Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TheBoy]

Trains? Never heard of them in these parts. I think Beeching got it right - if they cannot survive on their own merit, close the lines.

I also think HS2 should be scrapped, or at the very least, ENTIRELY paid for by the company running it.

[Mr Skrunts]

It shouldnt be about taxing us to pay for mistakes.

Put money in a workers pocket and they will spend more, When the mortgage rate was dropped (I personally think this was a mistake and said so at the time) People uped and moved, or built extentions, this in turn created more work for the building trade and business in general.  More money in pockets meant more shopping, holidays and fancy goods, this was good all round and on the surface the mortgage drop was good and everyone was happy - Till the housing prices shot up - Now look at the mess.  Less houses bullt, fuel costs going up, that cost then gets added to all trades as they use transport, travel costs go up on planes, trains and all forms of public transport.  Who loses out - yup - Mr average trying to get to work.

Licening hours were altered in the 80's now look at the ammount of closed down pubs

Cut throat fuel prices - look at the amount of disused garages.

Mortgage cuts - Look at the record amount of reposesions.


IT's NOT BE ABOUT THE AMOUNT WE PAY IN TAX  But I believe it's about the way it should be managed.  As allready mentioned, MP's expences, Then government Grants, Homeless help for people coming from abroad and benfits handouts for the same.  Ridiculous and exspensive survays to tell us what we allready know.

Any government is just another set of management, they get some of it right and most of it wrong, but as long as they are doing ok then they dont give a site (missed the H out - sorry)

[Varche]

Trains? Never heard of them in these parts. I think Beeching got it right - if they cannot survive on their own merit, close the lines.

I also think HS2 should be scrapped, or at the very least, ENTIRELY paid for by the company running it.

Can't see that happening. What actually happens is the people pay for the infrastructure and R&D then when it is working the debt is written off and the company "floated" at a knockdown price. Everything is hunky dory for a while then because of no investment and no long term planning(too busy draining the coffers to pay shareholders) the process is started again.

Sound familar. It should.

Thinking about it maybe petrol should be £3 a litre so that HS2 can happen (in 17 years time apparently) and a national grid for fresh water, Nuclear power stations, Trident (can't forget that beggar) and the wars with Iran etc

[Dishevelled Den]

Allowing so many 'out of town' shopping centres was, frankly, a  mistake, and has just ruined many a town and city centre, with encouragement and necessity given to the use of the car.  These centres, now built, should be properly linked by railways, or tram ways, to further reduce the need for car travel.  Far more frieght being moved by the railways should also be an aim to remove thousands of lorries from our roads, leaving just local delivery trucks running out from central rail linked warehouses (like it used to be, but for 'loose' frieght.

I know what I am saying will not be popular on here, but how long do you think we can keep clogging our roads and using vastly reduced oil stocks?



Oh, almost forgot!!   Watch out for OPEC and all oil producing countries wanted to charge a lot more for their dwindling super resource!!

 

Yes, I certainly agree with both Lizzie

[Dishevelled Den]

Can't see that happening. What actually happens is the people pay for the infrastructure and R&D then when it is working the debt is written off and the company "floated" at a knockdown price. Everything is hunky dory for a while then because of no investment and no long term planning(too busy draining the coffers to pay shareholders) the process is started again.

Sound familar. It should.

 

It certainly does V and unless there's a radical alighnment of the senses within our government (of whatever hue) there will be more to come.

[mowerman]

wow this is a popular topic i started 

high fuel prices will affect the trains too there not all electric yet
some poeple complain about aircraft and the amount of fuel they use this is simple stay in the uk there is plenty to see in are wonderfull country
a holiday is just a memory to take to the grave

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Trains? Never heard of them in these parts. I think Beeching got it right - if they cannot survive on their own merit, close the lines.

