Treasures found on HS2 route

2026-02-0122:1411982www.bbc.com

Archaeological finds from the planned HS2 train line have been shown exclusively to the BBC.

Harriet BradshawScience reporter

Tony Jolliffe BBC A close up of a Roman coin with detail found during HS2 archaeological excavationsTony Jolliffe BBC
A Roman coin unearthed during HS2 archaeological digs is now being held in a secret store

Treasures unearthed by hundreds of archaeologists during the ongoing construction of the controversial HS2 train line have been shown exclusively to the BBC.

The 450,000 objects, which are being held in a secret warehouse, include a possible Roman gladiator's tag, a hand axe that may be more than 40,000 years old and 19th Century gold dentures.

It is an "unprecedented" amount and array of items, which will yield new insights into Britain's past, says the Centre for British Archaeology.

Major building developments in the UK need land to be assessed by archaeologists as part of the planning process, to protect heritage sites.

Tony Jolliffe BBC An imported French pipe with a finely moulded form of a woman’s head, sporting a feathered hat. This was probably made by Fiolet of St Omer, although the stem and maker’s name have not survived. Tony Jolliffe BBC
French pipe found at St James' Gardens Euston

Since 2018 around 1,000 archaeologists have been involved in 60 digs along the route HS2 is set to take between London to Birmingham.

While the route is not currently scheduled to open until after 2033 due to delays, archaeologists say their fieldwork is largely complete.

The warehouse's location is a closely guarded secret for security purposes. All we can say is that it is in Yorkshire. Inside are shelves and shelves of pallets, loaded with around 7,300 boxes of historic items destined for further research.

The future of many objects, including whether they will stay in storage or be displayed, is still undecided, along with their ownership.

Tony Jolliffe BBC A pottery head detached from a Roman vessel found in NorthamptonshireTony Jolliffe BBC
A pottery head detached from a Roman vessel

Historic England commended the team for revealing "new and exciting sites spanning over 10,000 years of our past".

But building HS2 has changed the landscape along its route, cutting into fields and communities, and dividing opinion.

Critics, such as Greg Smith, MP for Mid Buckinghamshire, say soaring costs, delays, abandoned villages and damage to the natural and historic environment mean that it is not worth building.

"It should not have cost the taxpayer tens of billions of pounds to build a railway that no-one wants and brings so much destruction," Smith says.

HS2 said in response: "Chief Executive Mark Wild has been clear that overall delivery of HS2 has been unacceptable and he's committed to ending the project's cycle of cost increases and delays."

"Our specialist archaeology team and contractors have carefully excavated numerous sites and have shown care and respect throughout this work."

"Whether HS2 is a good or bad thing is debatable, but I tell you what, if they built the railway and they didn't do the archaeology that would be more tragic," said historian Graham Evans, who chairs the Northamptonshire Battlefields Society.

Tony Jolliffe BBC Gold 'three lions' pendant from the 13th-14th century. The heraldic device or harness pendant survives in incredible condition. Tony Jolliffe BBC
Gold 'three lions' pendant from the 13th-14th Century

The store holds showstoppers such as Roman statue heads and a gold 'three lions' pendant from the 13th-14th Century.

On the ground in one area is a bubble-wrapped empty coffin dating to 1799, with a smaller one next to it wrapped in masking tape - sobering reminders that this store is a snapshot of real lives once lived.

Some of the objects discovered have already been shown to the public.

We have picked out six that have never been on display. You can see where they were found on the HS2 route map below - then scroll further down to see the objects and read about their history.

A Map of the HS2 route stretching from London to Birmingham as a blue line. Along the way in order from London, are the following points - London, post-medeival pug, Buckinghamshire, 19th Century gold dentures, Buckinghamshire, Anglo-Saxon spinning whorl, Northamptonshire, Palaeolithic hand axe, Northamptonshire, Roman Gladiator tag, Warickshire, Deserted Medieval Village die

Tony Jolliffe BBC Dr Sara Machin, the finds lead for a consortium of archaeologists working on the post excavation archive holding a Paleolithic hand axeTony Jolliffe BBC

Experts think this is more than 40,000 years old and was made by Neanderthals or an earlier species of human.

Found in the Edgcote area in Northamptonshire, it has a sharp edge likely designed for butchering animals.

Hand axes were held in the palm rather than attached to a wooden handle.

"There is something tactile about it when you hold it," said Dr Sara Machin, the finds lead for Access +, the consortium of archaeologists in charge of this project. "Even now it fits snugly in my hand."

