The £100bn Railway: Why is HS2 Four Times Over Budget? 

they'll happily slap it all into a new motorway proberbly.... seems like they want to smear transit projects.

wasn't Boris supporting this project strongly?

they want a project to fail on their government, yeah, makes sense, what every government wants, bad publicity and mega projects failing.

@ he ”was” but I believe it was to help himself get re-elected in 2024 if he stayed prime minister

@@Fuzzy9001 well, but he did, what ever is the reason, he understood that the success of the project was also his own success. I am just trying to make the poing that by being better critics we can actually force to get better results. If anything I would critizize that the tories didnt start an HS3 by now after a long term in goverment.

@@crapmalls You OK?

The Japanese built 200? Mile of motorway in 6 weeks after fukushima.

What "cost savings"? Paying 4x the actual price...

@@davidwebb4904 4x= on budget🤷‍♂️

"we're only got 68 miles of high speed rail in HS1. ".. HS1 line built in 1998 was just a French LGV high-speed line and first Eurostar trains were based on TGV trains. In the 90s UK had zero knowledge in building real HS lines (speed > 280-300 kph)

Idk any going on in the UK but think adding an extra lane to the A1 is already long past budget and schedule.

Lol so true Highways is worse than rail in the UK in managing budgets.

Every single government budget is always way over the planned expenditure. Are those who plan these projects knowledgeable enough to get out of bed? A budget has to take all possibilities into consideration, but all projects seem to miss something. Of course they have unlimited resources as the tories have proven.

The Government will abandon it and spend even more cash turning it into a motorway. Then all the objectors to 'occasional trains on a dark railway' will be subjected to a continuous roar form a brightly lit super-highway.

@@verybiased907 not true A46 dualing from Widmerpool to Newark, started 2008/2009 finished on time and on budget, was actually way ahead at one point, but lots of snow followed by rain slowed them down.

But ther is no I house building in the Construction Industry as everything is Sub contracted out to Sub Contractors. The HS2 Contracts are all let on an actual cost basis. They root of the problem lies in an insufficient costplan put in place in 2010. Then to add to the oroblem no inflstion was added. Then years later the contracts are designed and tendered on an actual cost basis reflecting the individual calendar programme dates the contracts are built to. This is how all government funded projects are let so the original budget can never be enough unless there is no inflation.

What does in-house mean in this case?

​@trevorwilliams632 utter nonsense. Transport projects always include the risk adjusted capital cost, inflation adjustment, and optimism bias. The guidance for this is available online for all to see in TAG and the Green Book.

They'll pay multiple companies because it helps get the money back out into the public quickly rather than giving it all one greedy ceo

​@@trevorwilliams632Government procurement is a joke. Basiclly the lowest bid wins and the contracted project managers have no way to valid if the bid is even possible. Then once the winner starts the work and can't make it work they know it costs too much to start again, so the government will pay to correct everything at a much higher cost and takes 3 times longer.

that is EUROstar...its a French company using French locomotives and trains....

@@Arltratlo the domestic service is run by Southeastern Trains (which is indirectly owned by the UK government) using Javelin trains built by Hitachi, a Japanese company. The international service is run by Eurostar which is owned by French, Belgium, and Canadian companies. The actual high speed rails are owned by a subsidiary of the UK government but has been leased to Canadian investment entities. Yes it’s called Eurostar as it’s in Europe, just like the two countries it connects

@@Arltratlo HS1 is practically a French high speed railway with French signalling and French speed limits

@@Arltratlo Important to know, there are several locomotives in use designed by both the French and the British. The operating company is operated from London but is owned by a multitude of other businesses in France/US/Belgium/UK. The HS1 network extends to the tunnel (which connects France and England) and is used by both international services (eurostar) and domestic services (South Eastern Railways (Useless piece of sh**)). For domestic services (South Eastern), it runs at full operating speed from St Pancras to Ashford International, moving to the old lines with an operating speed of ~80mph.

@@hebikotei9578 i am living in a small town in the nowhere of north Germany, not even 1km away from me is a HSR with speeds up to 280kph and its here for nearly 30 years... looks like the Brexshit done nothing positive to you, but how do i know, i am not traveling to the UK anymore and not buying anything from it... have fun with the French!

