Massive train timetabling amendments
Discussion
cuprabob said:
Despite him resigning, I bet he still leaves with a big wad of cash and will walk straight into another similar role.
Yep, the magical railway merry-go-round.He’ll land on his feet somewhere with a larger pay packet for good measure.
I suppose someone had to fall on their sword over this shambles, just a pity it wasn’t Grayling.
cuprabob said:
Robertj21a said:
At least Charles Horton, the GTR boss, has resigned.
Despite him resigning, I bet he still leaves with a big wad of cash and will walk straight into another similar role.
tight5 said:
V8 Fettler said:
I've shown you where FOCs benefit from indirect subsidy.
So you're saying FOCs don't get subsidies ?That is the same as i've been saying.
legzr1 said:
What a rediculous ‘argument’.
The overall benefit of freight on rail rather than clogging up an already bursting-at-the-seams road network is so obvious even this Government see the sense in it.
It obviously passes you by...
The yearly subsidy you’ve pointed out is piffling compared to loss to the economy. Almost inconsequential in fact.
The last bar on your chart, for the whole year, doesn’t even cover the amount lost to the economy in traffic jams and accidents in one DAY.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/18/traf...
And you want to make it worse?
Off your head you are.
Off your head.
The yearly subsidy for the railways is approx £5 billion, Network Rail operates with a debt of approx £50 billion, how is this "piffling"? Southern Rail strikes cost the economy £300 million+ http://www.cityam.com/255961/southern-rail-strike-...The overall benefit of freight on rail rather than clogging up an already bursting-at-the-seams road network is so obvious even this Government see the sense in it.
It obviously passes you by...
The yearly subsidy you’ve pointed out is piffling compared to loss to the economy. Almost inconsequential in fact.
The last bar on your chart, for the whole year, doesn’t even cover the amount lost to the economy in traffic jams and accidents in one DAY.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/18/traf...
And you want to make it worse?
Off your head you are.
Off your head.
Increasing the freight traffic on the railways increases total subsidy costs, why would anyone in their right mind want to do that? Invest the money in the roads (incuding providing more roads by ripping up the railway tracks), reduce congestion to benefit the economy and generate income to benefit the taxpayer.
V8 Fettler said:
Increasing the freight traffic on the railways increases total subsidy costs, why would anyone in their right mind want to do that? Invest the money in the roads (including providing more roads by ripping up the railway tracks), reduce congestion to benefit the economy and generate income to benefit the taxpayer.
You won't listen, will you? If you can be bothered, try reading this article about a proposal to convert Marylebone station to a coach station back in the 80s, together with a rail to road conversion scheme to feed it. There are also details of other rail/road conversions in the London area that never even got off the ground (it has been posted on PH before, but perhaps you never saw it)
Don't forget to read right to the end to see why it wouldn't have worked for all manner of practical reasons.
https://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-term...
V8 Fettler said:
Do you not understand that an indirect subsidy is still a subsidy? FOCs and TOCs receive direct and indirect subsidies. This table shows subsidy cost for FOCs and TOCs, compared with the profit generated by road.
No, it's not.I'll say it again, show me FOC subsidy.
No matter what you and your graphs say, railways do make a profit for the industry and the country.
It is profitable for the companies that transport their goods by rail.
If you think your automatic electric road vehicles is gonna happen, then you are deluded.
Suck it up, buttercup.
tight5 said:
Suck it up, buttercup.
Just about to contact https://www.dur.ac.uk/cmp/
Think we’ve found a competitor for osmium.
rs1952 said:
V8 Fettler said:
Increasing the freight traffic on the railways increases total subsidy costs, why would anyone in their right mind want to do that? Invest the money in the roads (including providing more roads by ripping up the railway tracks), reduce congestion to benefit the economy and generate income to benefit the taxpayer.
You won't listen, will you?If you can be bothered, try reading this article about a proposal to convert Marylebone station to a coach station back in the 80s, together with a rail to road conversion scheme to feed it. There are also details of other rail/road conversions in the London area that never even got off the ground (it has been posted on PH before, but perhaps you never saw it)
Don't forget to read right to the end to see why it wouldn't have worked for all manner of practical reasons.
https://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-term...