Tony Jolliffe BBC Bone inscribed tag fragment, broken/cut neatly at one end, thought to be associated with Roman gladiatorsTony Jolliffe BBC

The small piece of carved thin bone bears an inscription. Experts would expect it to read if complete: "DOMINE VICTOR VINCAS FELIX" or "Lord Victor, may you win and be lucky."

Discovered in Northamptonshire, Machin says it could have belonged to an active or former Roman gladiator, or even be a spectator's souvenir, even though there is no evidence of an arena or circus space in that part of the country.

It was recovered from a large pottery vessel containing cremated human remains, with an X on the lid.

Dr John Pearce Reader in Archaeology at Kings College University said that a link to a gladiator was possible, but added that "with more forensic analysis of the burial, a different story may come to light".

Anglo-Saxon spindle whorl

Tony Jolliffe BBC Decorated bone spindle whorl from Anglo-Saxon eraTony Jolliffe BBC

Thought to be made from a cattle femur, this decorated Anglo-Saxon spindle whorl, used to provide weight while spinning yarn, was unearthed from farmland near Bishopstone, Buckinghamshire.

"It's a very interesting piece of evidence of textile advancements in the Anglo-Saxon period," said Willow Major, a post-excavation assistant.

Its polished surface leads her to believe it got a lot of use and was very dear to someone, she said, adding that interestingly, the ring and dot motif had been found on spinning tools from the much earlier Iron age.

Tony Jolliffe BBC A medieval cubic die made from bone and survives in good condition, with all six faces clearly visible. Tony Jolliffe BBC

A tiny polished die recovered from a deserted medieval village in Lower Radbourne, Warwickshire, resembles modern ones, but with a different numbering format.

Its imperfections, with one side longer than the others, stand it in contrast with today's mass-produced dice.

Tony Jolliffe BBC A complete figurine of a seated pug dog in plain white glazed porcelain with details picked out in black found at St James' EustonTony Jolliffe BBC

This complete figurine of a seated pug dog in plain white-glazed porcelain with black details was found in the grave of an unnamed female at St James' Gardens in Euston.

It is thought to have been made in the Derby porcelain factory around 1770-1800.

19th Century gold dentures

Tony Jolliffe BBC 19th Century gold denturesTony Jolliffe BBC

"Every box has a surprise," Machin said as she unwrapped perhaps the most bizarre item here, thought to be from the 19th Century: a set of lower gold dentures found at St Mary's Old Church in Stoke Mandeville.

It contains six teeth and has a number stamped on the inside.

"These are objects, but they all relate to people," Machin said. "It's all about the people who lived in these areas going back thousands of years and we can start writing the stories about their lives and what they can tell us."

"The scale is what makes it so extraordinary," Neil Redfern from the Council for British Archaeology says comparing HS2 to other big development projects.

"But it is the length of the scheme and the landscapes and places that HS2 passed through that make the collection of sites and material so interesting. The research potential from this material is remarkable."

He believes that the finds could help people understand wider landscape change now and in the past.

To dig deeper into these stories, archaeologists are now entering the second phase of works, including further condition, cleaning and conservation checks.

More plans are afoot to show the objects. Artefacts from the Wendover Saxon cemetery, where 122 graves were unearthed, will soon go on display for the first time at a Discover Bucks Museum exhibition.

However, the future of other items is less clear.

A spokesperson for HS2 explained that under English property law, archaeological and historical objects found during the works will either belong to the government or landowners.

"Occasionally landowners may wish to retain title to objects, in which case they will be returned to their care," said the spokesperson.

Charlotte Self, archive manager for the project said she and her team were asking landowners to donate them where possible, so people around the route could enjoy them.

"I would love to see the majority of these items deposited with the local museums from near where they were found," she said.

A thin, grey banner promoting the News Daily newsletter. On the right, there is a graphic of an orange sphere with two concentric crescent shapes around it in a red-orange gradient, like a sound wave. The banner reads: "The latest news in your inbox first thing.”

Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.


Read the original article

Comments

  • By zhivota 2026-02-023:271 reply

    This should be the gameplay in Civilization, instead of the thing where you train and archaeologist who goes to excavate magically known locations.

    Excavation of tunnels and such should just come with a chance of finding artifacts, but it only materializes with the right culture tech unlocked (before some point, buried treasures were just scrapped or sold, not put into museums).

