thought this would be a good topic on here as it will run near to a lot of the posters and affect the lives of quite a few on here by the looks of it.

the route for the northern leg of the project has just been announced though in typical fashion nothing has been set in stone yet. some details rlhererl

what's everyone's thoughts on this? waste of money or a good investment. will anyone be affected by it either through demolitions or noise etc. do we really need to invest all this money to save less than an hour travel to london from leeds for example. will other services be cut to make this more affordable. will it simply mean more people from the north can go to london to work or will it attract much needed businesses to the north and make the so called northern powerhouse come to fruition.

one of my problems with all of this is that it is assumed we are going to have a super railway where everything runs on time. when built no doubt there will still be leaves on the line, the wrong type of snow and staff shortages meaning the usual lengthy delays. overrunning engineering works and people shoehorned into inadequate length trains. and i dare not even think about ticker prices. just wish we could spend some money on the network where needed such as selby swing bridge which seems the be closed every year for one reason or another

From speaking to lots of people, my view on this is comfortably the less popular one in the North of England.
However, for me, infrastructure stuff is simple, we should have the best, up to date transport system that is available.
Following the logic of the "naysayers", we would still have a bloke with a red flag, walking in front of a train travelling at 7 mph.

Of course there has to be provision for many of the areas that will be disrupted but, like all these things, the objections come from those that are
directly affected and most people would also object if it war routed close to them or causing inconvenience.

At the risk of stoking up the Euro debate, we are well behind other developed nation with our rail system and the HS2 is a step in the right direction.

One thing that I would add, is that, England does seem too London centric in it's overall strategy and there is too much emphasis on centralising many of the country's larger businesses down there and perhaps there should be more effort made, as government policy, to move certain amenities into other parts of the UK.

They do have something called the "Northern Powerhouse" but, quite frankly, this just appears to be some kind of buzz word among politicians and there seems very little evidence of any kind of drive to help the North of England.

(I'll get my tin hat ready)

There was a thread on HS2 a while back.

Whilst continuous improvements in our infrastructure are needed, HS2 is yet another case of a huge investment aimed at benefitting London primarily.

Combine the estimated costs (£55.7bn for HS2), plus Crossrail (£14.8bn), London Gateway (£1.5bn) and the new runway at Heathrow (£18.6bn) - that comes to a total of £90.6bn. That's just 4 projects.

What have we got going on up North? Well, the A64 got some pot holes filled in a couple of years ago.

Investment in infrastructure = great! But make sure that the levels of investment are fair.

Wait until inflation affects those figures.

I'd be less skeptical if work started in the North with HS3. Connect Liverpool to Hull and take in as many major cities in between, a kind of M62 on rails. As I see it the HS2 money will 'run out' once London is connected to Birmingham, essentially making Birmingham London's biggest commuter village and further sucking the life out of the rest of the country.

rlThe line from Selby to Hull will not be electrifiedrl

Northern [delPower[/delhouse

Northern chugchugchugonthepacertrainwiththebusseatshouse more like

3 years of roadworks on the M1/M62 - to add another lane, which will be just as full of cars and trucks as the other lanes?

That remains to be seen - my point is that it's been 3 years and counting since the work started, making South Yorkshire virtually impassible in both directions during both rush hours; and what we'll get when they eventually finish, is an extra lane in place of the hard shoulder, and variable speed limits.

Before HS2, it would seem to make more sense to improve connectivity between Northern cities; that might actually take some cars off the road?

M1 Luton - M25 London, M3 Farnborough to M25, M25 past Heathrow, M25 generally, M6 Bham...............

Its not just happening up North! Smart motorways are coming. Don't feel the pain is just at your front door. Southerners commute is typically longer than that of someone up north.......he pulls the hand grenade pin

The stretch of the M1 between junction 30 and 32 seems to have been in a perpetual state of roadworks for the last 10 years or more. I don't remember a time when it wasn't in some part coned or under 50mph speed restrictions. If it's the same contractor doing the 'work' they must have made billions out of it!

I think you've missed the point.

I would suggest 1 mile of railway would cost less to build than 1 mile of motorway, dual carriageway or even trunk road. It would probably be more environmentally friendly and use less land. When in use , using modern technology it would be more efficient and cost effective moving people and allowing goods to be moved quicker.
It would benefit EVERYONE in the same way roads do.
The fact this is not the case is down to short termism, ignorance, nimbys and political dogma. Perhaps if motorists paid the true cost of travelling,just like rail users, their "views" may change, but somehow I doubt it.
Freedom they cry at others expense.