Birmingham Grand Central station & High Speed 2

[Bachy Soletanche]

Originally Posted by feltip

A few bits from the app i've put on my blog.





http://birminghamcentral.blogspot.co...-ikon-for.html

Great to this building back in use.

[adamdalziel]

http://youtu.be/OFVeidt4jZA

Unbiased for a change

[adamdalziel]

http://goo.gl/V4ilC

[blar]

First Hs2 News update

http://www.hs2.org.uk/assets/x/92383

[oxo]

Originally Posted by vanson

Come on boys and girls we are so behind the rest of europe and most of the world with our transport infrastructure.THIRD WORLD MENTALITY.

Not the transport infrastructure so much as the greedy and incompetent management, executives and share dividend holders.
HS2 is set to become the greatest swindle in corporate history.

[Typhoon2000]

All I want is for them to get their arses into gear before the price of all this sky-rockets. This is one of the factors for cost overruns when they announce infrastructure projects like these so early with indecisions in the meantime.

BUILD THE BLOODY THING NOW!!

[theidealcopy two]

This is an exortionately expensive white elephant in waiting. Why do I say this? Simples: the record the government and all the private consortia have in actually delivering these schemes on time and within budget speaks volumes for itself.

No wonder the rail fares are soaring again next year. It's to pay for this rich man's fucking folly.

It could have been so much less expensive and straightforward than this. If they quadrupled the route between Stafford - Wolverhampton - Brum and Brum - Coventry - Rugby and expanded New Street with new subterranean platforms for local services and extra platforms on the main station (by removing the centre stabling tracks, thus allowing more room to fit in more platforms) and widened the approaches at both ends (especially the west end before the Bullring was built right up against it - remember how wisely Railtrack turned down the offer to protect a two track alignment??) - and started doing all this 20 years ago, we might have not needed to go for this option.....

But of course, all the money for infrastructural investment went to London, as ever.

All Birmingham is getting to show for its efforts is a new bigger station concourse.....oh wow!

[theidealcopy two]

Originally Posted by feltip

A few bits from the app i've put on my blog.





http://birminghamcentral.blogspot.co...-ikon-for.html

Now, this is good. But like somebody else here said, what is going to come of the old 1970s Central Library - they really could do with re-using it rather than the cop out option which is demolition.

[woodhousen]

Originally Posted by theidealcopy two

This is an exortionately expensive white elephant in waiting. Why do I say this? Simples: the record the government and all the private consortia have in actually delivering these schemes on time and within budget speaks volumes for itself.

No wonder the rail fares are soaring again next year. It's to pay for this rich man's fucking folly.

It could have been so much less expensive and straightforward than this. If they quadrupled the route between Stafford - Wolverhampton - Brum and Brum - Coventry - Rugby and expanded New Street with new subterranean platforms for local services and extra platforms on the main station (by removing the centre stabling tracks, thus allowing more room to fit in more platforms) and widened the approaches at both ends (especially the west end before the Bullring was built right up against it - remember how wisely Railtrack turned down the offer to protect a two track alignment??) - and started doing all this 20 years ago, we might have not needed to go for this option.....

But of course, all the money for infrastructural investment went to London, as ever.

All Birmingham is getting to show for its efforts is a new bigger station concourse.....oh wow!

this thread isnt discussing new street.. its talking about the brand new rail line and station being built to and in the city...?

[theidealcopy two]

Originally Posted by woodhousen

this thread isnt discussing new street.. its talking about the brand new rail line and station being built to and in the city...?

I know, and I simply weighed in to opine that it's a waste of money, this HS2 project.

There wouldn't be any need for it if they properly upgraded the standard of line and infrastructure between WV and CV via BNS.

[TedStriker]

Originally Posted by theidealcopy two

There wouldn't be any need for it if they properly upgraded the standard of line and infrastructure between WV and CV via BNS.

What do mean by 'properly upgraded' please?

[blahblahv2]

I think he means upgrading the WCML so that it can cope with the projected increase in passenger numbers. Something which has already been investigated, costed and rejected in favour of HS2 which is the more cost effective option.

[DBadger]

Do you realise how much would need to be demolished to quad the Rugby-Stafford loop? It's all very well throwing tosh like that around, but it's completely unfeasible. It would be BILLIONS more expensive than building a new route away from houses / listed buildings / canals / factories / city centres.

[PSS1980]

Originally Posted by theidealcopy two

I know, and I simply weighed in to opine that it's a waste of money, this HS2 project.

There wouldn't be any need for it if they properly upgraded the standard of line and infrastructure between WV and CV via BNS.

Totally disagree, HS2 in my opinion is needed nation wide also in Manchester and Scotland as all cities will run out of capacity.

( Regarding New street expansion, it is a world class redevelopment and increases passenger capacity by 3 times, there are many British cities who would love to have this type of developemnt for their main line stations, I do agree however that extra platforms should have been considered as curently the strtion can only hold approx 17 - 25 trains depending on which trains are in, thank god its a full through station...... )....

PS : Sorry Woody as I know this is not the New st thread was just replying to this post : - )

[Sgt.Wilko]

There remains valid debate to be had on HS2 however sweeping statements on this countries ability to deliver this project can not go without comment. The assertion that the UK can not deliver public infrastructure projects as well as other nations is simply not true.

