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.
- 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!
Reply to: According to Ian Hislop...
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.
Logging in...
Previously on "According to Ian Hislop..."
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Bob Dalek View PostOf course, that we now could utilize the trackways for trams is never addressed by HM Gov.Originally posted by Moscow Mule View PostExcept for the Croydon Tramlink...
Leave a comment:
-
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:
-
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:
-
Originally posted by Bob Dalek View PostOf course, that we now could utilize the trackways for trams is never addressed by HM Gov.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by EternalOptimist View PostIts 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
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by minestrone View PostThere 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.
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:
-
Originally posted by expat View PostSo for example the line from Glasgow north to Crianlarich had enough traffic to be retained
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:
-
Originally posted by EternalOptimist View PostIts 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
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:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostAccording 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:
-
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:
-
Originally posted by NickFitz View PostAccording 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:
-
Originally posted by Purple Dalek View PostBeeching 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...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by EternalOptimist View PostIts 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
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Critical Illness Insurance for Contractors: Protect Yourself When It Matters Most Yesterday 16:26
- Relevant Life Insurance for Contractors with a Limited Company Yesterday 16:14
- Life Insurance for Contractors: Why it’s Essential Yesterday 16:09
- Guide to Income Protection Insurance for Contractors Yesterday 16:00
- Treasury minister told six actions can save contractor umbrella sector from ‘existential’ crisis Yesterday 09:40
- Critical Illness Services Jan 13 16:41
- Income Protection Services Jan 13 16:35
- Umbrella company Rocket Paye says it’s been cloned Jan 13 09:35
- Five tax return mistakes contractors will make any day now… Jan 9 09:27
- Experts you can trust to deliver UK and global solutions tailored to your needs! Jan 8 15:10
Leave a comment: