UK Politics Thread XII: The Lockdown

[Fartsniffage]

We've been running 125s on general trackways since the early 70's. We even manage that speed on twisty sections of track using Pendolino trains. The Kent-London Eurostar route runs at 140. Bumping to 150 wouldn't really be a big enough gain to bother with the expense.

And of course the rolling stock isn't built or even fully designed yet. Government program, remember? But it shouldn't be a huge problem, Japanese trains can already run at that speed, they're just limited due to the specially built tracks not being up to those speeds.

Well bumping it up to 150 then 160, then 180 probably would not cost that much. Especially as the 140s are not north of London.

I mean the balls to the walk all or nothing approach might get the biggest improvements on paper but I am somewhat dubious (well honestly of course completely so) it will get done properly, on time, without outrageous cost.

And since the trains are not built yet, and neither are the tracks, sure in theory they might get that high in places (the track still has some curves it appears) but in actuality? I will believe it if I see it. I would not be surprised if the tracks cannot actually do as well as planned.

And right now the trains are just vapor ware. Who will build them? The Japanese I guess? Where will they be built?

I still think maybe the more gradual approach would be safer and possibly cheaper, even if not as fast (on paper at least).

But eh, I guess too late now. I guess we will just have to see how it turns out.
I like the idea, but I doubt you can blame me for doubting your government’s ability to execute it.

I edited that 140. It's actually 186. The train can go faster and does in Europe but is limited on the UK bit of track. It's the Eurostar line into London from Kent. That line was HS1.

And 140 is possible on all our lines, it's a safety limit to 125. They don't trust our somewhat older signals system.

Another thing you're forgetting here is the matter of national prestige. The Japanese have been regarded as the kings of high speed rail for decades and I think our government is keen on taking the crown. The rolling stock is out to international tender but they must be built in the UK to get the contract.

Something will happen with it all, Britain might not be its former self but never bet against us when it comes to engineering. It'll be shoddy government oversight that fucks things up.

[Novus America]

Well bumping it up to 150 then 160, then 180 probably would not cost that much. Especially as the 140s are not north of London.

I mean the balls to the walk all or nothing approach might get the biggest improvements on paper but I am somewhat dubious (well honestly of course completely so) it will get done properly, on time, without outrageous cost.

And since the trains are not built yet, and neither are the tracks, sure in theory they might get that high in places (the track still has some curves it appears) but in actuality? I will believe it if I see it. I would not be surprised if the tracks cannot actually do as well as planned.

And right now the trains are just vapor ware. Who will build them? The Japanese I guess? Where will they be built?

I still think maybe the more gradual approach would be safer and possibly cheaper, even if not as fast (on paper at least).

But eh, I guess too late now. I guess we will just have to see how it turns out.
I like the idea, but I doubt you can blame me for doubting your government’s ability to execute it.

I edited that 140. It's actually 186. The train can go faster and does in Europe but is limited on the UK bit of track. It's the Eurostar line into London from Kent. That line was HS1.

And 140 is possible on all our lines, it's a safety limit to 125. They don't trust our somewhat older signals system.

Another thing you're forgetting here is the matter of national prestige. The Japanese have been regarded as the kings of high speed rail for decades and I think our government is keen on taking the crown. The rolling stock is out to international tender but they must be built in the UK to get the contract.

Something will happen with it all, Britain might not be its former self but never bet against us when it comes to engineering. It'll be shoddy government oversight that fucks things up.

Well yeah, we have the same problem. Signals are the problem more than anything.
The new Liberty trains (designed by France but built here) should go 160 mph on existing track and up to 186 with some mostly signal related improvements.
I mean you could probably upgrade all your main lines to 140 mph without to much trouble then though, just spend a few billion on signals.

I mean you can get pretty good speed, pretty cheap by just upgrading existing lines is the point.

Although not 250 mph true.

Sure I get that, if it is more a national pride than practical thing that explains a lot.
Also good you are forcing them to be built in the UK, not “muh free trade”.
Surprising but good.
Where in the UK? Somewhere North I presume? That part is good.

So we will have to see. The engineering part is not what worries me, more the implementation.

[Fartsniffage]

I edited that 140. It's actually 186. The train can go faster and does in Europe but is limited on the UK bit of track. It's the Eurostar line into London from Kent. That line was HS1.

And 140 is possible on all our lines, it's a safety limit to 125. They don't trust our somewhat older signals system.

Another thing you're forgetting here is the matter of national prestige. The Japanese have been regarded as the kings of high speed rail for decades and I think our government is keen on taking the crown. The rolling stock is out to international tender but they must be built in the UK to get the contract.