    • By SenHeng 2026-02-0215:09

      My little village is built on the site of some ancient Japanese village [0] and any construction that involves digging up dirt often also unearths some kind of archaeological find that stops all work for half a year while the archaeologists do their stuff, if they can even be bothered to come.

      It’s happened often enough that it’s a wink and a nod that nothing was found. Foremen and anyone ‘in-charge’ will not be on site until any kind of digging is complete.

      [0]: https://kanko-omachi.gr.jp/spot/wappara/

  • By sarreph 2026-02-029:173 reply

    I recall comments about this last week on the BBC website where people made the points that:

    1. Surely the long term plan is to not keep these relics in a gargantuan warehouse but instead to put them in a museum(s) — with free entry no less — so that the tax paying public can enjoy them.

    2. Further, collections of relics that relate to the site of each station on the line could be displayed in each.

    • By pjc50 2026-02-029:504 reply

      > museum(s) — with free entry no less

      The tax paying public aren't going to pay for that.

      The existing collections can just about barely justify free entry. Most museums have a vast secondary collection that's not on display already. These items are going in a warehouse because there isn't enough money to do archaeology on them any time soon, let alone prep them for display.

      • By Angostura 2026-02-0210:142 reply

        Or do what the V&A has done in Docklands - make its warehouse available for the public to visit. Pretty cool day out.

        https://www.vam.ac.uk/east/storehouse/visit

        • By OJFord 2026-02-0212:00

          Second that, it's really good. You can only really see a small fraction of it still, just because of the nature of it (it's like a central viewing space completely surrounded by warehouse shelving) but really interesting, from the meta perspective of seeing how they store and tend to pieces too.

          For example, there's a bunch of swords 'on display' (such as it is) and then you can sort of just about see an entire sword storage/curation room off to one side, with many times more than are actually visible in some detail.

        • By notahacker 2026-02-0213:11

          Science Museum opens its warehouse in Swindon to the public too

          Highly recommended for people with an interest in vehicles, but there's a lot of other stuff from twentieth century consumer goods to the contents of Stephen Hawkings office on shelves there and document archives too.

      • By whywhywhywhy 2026-02-0213:20

        London already has free museums and galleries fyi

      • By Arbortheus 2026-02-0219:131 reply

        London has loads of exceptional museums that are completely free. If you ever have the chance to visit the city, do try to take advantage!

        • By Reason077 2026-02-0220:49

          Entry to the main/permanent collections is free, but there are usually one or more special exhibitions at each museum that are paid entry.

      • By N_Lens 2026-02-0212:51

        Sadly we’re in the era where everything has a price but nothing is valued.

    • By victorbjorklund 2026-02-0211:452 reply

      Out of 450 000 pieces I bet 440 000 pieces are just pottery shards and other ”boring” things. Important for history etc but no one wants to go to a museum with 400 000 almost identical pieces of pottery shards and similar. Only a tiny amount will be things the public wanna see in a museum.

      • By JasonADrury 2026-02-0214:061 reply

        > Out of 450 000 pieces I bet 440 000 pieces are just pottery shards and other ”boring” things

        That's certainly super optimistic of you.

        • By cucumber3732842 2026-02-0214:09

          Yeah, it's probably more like 449,000 are pottery/ceramics.

          Be kinda cool if they made wall mosaics at the respective stations out of them or something.

      • By JoeAltmaier 2026-02-0214:36

        So true. Folks used pots for tens of thousands of years, and used them mostly like disposable dinnerware. They broke, daily, and got tossed out the window. A settlement of a dozen roundhouses might have a million sherds, depending on how long it persisted.

    • By seanhunter 2026-02-0215:18

      Probably that's what will happen.

      1. The permanent collections of just about all museums in the UK are free so if they go to a museum they will be free to see (after an initial exhibition if they were to host that)

      2. This is not uncommon for things like Roman ruins in the UK. For example, near the Tower of London, there is a glass window in a random pedestrian underpass where you can see part of the original Roman wall around London, or in Cirencester and St Albans there are big parks where you can see all the Roman ruins. Where relics are smaller or more valuable, something like a railway station isn't really set up to keep them secure and on display so they would sometimes show casts or photographs of items, and have the original in an actual dedicated exhibition in a museum. For example if you go to Orkney you can see some viking relics in situ (eg the "viking grafitti" runes on the stones in maes howe) and some (like the scar boat burial) you need to go to an actual museum to see.

  • By troad 2026-02-022:236 reply

    Contrapoint to the naysayers: building infrastructure is good actually, and in this specific case, has had the added side benefit of unearthing these cool artifacts that would otherwise still be decaying in some peat bog.

