have a railroad news series, the Pensyfan Periodical, which goes over railway news articles from around the world including HS2 and other events in the US, UK and more.

Plus California High Speed Rail happened to Engage WSP and particular Roy Hill who has been dismissed from the project due to serious conflicts of interest and procurement irregularities along with installing a culture of fear in regards to reporting the truth. And who was in charge of HS2 for a period and who did the current CEO of HS2 used to work for and what organisation has benefited hugely from HS2 for a number of years. If the DFT had any gumption at all they would look closely at some of the procurement and ongoing Variations to contracts that HS2 is managing and question some of the reasons behind HS2 and a number of the very Senior Staff .

California HSR has been sued endlessly. Californian environmental law allows private property owners to take the project to court under the guise of environmentalism, but it’s been used by NIMBYs to slow property acquisition. The most expensive aspect of these projects is time: over a decade in the HSR authority STILL doesn’t own 100% of the land they need for the Phase 1, Central Valley portion linking Bakersfield, Fresno and Merced. Getting that train through the more populated areas in later phases is a fool’s errand given the tsunami of lawsuits that would come in. Sad. People don’t understand if we were building the interstate highway system there right now it’d be the same over budget mess.

Wanna bet if HS2 will also use French TVM like HS1? Or maybs ETCS?

The InterCity services (eg Manchester - London) will be moved over to HS2, so you won't exactly have much choice. Prices will be within the existing fare structure (not a two-tier system)

@@DavidFrankal MK to Liverpool/Manchester/Glasgow will still be on the WCML. Train companies have said they will still want to run trains on the WCML with a few stops. So, Liverpool or Manchester to London will still be on the WCML with some stops between, which HS2 cannot do. The intermediate stops are the attraction.

The only problem is that they will not be able to run on other lines and will thereby have restricted use.

@@williamgeorgefraser That's not a problem, even the London Underground has different size trains and novel ways of ensuring an oversized train cannot enter a smaller tunnel.

It will be able to, but double decker trains only see a modest capacity increase, since more equipment is needed, and accessibility on them is crap, plus dwell times are significantly longer, outweighing any capacity increase. Germany doesn’t use them on their high speed routes for a reason.

The overcrowding should be alleviated for a good 30 years by the massive step change in capacity that 400m trains and higher frequencies will provide, but yes, they will be able to run double deck trains should they want.

@@williamgeorgefraser That's the point, HS2 trains are not planned to run on conventional routes in the initial stage, irrelevant of what this video says most trains will only run on HS2 especially at the initial stage.

Won't speed up services on those branch-lines, or make them more attractive as would reinstating missing, but highly useful links, closed due to Beeching. Also, hardly 'green' to encourage more people to make long distance journeys. The South West will not be affected and neither will it benefit Aberdonians travelling to Edinburgh or Newcastle etc. Also, 225mph is great, but linear motor Maglev trains offer superior ride quality and 300mph plus performance. Incidentally, we pioneered the linear motor and produced a viable prototype as far back as 1976 (c.f. Modern Railway, December 1976).

@@davidjenner5665 But Maglev trains aren't compatible with existing infrastructure! And reinstating old lines would feed even more traffic onto the already congested existing network, so it's much better to build HS2 first so it can free up capacity for that traffic!

@@Inkyminkyzizwoz The only capacity that HS2 frees up is that between London and Birmingham already served by two fast routes from Marylebone taking around 1.30 Minutes Unless you are going direct and swapping to HS2 there is additional capacity. The HS2 blurb about an additional 22000 per hour is hogwash, as its non stop between the two, Anyone wanting to go ANYWHERE in betyween have not got the extra capacity, except for the minority travelling all the way to Brum who can afford the extra fares needed.

@@richardwilliams6132 Except they have, because there will be room for more trains serving those places!

@@Inkyminkyzizwoz Except they havent! The only extra capacity is between London and Birmingham Non stop. It won't take any trains off the WCML that currently stop at intermediate stations or those going elsewhere, If I currently commute to Milton Keynes, Rugby or Aylesbury for example there's hardly any difference. Because even though they are "on the way one still has to go to Marylebone or elsewhere to get there, and the numbers don't fall doing so, nor are there any extra seats except for those who choose to go direct to Brum on HS2, currently less than 1 % of rail passengers in and out of London..