I also think HS2 should be scrapped, or at the very least, ENTIRELY paid for by the company running it.

lol TB, you did!  The Great Central main line, completed in 1899 to full modern standards ran just a few miles from you.  Yes Beeching was responsible for its closure between 1966 and 1969, due to a belief this was an unnecessary duplication of the main West Coast and East Coast lines.  How wrong he was, as now, if not then, this line was a crucial route between London, Rugby, Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield for passengers, and frieght!  Now that line could have not only have provided the extra capacity for the traffic that now needs to be dealt with, but would save a great many unnecessary car and lorry jouneys, thus saving fuel costs.

Imagine virtually every area being linked by rail TB; well it once was until Beeching, the government, and earlier politically anti-railway fiends got to work.

This was the railway map in 1900.  The main lines are shown in thick black lines, with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pbtyc/Maps/England_Sea_Routes.html

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

[Dishevelled Den]

 with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

Yet again I find myself in agreement with you Lizzie - even with the dreaded 'European link'.

[bob.dent]

Sorry, I think there should be another form of fuel blockade or demonstration. I firmly believe we should take a lesson from the French and stand up for ourselves rather than sitting back and taking it on the chin like the soft wimps that us Brits so often are. If we do nothing, the government will assume that we are all happy little bunnies with plenty of money to spare and put even more duty or tax on.
Providing that the blockade or demonstration was peaceful, it's one of the few ways us minions can let the bloody government know our feelings.
At the end of the day, it usually works for the French so why not us?

[Kevin Wood]

 with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

Yet again I find myself in agreement with you Lizzie - even with the dreaded 'European link'.

I think the 'European link' would make an ideal test bed for large cans of expanding foam.

Having been stranded by it once - never again.

As to railways, I think we've missed the boat. Had they grown with the vast development of conurbations that has taken place since Beeching's time, as they have in other countries, they may have been viable, but threading railways back into the suburbs and modern towns would be an impossible task, and if you can't walk or cycle to a station, that gets you in the right direction*, it may as well not be there.

* - i.e. not just towards or away from London - London is an irrelevance to most commuters.

Kevin

[Dishevelled Den]

 with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

Yet again I find myself in agreement with you Lizzie - even with the dreaded 'European link'.

I think the 'European link' would make an ideal test bed for large cans of expanding foam.

Having been stranded by it once - never again.

As to railways, I think we've missed the boat. Had they grown with the vast development of conurbations that has taken place since Beeching's time, as they have in other countries, they may have been viable, but threading railways back into the suburbs and modern towns would be an impossible task, and if you can't walk or cycle to a station, that gets you in the right direction*, it may as well not be there.

* - i.e. not just towards or away from London - London is an irrelevance to most commuters.

Kevin

Yes, I certainly agree with that analysis K and no doubt, as Lizzie says, it would require a major rethink of the strategic transport network but to try and carry on as we are isn't a viable option as far as I can see.

The weakest link always seems to be the journey from home to the first point of public transport (for anything beyond very local journeys) - should this require a car then perhaps enhanced parking facilities should be installed at local feeder points where the traveller can be then taken on to major hubs if necessary.

It would seem sensible to try to reduce the amount of road traffic we are likely to see in the coming years but this should be done by making the alternative attractive, convenient and above all affordable, not by pricing road traffic from the roads.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

 with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

Yet again I find myself in agreement with you Lizzie - even with the dreaded 'European link'.

I think the 'European link' would make an ideal test bed for large cans of expanding foam.

Having been stranded by it once - never again.

As to railways, I think we've missed the boat. Had they grown with the vast development of conurbations that has taken place since Beeching's time, as they have in other countries, they may have been viable, but threading railways back into the suburbs and modern towns would be an impossible task, and if you can't walk or cycle to a station, that gets you in the right direction*, it may as well not be there.

* - i.e. not just towards or away from London - London is an irrelevance to most commuters.

Kevin

Yes, I certainly agree with that analysis K and no doubt, as Lizzie says, it would require a major rethink of the strategic transport network but to try and carry on as we are isn't a viable option as far as I can see.

The weakest link always seems to be the journey from home to the first point of public transport (for anything beyond very local journeys) - should this require a car then perhaps enhanced parking facilities should be installed at local feeder points where the traveller can be then taken on to major hubs if necessary.