Chiltern Railways runs at a loss, how is that a success?
Spatial restrictions dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-3-wid...
Average flow etc dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-1-%E2...
The use of automatic electric vehicles adds further weight to the argument to rip up the tracks.
tight5 said:
V8 Fettler said:
Do you not understand that an indirect subsidy is still a subsidy? FOCs and TOCs receive direct and indirect subsidies. This table shows subsidy cost for FOCs and TOCs, compared with the profit generated by road.
No, it's not.I'll say it again, show me FOC subsidy.
No matter what you and your graphs say, railways do make a profit for the industry and the country.
It is profitable for the companies that transport their goods by rail.
If you think your automatic electric road vehicles is gonna happen, then you are deluded.
Suck it up, buttercup.
Freight avoidable costs and freight only line charges are set at a level that allows the FOCs to continue operating, if these costs were set at the true cost to Network Rail then the FOCs would almost certainly go bankrupt.
https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2...
Automatic electric vehicles are already here.
V8 Fettler said:
I've spent too many years listening to feeble excuses from the railway sector, remove all subsidies and let the free market prevail.
Chiltern Railways runs at a loss, how is that a success?
Spatial restrictions dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-3-wid...
Average flow etc dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-1-%E2...
The use of automatic electric vehicles adds further weight to the argument to rip up the tracks.
Are you suggesting something like the pods that run between Heathrow and the t5 car park? Chiltern Railways runs at a loss, how is that a success?
Spatial restrictions dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-3-wid...
Average flow etc dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-1-%E2...
The use of automatic electric vehicles adds further weight to the argument to rip up the tracks.
Cupid you show us these automated electric vehicles?
V8 Fettler said:
I've spent too many years listening to feeble excuses from the railway sector, remove all subsidies and let the free market prevail.
Chiltern Railways runs at a loss, how is that a success?
Spatial restrictions dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-3-wid...
Average flow etc dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-1-%E2...
The use of automatic electric vehicles adds further weight to the argument to rip up the tracks.
And round we go in another pointless circle Chiltern Railways runs at a loss, how is that a success?
Spatial restrictions dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-3-wid...
Average flow etc dealt with here http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/facts-sheet-1-%E2...
The use of automatic electric vehicles adds further weight to the argument to rip up the tracks.
It's like a religious mantra with you isn't it - why not just post a reply of "Hare Krishna" and have done with it?
V8 Fettler said:
rs1952 said:
You won't listen, will you?
If you can be bothered, try reading this article about a proposal to convert Marylebone station to a coach station back in the 80s, together with a rail to road conversion scheme to feed it. There are also details of other rail/road conversions in the London area that never even got off the ground (it has been posted on PH before, but perhaps you never saw it)
Don't forget to read right to the end to see why it wouldn't have worked for all manner of practical reasons.
https://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-term...
I've spent too many years listening to feeble excuses from the railway sector, remove all subsidies and let the free market prevail.If you can be bothered, try reading this article about a proposal to convert Marylebone station to a coach station back in the 80s, together with a rail to road conversion scheme to feed it. There are also details of other rail/road conversions in the London area that never even got off the ground (it has been posted on PH before, but perhaps you never saw it)
Don't forget to read right to the end to see why it wouldn't have worked for all manner of practical reasons.
https://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-term...
The use of automatic electric vehicles adds further weight to the argument to rip up the tracks.
The link to the London Connections website gives details of a government-inspired idea to carry out rail/road conversions in the London area back in the 80s. Flogging off Marylebone and not having to pay out mega-bucks modernising the Chiltern lines was just the icing on the cake, and the bit that BR particularly liked. They were also reasonably keen on the concept of being paid tolls for the use of their real estate (ie the track formations) rather than have the bother of running trains on them. When you read the detail of the Marylebone closure debacle you will see that they were actually looking for feeble excuses to execute the plan rather than feeble excuses to scupper it.
