427 replies to this topic

[PaulEden]

With regards to a connection / station for Heathrow, there is a provision for a station around Old Oak Common for a connection to Crossrail, which will connect to Heathrow.

It's hardly direct is it though?

What I think is needed is a sort of M25 for rail, connecting all the major towns around London. This would save a huge amount of time for people who have to travel in and out of London, reduce crowing in central London and provide greater transport routes for many meaning reduced car travel. if HS2 connected at this, say at Aylesbury, then the line would be of benefit to Amersham. Will it ever happen?

I agree we need more London orbital infrastructure, not sure if rail would be the best way though.
You don't say that your M25 rail should be high speed, but I'll make the following point anyway; HS rail relies on maintaining high speeds for long periods of time, so the more stations you put on a line, the less high speed it becomes. You can mitigate it to an extent if you're prepared to submit your passengers to sports car acceleration and braking, which can be made quite efficient thanks to Kinetic Energy Recovery systems, but I'd suggest that it's not the sort of handling a train customer likes.

[PeterC]

I thought that, and then realised that trains will be going direct from Birmingham to Paris via Stratford, without calling at either StPancras or Euston.

There will be no through international trains because of the "need" for full immigration and customs controls at stations and a consequent ban on any domestic traffic. Curiously this isn't a problem for our other international rail service which will quite happily take passengers from Belfast to Portadown or Newry as well as to Dundalk, Drogheda or Dublin.

[Adrian]

Like some of the others here I'm absolutely horrified by this proposed route. Not only is a 'high speed rail' (ie TGV) line completely unnecessary, it would be mind-bendingly expensive and generate probably a decade of spoil-trucking misery for our town. The whole thing is a colossal waste of time and money. Trying to build a long-distance passenger train service that can compete with an air service is simply futile, as much as trying to build a freight one that can compete with roads is.

I thought Crossrail was depressing until I saw this. I will oppose this idiocy at any opportunity presented to me.

[roob_the_doob]

There will be no through international trains because of the "need" for full immigration and customs controls at stations and a consequent ban on any domestic traffic.

Says who? International departures can easily be kept to dedicated secure platforms, for instance as they do at Lille.

[hyposmurf]

What I think is needed is a sort of M25 for rail, connecting all the major towns around London. This would save a huge amount of time for people who have to travel in and out of London, reduce crowing in central London and provide greater transport routes for many meaning reduced car travel. if HS2 connected at this, say at Aylesbury, then the line would be of benefit to Amersham. Will it ever happen?

Its true we do need better services to these high speed stations, even our airports need much better links.It takes 1 3/4hrs to fly from Stansted to Prague but the entire journey takes me about 12hours, to get to the final destination as it is so broken up by car,bus,train and flight.

[Adrian]

The construction period will be dreadful for us (dirt, noise, mess, traffic) but someone has to suffer it and if it is managed properly it would be worth it.

Why does someone have to suffer it? What good is a railway in the age of the car and jet plane? This project is just a tunnel borers dream, it has no relevance to the way that England functions.

[PeterC]

Says who? International departures can easily be kept to dedicated secure platforms, for instance as they do at Lille.

Yes, with full time teams from HMR&C and UKBA. You want to pay taxes on that to run a couple of half empty trains from Paris to Brum?

Getting back on topic, looking at the amout of tunnelling on the plans I have a strange feeling that cost cutting will result in a lot of that ending up as surface running or at best in cuttings.

[Fran]

Getting back on topic, looking at the amout of tunnelling on the plans I have a strange feeling that cost cutting will result in a lot of that ending up as surface running or at best in cuttings.

Much of the tunnel is under homes, shops and roads. If they kept the route but didn't tunnel, the compulsory purchase costs of all that property and road rebuilding would surely be at least as expensive as tunnelling?

[hyposmurf]

Much of the tunnel is under homes, shops and roads. If they kept the route but didn't tunnel, the compulsory purchase costs of all that property and road rebuilding would surely be at least as expensive as tunnelling?

They seem to have gone for the tunneling option near or through towns,probably as you said Fran for financial reasons, maybe it also has to do with less impact from noise,visual disturbance to public.
Has anyone else noticed that the single bore tunnel is 9.8m diameter and the double bore 8.5m diameter?Im even more confused as to what a single and double core tunnel are.I take it the double core has something to do with the emergency access shaft.