Something will happen with it all, Britain might not be its former self but never bet against us when it comes to engineering. It'll be shoddy government oversight that fucks things up.

Well yeah, we have the same problem. Signals are the problem more than anything.
The new Liberty trains (designed by France but built here) should go 160 mph on existing track and up to 186 with some mostly signal related improvements.
I mean you could probably upgrade all your main lines to 140 mph without to much trouble then though, just spend a few billion on signals.

I mean you can get pretty good speed, pretty cheap by just upgrading existing lines is the point.

Although not 250 mph true.

Sure I get that, if it is more a national pride than practical thing that explains a lot.
Also good you are forcing them to be built in the UK, not “muh free trade”.
Surprising but good.
Where in the UK? Somewhere North I presume? That part is good.

So we will have to see. The engineering part is not what worries me, more the implementation.

We do have some trains that are allowed to run at 140 on the network, they just have to have a signalling unit in the cab itself. Don't ask me how that works because I don't know. Their problem is being slowed down by all the other trains on the same line only running at 125.

I think that's another reason they've gone with all new lines. Avoiding traffic with slower inter city and commuter trains on the same line. Even if we only match Japan at 200mph it'll be a huge improvement over long distances.

As to where they get built, it would make sense to do it somewhere that currently has both heavy engineering and aerospace experience locally. The trains will be missiles on wheels so that combination would make sense to me.

[Novus America]

Well yeah, we have the same problem. Signals are the problem more than anything.
The new Liberty trains (designed by France but built here) should go 160 mph on existing track and up to 186 with some mostly signal related improvements.
I mean you could probably upgrade all your main lines to 140 mph without to much trouble then though, just spend a few billion on signals.

I mean you can get pretty good speed, pretty cheap by just upgrading existing lines is the point.

Although not 250 mph true.

Sure I get that, if it is more a national pride than practical thing that explains a lot.
Also good you are forcing them to be built in the UK, not “muh free trade”.
Surprising but good.
Where in the UK? Somewhere North I presume? That part is good.

So we will have to see. The engineering part is not what worries me, more the implementation.

We do have some trains that are allowed to run at 140 on the network, they just have to have a signalling unit in the cab itself. Don't ask me how that works because I don't know. Their problem is being slowed down by all the other trains on the same line only running at 125.

I think that's another reason they've gone with all new lines. Avoiding traffic with slower inter city and commuter trains on the same line. Even if we only match Japan at 200mph it'll be a huge improvement over long distances.

As to where they get built, it would make sense to do it somewhere that currently has both heavy engineering and aerospace experience locally. The trains will be missiles on wheels so that combination would make sense to me.

Still I bet you could get them all going 140 or more with just a few billion in signal overhauls.
I think maybe that might be a good investment although much less impressive.

If you make the whole “do it because it is the fastest” that is a fair argument, if it is more national pride. But that will cost you.

Well the way we do it here is there are triple or quadruple tracks. The right track going forward (I guess you do the opposite? Like your cars?) left track the other way, and the middle track(s) just for the high speed ones (the slower ones have to stay to the side ones).
That way the faster ones can just avoid the slower ones. Of course that is not cheap to do either.

Doing that we can do 150 to 160 and with the new trains and better signals 186 even on the crowded lines.

So some upgrades to existing lines are almost certainly needed, regardless of how HS2 turns out.

That is another issue though, because we run ours on shared routes we require them to be built really high crashworthiness standards which does increase weight and cost (we cannot buy European trains off the shelf, they have to be built here and the Europeans ones do not meet our crash worthiness standard without heavy reinforcement).

So certainly the separate track does have advantages, but it also has downsides.
So I can see an argument either way, and if speed for the sake of setting records is the goal then I guess separate tracks is the only real choice.

[Novus America]

Although I guess Boris is a balls to the wall sort of guy, at least in how he talks.

I mean I am not sure if HS2 or the bridge to Ireland are really practical from a strict monetary perspective BUT they work form the “do something crazy just because we can” perspective which actually has its place.

It is better at capturing people’s interest and attention than more pedestrian improvements, although the smaller improvements still need to get done too.

[Albrenia]

It is better at capturing people’s interest and attention than more pedestrian improvements, although the smaller improvements still need to get done too.

Also it must be bloody nice to be talking about something other than Brexit in UK politics. I widely support public transport but if I was British I'd almost feel like arguing just to have a different topic to talk about.

Even if my argument was "I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH YOU SIR! HOW DARE YOU!".