Sounds like an incentive misalignment. Politicians don't get rewarded for doing the boring but practical extended rollout. Instead they get incentivized to go with huge showpieces.

@@chrisj9700 I'd doubt 250mph trains will even run simply because it's currently non standard. Probs will be closer to 200mph or 320km/h (Could just brand it as IC 325 to stay consistant with express branding)

Not to mention all the hassles over right-of-way. The U.S. has not been a train-oriented country since the end of WWII.

@@davidty2006 Building a track now that is capable of 250mph but having trains run "only" 200mph is much more efficient and cheaper than having to upgrade all of that track once trains are capable of those speeds

That's not "mismanagement", but rather capitalistic corruption to funnel money to consultants with tied to politicians

= Tories

3. Tory austerity.

ANOTHER GREAT COCK UP !

@@johnsmith-rs2vk fukup

Ukraine PFP can't really talk about corruption

It's not strange at all. I'd bet anything that a lot of that money went into tory pockets.

Spain is a lot bigger and sparsely populated compared to the UK. It's a lot easy to build train on dry planes than it is to build having to buy out thousands of properties

We're not in the e.uu. Spain is bigger and requirs more trains.

@@mrcaboosevg6089 dry planes? Brother have u seen northern spain? Have u seen Spain in general ? A lot of mountains had to be tunneled and land bought , we have more mountains in one community that u have in the whole islands ,so obviously someone pocketed that money buddy , instead of coping so hard ask for the money back

@@richardgallagher4880 you were in the EU when you started it. The Netherlands has high-speed rail. Belgium has. So nice try but no cigar

Gareth Dennis is no expert. More HS2 plant.

Considering inflation rn yes cost will only go up. And only way to get it somewhat down again is to keep building more.

@@MEHOLE Read again. Main reason to build HS2 is lack of capacity, not shortening the travel journey. There are more passengers than public transit allows - HS2 is a solution. How does it affect natural eco-system? Architects decided to build long tunnels under the forests to preserve the nature. UK needs HS2.

@MEHOLE it's not just about speed, it's about capacity. Not to mention it's being done with environmental sustainability at the forefront

@@MEHOLE i think Britons would rather have affordable rail than faster service

@@MEHOLE I was going to criticize your statement, but after looking at the absolute mess that is the road/highway budget. For rail, it's pretty clear cut, 17 billion in spending, 12 billion in earning, 5 billion in subsidies. But roads? It ranges from 11 billion to 25 billion. It might be that some of these reports are full of it, I misunderstood the report, or something else. But holy crap, what did I just read

It's "TLDR" for a good reason.

Agreed, really wanted hear something in depth on the opposition e.g. the NIMBYs causing delays to sections of the line and even parts of the line to change route.

The brevity is the point of this channel. There are other videos giving in-depth analysis of HS2

They do make longer ones but those are on Nebula.

​@@craftinteemo7055 Let them stay elsewhere, I'm here for a brief fact-checked coverage. It's just enough for a general understanding of the issue and provides a vector for further in-depth research for those who are interested.

150 billion GBP to build it and Japan has magLev for a fraction. Thats the problem for us. Its a ripoff. I think we'll all be buzzing around in oversized drones soon anyway.

@@joecater894Could you elaborate on what you mean with 'oversized drones'?

I have many stations in many play throughs of Open Transport Tycoon which prove you wrong. The jankiest jank is absolutely fine, never a passenger complaint! /s 😼

Nothing technical there, many countries have done that very easily. The problem comes from Westminster, in not having good plans and advisors before hand. Spending years as a talking shop (like Wembley Stadium -10 years chat, then expect it built in two!) There are three HS trains in Europe,AVE,TGV and FRECCLAROSSAA 1000. all have an average 198mph and have been doing it for years! The UK doesn't even know what a Maglev train is!! Years behind, when once we were first! HS2 is behind the curve, the TGV has its boggies under the ends of two carriages, using the electric motors as brakes and broke the world record ( 574KM/H 372MPH) Sept 2009- so there are NO excuses, we are 14 years behind the French and its not even running! Couldn't organise a p...u. in a brewery

What was meant in the video is that there is a long running strategy so you know what you'll eventually end up with but you build it out bit by bit

How much do you think that requirement is worth? Lets say they can build the station now for 10 million, and you will have to wait till last carriage is out of station before you can accelerate full speed. Or they can align it all and you can accelerate from standing still? How much time would that save? are we talking an extra 100 million? 200?