    British NIMBYs seem unusually strong, even in a world of NIMBYism. Best wishes to the British in defeating the Midsomer Historical Society of Bat-Loving Cranks, which apparently controls the deep state over there.

    • By techterrier 2026-02-025:02

      On behalf of the Midsomer Historical Society of Bat-Loving Cranks, i'd like to extend a cordial invitation to our Wickerman Festival this year. Perhaps on perusing our good works, you might be persuaded of their merits.

      Kind regards,

      Nigel.

    • By ggm 2026-02-022:50

      Sir, this is wimpy's - the confusion of naming cheap housing construction firm, the same as a very old burger chain in the UK which predates Wendy's or McDonald's in the UK by many decades being most apposite.

    • By Reason077 2026-02-0221:082 reply

      HS2 will be fantastic, transformative infrastructure… decades from now when (or if) it is actually completed.

      The issue is that the project has been so badly mismanaged and costs have spiralled so far out of control that even the first small, incomplete section of it is now costing us 3X what the ENTIRE project was supposed to cost. It’s also at least 7 years behind schedule: when they started construction, stage 1 was supposed to open in 2026 - this year!!

      Yes, NIMBYism is part of this, but catastrophic project management failure and a culture where contractors view the public purse as an limitless cash cow to be milked to the maximum extent possible have a lot to do with it too.

      Bottom line is the UK is not good at building large infrastructure projects, and the bigger they are, the worse it gets. Complete rethink/reboot required.

      • By panick21_ 2026-02-0319:47

        You will never get better by simply saying lets stop it, cancel the project and 'rethink'. Your not going to find a route that is much better. Your not going to magically find much supplier for your trains and equipment.

        Also the short section that they are working on is by far the most expensive per kilometer compared to the northern parts. So the cost was always going to be pre-loaded in the early part.

        Its also the case that this 3x number is not correct when you adjust for inflation. Covid and other stuff has increased because of inflation specially in that sector.

        Another issue in the UK rail industry is simply that building and investing is so incredibly inconsistent that there isn't the pipeline for training people. And the constant political battle about HS2 also makes companies hesitant to do the needed investments.

        But bottom line is this, unless you simply continue to work on HS2 and other infrastructure projects (like desperately needed electrification) you simply will never get better at infrastructure. And there are many things to learn and to get better at, on every level from parliament down to individual construction worker.

        Unfortunately so far the 'reflection' that the UK has done on the issue with HS2 have been extremely disappointing and they have learned very little. But still even so, just by doing it the people and organization have gotten better and are moving increasingly faster.

        Not doing the next parts of HS2 is hilariously stupid as the larger benefits only happen once the whole thing is complete. The UK has spend likely 50-60% of the total cost and only gets about 20% of the benefits.

      • By troad 2026-02-0223:11

        > Complete rethink/reboot required.

        Or, instead, keep building, so the UK actually gets experience with large scale projects? Establish an anti-corruption body that retrospectively investigates every pound spent on HS2, and places lifetime public-contract bans on contractors found to have acted dishonestly? If the graft is as extreme and obvious as you say, surely this is no hard task.

        If the UK has no experience building things, there's only one way to get some, and it's not to stop building for ten years while the government 'rethinks and reboots' (i.e. pays McKinsey for expensive reports exculpating McKinsey for any cost overruns). Ten years during which all the people who were actually involved move on to other roles, often private sector, often overseas. That's how you throw away all the experience accrued during this construction.

        Sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good. In twenty years, when the HS2 is zipping around, bringing down the cost of logistics, making groceries cheaper, lowering house prices as people can live further out, no one will even remember how it was built.

    • By globular-toast 2026-02-027:164 reply

      UK is so densely populated that something like this affects a LOT of people. Also people's "back yards" are tiny enough as it is. Small changes have a big impact and people living in such cramped spaces are living in constant fear of that.

      If you happen to come across any part of HS2 in some random village you've never heard of it's quite incredible the impact it's having on the locals. Locals who live miles away from the nearest station and therefore unable to use the line, by the way.

      We also have very little wildlife left and we don't really want to live in concrete jungles.

      Suffice to say, it's not difficult to see why it's like this in the UK if you actually come and see.

      • By gambiting 2026-02-029:094 reply

        >> If you happen to come across any part of HS2 in some random village you've never heard of it's quite incredible the impact it's having on the locals. Locals who live miles away from the nearest station and therefore unable to use the line, by the way.