Oh sugar, that's right! Alstom and Bombardier may merge now, however, I think that's what threw me off

David Frankal it is confusing now they merged. Good video btw

Agreed -- this creeping use of "haitch" instead of the correct "aitch" is very annoying.

Yep the elitist twerps who run us need to get to Birmingham 10 minutes quicker.

@Amtsf Is that really worth £70/100 billion How about spending that amount on extending the existing motorway network upgrade the A1 to the the North East and A38 to Plymouth and beyond there are many such schemes that can be undertaken which will benefit many more people than that damned white elephant and boondangle and btw i agree this country has been starved of infrastructure projects for at least thirty years the main reason is because we have been paying for everyone elses through the EU those airports and brand new motorways in Spain and Greece don't pay for themselves you know.

I know!

@@marcbiff2192 holy moly some shit just poured out of your mouth. Firstly, this video literally explained why HS2 should be built. Second, do you just ignore all the funding we got from the EU, and do you ignore that now going back to governing everything our self, it's actually going to cost us more than what we payed out to the EU? I'd love to hear more about how we funded the Spanish motor way

@@bobsemple7660 No thankyou i like my car.

I definitely could have worded that better. The in-cab signalling problem was an example of a problem the UK had - my broader point was that France and Germany got around 'problems like this' by building high speed rail. Anyway, you've thought me some things I didn't know about high speed rail in Germany, so thank you!

@@DavidFrankal He wrote: _"Separate highspeed lines don't have anything to do with in cap signaling. France and especially Germany have upgraded existing lines to run 200, 220 or even 230 km/h "_ Recall that nearly 40 years ago the APT was designed to run at 155mph on _existing_ track. Remove bottlenecks on the ECML and WCML, have two dedicated fast tracks with few points, uprated signalling and faster trains, then we have it. Trains get faster and faster. Train technology has overtaken the 50 year old French technology of HS2.

@@DavidFrankal You're welcome.

@@johnburns4017 What do you mean by 50 year old French technology? What would be proper modern technology?

@@NeoDerGrose If we want fast travel then 50 year old French technology is not the way to go. The British actually invented Maglev.

HS2 is so bad it is not worth doing.

@@johnburns4017 While I think some aspects are somewhat crazy, the basic idea is solid. The tracks are full as is. New tracks are needed. Segregate out a service type that has a clearly different speed than the others is the best option for that. Thus: HSR. that part is great. Terminal stations, I just don't get. The planned HSR here in Sweden goes into Norrköping which could have had a terminal station but instead has a station that's basically on a sort of loop. both the existing line, and the planned new station does that. It does look awesome IMO play.norrkoping.se/animering-upphojt-resecentrum

@@GustavSvard The existing lines are *not* full. *HS2 is a highly flawed design, as high speed railway.* ♦ HS2 is *slow.* London to Birmingham is 100 miles exactly. It take 52 minutes for the trip, the times cannot be improved. That is an average of 116mph on a 250mph railway. This is the prime section of the railway. No kidding. ♦ From the outset HS2 will be full to capacity to the point the city of Chester and the Liverpool to Birmingham trains have been bumped off onto snail rail. So, HS2 cannot cope with intercity traffic, its prime reason to exist. ♦ One of the prime points was that British provincial cities would be connected _"directly"_ to the Continent. They will not be, making the project redundant. ♦ HS2 does not connect with the connecting services at New St in Birmingham having a separate dead-end stand alone station where people have to drag their bags along a street in the rain between stations. ♦ It does not run into Birmingham airport with passengers having to take a ride to the terminal. ♦ It will have a separate station at Manchester airport to the existing station being one mile north west of the terminal needing a bus ride in. ♦ It enters Manchester via a 7.5 mile very expensive gold plated tunnel into Piccadilly which faces the wrong way, after negotiating an S bend around Tatton which slow the train down substantially. Victoria station is ignored which faces the right way. No kidding. ♦ HS2 is only two-track from London to Crewe, when this section serving the big cities of Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh should be 4-track to accommodate all services between these cities and London and also the cities of Chester and Stoke. ♦ Liverpool, a city region of around 2.2 million has 'no' direct HS2 line into the city. The city needs a new HS2 line to alleviate the existing lines for the new container terminal expansion and the forced movement to rail from road for environmental reasons. Liverpool is the only deep water port on that coast taking the largest ships in the world, serving all the North of England and further afield. It is everyone's port in the North and Midlands needing highly efficient rail links to improve business giving quicker and cheaper freight. Liverpool is also to expand as major cruise liner terminal is being built, needing top quality passenger rail for north of England cruisers direct top the waterfront. ♦ Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds have expensive dead-end branches off the main spine into these cities, which will have dead-end stations. ♦ Derby & Nottingham are served by Toton between the two. Centre to centre from London is quicker by existing rail, so Toton is an expensive waste. ♦ Birmingham to Derby, Nottingham, Chesterfield and Sheffield can match HS2 times by electrifying and uprating the existing lines.