To the contrary - those executives had to hire maids, gardeners, and pool boys for their second mansions.

BREL could of had it done by now! If they could build a roller coaster in their free time a HSR is nothing.

It's embarrassing that we're seemingly so incompetent at almost anything.

That’s some pretty brilliant editing right there

Yea, that struck me, too. Quite the mini chortle.

The cut backs on this are not helping the project one bit. atleast Shinkansen was built in full.

But then the pride of China HSR in 2010

Its behind schedule and 4 times over budget

3 times over budget is on budget.

but it was build by Japanese, this people know what they doing... in the UK nobody knows what to do and that starts on the government level!

Explain the cheapest quote in the context of a £7 million door at parliament.

Actually in this case, one of the problems was that the HS2 contracts placed too much overrun cost risk on the contractors (something like 70%-30%), so they increased their prices because more risk for them = higher prices.

...hold my Berlin Airport coffee 🍺😆

Lol what nonsense

the only single design they follow is to bribe the Tories and cash in for not delivered materials..... i wonder where you can find the same issue.. i covid not remember it, it must face mask something i now..!

Not so sure about the rich part. We have some very rich people living in this country but the average person and the country itself is that not that rich. We have really big wealth inequality in the UK. And the London-centric nature of the UK is another factor against HS2.

Also, the oldest section between Osaka and Tokyo was only 100mph average, with the highest speed of 140mph for a long time. Only relatively recently did the section started to see speeds comparable to Europe (highest speed 160mph), and it's still slower than the TGV or the ICE, yet it's still financially viable.

@@HenryMidfields It's true it has been incrementally improved but the Japanese Shinkansen are capable of travelling much faster than they generally do. On the sparsely-populated Tohoku route, they have an operating speed of up to 360 km/h (much faster than Europe). This has been the fastest passenger rail service for years, although some in greater Shanghai are faster nowadays. The Tokaido route is one of the most densely-populated regions in the world. So due to stops being closer together and for noise or safety concerns they operate at lower speeds (285 km/h) than they are capable of. This is one of the motivations for the construction of the alternative Chuo route via deep tunnels through sparsely-populated mountains. It's still a controversial and expensive project given that travel by Shinkansen is comfortable and most passengers are fine with current travel times. The main reason to expand the route is limited passenger capacity (on the world's busiest high speed rail route) rather than demand for faster speeds.

The Nishi Kyushu shinkansen isn't a very good example to use because it was planned in 1972, didn't start being built until 2008, only opened in 2022 and is only half the route planned because one of the prefectures refused planning permission through it's area because it saw no economic benefit and this left the section that was actually built totally isolated from the rest of the shinkansen network and passengers have to change to ordinary express trains in order to complete the rest of the route. There are no plans to complete it in the future either and even if there were it would be at least another two decades at before it would open.

@@TomKellyXY The _Tokaido Shinkansen_ also has sharper curves which is another reason for it running slower. As for the _Chuo Shinkansen_ I read that it's construction has been held up by the governor of a prefacture along the way, who has been asking for a more detailed EIA, supposedly worried that the tunelling required might pollute the _onsen_ /hot springs there. However some people think he's just unhappy that that _shinkansen_ doesn't stop in his prefacture. However I heard he might be replaced this year due to a scandal

Love your videos!

Too true right? The normally reliable "The Bunker" podcast just did an entire episode about HS2 without explaining what the project is for, or just asserting - without challenge - that nobody knew what it was for.

If only we had millions of readily available workers and no health and safety to worry about.

@@B-A-L High Speed Rail infrastructure Workers in China have Health and Safety protections at a higher level than Construction workers in the USA. (death and injury rates are lower than in the USA) and their productivity is so high precisely because of the use of innovative new technologies which require high levels of technical knowledge and competence to operate.

China wouldn't have paid for miles of tunnels to appease the NIMBYs in the Chilterns. They would have just bulldozed their homes as necessary.

