The University of Southampton has announced the appointment of two new Visiting Professors, to strengthen its capabilities and industrial links in the field of railway track research.
Andy Doherty (Director of Railway Systems Engineering – Network Rail) and Andrew McNaughton (Chief Engineer – HS2 Ltd) will be supporting the EPSRC funded Track21 Programme Grant in an industrial advisory capacity, and engaging with Southampton’s railway research activities under the auspices of Southampton Railway Systems Research.
Professor William Powrie, Dean of the Faculty of Engineering and the Environment at Southampton and Principal Investigator of Track21, says: “We’re delighted to welcome Professors Doherty and McNaughton on board to formalise their links with Southampton.
“Our researchers and students will benefit enormously from the wealth of knowledge and experience they bring to these roles, and this relationship will provide an excellent opportunity to promote railway research, careers in railway engineering and closer collaboration between industry and academia. That we have attracted such respected figures to Southampton also says something very positive about our growing reputation in the area of railway research.”
Professor Andy Doherty says: “I’m very pleased to be working with Southampton University, I hope to make a useful contribution to the University and to the Track21 project and make it the success it undoubtedly will be.”
Professor Andrew McNaughton says: “I am delighted to develop further my relationship with the University of Southampton which has a strong history of rail system research and, with Track 21, is now carrying out a vital programme to develop ballasted track for very high speed rail in the 21st Century.”
No way to high speed rail. I like slow. Keep our countryside beautiful and preserve our heritage for future generations.
A reduction in the present excellent high-speed services we enjoy between B’ham and London just so that the G’ment can justify a vanity project for the few who can afford to travel – at immense cost – a few minutes faster to or from London is unfair. The HS1 has just been sold off at a huge loss because the predicted passenger numbers have never materialised. Do we want another white elephant that we have to pay through the nose for?
HS1 was not ‘sold off’. The operating rights were sold, but DfT still has the freehold.
the huge cost of hs2would be better spent on extra lanes on motorways neveryone would benefit journeys quicker ie reduce time for deleveries etc if something is not donesoon in 10 years tailbacks will be massiven
HS2 big waste of money! Aren’t we in enough debt already!
Absolutely unnecessary addition to train services. Will be too expensive and will destroy some of Britain’s beautiful ecology. Agree with rph below that increasing motorway sizes is much better, as infrastructure already in place.
When will they realise, we do not want this HS2. Waste of tax payers ( or anyones ) money.
Read Professor John Whitelegg’s book “Critical Mass” and see HS2 as the manifestation of all Sir Rod Eddington warned of – a vanity project that will reap mass environmental destruction http://www.stophs2.org
HS2 cannot be justified financially,economically or environmentally.A waste of money n
Until such time as Government can prove that this project is worth the huge expenditure in terms of both monetary and human cost it cannot go ahead. Thus far the figures banded about (which seem very”fluid”) do not indicate that this is the case and hardly inspire confidence to the taxpayers who will be footing the bill!
As the money seems to be burning a hole in the governments collective pocket, I’d rather the money was spent on something worthwhile like helping to rebuild the shattered lives of the poor displaced people suffering in Japan right now.
HS2-Maximum spend for minimum benefit to the majority of tax payers funding it. We do not need this glorified airport link. Spend the money on enhancing the existing rail network so I, and millions of others outside London, can commute locally on a train.
What a waste of money this plan is. Do something about the awful roads we have in this country first, improve the underground and links to Heathrow and then we can maybe talk about high speed.
If the Government and HS2 Limited could prove the Business Case, the Environmental Case or that the project is in the National Interest then I would vote for the project, Regrettably they resoundingly cannot prove or put up a reasonable argument in favour of their case, HS2 provides a poor return for investment, is Environmentally catastrophic and is not in the National Interest
I think that HS2 is a waste of money.nnThe population distribution in the UK, unlike, say, Farnce, does not require high speed trains between population centres. It requires higher capacity on the existing network.nnSpending money to expand the capacity on the West Coast Main Line delivers a much better return on investment, around 3.6 according to the government’s own figures, than HS2 at just over 2. The latter figure is basted upon the best estimates for occupancy and capital cost.nnIn addition, HS2 is alleged to save some 28 billion tonnes of CO2 over the life of the line – 60 years. This is less than 0.5% of the CO2 produced by road transport. If the money, proposed to be spent on HS2, were to be spent on reducing the UK’s CO2 production it would deliver the UK’s CO2 reduction by more than the agreed target. This, I think, is much more strategically important than HS2. HS2 only benefits the few.nnThe case for HS2 is so fundamentally flawed that I find it difficult to understand why anyone would support it.
