|
Hezzy posted:Well, it is Workington... £42k a year and you could have your pick of any one eyed toothless hag there.
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:04 |
|
|
Metrication posted:Wish they would just take the Wimbledon loop into Overground and cut it off at Blackfriars. Loop trains are always cancelled to maintain services on the mainline when things are going to poo poo and they are often left queuing outside Blackfriars during the rush hour. Imagine how much more hosed it will be when Thameslink is serving several more destinations. 'Get out while you can' would be a good slogan for the publicity work.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
OppyDoppyDopp posted:If this is put back on the table, I hope they do a better job of selling Blackfriars as a terminus to loop residents. Also when it snows on the 60km of countryside track north of London the entire loop service collapses. They could probably run a slightly more frequent service as well.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Lofty132 posted:£42k a year and you could have your pick of any one eyed toothless hag there. Do you reckon they'll let me have the one with the peg leg?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Hezzy posted:Do you reckon they'll let me have the one with the peg leg? Only if you know how to play Uppies and Downies.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
OppyDoppyDopp posted:If this is put back on the table, I hope they do a better job of selling Blackfriars as a terminus to loop residents. This is why the circle line is the first to go if there are any major problems on the Underground as you can reach your destination via other routes
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2014 13:14
|
|
|
OppyDoppyDopp posted:Loop trains are always cancelled to maintain services on the mainline when things are going to poo poo and they are often left queuing outside Blackfriars during the rush hour. Imagine how much more hosed it will be when Thameslink is serving several more destinations. 'Get out while you can' would be a good slogan for the publicity work. It also goes to poo poo because the current arrangements at Blackfriars are considered "not operationally viable" by Network Rail but the DfT demanded they make the Wimbledon loop / Sevenoaks services cross over each other on a flat junction. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Trams are a bit like trains, aren't they? I had just started my Masters when they began laying track for the Edinburgh trams. They launched as of Saturday, 5 years late, covering less than half the planned route and at twice the budget. In that timescale I've managed a PhD, I've moved countries twice, and watched the CERN-Bernex tram line which crosses two rivers, under an airport runway and over a village, get installed in Geneva in around a quarter of the time while remaining underbudget. All of this is more than forgiven by this masterpiece up on the beeb: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
I've just moved to Edinburgh at the start of May but knew about the tram debacle. It's a mess. Who is going to use them. What do trams give Edinburgh that they couldn't do before? Even with 3 lines, I fail to see how they really are better than the buses. Am I missing something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
thehustler posted:I've just moved to Edinburgh at the start of May but knew about the tram debacle. It's a mess. Who is going to use them. What do trams give Edinburgh that they couldn't do before? Even with 3 lines, I fail to see how they really are better than the buses. Prestige and having a big infrastructure project that the Council could gloat about mostly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
Trams are ace but Edinburgh council hosed up big time in their specs for the system because they managed to fail to account for how terrible most other utilities are at records keeping so were shocked to find electric cables and gas pipes under the road every 10m which they somehow agreed to reroute. Good work, dildos.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
I suppose it depends how direct the route is and how much quicker it is vs buses. And if you have a Ridacard like I do then it's obviously more cost-effective compared to paying individual fares.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Bozza posted:Trams are ace but Edinburgh council hosed up big time in their specs for the system because they managed to fail to account for how terrible most other utilities are at records keeping so were shocked to find electric cables and gas pipes under the road every 10m which they somehow agreed to reroute. Signing up to a contract which was so one sided it would have enabled the contractors to build a £500million golden cock and get out with no challenge didn't help either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
twoot posted:Signing up to a contract which was so one sided it would have enabled the contractors to build a £500million golden cock and get out with no challenge didn't help either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:Was it stupidity or corruption on the council's part? i've left edinburgh years ago. so all you will have to enjoy the cleaner air, quieter streets and fast travel than a couple of bus routes without me. how many years do people think it'll be before proposing an extension / finishing the thing won't be political suicide?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:Was it stupidity or corruption on the council's part? A bit of both as per normal. The contract has clauses which have made it nearly impossible to fight the contractors on their poor project management and quality of construction, to the point where if the Scottish government hadn't bailed out the project to allow it to complete to this stage then all the work would've had to be torn up and scrapped and the contractors would have faced pretty much no repercussions. The council was warned at the contracting phase that this would happen if they signed as-is and simply brushed it off. There was also some degree of collusion between the Quantity surveyor firm and the Contractors to gently caress the Council out of more money, but I can't remember how exactly that played out. There was a really good blog which documented all of the farce but I can't find it now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Cerv posted:stupidity. the people appointed to manage had no substantial previous experience of large scale infrastructure projects. now, to be honest. loads of people are taking the position of "well it was a total shambles but they're here now and they're nice enough so we may as well make the most of it." i think a lot will depend on what the first 3-6 months look like in terms of ridership and revenue - if it looks convincing they'll probably work out some way of funding it to leith.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