The California project was initially intented to be Los Angeles to San Francisco; it's now Bakersfield to Merced which is of very limited benefit. HS2 may well end up as the southern end of the Old Oak Wood platform to the northern end of the Old Oak Wood platform.

@@John_259 er no, the Bakersfield to Merced is the first leg that will be opened. Reason why? Cheapest area to build and means it can help experiance aquire for the harder streches for the remainder of the project

@@John_259 The California high speed rail (CAHSR) was, and still is, a connection between LA and SF that passes through the San Joaquin Valley to connect to other cities along the way and to avoid the mountainous coastal area. It is the first section that is being built as it was to easiest to approve. The Merced San Jose section was recently approved. From San Jose it will use the Caltrain tracks (that by 2024 will be electrified, partly funded by CAHSR authority. The current estimation for the valley to SF is 2031 (which is a bit optimistic).

@@AL5520 And even then, it's not a maglev line, only a conventional line, China and Japan were the first countries to build maglev lines, with China being the first to build a maglev line at all, and Japan being the first to build a large-scale maglev line.

@@candyneige6609 I mean sure, but beggars can't be choosers. I'll take a 250-300 MPH line in a country that has only up to 150 MPH.

Same for Italy. For instance, part of the Turin-Salerno line quoted in this video was where they managed to build the section between Bologna and Florence all underground, through the mountains of Tuscany - all for a lot less and a lot quicker than HS2 is due to take through flat, open countryside. What's our excuse in the UK?

@@samuelollis5355 That's awesome! The excuses I keep hearing why the UK can't do the same mostly revolve around how expensive it is to tunnel under built-up areas and how expensive it is to purchase the land. But other projects on the continent have the exact same issues to deal with and manage for a lot less and much quicker... Brexit likely will have increased costs significantly, but suggesting St. Brexit could ever do anything wrong is still a taboo.

@@kortanioslastofhisname or the classic “but we are more densely populated than other places” forgetting we aren’t even in the top ten countries by density

@@Vonononie Oh, yea that is definitely a classic, has also been used to excuse the terrible state if motorways for decades... but somehow the Netherlands (quite a bit higher population density than England, I'm going by England since the people saying things like that forget Scotland, Wales, and NI exist most of the time) and Belgium (population density of England exluding London) have similar topography to England but manage to build more high-speed rail, at a faster pace, creating a denser network, for much lower cost...

But don't ignore that Stuttgart 21 was announced in 1994, and won't be complete until 2025. It is massively over budget too. The real crying shame of the comparison though. Is that Stuttgart (Germany) is spending all this money on a brand new through station, while we are building brand new dead end stations in our cities!

lol, the present government cant plan for 1 week ahead!

The Great Central route was far too curvy. Not a problem for the trains at the time, but not good to run the 300km/h+ high speed trains that HS2 will enable.

I wouldn't worry so much. Every country need new railway corridors, not old ones. Things change a lot in 200 years, and that includes the shape of the track routes.

@@exsandgrounder Absolutely. Gareth (Dennis) has an episode on his channel if anyone wants more detailed information.

But the old Great Central route would be of no use to the main stay of the HS2 destination of Birmingham which the main reason for building HS2

Spain is in the EU tories can't accept that. Though will be happy to give rail franchising agree ments to renfe.

"over 4000 km of HSR"?? England is a tiny overpopulated country: only 130,279 sq km, 57 million people (434/ sq km). It's the 2nd most densely populated in Europe (Netherlands 508/ sq km). You can't built 4,000 km of HSR in such a populated country like England.

@@davidty2006 nonsense

@@verttijineu2776 Spain is over 4000 miles of hsr not the uk. and they've been able to do it much cheaper than hs2

@@yonirapaport330 Yes I know. As I said: England is a tiny overpopulated country and Spain isn't. Another important thing: Spain is a very low-density population country, making HSR building easy (check vid "Why 70% of Spain is Empty." RLL channel) btw Spain's HSR length is not 4,000 miles (6,400 km) but around 3,760 km (As of December 2021)

To clarify I am pro high speed rail. It's just been done extremely poorly.

