On 11 Oct, 20:02, wrote:
Indeed, no new railway can be called that, but LGVs cost more because
of their special engineering, with as few curves as possible. This
means that their land take can be more aggressive and therefore more
expensive.
....
But a new conventional 225km/h line to Manchester might be enough,
offering about 1h45, and the same argument could apply elsewhere.
Maybe only the Scottish run really needs more. Britain is smaller than
France or Spain, and thus the gains to be achieved from building LGVs
are proportionately less, particularly within England alone.

I'd be interested to see any studies on the cost per km of a new 225km/
h line versus the cost of a new LGV - and rather surprised if they
were significantly different.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org