Editing Advanced Passenger Train (section)

===HST vs. APT===
[[File:Intercity 125 2169045.jpg|thumb|In contrast to APT, HST was a huge success.]]

It was during this time that other groups within BR began to agitate against APT, saying it was simply too large a step to make in a single design. They proposed building a much simpler design, powered by conventional diesels and lacking tilt, but capable of speeds of up to {{convert|125|mph|abbr=on}} and able to run anywhere on the BR network. This emerged in 1970 as the [[InterCity 125|High Speed Train]] (HST), and development proceeded rapidly.{{sfn|Wickens|1988}}<ref>{{Cite web| url = http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10710F73D5416768FDDA90A94D1405B808BF1D3 |title = Trains in Europe Fast and Growing |author = Edward Burks |work=[[The New York Times]]|date = 20 September 1970 | access-date = 29 April 2009}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BRB_APT004.pdf | title= Tomorrow's Train, Today | publisher=Railways Archive |access-date=18 May 2009 }}</ref>

As the APT programme continued, management began infighting. Experienced engineering resources were withheld from the APT project, using them instead to press ahead as swiftly as possible with what they saw as a conventional rival to APT.<ref>{{Cite news| url=http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoT_WP001.pdf |title=New opportunities for the railways: the privatisation of British Rail |publisher=Railway Archive | page=8 |access-date=18 May 2009}}</ref> As it appeared the HST would be a relatively sure bet, BR's board of directors dithered on the APT project, eventually cutting the number of trains to four. This was later cut to three by the government in a 1974 round of budget cuts.{{sfn|Wickens|1988}}