True but at least construction is underway on Phase One now

@@jermainetrainallen6416 Pretty much at point of no return it's too expensive to even cancel better off just getting it done and trains running so it can start paying it's self off.

@@davidty2006 Exactly

@@StarJellie I am from Hong Kong and would like to travel to England and try the British trains at the busiest King Cross someday, welcome to HK and try our high speed rail

How? I'm interested can you help me?

the bots are evolving I see

We actually helped the dutch railways rebuild post WW2. by that we gave them a bunch of electric class 77 locomotives. A successor to Gresleys EM 1 Class 76 that the prototype was used to help repair war damage.

Because UK is actually the best and the three measly countries look at the UK with envy in terms of innovation and democracy. The UK can have the slowest trains in the world and would still come up on top in innovation.

@@marktrinidad7650 what are you even talking about

British people tend to look down on Europe.

@@davidty2006 we need to move on from the ‘actually in the War Britain did x y z’. Since then the dutch infrastructure has completely changed, generations have now come and gone. The original comment is right, why aren’t we looking at what works for our neighbours instead of regurgitate past British glory. If we keep looking back to the 1940s we will (have) be left behind

It's been 13 years we know the song

Eh. Sure the Tories are corrupt but infrastructure going over budget with or without corruption is hardly unheard of. Especially in a nation where you completely lack expertise with such projects.

From what I've seen, 70% of the budget for HS2 is going on just getting the line those couple of dozen miles out of the Home Counties. Which explains why they've axed the important Leeds section of the route and barely saved any cash from doing so (but these are Tories and we're talking about the north so, y'know... fcuk northerners). It's amazing how much cheaper it gets once the line enters the Midlands where prices are depressed, The NIMBY armies are fewer and not as many vote Tory.

This was exemplified by their final act. They sold off a lot of the acquired land to their friends for discounts to make it impossible for Labour to resurrect the project.

The North doesn’t need a shitty high speed train to London, it needs the entire rail network reworked. HS2 is just another way for the government to take jobs away from the North and increase disparity

Seen Gareth explain HS2 on other channels in much more depth. For public Transport to work efficiently HS2 needs to be built as originally designed.

@@jonkernow4477 Each time he gets a roasting.

"This could be the fastest, most advanced conventional rail line in the world - we just need the government to seriously commit to it." You made me spit out my coffee. That's a level of ignorance/arrogance that only an Englishman can have. You know that Japan is a place right?

@@sueyourself5413 Whose HSR lines mostly run between 260 and 320km/h, with only a minority going over 300. Yes, I'm aware of Japan's HSR network. At recommended specs, which the government hasn't adopted, HS2 could easily have run at 400km/h, with the line and trains built from the start with 21st century signalling and technology, rather than being retrofitted with it like most existing HSR networks. The fact that you immediately jumped down my throat and called me ignorant, while showing absolutely no knowledge yourself beyond stereotypes, speaks volumes.

@@sueyourself5413 “could be” it’s not impossible. It would take the government to commit to it. How is this ignorance/arrogance?

@@josephharrison8354 I mean, if they wanted too they could have made it maglev but they chose not to

@@sueyourself5413 I know nothing about rail engineering but to call someone else arrogant with that comment is hypocrisy at the highest degree. You clearly have no interest in starting a respectful discussion and just want to win an internet argument.

Yes and it was built 15 years ago

@@Tasmosunt And actually works. Wow it's like a labour government can actually get shit done.

It's not really a particularly fair comparison to frame things in this manner, the UK has a very dense rail network going through some of the most densely populated places in Europe and it is possible to reach just about anywhere in the country within the space of about 5 hours requiring there arent any delays, most intercity journeys being about 2 or under. For most of these journeys speeds are quite high, but not to the extent that they are classified as officially high speed, but they are sufficient for everyday usage, e.g. I make a semi-regular commute during some week days from an apartment in London to an office in Cardiff, in total, Tube connections included the whole journey only takes about 2.5 hours which is quite reasonable for such a distance with all the changes involved. The speeds in the UK are appropriate given the urban geography, distribution of the population and size of the country as a whole. It makes much more sense for example for Spain to have an extensive HS network given where its cities are and how much of the population is situated in a string of very dense cities surrounded by very sparse countryside. HS2 (a bad name), while being high speed wont actually improve arrival times that much, for most journeys it will only shave off about 20 to 30 minutes, what it is actually intended as is as a capacity multiplier, by removing faster trains from English mainlines, that frees up an exponential amount of capacity and reliability for the utilisation of denser local, regional and freight services of the core of the UK rail network. A more appropriate name for the scheme would have been the translation of Shinkansen - New Main Trunk Line which is what it actually is in practice, the fact it is 'high speed' is mostly just for the purposes of marketing.

