New runway plans shelved

[Nemesis]

Hmmmm.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/6276506.stm

 

[CHRIS]

Just found out on news as well, maybe Stansted next - I dont think so.

 

[Nemesis]

It's interesting that the message is creeping in to news reposrt though that maybe unfettered expansion based on spurious figures re unlimited growth in flying (fueled by cheap flights) is nort necessarily a good idea.

 

[Flyfisher]

I wouldn't hold your breath regarding Stansted. The Luton runway was, I believe, intended to be a replacement not an expansion - well maybe a bit longer for larger aircraft. It would seem this was a basic business decision in terms of ROI etc. I doubt the Stansted expansion would proceed against a similar business background.

Applying NT's "money = energy" principle, perhaps air travel is actually greener than rail? It's certainly much cheaper and, I suspect, requires less infrastructure and disturbance. I wonder how many acres of land are covered by rail infrastructure compared with airports, for example? And all that signalling and track maintenance . . . etc etc.

I've got no real axe to grind for either mode of transport, but I do question the 'rail is best' dogma. Best for what? And if so, why doesn't the ticket buying public seem to agree?

where's the smiley for 'running for cover'?

 

[Nemesis]

So what do we do with all the rail infrastucture already there?

And I travel by train.

Twenty quid return Lunnon and back.

Nice.

 

[CHRIS]

20 quid to london!

Try using it for work before 09.30 - they pull your pants down. Great if you book 16 years in advance but for a 35min trip at 0730 £29.50 - its a scandal. iIs always late, too busy and too hot. I still drive and suffer the £8 congestion but all in the luxury of my own air con. infact its still quicker to drive than get the train.

Flyfisher I agree, the public hate the train. Turn the railways into a nice cycle track with not too many hills and sack all the idiots in charge.

Terry Waite will be walking as a member of SSE this weekend, it will be great to have him especially after Alan Johnson being freed this week.

 

[Nemesis]

I love trains.

 

[CHRIS]

I love trains as well, the TGV, any SBB train, the NYC metro or the Watercress line in Hampshire but not the 0700 from Stansted to Liverpool Street.
Infact my boss saved the Flying Scotsman in the 70s - just remembered that!

 

[Nemesis]

I think I helped save Span Four at Paddington Station.

I love train sheds too.

 

[CHRIS]

I remember that issue, I went and had a look at it after reading posts about it and it was wrapped in plastic, last year wasnt it?

 

[Nemesis]

It's been out of sight for over a decade.

But I hope not forever...

 

[Pford75]

I live 16 miles from Norwich...which fleeces you for parking...to get to Heathrow on a Sunday (which I need to do this weekend)...I would need to drive to Norwich, get a train to Stowmarket...then get off...get on a bus...get back on another train...travel into Liverpool street, struggle across London on the tube with my luggage....get on the Heathrow Express and be charged a fortune for a 15min journey.

Or alternatively, I can fly from Norwich to Amsterdam and get my connection there?

And people wonder why regional airports are growing? Integrated transport system?? Prescott wouldn't know an integrated transport system if he was sh@gging it

 

[Nemesis]

But Prescott surely has nowt to do with it?

 

[Flyfisher]

Pardon my presumptioness, but I think Pford was perhaps meaning that Prescott SHOULD have had something to do with integrated transport, but actually achieved diddly-squat.

I suspect the reason that integrated transport is a failure is that it would require overall management by some body, typically the government. As I recall, this was tried once and was not conspicuously successful. Whereas, the recent success of regional air travel is being driven by what people actually want to do with their time and money.

And Chris is right about commuters being fleeced, but then that's market forces as well. Of course there will always be rail fans, like Nemesis, but their tickets are probably being subsidised by the legions of cramped, standing and generally uncomfortable commuters. Still, it's their choice I suppose.

As for railway nostalgia , I like to see steam trains as much as any one, but is anyone seriously suggesting they were a clean, green, efficient mode of locomotion? No. Basically railways were developed because it was the only technology available at the time to move large numbers of people around the country. That technology has long been superseded by the car and the aeroplane. Unfortunately, railways left such a mess of infrastructure blotting the environment that no-one (well, since Beeching) has the nerve to question getting rid of it all and moving on.