This High Speed UK was a far better idea. All it needs is one Line from London to Edinburgh up the flat lands of the east of the country, branching into the Liverpool-Hull NPR line. NPR needs to be 4-track and 250mph capable, to reach Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool *fast,* with a fast _base_ tunnel under the Peninnes. www.highspeeduk.co.uk

​@@johnburns4017 The West Coast Main Line being clogged up with express trains means that regional trains are restricted to 2/3 per hour despite passenger numbers on the stopper routes between Coventry and Birmingham N St doubling in ten years. On the other side of Birmingham, the service pattern is 6 per hour, because it's not on the WCML. Services are also often delayed to allow the express trains with priority to use the line. How do you propose to fix that? Funny how you see the benefits of a HS2 for Liverpool but not for Birmingham! I'm not sure what the issue is with dead-end branches. The purpose of HS2 is to connect up major cities, of course it terminates at cities. Would you prefer if it was one line from London to Leeds with no spures and no linkage to exisiting network? You cannot add HS2 to Birmingham New Street unless you want to ramp up the cost significantly. The existing WCML doesn't run directly to Birmingham Airport either, you take a people mover or a 5 minute walk, which is absolutely fine. It takes just as long as traversing around large London Underground stations anyway. I agree that HS2 should be connected to HS1, but there are ways for that to be done in the future.

@@desperatemohammedantheworl5833 Why is green, low carbon high speed rail that will cut domestic air travel, take cars off the roads and create thousands of jobs a waste of money? Also, it will most likely get past Birmingham as Phase 2a to Crewe will probably get Royal Assent by the end of the year.

@@desperatemohammedantheworl5833 did you even watch the video? Eurostar trains can't run on the HS2 network without changing the rail gauges.

@@desperatemohammedantheworl5833 HS2 isn't 'for the rich'. It will cost around the same as it does now to travel by train. It will be for anyone to use. What I am trying to say is HS2 will be low carbon as soon as it opens and will be capable of net zero operation. It is not HS2's reponsibility as to where it sources its electricity. That will be the Department of Energy. This thread should help you out: twitter.com/HS2ltd/status/1289223951026028546?s=19

@@desperatemohammedantheworl5833 Compared to cars, and domestic air travel it is very green which is why we should be investing in high speed rail more to get people out of their cars and off domestic flights onto low carbon high speed rail. Also, hopefully by the time HS2 opens, we will have a lot more renewable energy sources in the UK

@@desperatemohammedantheworl5833 Rail travel in the UK emits around 8g of CO2 per passenger per kilometre. A car with 4 passengers emits around 40g of CO2 per passenger per kilometre.

She will never die so maybe 😄

Yep, a very poor error on my part...

No, you are not correct. I would advise watching the video you're commenting on, as a useful starting point

@@DavidFrankal Thanks, David. I have watched your video more than once and, Gareth's interview on BBC TV, too. Both are slick, confident and self-assured presentations, too. A little too so, when we are foolishly living infinitely on a finite planet and unnaturally on a natural planet. Neither of you reassure me that we will be able to dispense with any of the intercity trains and services without giving those trivial, minor cities and towns a poorer service. PLEASE PUT ME RIGHT.

