What about this idea for ending motorway congestion?

[santa]

Carryfast:

Santa:

Carryfast:

Santa:
I have another idea:

Why not upgrade the rail lines and bridges/tunnels etc so that they could run a shuttle up and down with cars and trucks on, with terminals at all the major cities.

This would save fuel, conjestion and the environment as well as being far more efficient.

Because we’d spend all day queing up to while they load and unload trains at each stop and each train would have to be so long to take all the cars and trucks that there would’nt be any space left on the tracks for them all and all the other half empty trains running passengers.And where’s the actual proof that trains are any more environmentally friendly than road transport and I’d get bored sitting there while some overpaid train driver did all the driving anyway.Sounds like something which Stalin would have liked though.

They seem to manage under the Channel OK. And I though we established that train drivers are not paid much more than most of us, and less than some.

They manage under the channel because most sensible drivers doing international work go by boat not the train because there’s been enough near misses with fires under there to frighten off most of those who might have used it.But I use the boat anyway on princible because I’d rather give them my money than the rail operators who any right minded road transport supporter would want to see put out of business instead of the ro-ro ferry companys who we’ve worked with over the years to the benefit of both industries.And no I have’nt seen anything which would establish that train drivers don’t earn a lot more than most truck or bus/coach drivers which is probably why you’ll see a lot more jobs for truck/ bus drivers advertised at the jobcentre than train drivers jobs.However the ones which you won’t see advertised are those international/long distance road transport jobs using the ferry to cross the channel because they’re the ones most of us rightly want.Anyway it won’t be long before all of us British long distance road transport drivers are out of work because the commie government here want the rail lot to take our jobs but luckily the East European road transport industry is putting up a better fight than we are which is why you’ll see a lot more of them queing up at Dover for the ferry than you will British ones queing up at Ashford for the shuttle.But I’d be happy to join those East European drivers earning around £200 per week to haul the freight from point of collection to point of delivery and it would be worth it just for the pleasure of knowing that maybe someday I’d be helping to save the European road transport industry.It’s at that wage level where I reckon that the average train driver would be out there on the picket line with ASLEF and the RMT while I and my East European mates drive through the picket line with 2 fingers up as we drive onto the ferry.

I posted elsewhere that average train driver earns about £35k (some double that with working rest days etc)

The OP was about reducing motorway congestion, and putting trucks on rails seems to me to be a viable and efficient alternative to slogging up and down the M6 etc.

As for risk and danger I believe that roads are the most dangerous place that most ordinary people will ever go.

I will make no more comments on this thread

[carryfast]

Santa:

Carryfast:

Santa:

Carryfast:

Santa:
I have another idea:

Why not upgrade the rail lines and bridges/tunnels etc so that they could run a shuttle up and down with cars and trucks on, with terminals at all the major cities.

This would save fuel, conjestion and the environment as well as being far more efficient.

Because we’d spend all day queing up to while they load and unload trains at each stop and each train would have to be so long to take all the cars and trucks that there would’nt be any space left on the tracks for them all and all the other half empty trains running passengers.And where’s the actual proof that trains are any more environmentally friendly than road transport and I’d get bored sitting there while some overpaid train driver did all the driving anyway.Sounds like something which Stalin would have liked though.

They seem to manage under the Channel OK. And I though we established that train drivers are not paid much more than most of us, and less than some.

They manage under the channel because most sensible drivers doing international work go by boat not the train because there’s been enough near misses with fires under there to frighten off most of those who might have used it.But I use the boat anyway on princible because I’d rather give them my money than the rail operators who any right minded road transport supporter would want to see put out of business instead of the ro-ro ferry companys who we’ve worked with over the years to the benefit of both industries.And no I have’nt seen anything which would establish that train drivers don’t earn a lot more than most truck or bus/coach drivers which is probably why you’ll see a lot more jobs for truck/ bus drivers advertised at the jobcentre than train drivers jobs.However the ones which you won’t see advertised are those international/long distance road transport jobs using the ferry to cross the channel because they’re the ones most of us rightly want.Anyway it won’t be long before all of us British long distance road transport drivers are out of work because the commie government here want the rail lot to take our jobs but luckily the East European road transport industry is putting up a better fight than we are which is why you’ll see a lot more of them queing up at Dover for the ferry than you will British ones queing up at Ashford for the shuttle.But I’d be happy to join those East European drivers earning around £200 per week to haul the freight from point of collection to point of delivery and it would be worth it just for the pleasure of knowing that maybe someday I’d be helping to save the European road transport industry.It’s at that wage level where I reckon that the average train driver would be out there on the picket line with ASLEF and the RMT while I and my East European mates drive through the picket line with 2 fingers up as we drive onto the ferry.

I posted elsewhere that average train driver earns about £35k (some double that with working rest days etc)

The OP was about reducing motorway congestion, and putting trucks on rails seems to me to be a viable and efficient alternative to slogging up and down the M6 etc.

As for risk and danger I believe that roads are the most dangerous place that most ordinary people will ever go.