I agree with jpl121mhl: HS2 is a waste of money. Rail Package 2, a set of proposals by WS Atkins for the DfT for increasing capacity on the West Coast Main Line provides the additional capacity require at far lower cost and much sooner than HS2, without the environmental damage caused by driving new tracks through an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.nnThe benefits claimed for HS2 are based on sentiment and wishful thinking and don’t stand up to objective analysis. The fact that the technology exists for High Speed Rail is not a sufficient reason for going ahead with it. Remember Concorde!nnWhat we need is a an independent Public Inquiry to establish the facts – not a Governmemnet funded campaign by railway enthusiasts
R101 airship, which crashed on its maiden flightnBristol Brabazon airliner, never flew properlynThe lovely but uneconomic Concorde, sold to BA and Air France for u00a31 eachnThe Dome, that was supposed to recoup investment in one yearnHS2, a train beyond reason.nAll government projects, and without sound economic logic. n
I think HS2 is a waste of money. If you want integrated rail systems then why start it at Euston not at St. Pancras. It makes no sense at all.
The THREE fundamental arguments AGAINST the HS2 project as it is currently being proposed are :-nn1. Great Britain cannot afford this enormous expense of current “FORECAST COST” plus, housing BLIGHT COMPENSATION, BUDGET OVERRUN of 200% which history confirms will surely be incurred, all at this time of BANKRUPT BRITAIN, for such a tenuous return of 20 minutes saving on PEOPLE rail travel between London and Birmingham.nn2. The destruction of an AONB is involved, it shouldn’t be, or COUNTRYSIDE “PROTECTION” will be shown to mean nothing to this nation.nn3. The only possible justification for a better rail link London to Birmingham, would be to REMOVE FREIGHT from the M1 in order to reduce ROAD DEATHS, costly RTA’s and nthe currently horific congestion. The result would be less POLUTION and reduced travel time for NON FREIGHT, PASSENGER VEHICLES, between London and Birmingham.nnWHICH, after all is why the HS2 is being proposed isn’t it ?
I should have added :-nIf the Exchequer can “afford” the u00a3billions cost of HS2 that money would be better INVESTED in schools.nFor example, every Junior school should have a swimming pool and no child allowed to leave Junior education without being a competent swimmer.nAlso, every school should have SPORTS FIELDS where rugby, tennis, athletics can be pursued as a part of the curriculum for COMPEITIVENESS.nnAny school governors who SELL OFF SPORTS FIELDS should be charged with criminal neglect and be forced to recompense the school from their own finances.nnNothing, but NOTHING, is more important than educating a healthy future generation.nFAIL, and we all lose.nnIf the HS2 project GO AHEAD fails, we all GAIN !n
Anyone who viewed the Richard Wilson TV programme will realize that future monies would be much better spent on improving existing lines and maybe re-opening some of those closed by Beeching. nThe enviromental damage cannot be overcome by planting trees. The line will slice through and destroy at least 21 ancient woodlands. A further 27 will be severely damaged by the proximity of the line.nThe business plan does not stack up and each tax payer will have to pay approximately u00a31200 extra tax for this white elephant
If the business case could be proved for this white elephant I would probably reluctantly agree that it should be built for the greater good of the country. It is however complete nonsense and simply a product of ego based on a plan that is fundamentally flawed put together by a company employed by the government. It will destroy our countryside and divide communities. It’s about time that David Cameron listened to many business leaders who state that it is unaffordable and environmentally disasterous. Politicians need to stop wasting tax payers money!
There is no business case, no environmental case. Public transport over the whole country will be pared back to pay for this fat cat shuttle. The costs will overrun, the benefits are overstated. It will be a financial disaster exceeded only by the last world war.
Absolute appalling use of money.nUnneccessary destruction of beautiful countryside.nRemoval of peaceful homelife for those in ear and eyesight of the line.nnn
For once the politicians have the common sense to ignore the whines of NIMBYs who can’t see further than the end of their paddocks. The UK needs HS2. Fact. It’s saying something when countries like Italy have already completed their high speed rail networks. Campaigning against HS2 is campaigning to keep Britain in the dark ages. Time to see the light people….
For once the politicians have the common sense to ignore the whines of NIMBYs who can’t see further than the end of their paddocks. The UK needs HS2. Fact. It’s saying something when countries like Italy have already completed their high speed rail networks. Campaigning against HS2 is campaigning to keep Britain in the dark ages. Time to see the light people….