@@hpsauce1078 Japan has a higher population density. They also have more high speed rail than the UK.

@@neodym5809 It does, but once again, if you look at the geography Japan has more closely, you will still find that Japanese geography favours HSR better than in the UK. Japan consists of a series of very densly populated flat coastal plains situated more or less along a straight line from one side of the country to the other with each city having a population between 3 and 10 times the size of the average British one, giving them a bigger market to fund these schemes. These are separated by nearly empty forested mountain ranges that separate the plains, this makes it very economically sensible to connect them using a series of strategically placed mountain tunnels. British cities in comparison are dense but in an odd sprawling manner, in essence the UK is like a very dense version of American suburbia. Houses sprawl out for miles in a spiderweb like network of cul-de-sacs etc, building between all of these obstacles is exceptionally expensive, and its cities tend to be built in mildly hilly lowlands not completely flat plains. The population is also not spread along a linear axis making train lines more difficult to justify because the percentage of the population that will benefit from them is much less comparatively. So oddly, most of the UK's new rail lines will have to be built in cuttings going through mild hills, whilst the shinkansen it built more or less like a traditional rail line on an elevated linear mound connected by a series of very impressive tunnels. So effectively the UK has density, but in the most unhelpful way possible whilst Japan, although mountainous and prone to disaster has a very dense population distribution that makes HSR still very expensive but much more easily justifiable.

This is a consistent problem, e.g. the crossrail systems were intended to follow one after another, so that the experience and supply chains would compound and entrench themselves making it theoretically exponentially cheaper to construct lines in the future. For example the system was designed to have a one size fits all station design with similar design language throughout in order to improve replicability in the future. What is happening instead is that they finished Crossrail overbudget and that has dampened moods to try again with crossrail 2 which has largely been mothballed for the time being. If we wait say 5 years to start again, those logistical and educational networks will atrophy and we will have to learn all over again how to build a regional underground line, rehire civil engineers who may have moved into a new line of work etc. The key with these big projects is to have a consistent pipeline for them, our habit of building big projects one decade and then not doing anything for another is incredibly inefficient and needs to be phased out as a development model.

@@hpsauce1078 Exactly. No one is gonna wait. A more dramatic example is what happened between WW1 and WW2. The arms industry famously started making bicycles and consumer goods; you don't revert that overnight.

They would have been able to use the normal commuter trains that benefited from the increase in capacity on the rail networks due to HS2 though.

And will the EU ask their 39 million investment back they did in 2017?

The expert described the issue, if you listened. This is a pretty standard scope creep situation. HS2 was probably initiated at the cost of the lines, which is the simple part. Once you add the complex parts in cities etc, the prices inflate. The cost to do a full estimate is usually so large that businesses and governments don’t want to commit millions upon millions into an estimate that they don’t end up following through on. I see it all the time, but on a much smaller scale than HS2.

they didnt calculated the amount of bribes and corruption the Tories need!

The civil service were instructed to hide it. They presented knowingly misleading figures in public which made it look on budget but in reality they knew it was going way over budget. Successive governments also knew this and suppressed it.

Think there was plans to run eurostar trains up the ECML to newcastle and scotland.... idk what happened to that.

