Live data from Hacker News

Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

freewheeling.info

1–10 of 161 posts

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#3
I think the Lower Thames Crossing will make HS2 look like a model of efficiency by the time it is completed.

£1.2bn spent without even a shovel of dirt being removed. [1] Instead they have spent money on shite like this [2] (which may be admirable in themselves, but bribes to shut local communities and charities up shouldn't be part of the project).

[1] https://www.kentonline.co.uk/gravesend/news/1-2bn-spent-on-l...

[2] https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-roads/lower-thames-crossi...

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#4
post #3

I think the Lower Thames Crossing will make HS2 look like a model of efficiency by the time it is completed. £1.2bn spent without even a shovel of dirt being removed. [1] Instead they have spent money on shite like this [2] (which may be admirable in themselves, but bribes to shut local communities and charities up shouldn't be part of the project). [1] https://www.kentonline.co.uk/gravesend/news/1-2bn-spent-on-l...…

I'm way more ok with worthy bribes than I am with nonsense like the £100m bat tunnel. But yeah it's still pretty ridiculous.

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#5
The Swiss method works because their population is 6X smaller and GDP per capita is twice as high. They have a smaller geographic footprint and heavier services economy. The UK still has so much industrial traffic (inclusive of agriculture) and a far less cohesive political environment. This isn’t to say that HS2 isn’t a train wreck (haha - it is) but applying small country policies to big country problems is a a bit simplistic.

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#6

The Swiss method works because their population is 6X smaller and GDP per capita is twice as high. They have a smaller geographic footprint and heavier services economy. The UK still has so much industrial traffic (inclusive of agriculture) and a far less cohesive political environment. This isn’t to say that HS2 isn’t a train wreck (haha - it is) but applying small country policies to big country problems is a a bit…

Did you read the article and can point out which part of the specific method would not work in the UK?

There is nothing in the outlined strategy that would be made unworkable. You may reach a different value-engineered point, and it explicitly mentions cargo trains as well.

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#8

The Swiss method works because their population is 6X smaller and GDP per capita is twice as high. They have a smaller geographic footprint and heavier services economy. The UK still has so much industrial traffic (inclusive of agriculture) and a far less cohesive political environment. This isn’t to say that HS2 isn’t a train wreck (haha - it is) but applying small country policies to big country problems is a a bit…

> They have a smaller geographic footprint

you seem to forget their famous mountains

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#9
This is an excellent analysis of how to avoid the curse of megaprojects.

Heres a couple reactions based on the Swiss point of view.

> keeps the supply chain warm

Yes! And the human resources pool. And a constant supply of construction projects means every industry touched by them can keep a pipeline of apprentices in training.

And lots of small projects means there are places where the risk is not so big of taking a chance on some innovation, or a university research collaboration, further keeping the pipeline full of students and innovations.

But, for it to work, you probably also need a high trust society. You need light touch regulation on the training, research funding, and project management. And all of that is easier at the 9 million person scale than at the 60 million person scale.

Re: Swiss vs. UK approach to major tranport projects

#10
This is a big reason why most modern Western large-scale infrastructure projects get delayed and cost overruns. People making decisions treat construction as if it was cloud computing: just pay for how much you need, when you need it. Some sectors are highly specialized and if their future use is not predictable, they must charge a high premium for that uncertainty.
Post reply on HN