Get ready for some serious carnage...

[V8 Archie]

BBC

BBC said:

Rubber highway to beat congestion A congestion-beating project that could lead to some of the UK's 9,000 miles (14,500km) of disused railway being paved with rubber, has been launched. ...New thoroughfares could be shared by both cars and trams travelling at up to 50mph (80km/h) say Holdfast, the company behind the scheme.

As pointed out in the article, many disused lines are disused because they traverse routes that no-one wants to use. I'm more scared by the idea of trams and cars sharing the same thoroughfares though.

[MGBGT]

Another minor in the Treasury blowing bubbles out of his backside again..."What else can we sell into privatisation, sorry, partnership? I know! We can put some of those nasty cars on rubber mats on old railway lines and then drive trams over them..."

[vipers]

V8 Archie said:

As pointed out in the article, many disused lines are disused because they traverse routes that no-one wants to use.

If they are disused because they traverse routes no one wants to use, what makes them think they will be used if put back into service?

If they think they will be used, why not just open them up as trams/trains only, and have some kind of scheme whereby car owners can travel free, thus leaving the car at home, now that for me would encourage me to go by train, assuming it went where I wanted to go.

Non car owners could pay a nominal fee to travel.

[Narvanath]

I just can't see it. Rubber types running on a rubber road? No. What will the additional tyre wear be? And what about the rubberized dust particles that will settle onto the paintwork? No, no, no! Tis 'nother evil idea from those who hate drivers.

[vipers]

go to to the link, and look at the caption under the picture

Car drivers could soon have an alternative to waiting in traffic jams

Absolutely, the alternative will be WAITING IN TRAFFIC JAMS, it rightly says in the article overtaking will be impossible.

God they make me

[109 Bob]

And I wonder how much per mile motorists will be charged to drive on these routes.

[cptsideways]

Now if they converted the railway lines into this that'd be a much better idea

[vipers]

109 Bob said:

And I wonder how much per mile motorists will be charged to drive on these routes.

They'll probably bounce that one around a while, until they get tyred of it

[Parrot of Doom]

Hmmm, stopping distance on this surface when wet?

[vipers]

Parrot of Doom said:

Hmmm, stopping distance on this surface when wet?

What stopping distance

[pugwash4x4]

V8 Archie said:

As pointed out in the article, many disused lines are disused because they traverse routes that no-one wants to use.

This isn't right.

Vast majoiryt of Disused lines are only disused becuase in 1964 Mr Beaching and the stupid sodding labour goverment decided mass transportation had no future, and was never going to be profitable, and closed just about everything they could.

wish someone would remind them of this.

[V8 Archie]

pugwash4x4 said:

V8 Archie said:

As pointed out in the article, many disused lines are disused because they traverse routes that no-one wants to use.

This isn't right.

Vast [majority] of Disused lines are only disused becuase in 1964 Mr Beaching and the stupid sodding labour goverment decided mass transportation had no future

I said many, not the majority. I believe that most of the Beeching lines have had the tracks taken up and are in an advanced state of decay such that it would take rather more than slapping some rubber down to make them usable. I think the idea is based on more recently closed lines - which were closed because they weren't profitable. That's no doubt partly due to shambolic way the system is "organised" in this privatised world, but I doubt Beeching has anything to do with this one.

[Peter Ward]

V8 Archie said:

pugwash4x4 said:

V8 Archie said:

As pointed out in the article, many disused lines are disused because they traverse routes that no-one wants to use.

This isn't right.

Vast [majority] of Disused lines are only disused becuase in 1964 Mr Beaching and the stupid sodding labour goverment decided mass transportation had no future

I said many, not the majority. I believe that most of the Beeching lines have had the tracks taken up and are in an advanced state of decay such that it would take rather more than slapping some rubber down to make them usable. I think the idea is based on more recently closed lines - which were closed because they weren't profitable. That's no doubt partly due to shambolic way the system is "organised" in this privatised world, but I doubt Beeching has anything to do with this one.

I think many routes have been converted to footpaths and cycle routes as well. And the odd one or two have been relaid for railway preservation society use.

The sad thing is that railways are effective for mass transit and freight movement, yet still Railtrack wants to close more lines. Perhaps the main problem is that Britain is just too small to support the long-distance movement of people and goods that works so well over the longer distances of continental Europe?

[dcb]

pugwash4x4 said:

Vast majoiryt of Disused lines are only disused becuase in 1964
Mr Beaching and the stupid sodding labour goverment decided mass
transportation had no future, and was never going to be profitable,
and closed just about everything they could.

I'm not sure if this is related to motoring going all mass market
after the 1939-1945 show.

Lots of folks bought cars for the first time
=> reduced rail useage
=> shutting lines down.

Dr Beeching did a thorough and complete analysis of the rail
network and shut down underused and unprofitable lines.

I'm sorry to intrude with harsh economic reality, but don't
let the facts get in the way of trying to recall the good old days.

[dcb]

Peter Ward said:

Perhaps the main problem is that Britain is just too small to
support the long-distance movement of people and goods that works so
well over the longer distances of continental Europe?

No.

You are missing out the fact that many Euro governments know
almost all rail lines are a money pit, but are still prepared
to fund them anyway, partly as a public resource.

UK Gov is deeply unwilling to chuck away money in the same fashion,
hence lower taxes in the UK than many places in Europe.

Also, I think it was a standard 'O' level Geography question
back in the 1970s to ask what kind of good loads rail was good at.

The answer was always high volume low value goods like coal and
concrete.

I'll leave it to the concerned reader quite how complex the problem
was if it appeared on an 'O' level paper designed for average
16 year olds.

[cptsideways]

I'm pretty sure sustrans have the monopoly on disused railway lines nowadays, as long distance & flat cycle routes. They are brilliant by the way.