From
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/are-we-asking-the-wrong-questions-about-hs2/

Are we asking the wrong questions about HS2?
by Rory Sutherland

I am not sure there was much else Rishi could have done to salvage HS2. But I come bearing good news. There is no reason
why HS2 cannot still be a great railway, even if it travels along the wrong route at the wrong speed and was constructed
in the wrong direction to solve a problem which no longer exists. All you need to do is redefine what the railway is
for. Perhaps it can be the right answer to a different question.

A useful precedent for reinvention here might be what was originally called the Millennium Dome. Though hopeless at
fulfilling its original purpose, once reinvented as the O2 it has proved an asset to London. Or consider Cunard: when it
found its liners outpaced by aircraft, it sold its ships as a destination rather than transportation and in the process
largely invented the cruise-ship industry. The ships remained good answers – but to a different question.

In the words of Piet Hein: ‘Art is solving problems that cannot be formulated before they have been solved. The shaping
of the question is part of the answer.’ There are two sources of hope: first, contrary to most assumptions, the
high-speed trains themselves will not terminate at Birmingham – only the line. The trains themselves will continue to
other destinations at lower speed and hence may be free to stop at intermediate stations where there is space for
northerners to park their flashy cars.

Secondly, the junction at Old Oak Common, though often an object of ridicule, is actually a good idea. Indeed it formed
part of Arup’s sensible plan for the line, before some idiot ruined everything by deciding the trains had to travel at
250 mph. Since this interchange connects HS2 to the Great Western Line and the Elizabeth Line (Crossrail), it will allow
HS2 passengers to disembark without changing stations for onward journeys to Bristol, Wales, Heathrow and worthwhile
parts of London while avoiding Euston altogether. That’s no bad thing given that, with the exception of Roti King in
Doric Way and Drummond Street’s Indian restaurants, Euston is in a part of London bereft of attractions. For people
making onward journeys, big cities are an obstacle not an objective; when travelling through France, I would rather have
a three-hour layover in Lille than change stations in Paris.

This is why all is not lost. You see, the things that matter to train passengers – parking, easy connections,
connectivity, comfort, refreshments and reasonable fares – are orthogonal to the things which econometricians and the
other nerds in our self-perpetuating quantification economy model and optimise. Indeed by over-weighting measures such
as capacity, the passenger experience of trains has become worse: watch Strangers on a Train or Brief Encounter and
you’ll see how far we have regressed. The Eurostar when it launched had far plusher interiors than the sterile designs
that replaced them. Yet rail journeys could be delightful if we aimed for enjoyment not efficiency. By far the nicest
train carriage in Britain is the bar on the Cornish Sleeper.

And herein lies the opportunity. What if we forget banausic measures such as speed, journey time and capacity, and ask a
different question? Such as ‘How can we produce a railway so pleasant that people would feel stupid driving?’ Spending
£50 million on design would achieve more here than £500 million spent on speed and £5 billion spent on consultants. I’ve
got nothing against economics – it’s a great Care in the Community scheme for slightly tragic introverts – but isn’t it
time we gave designers a chance? Jony Ive has moved back to Britain from Apple. Why not ask him?

Trust me, I work in advertising. Things don’t have to be logical for people to like them. After all, try making a
business case for the Eiffel Tower.

