This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
INBOX


From:


Donald MacPhee,


chairman, Railfuture Scotland Subject: ‘High Speed Rail from a Scottish Perspective’


I read with interest the contribution in the Dec/ Jan issue, ‘High Speed Rail from a Scottish Perspective’ from a member of Railfuture Scotland. I need to emphasise that this was the personal view of the author, and not that of Railfuture UK.


line shown from London to Nottingham neither refl ects the formal Government proposed route through Old Oak Common and the Chilterns, nor our well- established proposal for a route broadly following the existing M1/M6 corridor from the start, to both Birmingham and Leicester, before considering ideal routes north thereof, and could be taken incorrectly as our present view on the southern sections of the


trains throughout mainland Europe.


From: Clive H Price Subject: Virgin to offer London- Shrewsbury direct services


Had the late and much-lamented Wrexham & Shropshire service been allowed to run through to Chester perhaps it might have avoided withdrawal, so it is a bit rich for Virgin now to be attempting to cream off traffi c from Shrewsbury and calling it a Shropshire service. This still leaves Oswestry (Gobowen), Wrexham and intermediate stations between Shrewsbury and Chester without a direct London service.


Presumably the intention is to use Super Voyagers, and given the option of travelling in a Class 221 or the beautifully refurbished MkIII’s used by Chiltern, in my book it’s ‘no contest’. But then franchising never was about a joined-up railway and customer preference was it?


We have yet to publish our national view on the ideal route for HS2 to be extended to Scottish destinations. Now that the Secretary of State for Transport has set out his initial preferences for stage 2 of HS2 we will be able to engage in internal discussion about the suitability of those routes/branches as


they relate


to the fi rst stage and press for a proper route on to Scottish cities rather than using existing lines indefi nitely.


As far as logical high-speed rail capacity within Scotland,


we


would probably, after internal discussion, support much of the article’s content.


However, we have a problem with the apparent defi nite lines shown on the attached map, especially in England. The straight


route. (Editor’s note: This map was supplied to us by the article’s author.)


Full details of our present views and detailed submission to the DfT on HS2 Stage 1 can be found on Railfuture’s website www.railfuture.org.uk under ‘Campaigns’ and High Speed. It may well be that Railfuture, after consulting its members, will come to different conclusions about ideal routeings and extensions to Scotland.


From: Mike B Subject: National Express to operate German regional services


It is good to hear of a UK operator obtaining access to the German rail market. Let us hope that other UK companies will follow suit and win lucrative contracts to operate


was lost. However, with modern remote control repair techniques, to what extent is it still the issue it once was? When it is possible to use robots to work on complex tasks at the bottom of the North Sea, surely the lack of direct access could be overcome in the same way?


From: GLC Subject: HS2 through running


High speed rail services should have been built in the UK during the 1980s. In my view there is a signifi cant fl aw in the feeder services to maximise the benefi t of the proposed high speed routes.


The ICE services operated by Germany’s DB have shown the value of high speed trains services running on both dedicated high speed lines and


the existing


network. For example ICE services linking the Lower Rhineland and Ruhr district to Berlin run on existing standard tracks to maximise passenger pick-up and set-down points in the heavily populated areas of Nord Rhein Westfalen before picking up the dedicated high near Hannover.


speed network ©. PhotoOptik/Christopher


From: Henry Law Subject: Light rail infrastructure


Re: ‘Lowering the cost of UK light rail and tram projects’, RTM Dec/ Jan.


The German template of through running beyond the dedicated high speed network will be essential to maximise the value and revenue stream of HS2.


A high speed link in the North (i.e. Sheffi eld to Manchester – re-opening and


upgrading the


Underground services in central Brighton were completely renewed in the late 1990s. Had there been a plan for a possible light rail system in the future, this work could have been done at next to no extra cost, so as to avoid the necessity of renewing the services in the future.


Unfortunately, the opportunity


former Woodhead route!) could enable both the HS2 Leeds and Manchester routes to operate a valuable complementary northern link within HS2.


Otherwise HS2 will become something akin


to Eurostar’s


present limited destination operations.


TELL US WHAT YOU THINK opinion@railtechnologymagazine.com


rail technology magazine Feb/Mar 13 | 13


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84