 

[Nemesis]

Oh but I love all that infrastructure! All those wonderful buildings -stations, trainsheds, bridges and viaducts! And you might be surprised to hear that apart from a few preserved lines and steam specials in fact we haven't had steam trains for quite some time. They were phased out.

Moving on - like an airport everywhere instead of rail stations?

 

[Flyfisher]

. . . all those derelict rail yards, rubbish-strewn wasteland. You'll have seen plenty of that sort of thing on your rail journeys. In my experience, the rail corridors into our major cities are not usually the most edifying enhancements to our environment.

Moving on - like an airport everywhere instead of rail stations?

Of course not, that's the beauty of airports; far fewer are necessary, which is why they create less environmental impact than railways criss-crossing hundreds of thousands of acres of countryside with millions of tons of concrete and steel.

I know we're lumbered with railways now, but that doesn't automatically make them 'good things'. I think they've had their time and are now, largely, a historical relic - with the possible exception of mass rapid transit systems in large cities. Of course there are times when they are convenient to use - I use them myself occasionally - but we pay a collectively high price for that occasional convenience.

The words 'horse', 'dead' and 'flogging' come to mind.

 

[Nemesis]

Have you actually any idea how many acres of countryside are covered with rail tracks?

Certainly the dereliction which many goodsyards have been allowed to slide into is sad, but that's something which could be dealt with.

Of course airport expansion is going to have to swallow up vast acres with new roads, car parks etc.

I have one station three miles from me and another a mile. Both have listed buildings and structures. Quite joyful places from which to travel.

I love train travel, whether country routes or down either the east or west coast routes. It never loses its excitement.

Pitch up, get on at one end, get off the other. Great.

 

[Nemesis]

PS I gather Mr Dimbleby is turning up at Newcastle Central by steam in this evening's prog.

One of the finest stations anywhere in my opinion - Dobson, Bell and prosser.

 

[Flyfisher]

Have you actually any idea how many acres of countryside are covered with rail tracks?

Not to the nearest acre, but I'd bet it's a lot more than the sum of UK airports. I've read that Network Rail is one of the biggest landowners in the UK though, with about 16000 route miles of track, 40,000 bridges, viaducts and tunnels, 9000 level crossings and 2500 stations, plus all the maintenance depots and other facilities. Imagine the environmental impact and maintenance costs of that little lot. And that's not including all the disused and derelict facilities that Network Rail (or Railtrack as it then was) didn't take over from British Railways when it was privatised. Apparently, in 2006 BRB (Residuary) Limited was still dealing with over 700 non-operational sites, 4000 structures on closed lines (bridges etc) and various H&S claims provisioned in excess of £250m - quite an on-going 'legacy' indeed.

Imagine the costs (time,energy and money) of looking after that little lot during your next rail journey. No wonder it's cheaper to travel by plane than by train.

I'm glad you enjoy your rail journeys. As I said before, I also quite enjoy the ones that I ocassionally take, but there is a very big price being paid for this outdated mode of transport.

 

[Flyfisher]

Have you actually any idea how many acres of countryside are covered with rail tracks?

Not to the nearest acre, but I'd bet it's a lot more than the sum of UK airports. I've read that Network Rail is one of the biggest landowners in the UK though, with about 16000 route miles of track, 40,000 bridges, viaducts and tunnels, 9000 level crossings and 2500 stations, plus all the maintenance depots and other facilities. Imagine the environmental impact and maintenance costs of that little lot. And that's not including all the disused and derelict facilities that Network Rail (or Railtrack as it then was) didn't take over from British Railways when it was privatised. Apparently, in 2006 BRB (Residuary) Limited was still dealing with over 700 non-operational sites, 4000 structures on closed lines (bridges etc) and various H&S claims provisioned in excess of £250m - quite an on-going 'legacy' indeed. I'd also bet that more people live within 'disturbance distance' of a railways than airports.

Imagine the costs (time, energy, money and quality of life impact) of that little lot during your next rail journey. No wonder it's cheaper to travel by plane than by train.

I'm glad you enjoy your rail journeys. As I said before, I also quite enjoy the ones that I ocassionally take, but there is a very big price being paid for this outdated mode of transport.