        Because people inherently misunderstand the benefit of HS2, and how could they not if it's constantly being misrepresented by our media and politicians.

        UK has one of the highest proportion of freight transported by road in Europe. That is fundamentally because our rail infrastructure is overloaded and unable to take any more freight. All non-perishable stuff that in other countries just goes on rail, in the UK is moved by trucks on our roads. Which as you can imagine, is causing tens of billions of pounds worth of damage to our roads, which we - taxpayers - pay for. All of these locals that live miles away from the train station are already affected by the lack of rail infrastructure - because every time they drive somewhere they have to contend with massive potholes and insane amount of heavy cargo traffic anywhere they go. If HS2 is ever finished, it will reduce congestion and our roads and reduce the wear and tear which again, is costing us billions in upkeep every year.

        But according to our media, it's all about saving london commuters 2 minutes on a train from Birmingham, so every Dick and Harry is against it, because like you said - they live miles from the nearest station, why would they care?

        • By pjc50 2026-02-029:562 reply

          It's not even about freight! HS2 will increase passenger capacity. The existing trains are completely full at peak time and run at the maximum frequency. Building a whole new line will allow a lot more people to travel. The demand is clearly there despite the price, because it's also pretty congested to drive anywhere inside the M25.

          If we wanted to address the freight situation it would be along the route of the A428/A14 from Folkstone (where much of the freight is landed) to the Midlands. That road already has a cheery sign on it pointing out how high the accident rate is.

          • By globular-toast 2026-02-0213:07

            Felixstowe, not Folkestone? The latter is where the channel tunnel is, which does account for a lot of freight but you probably meant the container port at Felixstowe. I used to drive on the A14 daily and you could tell when a ship had recently arrived by the number of containers on the roads. The road also suffered badly from "tram tracks" due to large numbers of heavy good vehicles. Crazy when you realise a lorry can take one container while a single train can take a hundred or more.

          • By matt-p 2026-02-0211:562 reply

            A problem with this argument is that it actually doesn't help most people on the HS2 route. If you live in a village on the outskirts of Aylesbury say, it's not much good to you personally that there's more local services on the WCML, because it's a 40-50 minute drive to the nearest WCML station; your local line will see no improvement. Freeing up space on the M1 has no impact either for the same reason.

            It would of perhaps been an easier sell if we could of built it much closer to the WCML and told people, look this is to get rid of those horrible fast trains that wizz though your local station at 125mph.We'll use the space for more services so your commute to London from say Leighton buzzard is faster and less busy.

            • By growse 2026-02-0212:561 reply

              > if we could of built it much closer to the WCML

              Knocking down half the towns that the WCML runs through to build more tracks carrying trains that aren't going to stop there would be neither easier nor cheaper than HS2.

              • By matt-p 2026-02-0214:551 reply

                There is a huge amount of countryside between the WCML and the current HS2 route. I'm not saying it should be literally parallel.

                • By panick21_ 2026-02-0320:071 reply

                  Do you think the people who designed HS2 have not considered these aspects?

                  You analysis is very narrow and only considered the benefits to a certain set of people.

                  HS2 actually follows reasonably closely to the old GCML. And for the same reason, its the best route to build a fast rail-line along.

                  I think your proposal complete ignores the additional cost of such a route change. And the cost alone, aside from anything else would make it unreasonable.

                  Many things go into selecting a route and in most cases where I think they made the wrong choice its usually because of cost concerns, like not building the needed tunnels into cities.

                  • By matt-p 2026-02-043:261 reply

                    I actually don't think that's true.

                    The reason HS2 route cost so much money is because so much is tunneled. Why is so much tunnelled? Because rich people live there and won't accept a blot on the landscape, partially because they don't see a personal benefit.

                    If you can remove the tunnels it doesn't really matter that the route is slightly longer or has slowly less optimal geometry.

                    • By panick21_ 2026-02-050:52

                      That not totally true. Yes, HS2 spend additional billions on tunneling. But even without that you don't magically solve all the issues and in some places where they do tunneling its actually not completely stupid. Tunneling accounts for a few billions, not many 10s of billions.

                      And you don't get magically rid of all issues with people complaining, because guess what, other people live on that other imaginary route that lives in your head, and they would demand tunnels too.

                      And its really the politicians fault, a few people who don't like the look of the train should not have the power to stop it, specially not in a place as centralized as England.