On 12/11/2023 14:12, Recliner wrote:
> From
> https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/are-we-asking-the-wrong-questions-about-hs2/
>
> Are we asking the wrong questions about HS2?
> by Rory Sutherland
>
>
> I am not sure there was much else Rishi could have done to salvage HS2. But I come bearing good news. There is no reason
> why HS2 cannot still be a great railway, even if it travels along the wrong route at the wrong speed and was constructed
> in the wrong direction to solve a problem which no longer exists. All you need to do is redefine what the railway is
> for. Perhaps it can be the right answer to a different question.
>
> A useful precedent for reinvention here might be what was originally called the Millennium Dome. Though hopeless at
> fulfilling its original purpose, once reinvented as the O2 it has proved an asset to London. Or consider Cunard: when it
> found its liners outpaced by aircraft, it sold its ships as a destination rather than transportation and in the process
> largely invented the cruise-ship industry. The ships remained good answers – but to a different question.
>
> In the words of Piet Hein: ‘Art is solving problems that cannot be formulated before they have been solved. The shaping
> of the question is part of the answer.’ There are two sources of hope: first, contrary to most assumptions, the
> high-speed trains themselves will not terminate at Birmingham – only the line. The trains themselves will continue to
> other destinations at lower speed and hence may be free to stop at intermediate stations where there is space for
> northerners to park their flashy cars.
>
> Secondly, the junction at Old Oak Common, though often an object of ridicule, is actually a good idea. Indeed it formed
> part of Arup’s sensible plan for the line, before some idiot ruined everything by deciding the trains had to travel at
> 250 mph. Since this interchange connects HS2 to the Great Western Line and the Elizabeth Line (Crossrail), it will allow
> HS2 passengers to disembark without changing stations for onward journeys to Bristol, Wales, Heathrow and worthwhile
> parts of London while avoiding Euston altogether. That’s no bad thing given that, with the exception of Roti King in
> Doric Way and Drummond Street’s Indian restaurants, Euston is in a part of London bereft of attractions. For people
> making onward journeys, big cities are an obstacle not an objective; when travelling through France, I would rather have
> a three-hour layover in Lille than change stations in Paris.
>
> This is why all is not lost. You see, the things that matter to train passengers – parking, easy connections,
> connectivity, comfort, refreshments and reasonable fares – are orthogonal to the things which econometricians and the
> other nerds in our self-perpetuating quantification economy model and optimise. Indeed by over-weighting measures such
> as capacity, the passenger experience of trains has become worse: watch Strangers on a Train or Brief Encounter and
> you’ll see how far we have regressed. The Eurostar when it launched had far plusher interiors than the sterile designs
> that replaced them. Yet rail journeys could be delightful if we aimed for enjoyment not efficiency. By far the nicest
> train carriage in Britain is the bar on the Cornish Sleeper.
>
> And herein lies the opportunity. What if we forget banausic measures such as speed, journey time and capacity, and ask a
> different question? Such as ‘How can we produce a railway so pleasant that people would feel stupid driving?’ Spending
> £50 million on design would achieve more here than £500 million spent on speed and £5 billion spent on consultants. I’ve
> got nothing against economics – it’s a great Care in the Community scheme for slightly tragic introverts – but isn’t it
> time we gave designers a chance? Jony Ive has moved back to Britain from Apple. Why not ask him?
>
> Trust me, I work in advertising. Things don’t have to be logical for people to like them. After all, try making a
> business case for the Eiffel Tower.

Quite fun but I'm trying to fathom why people in Birmingham would travel
all the way to Old Oak common in order to get to Bristol and South Wales?