It would seem sensible to try to reduce the amount of road traffic we are likely to see in the coming years but this should be done by making the alternative attractive, convenient and above all affordable, not by pricing road traffic from the roads.

Indeed ZL!  When I say major I really do mean major, and massive investment to follow, with no holds barred!  It would take real commitment and dedication by the politicians to make it happen, with a very brave approach

I see it on a par with the great Victorian railway projects and their absolute commitment to make it happen, something that built the Empire and is so often seen by many, especially on the OOF, to be missing in modern Britain.

Kevin of course makes some very valid points, especially the one of the UK "missing the boat" and not keeping the railway development in pace with population spread and conurbations.  He is also right about the hard task of driving new railways through the urban suburbs.  However, that is not an "impossible task" as Kevin suggests.  Very difficult and expensive yes, but not impossible.

The Victorian engineers managed such a task, although admittedly far more 'empty space' existed for their building.  But the modern motorway builders have pushed their roads through whole cities, one example being the M5 and M6 through Birmingham.  In addition modern railway construction techniquies and accepted practice have developed so that major lines are 'cut and buried', put into very long tunnels under urban areas, or simply placed on long viaducts, for example with the HS1 line through Kent, under/ into East London to St.Pancras.  The cross London link is also adopting the same principles.

It is not generally recognised but a double stretch of track takes up less room than a three lane motorway.  Tram ways would take up even less room, so they could radiate out from the main line stations to the various suburbs, going along old track bed plus existing road space.  I believe Manchester, to name one city in this country, has such a system, as does Croydon in a far smaller way.  Many foreign cites of course have never lost they faith in trams, and they are widespread!!

With Victorian type commitment, passion and entrepreneurship, coupled to 21st century construction skills, with 100 of billions of pounds spent, which will have to be found if we are going to advance a modern integrated transport system, plus that magic ingredient of POLITICAL WILL, it CAN be done!

PS If our country does not bite the bullet on this now, then in 25 years time motorists will be complaining about impossible traffic conditions and fuel prices of £30 a gallon, with no alternative available!!

[TheBoy]

Trains? Never heard of them in these parts. I think Beeching got it right - if they cannot survive on their own merit, close the lines.

I also think HS2 should be scrapped, or at the very least, ENTIRELY paid for by the company running it.

lol TB, you did!  The Great Central main line, completed in 1899 to full modern standards ran just a few miles from you.  Yes Beeching was responsible for its closure between 1966 and 1969, due to a belief this was an unnecessary duplication of the main West Coast and East Coast lines.  How wrong he was, as now, if not then, this line was a crucial route between London, Rugby, Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield for passengers, and frieght!  Now that line could have not only have provided the extra capacity for the traffic that now needs to be dealt with, but would save a great many unnecessary car and lorry jouneys, thus saving fuel costs.

Imagine virtually every area being linked by rail TB; well it once was until Beeching, the government, and earlier politically anti-railway fiends got to work.

This was the railway map in 1900.  The main lines are shown in thick black lines, with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pbtyc/Maps/England_Sea_Routes.html

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

But I wasn't born until 1970 . Long gone by then.  And the fact it hasn't been used for the past 40yrs shows it was not required.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Trains? Never heard of them in these parts. I think Beeching got it right - if they cannot survive on their own merit, close the lines.

I also think HS2 should be scrapped, or at the very least, ENTIRELY paid for by the company running it.

lol TB, you did!  The Great Central main line, completed in 1899 to full modern standards ran just a few miles from you.  Yes Beeching was responsible for its closure between 1966 and 1969, due to a belief this was an unnecessary duplication of the main West Coast and East Coast lines.  How wrong he was, as now, if not then, this line was a crucial route between London, Rugby, Leicester, Nottingham and Sheffield for passengers, and frieght!  Now that line could have not only have provided the extra capacity for the traffic that now needs to be dealt with, but would save a great many unnecessary car and lorry jouneys, thus saving fuel costs.

Imagine virtually every area being linked by rail TB; well it once was until Beeching, the government, and earlier politically anti-railway fiends got to work.