            • By panick21_ 2026-02-0320:021 reply

              The reason you can't run as many other trains on WCML and other lines is because high-speed non-stop trains take so much capacity. Once you remove them, you can run many more local/regional trains with more stops and higher frequency.

              The whole way HS2 is designed is to maximally reduce the amount of fast trains going north south on the existing network. Leading to a massive capacity upgrade on the existing lines. You can still run some express lines but likely much more lines that stop at more station, making it fast for you to go to next HS2 stop and from there to the further distance destination.

              HS2 connection to Leeds was designed to help the ECML, the whole HS2 system was designed by experts to help with WCML and ECML.

              Of course now that the former car brained fucking moron of a prime minister in his last attempt to safe himself canceled most of HS2 all those benefits are gone. And labor is to cowardly and ignorant to bring it back.

        • By globular-toast 2026-02-029:541 reply

          Yes, most people cannot think beyond first-order effects, but this can be equally applied to HS2 proponents. There are other solutions to cut the amount of cargo traffic, but most of them involve just consuming less stuff.

          Building more and more infrastructure is not sustainable. It's been shown time and time again that more infrastructure only leads to more usage of said infrastructure. The number of lorries on the road will not decrease, we'll just start carting around even more stuff than before.

          > because every time they drive somewhere they have to contend with massive potholes and insane amount of heavy cargo traffic anywhere they go

          I don't buy that. The potholes are in residential and country roads. No amount of railways is going to do anything about that. The cargo traffic which could go via rail is on the motorways.

          I'm all for more rail and less roads. But to stop the road usage we need to tax it more heavily, especially for heavier vehicles, and not just lorries. So far I haven't seen any evidence of replacing roads with rail, it's just more, more, more.

          • By panick21_ 2026-02-051:00

            Consuming less is simply not a solution that anybody would ever agree to. Anything that you cut out would just be replaced with other consumption. Maybe consumtion can be slightly more local, but the idea that most consumption can be replaced with something that is local a pipedream. And even if you did that, to produce all that stuff locally the inputs for that production would still need to be transported.

            The only way to reduce consumption is people getting poorer or people increasing their savings. And that's just future consumption.

            Building more and more infrastructure is actually sustainable. And arguably we are not even building more and more as things like rail infrastructure is less now then it was in many places.

            > It's been shown time and time again that more infrastructure only leads to more usage of said infrastructure.

            And that is actually good if the infrastructure usage does not have massive negative externalizes, like ... trains. It actually reduces externalizes because it takes away from car and air traffic.

            > The number of lorries on the road will not decrease, we'll just start carting around even more stuff than before.

            Switzerland is prove that you can reduce the amount of lorries. But even if you don't, it will at least reduce the growth. And it makes it so you don't have to invest in highway expansion.

            You might be against that anyway, but most people would demand it if existing highways are always full of lorries.

            > But to stop the road usage we need to tax it more heavily, especially for heavier vehicles, and not just lorries. So far I haven't seen any evidence of replacing roads with rail, it's just more, more, more.

            If you tax heavy transport without providing an alternative you simply drive up cost of living and make peoples live worse.

            But you are right, taxing lorries and putting that into a fund that helps rail expansion is exactly what Switzerland did.

        • By xioxox 2026-02-029:416 reply

          Isn't the problem that the requirements for line were "gold plated"? If they'd put in another standard rail line instead, it would have increased capacity, taken up much less space, would have been much cheaper, would have caused less disruption and would have had a clearer business case.

          • By pjc50 2026-02-0210:432 reply

            Japan built the first Shinkansen while British Rail was still running steam services. Can't stay on the Victorian era rail constraints forever.

            (it's very British to say "this is too good, can we have something cheap and nasty instead please?")

            • By xioxox 2026-02-0211:511 reply

              What's the good of a perfect railway line if it never gets built? What happened to the capacity argument? There is likely a good optimum between the cheapest and most expensive possible for capacity and speed. We could all fly around in supersonic aircraft, but there's a reason we don't.

              • By pjc50 2026-02-0213:591 reply

                It's getting built! Large sections of it are nearly finished!

                Quite a lot of the cost is the NIMBY appeasement mentioned upthread. Something like a quarter of the line will be in tunnels. Making a slower line wouldn't make that any cheaper.

                • By glompers 2026-02-0216:441 reply

                  Connections to HS1/Europe, and to Leeds, Golborne, East Midlands, Manchester and finally even Crewe have all been cancelled so now extra expenditures will focus instead on Euston Station. That's not the large section people were interested in riding. Perhaps Old Oak Common should instead have been tunnelled the same distance through to Waterloo International (whose international platforms are now deleted).

                  • By kruador 2026-02-0310:05

                    The international platforms are not deleted! They were brought back into use from 2018-2019 to serve the Windsor Lines, which includes the service to Reading - platforms 20-24. That somewhat reduces the congestion at Waterloo; the station throat limits adding more services.

                    The extension to Euston was supposed to have 11 platforms. Even the reduced scope now being implemented is 6 platforms, I believe. All 11 were required to handle the eastern leg of HS2 [providing bypass capacity for the East Coast Main Line out of King's Cross and the Midland Main Line out of St Pancras], and services to Scotland and Manchester [bypassing the West Coast Main Line from Euston's classic platforms].

            • By bluGill 2026-02-0211:40

              steam is great technology - it is still used in power plants today. The only reason diesel replaced it was labor cost which made up for the loss in fuel efficiency.

          • By 9Mfhf34U 2026-02-029:54

            The high speed lets you build the Y shape to serve London to both north east and north west, as well as cross country journeys from Birmingham to the north east with the minimum amount of new track. With more standard rail lines you'd need to build a lot more. Plus there's many other benefits to high speed.

          • By laurencerowe 2026-02-0217:40

            If you’re building a new rail line you might as well make it high speed. The problem is that a political decision was made to tunnel through the Cotswolds to minimise local impact because a lot of rich and influential people live there.

          • By tonyedgecombe 2026-02-0213:13

            It would have been cheaper if we hadn't done so much tunnelling.

          • By panick21_ 2026-02-0320:16

            No this is just a typical media nonsense that is spread by idiots who don't know anything.

            > If they'd put in another standard rail line instead

            That would be crazy. In order to be a viable line to go from Midlands to London and reduce capacity, it would have to be at the very, very minimum as fast as that line goes today. So you are going to build a high-speed line of some sort anyway.

            And that means maybe you can be a bit more adaptive to the terrain, but that also leads to more distance and thus more kilometers of line that has to be build.

            A huge amount of the cost is simply buying the land, building the tunnels and bridges, putting up the electricity wires and so on. All that you would have to do anyway.

            So basically at the very minimum you would need to build a 200km/h line, and nobody serious would even consider that. A 250km/h is the only reasonable 'lets safe money choice'. Going to a 300-350km/h line is going to be more expensive, but likely only by a few %, maybe 10%. But you would lose a huge amount of the benefit, as tons of study show time is a massive important to use.

            So if you actually take into account future income from the line, building it to a lower standard would have been insanely stupid.

            > taken up much less space

            This is just straight up factually wrong. If you want to save money by changing alignment, you need more space, not less.

            > would have been much cheaper

            As I pointed out, much is simply wrong here.

            > would have caused less disruption

            Building would have more disruption and overall there would be more disruption in general.

            > would have had a clearer business case

            The business case, would be much much worse.

            The people making that argument somehow think that you could build some rural 160km/h rail line and still get 90% of the benefit. Yet somehow no country who analysis this beliefs this and pretty much every single rail expert in the world doesn't agree with it either.

            So the question you have to ask yourself do you want to believe the designer of HS2, most experts in rail technology or a bunch of anti-infrastructure activists?

      • By youngtaff 2026-02-029:34

        Even in the South East, the UK isn’t that densely populated — apparently golf courses take up more space than housing (excluding roads)

        HS2 benefits pretty my everyone along it’s route path through increases local services as capacity is released from the current lines

        Midland Connect have a good overview of what it enables them to do – https://www.midlandsconnect.uk/media/1602/hs2-released-capac...

        There’s also a document somewhere that covers how HS2 increases short distance services from Euston somewhere

        Local rail transport should benefit hugely from HS2

      • By panick21_ 2026-02-0319:53

        What nonsense. As if there was a desperate need for land in rural Britain. Southern England is densely populated compared to countries, but its still incredibly rural.

        In most places it barley effects people at all and when it does 99% of the time its a minimal visual impact.

        > therefore unable to use the line, by the way.

        This is a complete misunderstanding on the system effects of these lines. The point is that all other train lines can be used much more efficiently because the high-speed trains don't have to use those lines anymore. Making it much easier to run more rural trains.

        And it will also reduce car use on these routes, meaning the much, much worse highways will be used less.

        So in actual fact, the new lines are massively positive in terms of overall impact for rural areas.