Westminster doesn't seem to care about the north

The elephant in the room when it comes to international railway services from the North of England to France and beyond is passport control arrangements. Currently all E* stations in Kent are closed, as is Lille Europe, because during the pandemic E* could not remain afloat while still paying the British and French governments for border control. The UK and French authorities have a complicated reciprocal arrangement whereby a train must be cleared for international travel at the point of departure, including all bags scanned. Passport checks on board are not acceptable. Since the number of passengers likely to make a HS2->HS1 journey is only enough to fill 1 or 2 trains as evidenced by the current number of flights from Manchester to Paris, and remembering that you can't use an international train for domestic services, you would be looking at staffing a brand new UK border for a mere hour per day. If the passengers have to pick up the bill for that (which they do) on top of the new infrastructure, there's no possible way that it can be competitive with the flight on price, and thus the business case falls apart. The only good and useful solution is simply to offer through ticketing on HS2 and Eurostar on day trains, or on an early morning E* after a sleeper and vice versa.

@asdaneedsfunds passport control might not be so much of an issue if the UK were to rejoin the EU and just looking at data of Paris to Manchester flights does not directly translate into passenger numbers for trains. For example if an E* train had multiple stops. It could also be run like the Caledonian Sleeper where it could be divided into sections that went to different destinations.

@@asdaneedsfunds Also one can consider that England outside of London is not that attractive for French tourists whereas Paris will always remain a holliday destination for Brits wherever they live in the UK. So the British government has no special economical interest in facilitating the export of its national population in hords of tourists abroad.

haven't seen anyone complaining about Wembley now. It's actually doing really good.

@@davidty2006 It cost twice, three times the budget £700bn in early/mid 2000s is insanely expensive) and was 2 years (I think) late in completion. Plus within 15 years it's not even the best stadium in London anymore.

A14 Huntingdon Bypass was open ahead of schedule...

Why is the scrapped HS2 route to Leeds and the surrounding area needed the most, the areas that need HS2 the most are Birmingham because of the fact Birmingham New Street is getting grid locked and strangled by the amount of trains using it which is affecting both the Birmingham to London services and also other service through New Street to the rest of the Country, it is far quicker via the ECML and MML than travelling from Leeds to Birmingham and then South to London.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 Guess you've never had the experience of travelling in/around Leeds/surrounding areas then. Leed to Sheffield is 29 miles and takes between 55mins and 1hr 20m. Remember, Leeds is the 3rd most populous city in the UK. It shouldn't be serviced so poorly, with such slow train routes.

but its now legal in the UK to wave the Union Jack, as long the Scots trot along!

HS2 was going to link up with HS1 but they cancelled that as a cost-cutting measure.

@@freddie_w Where did you get the idea of HS2 connecting to HS1, I live in Birmingham and have followed the HS2 project from it's start of building and in the local News there was never any mention of this idea, just some ones weared thoughts as there is no reason that HS2 a domestic high speed line to relieve traffic on the WCML and Birmingham New Street to London Euston would never require to connect to HS1 and the continent as there would be no custom for it.

@@peterwilliamallen1063 why would there be no custom for a direct train from Birmingham or Manchester to Paris?

@@freddie_w Because of these very simple reasons; 1/ Both Birmingham and Manchester have airports close to their respective City Centers. 2/ From both Airports there are cheap flights to Europe by carriers such as Easy Jet , Ryan Air, Lufthansa, British Airway's and Air France; 3/ It is quicker by Air from these places and cheaper to places such as Paris than Rail from Birmingham and Manchester; 4/ By Rail even from Birmingham the journey to London would take 50 mis plus waiting for said train, another hour to cross London at a sedate speed of about 40 mph and then about 2 hours on the HS1 line; 5/ At least Birmingham Airport has a station on the HS2 line; 6/ Customs Checks; 7/ HS2 has always been a domestic hispeed line designed to speed up services from Birmingham, Scotland and the North West to relieve rail congestion on the Existing WCML and Birmingham New Street so relieving the existing lines that can not be upgraded to carry more freight and passenger services to towns and Cities not on the HS2 line 8/ The cost o a rail ticket from Birmingham and Manchester by rail to Paris would out way the coat of a cheap air fare; 9/ And lastly why would people want to sit cramped up on a train for 4 to 5 hours from Birmingham to Paris when they could do the same trip by air for about 1 hour; So basically Freddie that is the reason, plus the fact that Domestic Intercity trains and European train are not compatible with their width in coach bodies, domestic British trains are built to fit the slimmer British Loading Gauge where as European trains are designed to the European UIC or Berne Gauge where the coach bodies are wider so would not fit through our domestic high level platforms.

