Talk:High Speed 2

Network of services + the mayors' scheme

Can we drop the 'network' aspect of HS2 from the lead and elsewhere? It seems to have been abandoned by the HS2 website, at least. A.D.Hope (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I would see no problem with this, the name of the exact passenger services etc is unknown until they actually enter operation. I would however, as set out above, wish to retain the ongoing review in the lead as summary but then its full content further in the body as present. It remains relevant. The report yet to come by the Mayors in Summer 2024 should shine further light on the true extent but the provisional report basically says Phase 2 will be paid for by private investment from Handsacre to Manchester Airport to then join NPR which will then be paid for by public investment. UnicornSherbert (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)

I've removed the references to the network from the lead; they can be reinstated if other editors disagree.

I don't think an ongoing review or provisional report are significant enough to mention in the lead. If they lead to concrete plans to complete parts of phase 2 then that can be included in the lead, but as it stands we'd be giving undue significance to plans which may not come to fruition. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

They have come to fruition because the Mayors have reported on this and have outlined the plans. They have even provided a map, which arguably should be included into the article for HS2. This is notwithstanding that they have stated they intend to give the exact details in the Summer. The review should therefore be reinstated. UnicornSherbert (talk) 22:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)

I don't think a map and good intentions are enough to make the plans firm enough to include in the lead, sorry. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support removing services, as mentioned above, I doubted where it came from.

Concerning private developments, that would depend if it is described as part of HS2, should it be developed. If it isn't, then it shouldn't be here (aside a minor link to another article) even if it covered the same route. DankJae 08:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Andy Burnham, addressing the board of Transport for the North, insisted that this proposal is not an attempt to revive HS2, saying "This is the son or daughter of HS2. It's not the same thing."--TedColes (talk) 11:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

This has already all been discussed above. In any event, the Act for Phase 2a refers to such as HS2 and so does the Phase 2b Bill. This would not change. Andy Street also told the media that it is essentially the same route and how therefore could someone logically try to describe it as not HS2? HS2 is the route and it remains relevant. It is highly unlikely that the private investment would simply drop out of the consortium. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that, as Andy Burnham also told media, this part of the HS2 route would be privately financed. It really is as simple as that. UnicornSherbert (talk) 12:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)

@JMF @Wire723 you both have contributed above. Are you able to also join the conversation here? UnicornSherbert (talk) 12:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

WP: CRYSTAL applies. As of today, it is still a wish list. When contracts have been placed, we can say what is confidently expected to happen. Not before. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, it should be noted the government have still be buying land and buildings etc along the Phase 2 route (i.e. the part which the Mayors are going to be paying for privately) notwithstanding that route has been cancelled by the government. UnicornSherbert (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)

It seems unlikely that the two Andys' scheme would be able to build track to the same standard that is needed for high speed running.--TedColes (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I mean that would be stupid to believe because HS2 trains are unable to drive on conventional track which means it must be high speed rail to Manchester. UnicornSherbert (talk) 19:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)

They can but they can't go as fast as Pendolinos, they are too long for the platforms and they won't fit into Manchester station as is. But apart from that, there's:s no problem. Well, other than the lack of budget or any means to raise it, obviously.

But when the mist clears in the crystal ball, all that will be solved. Right now though, we must stick to what is real. Ambitions can and should certainly be described but we cannot imply that they have any more status than that. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Says TGV finance model will be adopted... We will see what materialises but it has been made clear it would not be possible to run HS2 trains all the way to Manchester on the WCML mainly for safety reasons. and the government would not let them slow down the already most congested railway in the UK. There surely must be more to come. UnicornSherbert (talk) 20:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet)

This discussion is beginning to drift into speculation and WP:NOTFORUM territory, so best we draw a line under it at this stage. We can report as fact that "very high speed" track is funded, contracted and under construction between Old Oak Common and Birmingham Curzon St. Everything else is unfunded aspiration and may only be reported as such unless and until that status changes. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Crossed out text

Why is a lot of text crossed out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a01:4b00:bb18:a600:e738:4c0d:38f4:6829 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

If you're talking about the talk post above, see the user's history and WP:BE and WP:DENY. Also, I've noticed that you've made a few talk posts recently, please sign your talk posts and replies with four tildes at the end of each comment. It will produce a signature like this: Fork99 (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

King's speech 17/7/24

I reverted an IP edit that inferred far too much from the limited information we have to date. The Guardian merely says

High-speed rail (Crewe to Manchester) bill: An acknowledgement in law that Labour will not resurrect the Birmingham to Manchester leg of HS2, instead focusing on east to west links.

— https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/17/what-bills-are-included-in-the-kings-speech-and-what-will-they-do

That's it. Nothing more. We have to wait for the first reading. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:25, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Modern Railways says this:

Also in the King’s Speech was a commitment to repurpose the previous Conservative Government’s High Speed Rail (Crewe to Manchester) Bill to improve connectivity in the north of England. The Bill includes powers for infrastructure in Manchester and the surrounding area, including at Manchester Piccadilly and Airport stations, and the Government says carrying it over ‘demonstrates commitment to making progress on rail connectivity whilst we work with local leaders on improved overall strategy.’

It does not mention HS2, so phase 2 of HS2 remains canncelled. The WCML, ECML, MML are all high speed lines, falling into the definition. The bill says 'High Sped Rail', also mentions infrastructure relating to rail. Infrastructure can be 125mph High Speed Rail, or anything above, but not the HS2 project. Very obvious. 143.58.172.236 (talk) 10:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

It does not say that the northern phase has been reactivated. This is WP:SYNTHESIS. Please wait until something clearer emerges. Cnbrb (talk) 11:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Fully agree, thank you. 10mmsocket (talk) 14:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Exactly! It does not say the northern phase of HS2 has been reactivated whatsoever. 143.58.246.185 (talk) 22:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

The principle is very simple. If the source says X, then we write X. We do not write X+Y+Z and cite that source as the basis for it. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

That is what happened. 2A01:4B00:BB18:A600:E738:4C0D:38F4:6829 (talk) 13:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

...so source it! 10mmsocket (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

In fact even the Grauniad seems to have embroidered the facts. The speech says nothing whatsoever about HS2. So we have no idea what definite plans HMG has. WP: NOTNEWS, wait and see. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

That seems prudent. 10mmsocket (talk) 17:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

+1 Cambial — foliar❧ 17:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

HS2 phase 2 is cancelled

Repeated and verifiable announcements by the previous and current governments have confirmed it is cancelled. Will the offending editors please accept this. Text in the article that the phase may be revived is inappropriate and just plain wishful thinking. The article does not need to be cluttered with irrelevant text. phase 2 is DEAD! Get used to it. 2A01:4B00:BB18:A600:E738:4C0D:38F4:6829 (talk) 13:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

As above - source it! 10mmsocket (talk) 15:37, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Sources were given. You never read them. 2A01:4B00:BB18:A600:E738:4C0D:38F4:6829 (talk) 15:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)