Also, nit-picking, it was P&O rather than Cunard that invented cruising,
long before Wilbur and Orville invented Ryanair.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 12/11/2023 15:31, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 12/11/2023 14:12, Recliner wrote:
>> From
>> https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/are-we-asking-the-wrong-questions-about-hs2/
>>
>> Are we asking the wrong questions about HS2?
>>   by Rory Sutherland
>>
>>
>> I am not sure there was much else Rishi could have done to salvage
>> HS2. But I come bearing good news. There is no reason
>> why HS2 cannot still be a great railway, even if it travels along the
>> wrong route at the wrong speed and was constructed
>> in the wrong direction to solve a problem which no longer exists. All
>> you need to do is redefine what the railway is
>> for. Perhaps it can be the right answer to a different question.
>>
>> A useful precedent for reinvention here might be what was originally
>> called the Millennium Dome. Though hopeless at
>> fulfilling its original purpose, once reinvented as the O2 it has
>> proved an asset to London. Or consider Cunard: when it
>> found its liners outpaced by aircraft, it sold its ships as a
>> destination rather than transportation and in the process
>> largely invented the cruise-ship industry. The ships remained good
>> answers – but to a different question.
>>
>> In the words of Piet Hein: ‘Art is solving problems that cannot be
>> formulated before they have been solved. The shaping
>> of the question is part of the answer.’ There are two sources of hope:
>> first, contrary to most assumptions, the
>> high-speed trains themselves will not terminate at Birmingham – only
>> the line. The trains themselves will continue to
>> other destinations at lower speed and hence may be free to stop at
>> intermediate stations where there is space for
>> northerners to park their flashy cars.
>>
>> Secondly, the junction at Old Oak Common, though often an object of
>> ridicule, is actually a good idea. Indeed it formed
>> part of Arup’s sensible plan for the line, before some idiot ruined
>> everything by deciding the trains had to travel at
>> 250 mph. Since this interchange connects HS2 to the Great Western Line
>> and the Elizabeth Line (Crossrail), it will allow
>> HS2 passengers to disembark without changing stations for onward
>> journeys to Bristol, Wales, Heathrow and worthwhile
>> parts of London while avoiding Euston altogether. That’s no bad thing
>> given that, with the exception of Roti King in
>> Doric Way and Drummond Street’s Indian restaurants, Euston is in a
>> part of London bereft of attractions. For people
>> making onward journeys, big cities are an obstacle not an objective;
>> when travelling through France, I would rather have
>> a three-hour layover in Lille than change stations in Paris.
>>
>> This is why all is not lost. You see, the things that matter to train
>> passengers – parking, easy connections,
>> connectivity, comfort, refreshments and reasonable fares – are
>> orthogonal to the things which econometricians and the
>> other nerds in our self-perpetuating quantification economy model and
>> optimise. Indeed by over-weighting measures such
>> as capacity, the passenger experience of trains has become worse:
>> watch Strangers on a Train or Brief Encounter and
>> you’ll see how far we have regressed. The Eurostar when it launched
>> had far plusher interiors than the sterile designs
>> that replaced them. Yet rail journeys could be delightful if we aimed
>> for enjoyment not efficiency. By far the nicest
>> train carriage in Britain is the bar on the Cornish Sleeper.
>>
>> And herein lies the opportunity. What if we forget banausic measures
>> such as speed, journey time and capacity, and ask a
>> different question? Such as ‘How can we produce a railway so pleasant
>> that people would feel stupid driving?’ Spending
>> £50 million on design would achieve more here than £500 million spent
>> on speed and £5 billion spent on consultants. I’ve
>> got nothing against economics – it’s a great Care in the Community
>> scheme for slightly tragic introverts – but isn’t it
>> time we gave designers a chance? Jony Ive has moved back to Britain
>> from Apple. Why not ask him?
>>
>> Trust me, I work in advertising. Things don’t have to be logical for
>> people to like them. After all, try making a
>> business case for the Eiffel Tower.
>
> Quite fun but I'm trying to fathom why people in Birmingham would travel
> all the way to Old Oak common in order to get to Bristol and South Wales?

Because new, improved HS2 trains now come with free added marketing.

> Also, nit-picking, it was P&O rather than Cunard that invented cruising,
> long before Wilbur and Orville invented Ryanair.

Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).

On 12/11/2023 17:13, Certes wrote:
> Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).

ROTFL
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 12/11/2023 17:13, Certes wrote:
>> Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).
>
> ROTFL

Before we mock, Ryanair have been very successful in serving out of the way
airports and are one of Europe’s most financially successful airlines.

On 12/11/2023 17:13, Certes wrote:
>
> Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).

lol

In message <uir29r$5v8c$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:33:47 on Sun, 12 Nov
2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/11/2023 17:13, Certes wrote:

>>> Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).
>>
>> ROTFL
>
>Before we mock, Ryanair have been very successful in serving out of the way
>airports and are one of Europe’s most financially successful airlines.

But as far as I know Stansted is still advertising a train service to
London, quoting the time to Tottenham Hale, which is indeed in London.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:59:29 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:

>In message <uir29r$5v8c$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:33:47 on Sun, 12 Nov
>2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 12/11/2023 17:13, Certes wrote:
>
>>>> Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).
>>>
>>> ROTFL
>>
>>Before we mock, Ryanair have been very successful in serving out of the way
>>airports and are one of Europe’s most financially successful airlines.
>
>But as far as I know Stansted is still advertising a train service to
>London, quoting the time to Tottenham Hale, which is indeed in London.

I think they were told to stop doing that years ago. Now they claim 50
minutes to LST.

On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 21:07:40 +0000, Coffee
<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:

>On 12/11/2023 17:13, Certes wrote:
>>
>> Now we have Ryanrail, speeding you to "London" (Old Oak Common).
>
>lol
>
That is actually in London.
More likely e.g. London (Quainton Road) and "You can catch the No.16
to Aylesbury over there".