Trains are travel choice from past (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Trains are travel choice from past
11:09am Saturday 2nd February 2013 in Letters By Reader's letter
WITH regard to HS2, will rail commuters pay a surcharge to travel York to London in half an hour less time? I would argue the case against. Concorde flew faster from London to New York, yet has not been replaced.
Secondly, the case for a shorter travelling time is made that professional and business people need to save time when attending meetings in London.
Yet travel for this purpose is already outdated. It has been superseded by the phenomenal advance in communication technology. Go back only ten years and see the advance in computers, iPads, mobile phones television and email.
Link these all together. Fast forward 20 years and travelling to meetings will be a thing of the past. There will be plasma screens in the offices and we will be able to conference simultaneously with any number of people and see those taking part including ourselves on a large plasma screen, in the same way that interviews are seen on television. These can be conducted from miles apart to across the world.
Who will need or wish to go on a train just to physically be in the same room?
Sorry, the train is yesterday and communication technology is tomorrow.
RS Scruton, Palmes Close, Naburn, York.
Comments(12)
far2bizzy
says...
12:52pm Sat 2 Feb 13
People will still want to go places to see things first hand, rather than meet people. There will always be tourists, and there will still be a need to move these tourists about and the more quickly this can be done the better.
It’s just a pity they’ll have to change at London!
/kev/null
says...
1:32pm Sat 2 Feb 13
As for the railways, they're a nice way to travel when they work properly, but too unreliable for commuting. You are much more likely to arrive on time if you drive, and if you've got a reasonably efficient car then you are likely to save money by driving too.
I genuinely would like to use the railways to get to work but it's just too expensive and unreliable. I shudder to think what ticket prices will be in 20 years' time, especially on a new line that is ridden with debt.
CynicaloldGit
says...
3:10pm Sat 2 Feb 13
For business, most things can be done via the internet, but some meetings need to be face to face.
Railways are not out dated, they remain the best way of moving large numbers of people about the country, however, gov't's don't see it this way, if they did, they would realise that fares need to come down to encourage people off the roads and onto trains.
Secondly, next time you are stuck on a motorway or dual carriage way, behind two 38 tonners, one trying to pass the other with 1/2 mph more than the one he is trying to overtake and this goes on for mile after mile, you maight reflect that railways are the best way of moving goods over long distances in the country.
However, the letter writer may have a point if he is condemning HS2 as useless, I agree........30 billion, in 20 years time, to get a few business types to London 30 minutes quicker..........WAS
TE OF BLEEDIN MONEY when it could be spent on improving the network we have.
Even AndyD
says...
8:47pm Sat 2 Feb 13
Of course people will want to still see relations etc - but you don't need HS2 for that.
An interesting and thought provoking letter.
/kev/null
says...
12:51am Sun 3 Feb 13
Certainly. But even if you are in such a position you will be thinking 'This is much less inconvenient than standing on a freezing platform for 45 minutes and arriving at work an hour late because there was a length of copper cable stolen a hundred miles away.'
/kev/null
says...
12:58am Sun 3 Feb 13
People like these are already happily making a good living despite not really having a workplace: http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Digital_nom
ad
Magicman!
says...
4:21am Sun 3 Feb 13
/kev/null wrote:HS2 will use fibre optic cables, zero value to pikeys/chavs/scum/th
"next time you are stuck on a motorway or dual carriage way, behind two 38 tonners, one trying to pass the other with 1/2 mph more than the one he is trying to overtake and this goes on for mile after mile, you maight reflect that railways are the best way of moving goods over long distances in the country."
Certainly. But even if you are in such a position you will be thinking 'This is much less inconvenient than standing on a freezing platform for 45 minutes and arriving at work an hour late because there was a length of copper cable stolen a hundred miles away.'
ieves and so wouldn't be stolen.
Also how do we know the HS2 route won't be lined with aotumatic paintball turrets, so that everytime somebody unauthorised comes too close to the lineside they get pelted in the ar$e with a paintball at 40mph?!!
far2bizzy
says...
9:25am Sun 3 Feb 13
/kev/null wrote:Exactly. I know of a very prosperous IT company employing people (mostly under 30) all over the country, from their own homes. They are permanently in contact with each other without ever leaving their front doors. The only time they see each other face to face is at the annual Christmas ‘do’.
Can I add, by the way, that I am an IT contractor and for the last 12 years or so I have mostly worked from home. I think this will probably be the future of employment for many people who aren't required to travel to where their tools are, or who aren't customer-facing. Who needs plasma screens in offices when you have optic fibre running from home to home.
People like these are already happily making a good living despite not really having a workplace: http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Digital_nom
ad
The very idea that you need formalised meetings to run a business (or indeed any organisation) is coming under threat.
The world is going to be a very different place in 20/30 years time.
I even believe that the ‘customers’ of tomorrow will be more willing to accept screen based selling rather than demand face to face interaction.
As for the car vs train argument – what will the price of petrol be in 20 years time? Reducing our reliance on the internal combustion engine is a must.
yorkshirelad
says...
4:04pm Sun 3 Feb 13
The trains are bursting at the seams much of the time...I suspect largely because
a) the value of real human contact has actually not gone away with all the technology we have (now)
b) The roads are getting fairly intolerable.
Around the world high speed rail is booming with those looking more into the future investing most.
It reminds me a bit of the argument that IT would be so advanced that we'd all have vastly more leisure time...
ak7274
says...
6:23pm Sun 3 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit wrote:If the best way of moving goods was by rail, why isn't that how it's done?
I would not say the letter is stupid, nor the letter writer........simply put, he/she didn't think things out as well as they might have.
For business, most things can be done via the internet, but some meetings need to be face to face.
Railways are not out dated, they remain the best way of moving large numbers of people about the country, however, gov't's don't see it this way, if they did, they would realise that fares need to come down to encourage people off the roads and onto trains.
Secondly, next time you are stuck on a motorway or dual carriage way, behind two 38 tonners, one trying to pass the other with 1/2 mph more than the one he is trying to overtake and this goes on for mile after mile, you maight reflect that railways are the best way of moving goods over long distances in the country.
However, the letter writer may have a point if he is condemning HS2 as useless, I agree........30 billion, in 20 years time, to get a few business types to London 30 minutes quicker..........WAS
TE OF BLEEDIN MONEY when it could be spent on improving the network we have.
I suspect the vehicles you refer to are probably 44 tonnes and if your stuck on a motorway I suggest using the third lane.
How about cars that refuse to move into the nearside lane when travelling at 50 mph and the said lane is clear?
Not all HGV drivers are guilty of this and to stereotype them is a little disingenuous.
When goods are moved by rail, they inevitably have to be loaded onto trucks which means a double movement and more labour intensive than one vehicle manufacturer to customer.
I'm not trying to be dismissive of your points, but there is no easy answer.
goatman
says...
9:57am Mon 4 Feb 13
Mr Happy says...
11:23am Sat 2 Feb 13