Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
A no. 9 tribute post: railways 13:14 - Dec 15 with 5770 viewsgiant_stow

The Swiss are about to open up an engineering marvel 1700 metres up a bludy mountain for the price of €44.6m

Sorry forgot links: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/15/world-steepest-funicular-rail-line

Meanwhile a study says it will cost £1b to re-open an old curve of track (with the cutting still in place) in Reedham to re-establish a direct train link between Yarmouth and Lowerstoft.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/rail-plan-sparks-station-concerns-in-reedham-1-39101

wtf? Why is this country so expensive when our wages are apparently so low?

[Post edited 15 Dec 2017 13:17]

Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
Poll: A clasmate tells your son their going to beat him up in the playground after sch

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:09 - Dec 15 with 2171 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 13:26 - Dec 15 by giant_stow

You and Bankerdebt must be right, but gawd - what a price!


Now that's not something I read every day! Merry Christmas.
[Post edited 15 Dec 2017 14:10]

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:14 - Dec 15 with 2164 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 13:58 - Dec 15 by Throbbe

Depends on the size, and whether it's just the buildings and all the rail and signalling infrastructure, but I'd say at least double it, if not treble.

The new Cambridge North station was around £50M, but that's in an awkward location, and is larger.


Don't forget to send him your bill !

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:18 - Dec 15 with 2156 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:04 - Dec 15 by Clapham_Junction

In the field I work in, we're paying around seven times what Scandinavian countries are for the same equipment (we compared our quoted costs with our equivalents in Sweden).

The main differences seem to be the limited competition amongst suppliers in the UK, the lack of joined up thinking amongst providers (in Sweden they're mostly in a national co-operative that buy together and get better prices for buying in bulk) and the making a quick buck attitude from UK contractors.


A national co-operative.......you've gotta love Sweden ! I may have found my people. Even the clouds are interesting......


"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:25 - Dec 15 with 2145 viewsEastTownBlue

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 13:54 - Dec 15 by Oldsmoker

The cost of HS2 was already 1billion pounds and growing before one piece of track had been laid. This was attributed to consultation or "talking amongst themselves" to put it another way.
Whoever said "Talk is cheap" was wrong unless of course 1billion is small potatoes and you ain't seen nuthin' yet. In 2011 the expected cost-per-km was 47million, 2017 cost is 403million-per-mile.
It's a gravy train - pun intended.


Worst of all, they will be knocking down the Bree Louise pub near Euston for this after next month.
0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:46 - Dec 15 with 2124 viewsEastTownBlue

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 13:49 - Dec 15 by blue_oyster

A very good question. The future crippling impact of the Beeching cuts has been showing for quite some time now. Possibly the country's biggest mistake with regards to travel infrastructure.


Beeching was appointed by Ernest Marples, who had no conflict of interests whatsoever.
0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:50 - Dec 15 with 2123 viewschicoazul

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 13:51 - Dec 15 by giant_stow

You're bang on about Beeching - short sighted and now we pay.


The person who appointed Beeching was a motorway builder.

Ironically he fled the country by train over tax fraud.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Marples

In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
Poll: With Evans taking 65% in Huddersfield, is the Banter Era over?

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:52 - Dec 15 with 2121 viewsThe_Romford_Blue

Bloody hell thats madness

Poll: Would we sell out our allocation for Wembley for a PJ Trophy final?

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 15:43 - Dec 15 with 2103 viewsblue_oyster

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 14:46 - Dec 15 by EastTownBlue

Beeching was appointed by Ernest Marples, who had no conflict of interests whatsoever.


It seemed as though the future of the country's infrastructure was decided by so few. It was an age where all you heard was that roads were 'the future' and the hype around them ensured that nothing got in the way of the destruction of the countryside for these great lanes of concrete and tarmac, which take so many lives in towns and cities every year. Never did they think about what would happen once *everyone* wanted to travel like this.

Conventional wisdom is the enemy of thought.
Poll: Who is the most hated contributor to this site?

0
Login to get fewer ads

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 16:53 - Dec 15 with 2071 viewsOldsmoker

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 15:43 - Dec 15 by blue_oyster

It seemed as though the future of the country's infrastructure was decided by so few. It was an age where all you heard was that roads were 'the future' and the hype around them ensured that nothing got in the way of the destruction of the countryside for these great lanes of concrete and tarmac, which take so many lives in towns and cities every year. Never did they think about what would happen once *everyone* wanted to travel like this.


The benefits of a car economy far outweighed the case for railways at the time.
1) Road tax.
2) Fuel duty on petrol
3) An expanding industry of car manufacturers and garages.
4) More money for insurance companies.
We had our own North Sea oil so lets waste it by burning it in car engines.
Later changes were VAT on fuel (and the fuel duty), VAT on car purchases, insurance tax and the de-regulation of buses which meant even more cars as bus travel dropped massively after that.
It made sense at the time but the wholesale abandonment of the railway infrastructure was shortsighted. They thought that long distance travel would follow the USA and be air travel, which never happened.

Don't believe a word I say. I'm only kidding. Or am I?
Poll: What mode is best?

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 17:02 - Dec 15 with 2064 viewsazuremerlangus

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 16:53 - Dec 15 by Oldsmoker

The benefits of a car economy far outweighed the case for railways at the time.
1) Road tax.
2) Fuel duty on petrol
3) An expanding industry of car manufacturers and garages.
4) More money for insurance companies.
We had our own North Sea oil so lets waste it by burning it in car engines.
Later changes were VAT on fuel (and the fuel duty), VAT on car purchases, insurance tax and the de-regulation of buses which meant even more cars as bus travel dropped massively after that.
It made sense at the time but the wholesale abandonment of the railway infrastructure was shortsighted. They thought that long distance travel would follow the USA and be air travel, which never happened.


Not true about North sea oil; very high quality heavy crude suited to the lubricants market rather than the light crude fuels one.

British rail was losing millions a year in the early 60's and something had to be done about it.You could argue they made the wrong choice but the road infrastructure needed developing to keep up with the rest of the western world.

Poll: What type of manager will we get?

0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 17:50 - Dec 15 with 2052 viewsClapham_Junction

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 17:02 - Dec 15 by azuremerlangus

Not true about North sea oil; very high quality heavy crude suited to the lubricants market rather than the light crude fuels one.

British rail was losing millions a year in the early 60's and something had to be done about it.You could argue they made the wrong choice but the road infrastructure needed developing to keep up with the rest of the western world.


The problem was not necessarily closing lines, but flogging off the land afterwards which meant they couldn't be reopened at a later date when it was realised it hadn't been a good idea.

The mass closure of tram systems across the UK is perhaps an equally big mistake.
0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 18:08 - Dec 15 with 2044 viewsFrowsyArmLarry

I suspect that’s a mistake and it’s actually 44 billion
0
A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 18:34 - Dec 15 with 2039 viewsFreddies_Ears

A no. 9 tribute post: railways on 13:32 - Dec 15 by Ftnfwest

it says its a completely new line in there (imagine you can't use 50 year old plus lines and you'd have to renew base etc). The guided bus route in Cambridge cost something incredible as well a few years ago. As for the Swiss - maybe it shows how efficient you can be outside of the EU


Cost per mile of motorway and high speed rail build is roughly one tenth of UK cost in France. Admittedly land is cheaper but that only explains a little bit of the difference.
Maybe th e French use engineers rather than consultants and project managers.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024