[Fartsniffage]

Although I guess Boris is a balls to the wall sort of guy, at least in how he talks.

I mean I am not sure if HS2 or the bridge to Ireland are really practical from a strict monetary perspective BUT they work form the “do something crazy just because we can” perspective which actually has its place.

It is better at capturing people’s interest and attention than more pedestrian improvements, although the smaller improvements still need to get done too.

HS2 isn't new. We've been planning and working on it since 2009. And the final stages aren't expected to be online until like 2045.

And in regards to the general infrastructure upgrade then we need to re-nationalise the railways. It's bullshit that the public purse pays for the infrastructure while the private sector takes the profits for running services.

And, full disclosure, I just really like fast things. They're awesome and if we can help the economy as a side benefit then great. But I just wanna go fast....

[True Refuge]

It is better at capturing people’s interest and attention than more pedestrian improvements, although the smaller improvements still need to get done too.

Also it must be bloody nice to be talking about something other than Brexit in UK politics. I widely support public transport but if I was British I'd almost feel like arguing just to have a different topic to talk about.

Even if my argument was "I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH YOU SIR! HOW DARE YOU!".

Best way to go about it is haggle over minute details of the policy no one really cares about.

[Novus America]

It is better at capturing people’s interest and attention than more pedestrian improvements, although the smaller improvements still need to get done too.

Also it must be bloody nice to be talking about something other than Brexit in UK politics. I widely support public transport but if I was British I'd almost feel like arguing just to have a different topic to talk about.

Even if my argument was "I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH YOU SIR! HOW DARE YOU!".

That to. Talking about trains and bridges is a refreshing break from refighting the same Brexit battle the one millionth time.

[Souseiseki]

Also it must be bloody nice to be talking about something other than Brexit in UK politics. I widely support public transport but if I was British I'd almost feel like arguing just to have a different topic to talk about.

Even if my argument was "I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH YOU SIR! HOW DARE YOU!".

That to. Talking about trains and bridges is a refreshing break from refighting the same Brexit battle the one millionth time.

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

That to. Talking about trains and bridges is a refreshing break from refighting the same Brexit battle the one millionth time.

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

Is it a nice bridge?

[Fartsniffage]

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

Is it a nice bridge?

All bridges are nice bridges. Engineering is awesome.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Is it a nice bridge?

All bridges are nice bridges. Engineering is awesome.

Even the concrete monstrosities?

[Fartsniffage]

All bridges are nice bridges. Engineering is awesome.

Even the concrete monstrosities?

Especially them.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Even the concrete monstrosities?

Especially them.

We're getting a new bridge from Scotland to NI so that should be nice.

[Fartsniffage]

Especially them.

We're getting a new bridge from Scotland to NI so that should be nice.

The engineering to do it would be awesome. But I doubt it will happen.

[Souseiseki]

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

Is it a nice bridge?

yes

[The New California Republic]

Especially them.

We're getting a new bridge from Scotland to NI so that should be nice.

Prob not going to happen. And even if it does, it'll be at least a decade or more before we see it.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

We're getting a new bridge from Scotland to NI so that should be nice.

Prob not going to happen. And even if it does, it'll be at least a decade or more before we see it.

I would bet money on that it'll end up being PRC who builds 100% of the bridge... and then it'll collapse in the next storm because PRC'ian "quality control".

[Albrenia]

We're getting a new bridge from Scotland to NI so that should be nice.

Prob not going to happen. And even if it does, it'll be at least a decade or more before we see it.

Hopefully they're a bit quicker at literally building bridges than metaphorically burning them, heh.

[Druing]

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

the correct response to this is to set up a big sign next to it, clearly addressing that part, that just says "ok boomer" on it

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

the correct response to this is to set up a big sign next to it, clearly addressing that part, that just says "ok boomer" on it

Wasn't it boomers that voted Brexit though?

[Fartsniffage]

the correct response to this is to set up a big sign next to it, clearly addressing that part, that just says "ok boomer" on it

Wasn't it boomers that voted Brexit though?

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT BREXIT!

Just give us a month or so. I beg you.

[Druing]

the correct response to this is to set up a big sign next to it, clearly addressing that part, that just says "ok boomer" on it

Wasn't it boomers that voted Brexit though?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

one of the bridges in my city has a big FUNDED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION sign on it. you will never escape brexit.

the correct response to this is to set up a big sign next to it, clearly addressing that part, that just says "ok boomer" on it

Don't worry. You'll enjoy your PRC'ian internet and PRC'ian bridges and PRC'ian food standards soon enough.