[Zoom]

With regards to a connection / station for Heathrow, there is a provision for a station around Old Oak Common for a connection to Crossrail, which will connect to Heathrow.

That's seems totally pointless to me.... for those who don't know, Old Oak Common is virtually in central London... It is next to Wormwood Scrubs next to the A40 Westway.

What is the point of a station there ? Its ridiculous. If people have to get off there you might as well save the cost of building a station and send them another 5-10 mins to Euston where they can get a train to Heathrow that won't take much longer.

If there is going to be a Heathrow connection at all it should be or near Heathrow (duh !).... and the line could do with a station West of London, say near Uxbridge.... so that it could pick up passengers for Birmingham and the North from all over West London, Herts, Bucks, Berks, Surrey, Hants, etc without them having to travel into central London and back out again. This would be an enormous benefit and attract a lot of use - just like Ashford and Ebbsfleet on the HS1 line.

And the HS2 line needs a connection to the HS1 line so that they can run through trains from the midlands and the north straight through to Paris and Brussels. That would attract a huge amount of business.

[Eaton]

According to the BFP the woman who spearheaded the campaign against the parking changes in Old Amersham is setting up an action group to fight against the High Speed Rail as well. See below for full story:

http://www.bucksfree...lt_railway_bid/

[Adrian]

That's seems totally pointless to me.... for those who don't know, Old Oak Common is virtually in central London... It is next to Wormwood Scrubs next to the A40 Westway.

What is the point of a station there ? Its ridiculous. If people have to get off there you might as well save the cost of building a station and send them another 5-10 mins to Euston where they can get a train to Heathrow that won't take much longer.

Old Oak Common is on the Great Western main line, the same line that Crossrail will be using and thus makes MUCH more sense than going to Euston which isn't connected with Heathrow in any realistic sense. It also contains the Eurostar North Pole facility which was only fairly recently shut down, so presumably there's some 400M long train infrastructure worth leveraging there already.

[David P]

According to the BFP the woman who spearheaded the campaign against the parking changes in Old Amersham is setting up an action group to fight against the High Speed Rail as well. See below for full story:

http://www.bucksfree...lt_railway_bid/

Mrs Axelby said: “My approach to anything is one of enthusiasm and positivity. If anyone can put a stop to things as a community, we can.

I wonder what she would do if she were un-enthusiastic and negative about the rail line?

[Fran]

According to the BFP the woman who spearheaded the campaign against the parking changes in Old Amersham is setting up an action group to fight against the High Speed Rail as well. See below for full story:

http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/5062645.Campaigner_on_track_to_halt_railway_bid/

Even though she acknowledges it's a vastly different scale of campaign and that she'll talk to people in Missenden, I think firstly it's too early to do much (after the election it's likely to change because only Labour support this route) and secondly, there is no point protesting about one small section when it's part of a grand scheme. To have any chance of affecting things, one would have to put a strong case for a totally different route.

[Bengley]

Of course, there is going to be a lot of opposition since this line is going to head through toryland.

I think the government should just take the chinese approach and ignore all the protesters and their nonsense, and if they try to sabotage the route while it is being built, sling them in jail.

After all, people can hardly sue the government for wanting to improve our infrastructure (which, seeing as the WCML is reaching full capacity, is totally necessary)

I say that all the people for this route go to the meeting in Missenden and give the route some backing, rather than everyone just trying to crush it as usual.

[ianbartlett]

Mrs Axelby said: "My approach to anything is one of enthusiasm and positivity. If anyone can put a stop to things as a community, we can.

I do wonder if Mrs Axelby and friends have considered the consequences of not building this line. The proposal is based primarily on the need to add to Britain's transport infrastructure capacity - the high speed aspect is simply a reflection of modern travel demands. If this is not built, something else will have to be built; that could be a motorway or a massive expansion of air travel. Airport expansion would create considerable increase in noise pollution over a much wider area of the Chilterns and a new motorway would probably follow roughly the same route as the railway - the Amersham to Aylesbury corridor has clearly been identified as meeting the requirements for such a route.

I do hope that, if successful, Mrs Axelby gets a blue plaque on her house commemorating her contribution to construction of the M40 mark 2 - or at least on the house nearest to where hers used to be.

[Peter1]

I cannot believe the many voices in support of the current plan. Of course its easy to be negative and a NIMBY but it is just as easy to be blandly positive and weakly accepting. We need high speed rail but many billions on a line only to Birmingham is not the answer. Extension along existing transport corridors is the most acceptable solution. I cannot believe that if you are an Amersham resident and have studied the plans carefully that you would think they are a good idea - a 50m wide cutting 200 yards from the old town with 200mph trains every few minutes!

