Not looking good for HS2

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:15 pm

nekomatic wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:59 pm
Is the reported claim that the Chinese can build HS2 in five years at half the cost simply too stupid to entertain, or is it too stupid to entertain entertaining?
They probably can. But. You don't want to bring in thousands of Chinese workers. Wouldn't look good.

User avatar
Martin Y
Snowbonk
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:08 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Martin Y » Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:49 pm

I get the impression that the actual construction work, however much cheaper at Chinese prices, is only one element of the total cost and so might not provide a sufficiently tempting deal to offset how it looks politically. Boris's perfect outcome is to slash costs as mentioned upthread by unburdening the contractors of their expensive future responsibilities and keep the whole project as flag-wavingly British as possible, as a shining example of post-Brexit Britain surging ahead into the bright new dawn.

plodder
Catbabel
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by plodder » Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:40 pm

nekomatic wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:59 pm
Is the reported claim that the Chinese can build HS2 in five years at half the cost simply too stupid to entertain, or is it too stupid to entertain entertaining?
1) They’re claiming to have some sh.t hot track laying tech developed during the huge amounts of high speed track they’ve recently laid in China. This is credible.

2) Not sure why, but they didn’t get involved during the tender stage for HS2 and haven’t formed joint ventures with any of the winning contractors. This sets off massive b.llsh.t alarms.

Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:34 am

The Chinese have built thousands of miles of high speed rail. They are the worlds leading experts. Should just contract the whole thing out to them.

plodder
Catbabel
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by plodder » Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:53 am

:roll:

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Dorkwood
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: with the birds

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:28 am

AFIAA the Chinese have experience building railways in China, where they are the government, and in Africa, where governments are easily bought and sold.

A large part of the cost of HS2 will have been wiggling around existing towns, golf courses and woodlands, etc, whereas the Chinese modus operandi seems to be displacing people and giving zero shits whatsoever about conservation.

That, and having access to unlimited slave labour.

It certainly keeps costs down but I'm not sure it's an approach Britain is quite ready for. Maybe for HS3? If the Chinese are even interested in such a short-distance project that benefits them not at all.
"Ecology without socialism is just gardening" - Chico Mendes

User avatar
nekomatic
Clardic Fug
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by nekomatic » Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:32 am

Is it possible to say, however approximately, how the costs of such a project break down? As in % going on construction labour / management and admin labour / plant / materials / disposal / legal / etc?

Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:09 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:28 am
AFIAA the Chinese have experience building railways in China, where they are the government, and in Africa, where governments are easily bought and sold.

A large part of the cost of HS2 will have been wiggling around existing towns, golf courses and woodlands, etc, whereas the Chinese modus operandi seems to be displacing people and giving zero shits whatsoever about conservation.

That, and having access to unlimited slave labour.

It certainly keeps costs down but I'm not sure it's an approach Britain is quite ready for. Maybe for HS3? If the Chinese are even interested in such a short-distance project that benefits them not at all.
The Chinese would be happy to do it, given the opportunity, if they could make money and gain influence. They have built high speed rail all over the world, not just in China and Africa. Politically, it would be a total non starter in the UK, but its fun to speculate about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_uwrue9cnY

plebian
Buzzberry
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:45 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by plebian » Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:31 pm

Herainestold wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:09 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:28 am
AFIAA the Chinese have experience building railways in China, where they are the government, and in Africa, where governments are easily bought and sold.

A large part of the cost of HS2 will have been wiggling around existing towns, golf courses and woodlands, etc, whereas the Chinese modus operandi seems to be displacing people and giving zero shits whatsoever about conservation.

That, and having access to unlimited slave labour.

It certainly keeps costs down but I'm not sure it's an approach Britain is quite ready for. Maybe for HS3? If the Chinese are even interested in such a short-distance project that benefits them not at all.
The Chinese would be happy to do it, given the opportunity, if they could make money and gain influence. They have built high speed rail all over the world, not just in China and Africa. Politically, it would be a total non starter in the UK, but its fun to speculate about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_uwrue9cnY
Links to channel funded entirely by the Chinese government. Proceed with caution.
Pithy, well, a right helmet at least.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Catbabel
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:08 pm

If the Chinese fancy tendering for it then more power to them.

Oh wait, they've already tendered the contracts for the bulk of phase 1.
Mike Patton wrote:"You overdo it sometimes. There I am, peeing on Axl Rose’s teleprompter." He looks rueful: "I didn’t really have to do that."

Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:26 pm

plebian wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:31 pm


Links to channel funded entirely by the Chinese government. Proceed with caution.
Yes indeed. The people with the most experience building and operating high speed rail, in the world.

This is a silly internet discussion, the Chinese are not and will not be involved in HS2.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Catbabel
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:36 pm

well not much and not yet, anyway.
Mike Patton wrote:"You overdo it sometimes. There I am, peeing on Axl Rose’s teleprompter." He looks rueful: "I didn’t really have to do that."

Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:10 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:36 pm
well not much and not yet, anyway.
Unless Boris sells the whole project to them. After he sells the NHS to the Americans.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Catbabel
Posts: 866
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Woodchopper » Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:08 am

Is there any reason in principle why Chinese firms couldn't build UK high speed railways? I'm assuming that as Chinese firms are already involved in nuclear power and mobile phone networks that they wouldn't be excluded on strategic grounds from building high speed rail.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Catbabel
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:24 am

No indeed, but they'd have to go through the procurement processes just like anyone else. I don't know if HS2 are using framework contracts or not, but they just need to up their contracting game.
Mike Patton wrote:"You overdo it sometimes. There I am, peeing on Axl Rose’s teleprompter." He looks rueful: "I didn’t really have to do that."

Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Tue Feb 18, 2020 2:11 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:08 am
Is there any reason in principle why Chinese firms couldn't build UK high speed railways? I'm assuming that as Chinese firms are already involved in nuclear power and mobile phone networks that they wouldn't be excluded on strategic grounds from building high speed rail.
From a practical perspective it would make total sense. It wouldn't fly politically, especially for a nationalistic Tory government. Countries where the Chinese have built high speed rail, they have brought in Chinese labour to do much of the work. Nothing wrong with that, but the optics are bad.

plodder
Catbabel
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by plodder » Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:04 pm

Have I linked to the discussion about the really silly contract model being used for HS2, which passes huge amounts of risk to the contractors and has resulted in costs being about a third higher than they ought to be? (Things like risks for settlement of track over 50 years, which normally sit with the client, but are now being massively over-engineered in order to protect contractors from future liability)?

The suspicion is that they'll go to a more standard model, claim to have knocked heads together, and take the credit for saving billions. I can dig out some links if needed.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Catbabel
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:40 pm

You did, link, yes. And a great link it was too. Feel free to repeat the link.
Mike Patton wrote:"You overdo it sometimes. There I am, peeing on Axl Rose’s teleprompter." He looks rueful: "I didn’t really have to do that."

plodder
Catbabel
Posts: 693
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by plodder » Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:50 pm

Only if people promise to read them this time and not just jump in with half arsed hot takes of headlines they've just read whilst taking a sh.t at work or something.

User avatar
rockdoctor
Clardic Fug
Posts: 167
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 11:52 am
Location: Paddington, London

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by rockdoctor » Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:01 pm

I thought the cost difference between TGV and HS2 was that TGV runs in straight lines across the flat farmland of the Paris basin, whereas HS2 was forced to tunnel under the tory-filled shires and the hilly bits up the middle of the country?

Herainestold
Clardic Fug
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Herainestold » Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:03 pm

plodder wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:50 pm
Only if people promise to read them this time and not just jump in with half arsed hot takes of headlines they've just read whilst taking a sh.t at work or something.

What would be the fun in that?

User avatar
Martin Y
Snowbonk
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:08 pm

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Martin Y » Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:39 pm

Herainestold wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:03 pm
plodder wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:50 pm
Only if people promise to read them this time and not just jump in with half arsed hot takes of headlines they've just read whilst taking a sh.t at work or something.
What would be the fun in that?
It's what gets me through the day.

User avatar
lpm
Catbabel
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm
Location: IMPEACH AND EXTERMINATE

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by lpm » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:09 pm

Is the tunnel and cuttings all the way going to cause flooding problems? I'm thinking of that slopey Veravista photo of the tracks under a couple hundred of metres of water. You'd think they'd have a plan but, you know, Britain.
I'll miss him after he's died in the pandemic

User avatar
veravista
Clardic Fug
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 7:29 pm
Location: Directly above the centre of the earth

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by veravista » Wed Feb 19, 2020 7:57 pm

Interesting that piece of track though. It was built after the Derby Sandiacre canal branch, and was fine until some bright spark filled the then derelict canal in. It then flooded to the extent that BR (or NR or whatever) put a couple of massive pumps in to keep it dry. Go forward a few years and the local woolly jumper group began restoring the canal and, lo and behold, the line stopped flooding again. The original railway builders used the canal as a drain. Now, unfortunately, due to works further up the canal it's stopped draining again and it floods the railway...

User avatar
Martin_B
Fuzzable
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:20 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Not looking good for HS2

Post by Martin_B » Thu Feb 20, 2020 12:06 am

veravista wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 7:57 pm
Interesting that piece of track though. It was built after the Derby Sandiacre canal branch, and was fine until some bright spark filled the then derelict canal in. It then flooded to the extent that BR (or NR or whatever) put a couple of massive pumps in to keep it dry. Go forward a few years and the local woolly jumper group began restoring the canal and, lo and behold, the line stopped flooding again. The original railway builders used the canal as a drain. Now, unfortunately, due to works further up the canal it's stopped draining again and it floods the railway...
So, you mean the original engineers were very good at their job, they just didn't leave behind the documentation?
"Don't tell me that the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon"

Post Reply