Why not start at Edinburgh and/or Glasgow and then include the rest of the north beyond Leeds?

AsHS" is a Birmingham based project with HS2 headquarters in Birmingham that is why the majority of HS2 work starts in Birmingham and working North to Stafford and South to London with building work working from London North to meet up with work in the Midlands

@@simonn2045 The need for extra railway capacity is greater in the south, so makes more sense to start it there. As Gareth explained, though, smaller projects getting HS rail further north would make sense from a cost perspective.

@@simonn2045 Because the current routes above Leeds are not at capacity and it make sense building the routes that are at capacity first and offer the biggest benefit. Starting in London is the right choice for the project as the most benefits would be achieved more quickly starting from the south just due to choke points and capacity.

how is the saying; plan what you do, do what you plan

The thing is that if you made it slower then you would still want to run express trains on the east and west main lines which is currently halving their capacity. By making HS2 fast you can get to Leeds the long way via Birmingham faster than the direct route, so you can take all the express trains off the East and West coast main lines and double their capacity. It is badly managed but doubling the capacity of the east and west coast main lines would have been more expensive and you still wouldn't have a high speed line. The problem is that the government haven't been managing the industry by providing a continuous stream of infrastructure projects. If the industry knew that the government was going to spend 15 billion a year on infrastructure the contracts wouldn't have to pay for building the machinery, teams and capacity in every contract.

@@daveansell1970 You're saying that if you slowed down HS2 you'd still want to run express trains on existing lines but I think that's a bit of a misconception. The purpose of a new line shouldn't be primarily speed but rather connectivity and capacity. More stops would mean that long distance journeys between the ends of the line (i.e. London to Leeds) might be slightly slower but if you have a service that stops at, for example, Milton Keynes, Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield and Leeds you've created a bunch better connected line and cut journey times to and from the other places on route which would otherwise still want the faster service on existing lines.

@@EuroDC1990 you would still need express trains on the existing lines, as otherwise you would slow down the journey from London to Leeds, because going via Birmingham is further. Slower journey times won't help move people from cars and planes.

The original HS2 was supposed to connect to HS1 so that trains using the Channel tunnel could run all the way to the North. Stratford International station was built as the London station for trains going north because those trains would not be terminating at St Pancras.

Is this sarcasm that I'm failing to get?

Don't forget the demotivation that comes when you eventually have no choice but to let go of some original plans of a huge project because you finally get to realize that they are just not viable!

It is also extra important with rail infrastructure, where you basically want to always work on the tracks. Be it updating/upgrading old track or laying new track, since a longer break between building it generally leads to those techniques not being maintained and resulting in a higher building cost when stuff has to be rediscovered. This is likely one of the main reasons why high speed rail in other european countries has such low cost per track mile/kilometer.

Lmao. Just 500 km of High Speed Rail is so big for UK that you need to "divide it" into stages? No. These are just excuses. Look at the similar project in India. 500 km of HSR, all elevated, Japanese tech in signalling and rolling stock, all for $14 Billion that appreciated to $21 Billion after land acquisition. Despite political wrangling and attempts at stalling by a rival political party.

Overshooting is one thing, the magnitude is another. UK is world leading in that regard (for once...)

@@neodym5809 even compared to the us? With it's California railway.

@@makuru.42 Is the Californian high speed railway in a serious planing phase? I say they have an excuse due to earth quakes.

@@neodym5809 I dunno, i just know it has a lot of drama.

@neodym5809 California HSR have been in construction since 2015. The first phase will be completed in 2029 (Merced-Bakersfield).

It'll probably never happen, but hopefully Wales can be an independent country one day and be able to preserve/put their own culture ahead of the colonisers.

HS2 has and has never been a Wles project.

@@Devilishlybenevolent As with the result of the UK Supreme court over Scottish Independence ruling, the answer is a categorically NO until the UK Government says YES.

Great way to destroy commuter traffic.

@@thomasgray4188 Slow tracks for them.

Do a bit of research, HS2 will terminate in London Euston and it terminates in Birmingham City Center at a new mega Station called Birmingham Curzon Street, plus how can it be outdated before it is finished as all equipment will be installed when the line is finished.