• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "According to Ian Hislop..."

Collapse

  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    I love railways.

    But the only sensible solution is to remove all track and reserve the routes for coaches. Capacity could be increased tenfold, and coaches can start and finish closer to the two ends of your journey.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doggy Styles
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Dalek View Post
    Of course, that we now could utilize the trackways for trams is never addressed by HM Gov.
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    Except for the Croydon Tramlink...
    The bits of the Croydon Tramlink I've been on go down the middle of the road, not old railway tracks. Is that what steam trains did in the old black-and-white days?

    Leave a comment:


  • TimberWolf
    replied
    I've just thought of something that we can sell to pay off our debts. Roads. Put these in private hands where they will better and more efficiently run and it will raise a lot of money for the government. How could this possibly fail?

    Leave a comment:


  • Beefy198
    replied
    Nice to see on the programme all the people moaning about the state of the network "back in the day". I'll mention that whenever I hear anyone bark on about nationalising the railways again in order to bring down costs and improve punctuality.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Dalek
    replied
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    Except for the Croydon Tramlink...
    Thank you for destroying my POV.

    Leave a comment:


  • Moscow Mule
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Dalek View Post
    Of course, that we now could utilize the trackways for trams is never addressed by HM Gov.
    Except for the Croydon Tramlink...

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Dalek
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    Its funny that.

    Beeching and that guy Malthus always get a beating from lefty lecturers etc
    I never understood why, and I was always too scared to ask, or even mention it. I still am



    Saw a decent documentary featuring Beeching recently (made in the 80s, I think). He had a job to do and did it. Trains were unbelievably expensive to run as they were, back then. Of course, that we now could utilize the trackways for trams is never addressed by HM Gov.

    Leave a comment:


  • expat
    replied
    Originally posted by minestrone View Post
    There is no Glasgow north station

    Crianlarich is a 2 sheep town and the male population are more intersted in firing into the sheep for an afternoon delight than going to Glasgow.
    "The train from Glasgow north to Crianlarich" = "The train from Glasgow going northwards to Crianlarich". If there had been a station called that, I would have typed Glasgow North. I added the compass direction for thos who may not know where Crianlarich is.

    But as we all know, the termini at that time were Buchanan St, Queen St, Central, and St Enoch.

    That was my point about Ciranlarich, the passengers travelling on the segment Glasgow-Crianlarich were not going there, they were all going on, over lined that Beeching planned to close.

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    Originally posted by expat View Post
    So for example the line from Glasgow north to Crianlarich had enough traffic to be retained
    There is no Glasgow north station

    Crianlarich is a 2 sheep town and the male population are more intersted in firing into the sheep for an afternoon delight than going to Glasgow.

    Leave a comment:


  • expat
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    Its funny that.

    Beeching and that guy Malthus always get a beating from lefty lecturers etc
    I never understood why, and I was always too scared to ask, or even mention it. I still am



    I am not a lefty lecturer, but ISTM that the Beeching Report and its cuts justly attracted criticism for being far too narrowly-defined.

    The remit was to save money by closing "uneconomic" lines, and the accounting measures used were bound to produce unexpected and unwanted results. For example:

    1. if closing a line saved money, but in consequence even more money would have to be spent on alternative road transport, or money would otherwise be lost, no matter: it counted as a saving and the line was closed.

    2. lines were classed as "uneconomic" in isolation. So for example the line from Glasgow north to Crianlarich had enough traffic to be retained. The line then split with one branch going to Oban and the other to Fort William: neither carried enough traffic so both were to be closed. This ignored the fact that virtually all the traffic on the Crianlarich line was for either Oban or Fort William, so if these two branches were both closed there would be little traffic on the remaining section.
    This is just one little case that I know personally, the Beeching plan had this kind of thing up and down the country.

    3. the cuts took no account of whether we might think lines worth keeping open anyway. The Germans have done this, for example: they have built a fast modern network, but they have also kept lots of little branch lines with 2 or 3 little trains a day. Since they already have the lines, they keep them.

    Leave a comment:


  • VectraMan
    replied
    Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
    According to one of the experts Hislop had on the programme, about one-third of the lines Beeching cut would be profitable if still in operation today.
    Seems unlikely. In Beeching's day, car ownership was much lower, so the necessity for public transport linking villages and small towns was much greater.

    Leave a comment:


  • minestrone
    replied
    I wish the gimp could come back from the grave and sort out the bawsacks that work on the Glasgow-Edinburgh line.

    Leave a comment:


  • Purple Dalek
    replied
    Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
    According to one of the experts Hislop had on the programme, about one-third of the lines Beeching cut would be profitable if still in operation today.
    Yes, if you are (very) imaginative with the concept of what profitable means in the context of the British railway system.

    Leave a comment:


  • NickFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by Purple Dalek View Post
    Beeching didn't cut enough. He expected that his report would be seen in a holistic way, which was rather naive. If he had taken a more realistic view he would have recommended cutting far more, and in this way it would have saved more. Wasn't it something like 40 year after the recommendation they started installing high speed switches, and that was because the French insisted on them as part of the chunnel deal. Talk about foot dragging...
    According to one of the experts Hislop had on the programme, about one-third of the lines Beeching cut would be profitable if still in operation today.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrMark
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    Its funny that.

    Beeching and that guy Malthus always get a beating from lefty lecturers etc
    I never understood why, and I was always too scared to ask, or even mention it. I still am



    Funny though, I've met plenty of folk who hold right-wing views on other things, but would have supported pouring money into the old train network. Maybe it's nostalgia, but the sight of a steam train going down the an old countryside track, is something very beautiful. Perhaps we should have just converted all the south-west into a giant theme park (keeping all the old train lines).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X