        And I say this living in a country with some of the most dense rail networks in the world.

        > We also have very little wildlife left and we don't really want to live in concrete jungles.

        Another bunch of nonsense. Rail lines are very small and highly efficient. If you didn't build rail lines, you would almost certainty have to extend highways and those are infinity worse for wildlife.

        Railways and specially high-speed rail have the best impact vs effect calculation of almost anything you can build.

      • By energy123 2026-02-027:372 reply

        The taller the concrete jungle, the more spare land there is for people like you outside of it.

        • By globular-toast 2026-02-028:341 reply

          I don't live outside it.

          "People like you" shows that you're no better than the "NIMBYs" you so hate. Just complete refusal to accept that anyone might be different from you or have problems that aren't yours.

        • By cs02rm0 2026-02-028:431 reply

          HS2 is more sprawl than tall.

          • By panick21_ 2026-02-051:02

            Except it isn't, its designed to get people between city centers much faster, making living in cities much more attractive. Often the highest density areas are around train stations.

    • By hdgvhicv 2026-02-028:59

      It’s called the RSPB

    • By ErroneousBosh 2026-02-028:163 reply

      > building infrastructure is good actually

      It was never about "building infrastructure", though, which is why they used Compulsory Purchase to force farmers to sell their land for pennies. Because obviously "undeveloped" land without any sort of planning consent is worth very little.

      Now those bits of land, which have been put through the planning system and can now be built on, are not being used for HS2. So, they're being sold back to the farmers, right?

      No, they're being sold for thousands of times the purchase price to property developers run by the people who donate the most to the government.

      It's a land grab, same as the "inheritance tax on farms" thing.

      • By youngtaff 2026-02-029:352 reply

        Do you know how Compulsory Purchase Orders work?

        Many people along the HS2 route have been paid double the market price of their house

        • By ErroneousBosh 2026-02-0219:311 reply

          Yes, because a demolished house is a brownfield site which automatically has outline planning consent and you can build just about anything you like on it. It's worth a fortune.

          A farmer's field without planning consent is bought from the farmer priced as a worthless patch of mud, but taxed as though it already had a couple of dozen £500k rabbit hutch houses built on it.

          • By youngtaff 2026-02-0314:42

            > A farmer's field without planning consent is bought from the farmer priced as a worthless patch of mud, but taxed as though it already had a couple of dozen £500k rabbit hutch houses built on it.

            Farm land isn't taxed - it's exempt from business rates

        • By whywhywhywhy 2026-02-0213:253 reply

          Doesn’t matter what the price is if you lose your community.

          Very narrow minded view that doesn’t take into account people over 60

          • By pjc50 2026-02-0213:54

            Everything in UK politics takes into account people over 60. What we need is some policies taking into account people under 60.

          • By nly 2026-02-0223:34

            The over 60s in the UK are probably the most privileged demographic in the history of the nation.

            Just last October the government reduced tax free savings allowances on the Cash ISA for everyone...except he over 60s.

            The over 60s have iron-clad "triple locked" state pensions that are _guaranteed_ to grow unsustainably (faster than tax revenue) at the cost of the working tax payer.

            We need infrastructure and productivity growth, so the over 60s can take their gold plated compulsory buyouts and go do one.

          • By youngtaff 2026-02-0214:291 reply

            As someone who is in their 50s I'd disagree with you

            Very few people are losing their communities due to HS2

      • By gambiting 2026-02-029:15

        >>though, which is why they used Compulsory Purchase to force farmers to sell their land for pennies. Because obviously "undeveloped" land without any sort of planning consent is worth very little.

        Did you ever look into any of it? Because it's 100000% nonsense. One of the reasons why HS2 is over budget so much is because farmers are being paid absolutely through the nose for smallest chunks of land taken for it. Compulsory purchase has to pay the market rate, and in most cases it pays well above that.

        >>No, they're being sold for thousands of times the purchase price to property developers run by the people who donate the most to the government.

        I'd love to see an example of any piece of land being sold for "thousands of times the purchase price", it would be quite incredible. And the land goes back to auction, anyone can bid on it so not sure how exactly is it sold to "people who donate the most" - care to explain? Or better yet, give an example?

        >>It's a land grab, same as the "inheritance tax on farms" thing.

        Yes, nothing to do with people like the Percy family owning half of Northumerland for the last 700 years and never paying any inheritance tax on it because they farm on some of it. Nuh huh.

      • By kitd 2026-02-0214:23

        You really need a better source of information.

HackerNews