Who’s getting a great big fat back hander for pushing through HS2? Some one in the govenment must be, because anyone with half a brain can see that the bussiness case for this railway just doesn’t make sence. They had to sell off HS1 at a massive loss!nThe govenmant has already got several railway lines that they can’t run economically! Why do they need another! nInvest in upgrading the capacity of the current railways before wasting money on a new one.
If this were a large land mass country then the argument for, regarding time saving may be valid but being the size we are, are we really concerned with saving minutes.n Surely as part of any business case, alternatives should also be put forward by the government, for example by investing the same amount of money into existing infrastructure as the HS2 costs what benefits good or bad would that bring.nThere needs to be more transparency I feel rightly or wrongly that we the British public are being ignored and as we experience deep cuts on government spending to bring our national debt down, which I agree with, this sits very uneasy. n
REALLY NEEDED FOR THE FUTURE OR PLAYING AND PAYING FOR CATCH UP nnWhy did Railtrack and SRA fail to implentent strategic developments for the needed future and who is running it now n nThe Railway Industry needs constructive challenge all the present people and regimes have failed for one reason or another to produce and integrated infrastructure that meets demands of today. They are merely playing catch up with what Europe and the rest of the World already has. The regimes today are so far apart they are dysfunctional to evaluating a holistic overview of the needed transport systems in total. Letu2019s start with the Channel Tunnel Interoperability is very important and so why has it taken so long for this to be recognised the costs for safety cases to allow these important changes have been huge. This should have been a major contribution to the design of both Train and Tunnel were many problems where many other problems could have been avoided EXAMPLE Fires and Breakdowns; I expressed my concerns many years ago with the dangers and costs. The present regimes do not look at the infrastructures as a whole Freight and Passenger Trains appear to have no real vested interests. We have created longer platforms for longer trains to only find that the Height of the Freight containers will not fit under or through our tunnels. They are attempting to rectify this again at some speed and again at high cost as its needed to day, Southampton to Derby being opened 04 04 2011 attending is the transport minister wonderful! When much of the infrastructure is changed maybe then they will allow what was needed Duplex Trains The last port has just been sold to Germany, maybe itu2019s time to stop and take a stock check of what is happening and bring all the regimes together with a Think Tank, Example O.R.R, R.I.A. A.T.O.C.s Transport Committees R.S.S.B. Ultra speed Maglev HS2 Action Alliance, Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Dft and Detr there are so many regimes all with their own agendas nThen we have politics “The butchers the bakers the candle stick makers” maybe short term politics needs to change we need to bring into governments people that can give input to high technical industries leader ship. I have been lobbying for about 20 yrs not much changes you give ideas that could help manufacturing Example reduce paperwork for police, identify problems on points systems with computer recognition and red flagged, ideas for European Traffic Management System , reduce weight in trains with carbon brakes main line London underground, Reduce Particulate Matter Pm 10, Introduced Ideas cyber teaching for schools and industry for multi Skilled Training, Harvesting Energy from wasted kinetic energy example Shock Absorber Both Train and Car. Invited all leading governments and regimes to look at my ideas and concerns but little interest is shown, WHY we buy in at the last minute at huge cost to Safety and Manufacturing. nPS Sticking PM 10 to the roads of LONDON is hardly proactive in reducing these and other HARMFULL particulates from the atmosphere, These risks need to look at how they could be reduced in their making and if a more holistic approach could reduce many areas of concerns chemical / Radiation fall out all could be reduced with high pressure water vaporised scrubber devices in London Underground. All regimes overlap and affect each other they all need to be a part of any ways forward as with HS2.nFirst Question Speed V Safety = Built Up England nSecond Speed V Freight nThird Speed V Investors nFourth Speed V Maglev = Freight + Passenger = life Cycle costs nFifth Speed V Maglev Interoperability design wheels and maglevnSix Speed V Freight Container Heights / change bridges / tunnelsnSevern Speed V DOUBLE DECKER TRAINS nEight Speed V AIRPOD car that runs on compressed airnNine Speed V Costs of Running Both Track and TrainnTen Speed V Costs of Increased Energy nnCommunications is a real problem anylitc informatiom is often misguided in what is needed for all the common good and with all the present and past problems it hardly inspires the same renamed regimes will get this one right unless they change with some lessons learnt from past mistakes nn
I was informed by an HS2Ltd engineer at the Ruislip exhibition ,that on the Northolt Corridor,the new line would replace the classic.When asked where the freight would go,he said “On the West Coast Main Line”.So much for freeing up capacity and congestion there!