This was the railway map in 1900.  The main lines are shown in thick black lines, with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pbtyc/Maps/England_Sea_Routes.html

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

But I wasn't born until 1970 . Long gone by then.  And the fact it hasn't been used for the past 40yrs shows it was not required.

But since the period from 1966 to 1969 when it was dismantled, no track for trains to use TB!

[Omegatoy]

 with the crucial "feeding" branch lines running into them

How the UK lost out by abondoning its railway development advantage!    Time for a major re-think, with fuel prices, road congestion, the European link and an ever aging population who will not be able to drive for ever, to be taken into account.  We should again have the advantages of a fine, widespread railway system, but one catering for the 21st century.

Forget fuel blockades, this is what we should protest for!8-) 8-)

Yet again I find myself in agreement with you Lizzie - even with the dreaded 'European link'.

I think the 'European link' would make an ideal test bed for large cans of expanding foam.

Having been stranded by it once - never again.

As to railways, I think we've missed the boat. Had they grown with the vast development of conurbations that has taken place since Beeching's time, as they have in other countries, they may have been viable, but threading railways back into the suburbs and modern towns would be an impossible task, and if you can't walk or cycle to a station, that gets you in the right direction*, it may as well not be there.

* - i.e. not just towards or away from London - London is an irrelevance to most commuters.

Kevin

Yes, I certainly agree with that analysis K and no doubt, as Lizzie says, it would require a major rethink of the strategic transport network but to try and carry on as we are isn't a viable option as far as I can see.

The weakest link always seems to be the journey from home to the first point of public transport (for anything beyond very local journeys) - should this require a car then perhaps enhanced parking facilities should be installed at local feeder points where the traveller can be then taken on to major hubs if necessary.

It would seem sensible to try to reduce the amount of road traffic we are likely to see in the coming years but this should be done by making the alternative attractive, convenient and above all affordable, not by pricing road traffic from the roads.

Indeed ZL!  When I say major I really do mean major, and massive investment to follow, with no holds barred!  It would take real commitment and dedication by the politicians to make it happen, with a very brave approach

I see it on a par with the great Victorian railway projects and their absolute commitment to make it happen, something that built the Empire and is so often seen by many, especially on the OOF, to be missing in modern Britain.

Kevin of course makes some very valid points, especially the one of the UK "missing the boat" and not keeping the railway development in pace with population spread and conurbations.  He is also right about the hard task of driving new railways through the urban suburbs.  However, that is not an "impossible task" as Kevin suggests.  Very difficult and expensive yes, but not impossible.

The Victorian engineers managed such a task, although admittedly far more 'empty space' existed for their building.  But the modern motorway builders have pushed their roads through whole cities, one example being the M5 and M6 through Birmingham.  In addition modern railway construction techniquies and accepted practice have developed so that major lines are 'cut and buried', put into very long tunnels under urban areas, or simply placed on long viaducts, for example with the HS1 line through Kent, under/ into East London to St.Pancras.  The cross London link is also adopting the same principles.

It is not generally recognised but a double stretch of track takes up less room than a three lane motorway.  Tram ways would take up even less room, so they could radiate out from the main line stations to the various suburbs, going along old track bed plus existing road space.  I believe Manchester, to name one city in this country, has such a system, as does Croydon in a far smaller way.  Many foreign cites of course have never lost they faith in trams, and they are widespread!!

With Victorian type commitment, passion and entrepreneurship, coupled to 21st century construction skills, with 100 of billions of pounds spent, which will have to be found if we are going to advance a modern integrated transport system, plus that magic ingredient of POLITICAL WILL, it CAN be done!

PS If our country does not bite the bullet on this now, then in 25 years time motorists will be complaining about impossible traffic conditions and fuel prices of £30 a gallon, with no alternative available!!

but surely that just reiterates what i have said? trains are not good enough and probably never will be, society is built up the use of the motor car giving the personal freedom and choice of where to work and shop, such a high taxation rate ends this choice and leads to people spending less!! bring the tax down!!