[PaulEden]

But it isn't Peter. As it passes us, it'll be in an underground tunnel, nor will they be every few minutes.

Even as someone who works in haulage, I can see that we need a high speed rail infrastructure. Sure we need better trunk roads, but we need better rail more. How can we be so arrogant to suggest that we should be different to many other advanced nations (and France) in the world in NOT having a high speed rail network?

[ianbartlett]

I cannot believe the many voices in support of the current plan. Of course its easy to be negative and a NIMBY but it is just as easy to be blandly positive and weakly accepting. We need high speed rail but many billions on a line only to Birmingham is not the answer. Extension along existing transport corridors is the most acceptable solution. I cannot believe that if you are an Amersham resident and have studied the plans carefully that you would think they are a good idea - a 50m wide cutting 200 yards from the old town with 200mph trains every few minutes!

Peter , on what basis do you say 'many billions on a line only to Birmingham is not the answer'? How do you know? Although this report is backed by the Government, it is produced by professional transport planners and economists. The option of upgrading existing routes is completely out of the question as they would not be direct enough, would damage many more homes (as communities have tended to build up around these routes) and would be hugely disruptive in the process. The West Coast main line was upgraded in this way and hasn't delivered anything like the benefits it was intended to - it cost £8bn and represents pretty much the limit of what you can do with improvements to existing infrastructure.

The proposed line seems, to me, to have been very thoroughly thought through and considerate in its sensitivity to the environment. It will go under the whole of Amersham and will take up little more width than the Amersham by-pass and about the same as the dual section of the A413. It will also be mainly in a deep cutting so will not ruin existing views (as the road does) and will be very quiet...from Amersham certainly it wouldn't be heard over the noise of the traffic on the bypass.

Most of the objections are coming from people who either have little understanding of what's being proposed or who are vehemently against anything new. That doesn't actually cut it when it comes to planning national infrastructure.

It is also true that, if the railway is not built, something else much worse will replace it - motorway through Missenden anyone?

Ian

[Eaton]

other advanced nations (and France)

You're on quite a roll at the moment!

[Peter1]

It will go under the whole of Amersham and will take up little more width than the Amersham by-pass and about the same as the dual section of the A413.

Unless the Amersham football club and the fields immediately to the west of St. Mary's school are not counted as part of Amersham!

and will be very quiet...from Amersham certainly it wouldn't be heard over the noise of the traffic on the bypass

How do you know? - I don't see a report from the professionals you describe including an acoustic engineer

Most of the objections are coming from people who either have little understanding of what's being proposed or who are vehemently against anything new. That doesn't actually cut it when it comes to planning national infrastructure.

Simply not true - I have read the report in detail and I am moving out of Amersham soon. I still care about this town very much and have yet to achieve grumpy old man status in my early 30s!! An equally poor argument would to say that those in favour of this project on this forum originate from those living far from the proposed route.

[Bengley]

I cannot believe the many voices in support of the current plan. Of course its easy to be negative and a NIMBY but it is just as easy to be blandly positive and weakly accepting. We need high speed rail but many billions on a line only to Birmingham is not the answer. Extension along existing transport corridors is the most acceptable solution. I cannot believe that if you are an Amersham resident and have studied the plans carefully that you would think they are a good idea - a 50m wide cutting 200 yards from the old town with 200mph trains every few minutes!

They won't end up being every few minutes, probably more like 4tph in the peak and 2tph off-peak with a couple of freight trains every day travelling at 100mph or less.

They also won't go 200mph, I can almost guarantee that. Probably closer to 150.

I know two people, they both back onto a main line. One in Berkhamsted and the other in Stevenage on the East Coast Main Line.

The woman in Berkhamsted lives in a cottage (bottom left of this google map area
CLICK FOR MAP)
and is not disturbed by the noise of several 125mph trains going past every 15 minutes or so. I've also been inside her house when a train goes past, and really, it's nothing. If she lived in a more up to date house with double glazing, it would be even quieter.

The guy I know in Stevenage lives at the end of sheringham avenue (CLICK FOR MAP) on the very busy East Coast Main Line with VERY loud diesel trains passing regularly as well as electric ones. He says that he doesn't even notice it anymore, and even if he tries to listen for it, he says it's very quiet. That's in a house with double glazing.