The notion espoused by OXO and Theidealcopy on this forum seems to repeat the mantra that the caprices of our bureaucracy combined with some fraudulent capitalistic traits of business combine together so that Britain somehow manages to cock up things that other nations do not. There is no evidence for this in the literature and commentary that suggests otherwise seems to be based in some sort of anti-capitalist / anti-UK mindset that I can only assume is politically driven. So lets just look at the empirical evidence in the literature and put this to bed (AGAIN) once and for all.

Probably the most widely quoted report in this regard is one written by Professor Flyvbjerg of Oxford University. In his report 258 infrastructure projects across 20 nations valued at US$110b (2005 prices) were looked at and 86% were found to have substantial cost escalation. The worst performing sector was rail projects which had a typical cost escalation of 45%. Flyvbjerg concluded that “substantial cost escalation is the rule rather than the exception” and that it was a “global phenomenon”.

Let me illustrate with some examples.

The Danish National Audit Office 2004 report concluded that the Copenhagen Metro has a cost overrun of 157% and will take 76 years to break even.

In the USA The Schwartz Initiative on American Economic Policy in March 2012 stated “The infrastructure delivery system used in the U.S. today makes it easy for projects to run over budget”. The report cites California alone incurred cost overruns in transport projects of $305 between 2007-2010 then if we switch coasts The Central Artery/Tunnel Project in Boston (The Big Dig) was slated to cost US$6b (2006 prices) but came in at $14.6b (2006 prices).

In Holland the 125Km High Speed line that was given the go ahead in 1996 with a completion date of 2007 finally opened 2 years late in 2009 at a cost of Euro 7.17b which was a cost overrun of 110%.

Need I go on...Bangkok..San Francisco etc etc. Oh and to preclude any attempt again at stating that DB and Germany are different and all is rosy in their world please refer back to my previous posts on the state of that particular organisation and its various financial black holes and (mis)-management style.

The important thing is to understand why these cost overruns occur and to try to minimise them and hopefully take them into account before giving the go ahead. This will not be done by simply stating that we can't do it or we are worse than anyone else.

The 2011 work by Chantal Cantarelli at Delft University gives a useful framework to approach the exercise identifying factors such as poor project design, technical forecasting errors, incomplete estimations, changes in scope, inappropriate organisational structures, inadequate decision-making processes, inadequate planning processes, poor financing, poor contact management, errors in strategic behaviour, inefficient use of resources, optimistic bias among officials, cognitive bias of individuals, and just for OXO manipulation of forecasts and deliberate cost underestimation.

Can we do it? Yes we can – or at least we can as badly as any other nation on the planet.

[djay]

Originally Posted by Sgt.Wilko

Probably the most widely quoted report in this regard is one written by Professor Flyvbjerg of Oxford University. In his report 258 infrastructure projects across 20 nations valued at US$110b (2005 prices) were looked at and 86% were found to have substantial cost escalation. The worst performing sector was rail projects which had a typical cost escalation of 45%. Flyvbjerg concluded that “substantial cost escalation is the rule rather than the exception” and that it was a “global phenomenon”.

Let me illustrate with some examples.

The Danish National Audit Office 2004 report concluded that the Copenhagen Metro has a cost overrun of 157% and will take 76 years to break even.

In the USA The Schwartz Initiative on American Economic Policy in March 2012 stated “The infrastructure delivery system used in the U.S. today makes it easy for projects to run over budget”. The report cites California alone incurred cost overruns in transport projects of $305 between 2007-2010 then if we switch coasts The Central Artery/Tunnel Project in Boston (The Big Dig) was slated to cost US$6b (2006 prices) but came in at $14.6b (2006 prices).

In Holland the 125Km High Speed line that was given the go ahead in 1996 with a completion date of 2007 finally opened 2 years late in 2009 at a cost of Euro 7.17b which was a cost overrun of 110%.

Need I go on...Bangkok..San Francisco etc etc. Oh and to preclude any attempt again at stating that DB and Germany are different and all is rosy in their world please refer back to my previous posts on the state of that particular organisation and its various financial black holes and (mis)-management style.

Now that is just poor, you cant call this emperical evidence and literature without referencing sources. This is as unfounded as anyother supporting arguement as it stands

[Qoasis777]

Originally Posted by djay

Now that is just poor, you cant call this emperical evidence and literature without referencing sources. This is as unfounded as anyother supporting arguement as it stands

Read it again. He has for some of them. Admittedly not all.

[djay]

Well s/he's mentioned dates of documents, for example, google search The Schwartz Initiative on American Economic Policy March 2012 and you find nothing. again google The Danish National Audit Office 2004 report nothing, the literature is untracable and as i learnt at uni, untraceable means it offers little weight to the argument.

My point being, dont complain about someone offering an opinion and claim yours is based on near scientific fact when the references can not be traced.

[woodhousen]

its a pretty informed argument though lol

[djay]

Originally Posted by woodhousen

its a pretty informed argument though lol

lol so is mine if i drop The Nation Institute for Rail Studies report 2001 into it.