You will see that when the Telegraph stated “Professor Woodward, … and a colleague, Prof Mike Forde of Edinburgh University, have now been awarded almost £500,000 by the Government to investigate the issue” it should read “Professor Woodward, … and a colleague, Prof Mike Forde of Edinburgh University, were awarded almost £500,000 two years ago by the Government to investigate the issue” (£334,485 + £145,325 totalling £479,810 to be precise).

The research programme does not end until May 2013 so why should work in progress be made freely available – would a painter exhibit a portrait before it was finished? There is overall no real secrecy – this is old news regurgitated by the Telegraph in a sensationalist way and (very sensibly) not wanting to discuss the work with a journalist does not make the work ‘secret’!

still waiting for WCML peak time loadings

If you don’t like the Telegraph article, you might get better results if you complain directly to the Telegraph editorial team.

With regards to the high speed derailment in 1993, Rayleigh Waves weren’t involved in that.

But would be to build HS2 as a maglev line, and in a partially evacuauted tube one would be thinking of speeds for 1000-1000mph or more.

An evacuated tube from London to Birmingam would not be difficult to dig. It need not be very deep so would go mainly through subsoil or soft rock. An optimised straightened line running underneath the motorways and existing railways would almost do away with the the need for planning permission as no surface land-take would be required.

Dig 4 pits at 40 mile intervals along the rooute, placing the first one at about Uxbidge. Drop two TBMs in each pit one pointing north and the other south. Set them digging and when they’re going they grind out about half a mile of tunnel a week. Double it as we’ll neeed two tunnels. In less than two years after starting the northen and southern ends of each hole will meet up and you’ve got your tunnel.

Place a metal plate on the floor of the tunnel, wire it up and put in a maglev train – Birmingham Airport used to have one yonks ago, so its proven technology. Make the train neraly fit the tunnel and the piston effect can be used to evacuate the tunnel as it passes.

We’ll need to do s bit of working on docking the “train” at the northern and southern termini, but it isn’t really problematic. The train would have to sealed as the tunnels essentially a vacuum.

And you’ve got your up to date train system for the 24th century and beyond.

Now no jokes about the wrong sort of snow on the line.

@Elaine Luk: “It’s everywhere in the media questioning about the safety of HS2″

Really – one article has appeared in The Telegraph by Andrew Gilligan, a reporter well known for his visceral hostility to the HS2 project. A synopsis of that article has in turn been syndicated across a number of local titles, virtually all of them in areas close to the route of HS2 – the only other articles are those like this one regurgitated on anti-HS2 campaign websites – so hardly “everywhere in the media” – in fact the entire furore revolves around a single article of dubious validity?

Telegraph articles of this nature are routinely enabled for reader comments but for some reason the article in question lacked this feature – one wonders why? The Gilligan article is blatant scaremongering of worst possible kind – if the anti-HS2 campaign has now sunk to this level it really is in big trouble.

High Speed Trains already run at the speeds quoted in the article; 360km/h or 225mph. Any cursory search for information about High Speed Trains operating in Europe will reveal that they are amongst the safest in the world – much safer in comparison to conventional classic line technology trainsets. There hasn’t been a single fatality on any TGV train operating on a purpose built (complying with the exact same standards as that applying to HS2 construction) High Speed Line (LGV) since the first service ran between Lyon and Paris in 1981.

If you really want evidence to prove how safe these trains are, check out details of the High Speed Derailment on at kilometre post 110.5, LGV Nord (Paris-Lille) high speed line, 21st December 1993.

At 0706, TGV 7150 was bearing down at 294 km/h (182 mph) on a muddy hole 7 metres long by 4 metres wide and 1.5 metres deep, bridged by a section of unsupported track. The engineer felt a slight bump and made a service brake application. The last four trailers and the rear power unit derailed, and the train came to a rocky stop over a distance of 2.3 kilometres (somewhat less than it takes for a conventional emergency stop). It was fortunate that the train did not jackknife or leave the track bed; this is credited in part to the stiffness that the articulated design lends to the train. Only one passenger was injured, and another treated for shock.

The Gilligan article takes one piece of information; that research into a theoretically potential design flaw already known to experts in the field is ongoing and blows it up into a story designed with a single purpose in mind; to ignite a flame of panic in the public mindset – this is scurrilous journalism of the lowest possible order and deserves nothing but utter contempt.