It was a scheme backed by such well-known railway lovers as Margaret Thatcher, Norman Tebbit, Nigel Lawson and Cecil Parkinson who were in cabinet at the time. Yet, apparently, they all fell for the "feeble excuses from the railway sector" (that weren't there...) and the idea went nowhere. Well well well, who'd a thunk it?
The London Connections piece also gives specific details of "pinch points" on the proposed conversion routes (eg viaduct curved and too narrow, insufficient clearance under bridges and in tunnels etc). Yet, apparently, this was all hogwash and they must have been lying because V8F has found a Transport Watch web page that tells us all how easy and straightforward it really would have been. Well well well who'd a thunk that either?
Hare Krishna...
V8 Fettler said:
Freight avoidable costs and freight only line charges are set at a level that allows the FOCs to continue operating, if these costs were set at the true cost to Network Rail then the FOCs would almost certainly go bankrupt.
Freight avoidable costs and freight only line charges, but no mention of variable usage charge !Network Rail said:
Rail freight is vital to Britain’s economic success.
It contributes £870m to the economy and plays a big part in reducing congestion and carbon emissions
It contributes £870m to the economy and plays a big part in reducing congestion and carbon emissions
Network Rail said:
Britain relies on the railway
Rail freight is a success story. Whether it is taking lorries off the roads and drastically reducing congestion or transporting goods that we consume every day, Britain relies on rail freight to provide a faster, greener, safer and more efficient way of transporting goods than roads.
The rail freight industry directly contributes £870m to the nation’s economy every year, but supports an economic output of £5.9bn – six times its direct turnover.
It is an indispensable part of the British economy, and an essential component in supporting economic recovery and long-term sustainable growth.
Rail freight is a success story. Whether it is taking lorries off the roads and drastically reducing congestion or transporting goods that we consume every day, Britain relies on rail freight to provide a faster, greener, safer and more efficient way of transporting goods than roads.
The rail freight industry directly contributes £870m to the nation’s economy every year, but supports an economic output of £5.9bn – six times its direct turnover.
It is an indispensable part of the British economy, and an essential component in supporting economic recovery and long-term sustainable growth.
Network Rail said:
Key facts
The UK rail freight sector contributes £299m in profits and wages to the UK economy.
On average a gallon of fuel moves a tonne of goods 246 miles by rail but 88 miles by road.
Each freight train takes about 60 HGVs off the roads.
The UK rail freight sector contributes £299m in profits and wages to the UK economy.
On average a gallon of fuel moves a tonne of goods 246 miles by rail but 88 miles by road.
Each freight train takes about 60 HGVs off the roads.
V8 Fettler said:
Automatic electric vehicles are already here.
Show me one moving 100,000 litres of petrol/diesel/aviation fuel.Show me one moving a 40 foot shipping container.
Show me one moving 70 tons of coal.
Show me one moving Hydrocyanic acid.
Robertj21a said:
If this thread is still about timetable amendments (???), I gather that the Windermere branch is about to restart, with a couple of locos !
Now that I am glad to hear about, because I will be going on a "Reminiscence" tour of the North West shortly to commemorate 50 years since the end of steam, and the Windermere branch is on my itinerary.I had planned to start the tour last week but postponed it because of the current timetable debacle.
To me the most important element is going from Preston to Liverpool via Ormskirk, because that was the route taken by the very last ever normal scheduled steam-hauled passenger service on British Railways, the 2125 Preston to Liverpool Exchange, on Saturday 3rd August 1968. I was on it and here's my evidence
:https://www.flickr.com/photos/93122458@N08/2073987...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/93122458@N08/1991376...
The line has been cut in half at Ormskirk since the end of steam, with Merseyrail operating the southern half and Northern Trains operating the northern bit. You can't really reminisce about the "old days" when the Preston to Ormskirk section is being run as a f
king replacement bus service... Edited by rs1952 on Monday 18th June 00:57
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff