HS2
05 November 2013, 01:43 PM
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it was sunk by HMS Conqueror with 2 torpedos.
I don't think I'm the one who doesn't know what happened
Still not sure what any of that has got to do with our nuclear deterent. So please help me understand what you meant
I don't think I'm the one who doesn't know what happened
Still not sure what any of that has got to do with our nuclear deterent. So please help me understand what you meant
05 November 2013, 04:15 PM
#67
Scooby Regular
It was a joke, our nuclear deterrent is installed in nuclear submarines, and a nuclear submarine sank the Belgrano.
05 November 2013, 04:21 PM
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice wriggle
Oh and it wasn't a joke, you were just confused.
Oh and when you use
in response to me question your false theory, expect to get called on it
05 November 2013, 09:28 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
05 November 2013, 10:09 PM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
16 November 2013, 02:18 PM
#74
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is anyone else going to be directly affected by HS2?
I'm feeling more and more ambivalent towards it and maybe hostile. It runs through Cheshire close to where I am from and plan to buy a house. It isn't just the line itself, I suppose, but the years of disruption, noise, road closures, etc., when it is being built.
Obviously if you live within the 'corridor' you have a major problem. Less clear is how much of a problem you have if you live in the general area.
I'm feeling more and more ambivalent towards it and maybe hostile. It runs through Cheshire close to where I am from and plan to buy a house. It isn't just the line itself, I suppose, but the years of disruption, noise, road closures, etc., when it is being built.
Obviously if you live within the 'corridor' you have a major problem. Less clear is how much of a problem you have if you live in the general area.
16 November 2013, 03:01 PM
#75
I'm not opposed to another rail line, nor increasing the capacity. But what I am concerned about is the forecasts and expectations as well as the plans seem to be somewhat poorly implemented, and if its this bad at the planning stage, what will happen during execution and completion?
This report echos some of my concerns: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ht-expert.html
My view for HS2 is its ultimate main goal should not be to transport people to and from London, but from what I have seen so far, it is geared to do just that, which IMO is a waste of infrastructure and once again neglecting other parts of the country. What it should be doing is allowing people to commute across the country and transfer easily to local lines or bus, or airports with ease...no walking between stations, or taking a shuttle bus or "people mover" - in other words a integrated solution. Also its imperative to allow more freight traffic. Unfortunately, for me it doesn't appear to be able to do that:
Birmingham is a prime example - Yes they are building a new station at Curzon Street (which is actually the location of a existing station closed down due to its unsuitable location - irony? )...but nothing else will properly link up to it. Commuters will still require to move to already over-capacity New Street to get anywhere else - which is overcapacity from freight and local traffic alone: Basically it doesn't solve the existing bottleneck - what needs to happen is New Street to be demolished and whole new transport Hub to be built with proper integration of local and nationwide services. But that's too much common sense (and expensive).
The same applies to the Birmingham interchange...Now if you flew into Brum and wanted to catch a train - the station is literally next to the airport which is on the West coast mainline. Not so with HS2...its on the wrong side of the motorway. Barmy; it should be at the same station on a new platform.
Ironic that in the 50's and 60's planners were willing to tear the heart out of Birmingham for its new infrastructure needs, rightly so as it served the city well for many years. Yet today, when its crying for it to be renewed and expanded, planners refuse and try to preserve the 60's dilapidated concrete shyte to save a few quid and cut corners.
Worse still they approve to demolish existing infrastructure (roads/flyovers/underpasses etc) to make way for new housing. Utter lunacy. 
These are just two examples, and they both show a lack of foresight to the location and integration with existing routes. I only know this as they are in my locality so I'm aware of the local needs and geography. So it wouldn't surprise me if this lack of foresight applies to other parts of the route too.
Basically it seems what we are going to get is a giant park and ride system to serve London.
This report echos some of my concerns: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ht-expert.html
My view for HS2 is its ultimate main goal should not be to transport people to and from London, but from what I have seen so far, it is geared to do just that, which IMO is a waste of infrastructure and once again neglecting other parts of the country. What it should be doing is allowing people to commute across the country and transfer easily to local lines or bus, or airports with ease...no walking between stations, or taking a shuttle bus or "people mover" - in other words a integrated solution. Also its imperative to allow more freight traffic. Unfortunately, for me it doesn't appear to be able to do that:
Birmingham is a prime example - Yes they are building a new station at Curzon Street (which is actually the location of a existing station closed down due to its unsuitable location - irony? )...but nothing else will properly link up to it. Commuters will still require to move to already over-capacity New Street to get anywhere else - which is overcapacity from freight and local traffic alone: Basically it doesn't solve the existing bottleneck - what needs to happen is New Street to be demolished and whole new transport Hub to be built with proper integration of local and nationwide services. But that's too much common sense (and expensive).
The same applies to the Birmingham interchange...Now if you flew into Brum and wanted to catch a train - the station is literally next to the airport which is on the West coast mainline. Not so with HS2...its on the wrong side of the motorway. Barmy; it should be at the same station on a new platform.
Ironic that in the 50's and 60's planners were willing to tear the heart out of Birmingham for its new infrastructure needs, rightly so as it served the city well for many years. Yet today, when its crying for it to be renewed and expanded, planners refuse and try to preserve the 60's dilapidated concrete shyte to save a few quid and cut corners.
Worse still they approve to demolish existing infrastructure (roads/flyovers/underpasses etc) to make way for new housing. Utter lunacy. These are just two examples, and they both show a lack of foresight to the location and integration with existing routes. I only know this as they are in my locality so I'm aware of the local needs and geography. So it wouldn't surprise me if this lack of foresight applies to other parts of the route too.
Basically it seems what we are going to get is a giant park and ride system to serve London.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post