HS2 will only stop at one Airport, Birmingham International at the Birmingham Interchange Station, the only two Terminals will be Birmingham Curzon Street and London Euston, the line to the rest of the Network will be straight through as nothing has been decided on Manchester yet.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 Many thanks, Peter. Does your "straight through" mean that we will still have to have every intercity service for the stations that are missed out? Does this mean that the extra seating capacity is only for those on the HS2 train itself travelling to and from the terminus stations?

@@timweller9830 Hs2 services will go from Birmingham Interchange across a flying junction at Water Orton and straight up to Crewe and join the WCML there. only two intermediate stations on HS2 Birmingham Interchange and London Old Oak Common, not all trains will stop at these stations, Ordinary Inter City services operated by Avanti West Coast will use the Trent Valley line of the WCML.

That's a smart idea, no I hadn't thought of that!

the picture of the APT is at the crew heritage centre... they have a miniature railway running alongside it.

Judging by the progress being made on the Chiltern Tunnel I'd say it's already too far in!

@@Inkyminkyzizwoz I think the costs are at £8bn so far. Combination of compulsory purchase orders, design and a smidge of construction. Whilst they would get a lump if that back from selling property the money lost to cancel now would be unforgivable.

@@richardschofield2201 Don't forget John Bishop (vocal critic of HS2) made £6.8 million selling his property on the route - www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47845861

That's the sunk cost fallacy.

Also Pendolino trains consist I believe of 9 cars while they could be approx. 30 cars long like a Eurostar to solve capacity problems. Of course platforms would need to be longer with perhaps travelators to get more easily along the train to the required carriage.

@@Martindyna Exactly. Get the ECML & WCML up to 140mph on average - can go faster on some sections. With two dedicated _fast_ tracks with few points to keep speeds up and of course remove the bottlenecks, then have longer trains. Then *speed* and *capacity* is guaranteed. HS2 Ltd and their fanboys make out only HS2 trains can be long and fast. Which is complete nonsense of course.

@@johnburns4017 Oh we meet again with the rubbish you come out with, both the ECML and WCML were designed to take upto 13 coaches of Mk3 design only due to the length of platforms and sections between signals and can not be altered or the speed increased, you can not dedicate two fast tracks for these high speed trains as they are already used by LNER class 800 trains on the ECML and Pendilino's operated by Avanti West Coast on the WCML, so with out vast disruption for years and cancelled trains on these routes they can not be altered. The " Fanboys " of HS2 are correct in saying that the Railway and it's new station are being designed for 14 + coach trains ravelling at 230 mph which believe me is not nonsense but fact but you are talking nonsense with you strange ideas.

@@Martindyna God you have as silly imagination as John Burn.

The West Midlands Rail Executive propose increases of the stopping services to 4 per hour at (while still having semi-fast services on top of that) after phase 2b and then 6 per hour after upgrades that can happen after the WCML through Birmingham takes a more regional character (and so can have weekend closures for works and so on). Phase 1+2a benefits seem to be about changing the local service on the Birmingham-International-Coventry side of things from overlapping hourly patterns to regular half-hourly patterns. It's all here www.westmidlandsrail.com/strategy/wmris/ There's other plans too from bodies that have a say, but they are pretty similar in what they propose.

Yes, I meant derelict.

@@DavidFrankal You were referring to Birmingham so were probably in need of a kipper tie...☕

None yet. That should come out once they have decided on a winning bid, so probably a few months at least until we know. The HS2 only units are a especially unknown, as the loading gauge may be large enough for practical double decker trains.

@@owenstockwood5040 Ahh ok, thanks

Owen Stockwood each train will be 400 metres long with a capacity of approx 1000 people. Unfortunately the tunnel dimensions along with the platform heights and OLE height will prevent the likelihood of double decker trains. The access at Handsacre to West Coast Mainline will also prevent the use of double decker units due to the nature of the route.

@@boxingfan2281 Typical. Another sign of how badly planned this route was. They could have easily planned it for double deckers without barring classic compatible trains, which would have further increased capacity. If France and Japan can do it, we should be able to as well.