I will make no more comments on this thread

I’m not surprised that you would’nt want to keep arguing the case for rail transport with those type of wage figures and keeping up that same old suicidal (for the road transport industry) argument of let’s solve the congestion issue by giving all the work to the rail industry instead.No the ‘average’ truck driver could’nt earn £35,000 pa or £70,000 pa with or without overtime and unlike rail transport the law won’t let us work on our ‘rest’ days although the guvnors try to make up for all that by making us do the impossible on our work days and paying us a lot less than £70,000 pa because we don’t work in a subsidised industry with government backing unlike those in the rail industry.But no putting trucks on the railway would just mean putting the unaccompanied trailers on in practice while some poor mug driving a unit at each end gets paid even less to multi drop and collect all the loads for around £20,000 pa or less while that train driver gets even more carriages coupled to his massive ‘wagon and drag’ outfit and even more work for the boys in the rail industry so they can get even more money for sitting there letting the rails steer their wagons for them.

[sidevalve]

Santa:
I have another idea:

Why not upgrade the rail lines and bridges/tunnels etc so that they could run a shuttle up and down with cars and trucks on, with terminals at all the major cities.

This would save fuel, conjestion and the environment as well as being far more efficient.

Simple one word answer; time. My best mate, a highly qualified railway civil engineer, was involved with a company called Central Railway, which a few years ago piloted a scheme to re-commission the old Great Central route from London to Sheffield; that’s the one that runs parallel to the M1 just north of Lutterworth and crosses the motorway just south of Leicester.The plan was to use “double-deck” wagons like they do in the USA.

He told me that the initial studies proved that moving freight by train in the UK only worked if it was going north of Liverpool; further south than that and the time losses due to trans-shipping made it more economical to move the freight by road. That, and the environmentalists who wanted to save some newts near Rugby, scuppered the plan.

The biggest restriction on railway transport in the UK is the loading gauge. It’s smaller here than in Europe ;the Great Central was an exception to this actually as it was built to continental tolerances, but inter-regional politics killed it in the 60’s. This is one reason why cross-channel rail traffic, even after the Tunnel was built, is still limited.

[kenny1975]

DS074:
Like to know other peoples views on this idea?

Your ideas arent new, they were the orginal design for more than a few motorways. Like the M25 you mention it was designed orginally to have very limited junctions basically as you say the main roads and motorways, the problem was though to get planning permision you had to start adding extra junctions on, for smaller places who said well if we are going to have a motorway going through our backdoor we want access to it, so ended up with a motorway orginally designed for long distance travel, mixed in with short distance commutors and get huge amounts of congestion.

The M6 is exactly the same, supposedly the orginal route of the M6 through the West Midlands is what is now known as the M6 Toll, as well the M5 was designed to go to the West of Wolverhampton but again planing permission and money, the people in charge of Birmingham wanted the motorways to go as close to the city as possible to give it the maximum benifits.

Even the M6 Toll extension which has no been binned, was going to go from the exisiting northern end of the M6 Toll up to about Knutsford it would have been an expressway with limited junctions.

The biggest problem though is the motorway network in the UK was never finished, was part of a much grander plan which got mostly cancelled in the 1970’s with the oil crisis. So a lot of the motorway network has bottlenecks and is half finished which causes a lot of problems.

pathetic.org.uk/features/mightha … ands.shtml

pathetic.org.uk/features/mightha … ndon.shtml

Thats the orginal design for the west midlands and London.

ANother problem is you build a motorway it opens and its quietish, very soon people will start building houses next to it, start building retail parks, start building industrial estates, you designed a road to take say 70,000 cars a day and a few years later its taking 100,000.

[carryfast]

Kenny1975:

DS074:
Like to know other peoples views on this idea?

Your ideas arent new, they were the orginal design for more than a few motorways. Like the M25 you mention it was designed orginally to have very limited junctions basically as you say the main roads and motorways, the problem was though to get planning permision you had to start adding extra junctions on, for smaller places who said well if we are going to have a motorway going through our backdoor we want access to it, so ended up with a motorway orginally designed for long distance travel, mixed in with short distance commutors and get huge amounts of congestion.

The M6 is exactly the same, supposedly the orginal route of the M6 through the West Midlands is what is now known as the M6 Toll, as well the M5 was designed to go to the West of Wolverhampton but again planing permission and money, the people in charge of Birmingham wanted the motorways to go as close to the city as possible to give it the maximum benifits.

Even the M6 Toll extension which has no been binned, was going to go from the exisiting northern end of the M6 Toll up to about Knutsford it would have been an expressway with limited junctions.

The biggest problem though is the motorway network in the UK was never finished, was part of a much grander plan which got mostly cancelled in the 1970’s with the oil crisis. So a lot of the motorway network has bottlenecks and is half finished which causes a lot of problems.

pathetic.org.uk/features/mightha … ands.shtml

pathetic.org.uk/features/mightha … ndon.shtml

Thats the orginal design for the west midlands and London.

ANother problem is you build a motorway it opens and its quietish, very soon people will start building houses next to it, start building retail parks, start building industrial estates, you designed a road to take say 70,000 cars a day and a few years later its taking 100,000.

Where I live close to the M25 we did’nt want the motorway or it’s junctions because all it does is lumber the Counties outside London with London’s traffic proplems because the Nimbys there did’nt want to solve the problems themselves by sorting out the North and South Circular.All those extra junctions do is to make the M25 a series of bypasses for London commuters mixed with long distance traffic and as soon as it all comes to a grinding halt (often) then they all get off it and then jam up all the roads near it by trying to use them as rat runs to avoid the motorway which cost us millions and which ruined loads of countryside for nothing.

[silver_surfer]

Raised motorways are great until they start to degrade and rust like Spaghetti junction in Brum from all the salt that goes on in winter. You also can’t widen them in future.

They should just build a toll road round the complete M25 and parallel to the M6 and the M1.