Now take into account that this new proposed route will not have 125mph diesel trains passing regularly, just 150mph+ electric ones (A lot quieter than diesel) and the occasional freight train travelling at less than 100mph (diesel).

And on top of that, it will be in a cutting!


I also forgot to mention that modern trains are getting much quieter than they were 20 years ago!

[David P]

It occurred to me that there were exactly the same objections made to the building of the M25 (to much noise, too much construction traffic, we don't need it, it's in the wrong place, etc.). Then I thought of the Victorians trying to prevent the building of the Met line.

Now I've got this picture of a bunch of Ancient Brits, petitioning the Roman Emperor with a stone tablet opposing the widening of Whielden Street.

No wonder this country is always behind the times.

[Bengley]

It occurred to me that there were exactly the same objections made to the building of the M25 (to much noise, too much construction traffic, we don't need it, it's in the wrong place, etc.). Then I thought of the Victorians trying to prevent the building of the Met line.

Now I've got this picture of a bunch of Ancient Brits, petitioning the Roman Emperor with a stone tablet opposing the widening of Whielden Street.

No wonder this country is always behind the times.

And everyone loves the met line now! Imagine Chesham and Amersham without an affordable railway into London.

[Cutiecat]

And everyone loves the met line now! Imagine Chesham and Amersham without an affordable railway into London.

A Facebook group has been set up in opposition to HS2 please join here.

Save the Chilterns Facebook page.

[Peter1]

A Facebook group has been set up in opposition to HS2 please join here.

Save the Chilterns Facebook page.

Fantastic - thanks - 3500 members already!!

[Zoom]

a 50m wide cutting 200 yards from the old town with 200mph trains every few minutes!

But it isn't Peter. As it passes us, it'll be in an underground tunnel, nor will they be every few minutes.

They won't end up being every few minutes, probably more like 4tph in the peak and 2tph off-peak with a couple of freight trains every day travelling at 100mph or less.

They also won't go 200mph, I can almost guarantee that. Probably closer to 150.

I wish people would pay attention to the actual plans rather than saying what they think the plans are...

1. the tunnel ends ~200-300m from St Marys School, the recreation ground and Mill Lane. Look on the maps, you can see it and measure it.

2. the cutting from there to Little Missenden (2.2km) will be ~50-100m wide and 15-25m deep. The dimensions are specified on the maps.

3. where the trains emerge from the tunnel into the cutting they will be travelling at a maximum of 320 kmh (so they are likely to be travelling 150-200 mph in practice). Its all on the plan diagrams.

4. the line is designed for 8 trains an hour, at 320 kmh the trains will transit in the 2.2km of the cutting between the Amersham tunnel and the Little Missenden tunnel in 25 secs.... in other words 25 secs of noise approximately every 7-8 mins. This is described in the text of the proposals.

5. there will be no slow trains on the line, there will be no freight trains on the line... the line is a high speed passenger service. As above.



I think the route is not too bad and should be built but that doesn't mean it can't be improved. I think it would be an enourmous difference if:

a) the tunnel under Amersham was extended by at least 500m to reduce the noise impact on the old town, preferably extended all the way to join the tunnel at Little Missenden.

b ) a station was built actually at Heathrow providing an interchange/parkway with access from Heathrow, M25 and M4

c) the line was extended to join the HS1 line so that there could be through services from the north to Paris and Brussels

[roob_the_doob]

I agree that the proposal isn't that bad, although could do with improving. Constructive engagement is the way to get improvements made, rather than outright opposition. For instance, it's difficult to see why some of the cuttings can't be covered over to make tunnels. And matters to do with a parkway station (e.g. near Denham with access from the M40/M25 junction) and linking to HS1 will no doubt be handled as high-level policy issues - this is much more of a technical report.

8 trains per hour in each direction is 16 trains per hour. However, I agree that it will hardly be noticeable. I live next to the station (looking at the platform right now) and we simply don't notice the trains at all.

[David P]

A Facebook group has been set up in opposition to HS2 please join here.

Save the Chilterns Facebook page.

At a very quick look it actually appears to have at least one member who is capable of rational thought.

[ianbartlett]

A Facebook group has been set up in opposition to HS2 please join here.

Save the Chilterns Facebook page.

I've joined. Some of the people there seem quite unhinged...can't say anything without adding the 'f' word. Still, I look forward to posting counter-arguments regularly and often