@@owenstockwood5040 The line itself (but not the legacy network) will be capable of carrying double-decker trains, and the 'captive' units may be double decker (they won't come in until the line opens to at least Manchester, if not Leeds as well). They probably won't be, at least not in the first generation, as the line is such a step change in capacity that the additional capacity double-deck trains provide (looking, it's about 150% of the capacity of a single deck) is probably not needed, but they could be. There's also issues with disabled access and dwell times that complicates double-deck usage on HS2.

@@agent_605 there's nothing that can justify the amount of damage to the environment that is being done. Absolute disgrace. The government committed to being carbon neutral by 2050 and this delays that further (proven by HS2's own figures). The whole thing is ridiculous, should never be allowed to happen.

Jack Simmons The environmental damage is no worse than the Lower Thames Crossing motorway, which is only 15 miles long. Also, with the modal shift HSR encourages, there’s likely to be a huge reduction in carbon emissions thanks to HS2

Yes but things like that cost money. Britain doesnt like paying money to make things better.

John you keep saying HS2 will average 116 MPH, get your facts right, the present Pendolino's do 125 MPH, the new train's that are being operated under Avanti West Coast / TransItalia of italy will be doing an average of at least 250 MPH.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 London-B'ham takes 52 mins to cover 100 miles. Work it out.

@@johnburns4017 What is there to work out John, it may take 52 mins on a good day without any backlogs or hold ups due to freight or local trains, the speed between Birmingham and Rugby is an average of 90 MPH due to a two track line between Birmingham and Rugby, our trains will then only do 125 MPH from Rugby to London Euston. Your calculations must be wrong as the New HS2 line is designed with only two stops between Birmingham and Curzon Street, they are Birmingham International and Old Oak Common and not all trains will stop at these stations and from the outset will be travelling from end to end at around 250 MPH so basically 250 MPH of HS2 against 90 /125 MPH of the WCML, I do believe HS2 comes up the winner in time taken in all accounts, I think you need to check your calculations as HS2 is going to be a hell of a lot faster than the WCML.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 Boy! *HS2* takes *52 mins,* to cover *100 miles.* Get it?

@@johnburns4017 My you sound a nasty piece of stuff, how dare you insult me son, I am into railways as a hobby and live in Birmingham right next to HS2 I couldn't care less what your average speed crap is about, if as you Calculations were correct and HS2 averaged 116 MPH that makes a WCML pendelino average 60 MPH, What utter rubbish. Believe it or not read all the info on HS2 including their official Videos from HS2 limited the SPEED these trains will do is around 250 MPH, nothing to do with averages, it is fact as stated by HS2 limited and it will be quicker between Birmingham and London, and John , DO NOT BE SO BLOODY INSULTING MATE it makes you look silly in these comments. I suggest you look at the video again or are you a NIMBY and can not take or understand progress, AND DO NOT CALL BE BOY mate .

What’s a 21st century solution then? Because this is what everyone else is doing

@@agent_605 Well imagine if we had a network of computers in every house connected with high speed connections. And work back.

clangerbasher You can’t deliver goods over the Internet, you can’t travel for leisure over the Internet, nor can you commute on the Internet

@@agent_605 Most of the City is commuting over the internet right now. Travel for leisure? Is HS2 going to the south west of England or the coast of Wales? As for deliver goods HS2 might free capacity. We have roads to deliver things. Capacity problem for roads is mainly due to city dwellers using them as local roads. See for example say Cardiff.

clangerbasher Working from home is however less productive for the majority of jobs, and an investigation carried out in China found only 25% of office workers preferred working from home on a long term basis. Leisure travellers go all over the country, with London being the most popular destination. Roads are terrible for the environment, especially HGVs, even if someone made them electric they have the issue of tyre particulates.

I guess we could just build another bunch of 8 lane motorways instead which require far more space and have a much larger impact given the vast, vast majority of vehicles using them will be belching out CO2 from their internal combustion engines. Or we can use high speed, high capacity trains that run entirely on electric and this will be more and more offset by the fact we're becoming less reliant on fossil fuel sources. The point of this is to take traffic OFF the roads, locally and nationally, by making it quicker and easier to go between population centres and for local train services to improve their services by not having to share their track with these kind of trains as they do right now. The current network is at or near capacity, it won't last much longer. It's already affected along the entire west coast if there's a single issue anywhere along it so this is very much needed.

@@TalesOfWar or we could improve the existing rail network, using the money wasted on HS2 and avoid destroying huge tracts of countryside. HS2 is a vanity project designed to bale out failed Tory donor construction companies. Any environmental improvements as a result of HS2 are so far down the line there probably won't be a planet left to improve

@@kimcallaghan753 HS2 IS improving the EXISTING network! This argument is absolutely asinine, people use it all the time. How do you propose to "improve" the existing network without actually expanding it? It's already at capacity, the intercity links need their own dedicated tracks so the local lines can be used... for LOCAL traffic. It'll effectively double or even triple the local service capacity in all the areas it'll remove express intercity services from sharing the track.

@@TalesOfWar Asinine? The existing network is designed for the carriage of cattle. By "improve" I mean make it fit for human travel. Better, longer carriages - oh yes, running vaguely on time. Mate, you need reassimilating outside of the Borg. Think outside of the rectangle.

​@@kimcallaghan753 And yet again the whole thing went right over your head. Longer carriages need better and more track otherwise it bogs the network down even more as there's now less space for existing trains to use on the already crowded lines. So... separating the long distance intercity lines more from the local lines lets you do exactly this, while letting you put more services on the slower, local lines. It's not rocket science. Everything you want it to be is exactly what it's going to goddamn be.

120 miles per hour is fast for British standards, we have most of our trains in the north going maximum 75 or 90 and in the south 90, 100 or 110 on rare occasions but on My Local Line, the South-western Main Line, my local train usually didn't break 60!

Yes, they would.

@@DavidFrankal it would be good to see the NNML being given a regular service

Chiltern Train will not go near HS2 Old Oak Common, it will be served by Avanti West Coast / Trans Italia on HS2, Cross Rail / Under Ground service for trains across London and First Great Western trains into Paddington, explain why, Chiltern trains would need to diverge off the Chiltern line into Marelabone to service Old Oak Common Station, the station at Old Oak Common is planned to be serviced as I said by the main operator, GWR Trains and Cross Rail / Underground. The EWR Line that Chiltern may operate crosses HS2 around the Aylesbury area.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 if you actually did your research you would find that the underground will not go to old oak common, first great Western became GWR 6 years ago and there's something called the New North mainline that runs from old oak Common to South Ruislip next to the central line. Chiltern trains will use this instead of doing what you suggested which is going on EWR to Aylesbury and then running on HS2. Be realistic mate, do you think they will run class 165s on a 225mph hs line? You are right in saying that the Chiltern trains will diverge off the line to Marylebone, but that is like what hertford east trains on Greater anglia do when they terminate at Stratford via lea Bridge instead of Liverpool st

@@juanescobar8123 First you did not read my comment correctly, I said that Chiltern Railways WILL go no where near HS2, so where did you get the idea I thought 165 trains will be travelling on HS2, First Great western / GWR are the same company owned by First Buses. As I stated, London Old Oak Common will only be served by Avanti West Coast Trains ( a First owned Company )/ Transitalia, then the GWR line into Paddington and the South West and if you want it another way TFL trains joining up the rest of London, I was answering your comment 5 months ago when you asked whether Chilton Services " To Old Oak Common" use the North Main Line !, firstly Chilton Train Services only go on the Chilton Line and to Aylesbury and parts of the EWR and as I said will go no where near London Old Oak common, if you want to know about Old Oak Common Station I suggest you look at the official HS2 video's first. I do my research may be you should as I have like I suggested to you watched the HS2 videos which explain every thing. I have never suggested that Chilton trains would run on HS2, for a start their trains are not fast enough or compatible with HS2 and there will be no physical connection between the two, plus I never said Chiltern trains would diverge off the Chiltern Line just before Marelabone mate, Living in the Birmingham Area I can tell you that Chiltern trains will only terminate in London Marelabone as they near enough own that line and what is the " New North Mainline" never heard of it, the only new North Main line from London is HS2 and the only other line Chiltern Uses is the route to Aylesbury, so basically you did not read my comment correctly and as a Railway Enthusiast I read about things like HS2 and are very interested in it.