What's the value of tourism to Edinburgh? When I was in Edinburgh in April, I saw the trams being tested along Princes Street and as impressed as I was with Edinburgh buses, I would definitely have taken those trams. Something to be said for them alleviating traffic too I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Trams are great because they are more segregated than buses, take more of a priority over road traffic, and can travel at faster speeds (often on abandoned heavy rail lines). Are trolley buses any good? There's occasional rumblings to bring them back to London, but New Bus for London seems to have killed that for now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Metrication posted:Trams are great because they are more segregated than buses, take more of a priority over road traffic, and can travel at faster speeds (often on abandoned heavy rail lines). Trolley buses are alright but they're a mess to wire electrically because you need two contact wires instead of one. They had loads of them in Seattle and San Franscisco when I was there last year, which were p good even though people in the USA think you're odd if you use public transport. Trams are better imo because, as you say, they get traffic seperation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Trolley buses aren't that popular, mostly because you have to do most of the infrastructure spending of a full electrified tram line without a lot of the benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Bozza posted:Trolley buses are alright but they're a mess to wire electrically because you need two contact wires instead of one. Geneva is frankly insane for this. They run a mixture of diesel and trolley buses on top of a tram network. In the city center that means many streets see all three so you have three sets of overhead lines on both sides of the road. Works great though. CHF 2.50 for 60 minutes unrestricted travel on any of those plus boats and trains. You can get from one end of the city to the other easily in that time. The Edinburgh trams are and have always been a great idea, but with only one line, and the fact that the bus is still faster from the airport, they made the worst possible start. Maybe in 20-30 years they'll have a decent network, but it's hard to build momentum from a bad start.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Metrication posted:Trams are great because they are more segregated than buses, take more of a priority over road traffic, and can travel at faster speeds (often on abandoned heavy rail lines). There are occasional rumblings about using trolley buses with batteries to reduce the amount of wiring that needs to be put up (and address concerns about them ruining views) and allow detours, but obviously the extra weight reduces efficiency and there's all sorts of worries about the massive disruption of putting up the wires and also the up-front expense. They're basically not quite good enough to justify the cost (although if the EU keep slapping London around about air quality that might change the equation a bit). The other idea that sometimes rears it's head again is flywheel-powered buses with recharging being done at stops either through electrical pickups or through direct mechanical linkages. This neatly sidesteps a lot of problems with batteries (although they're heavier than comparable batteries they take up a lot less space) but the failure modes are... not fun and there are maintenance issues too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Literally the only way we'll get trolleybuses back in London is if we enter some weird Super Mario Brothers Movie alternate universe and everything is electrically powered from above the road. Or someone murders Boris Johnson and the LTDA union heads over our appalling air quality in the city. But at the moment TfL are quite happy with the hybrid powered buses despite having to spend a shitload of money on Boris' vanity project bus rather than a bunch of perfectly adequate (and cheaper) Volvo B5LH / Enviro400s.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 10:31
|
|
|
TfL have used the bizarre phrase "visual pollution" to reject trolley buses because of the overhead wires. Reducing deaths from air pollution takes a back seat to keeping Oxford St pretty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 11:02
|
|
|
Hong XiuQuan posted:What's the value of tourism to Edinburgh? a lot. just shy of £2billion annually population doubles in august for the festival most popular city in the UK after london for international associations hosting meetings (admittedly that is a distant second)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
Cerv posted:TfL have used the bizarre phrase "visual pollution" to reject trolley buses because of the overhead wires. Reducing deaths from air pollution takes a back seat to keeping Oxford St pretty. Well you know I see where they're coming from it would look untidy if the roofline of Oxford Street was covered in crossing messy wires. I mean just imagine what that would look like. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 11:26
|
|
|
Cerv posted:a lot. just shy of £2billion annually If my wife was in a different PhD track in her department we'd be in in Edinburgh right now (from USA)!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
Cerv posted:TfL have used the bizarre phrase "visual pollution" to reject trolley buses because of the overhead wires. Which is odd given that literally no-one else in a position of planning authority in London gives the slightest poo poo about 'visual pollution'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Today is International Level Crossings Awareness Day! http://www.ilcad.org/ILCAD-2014.html Bozza 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
I can't quite remember, are we still waiting for a level crossing effort post?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
Estragon: I'm tired! Let's go. Vladimir: We can't. Estragon: Why not? Vladimir: We're waiting for Bozza.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 08:49
|
|
|
You work for Mr Bozza? Yes, sir. What do you do? I mind his signal box, sir. Is he good to you? Yes, sir. He doesn't ignore you? No, sir.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
TNT & Colas are sort of bringing back the Travelling Post Office, and pretending it's a new exciting thing they've invented. http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/freight/single-view/view/colas-rail-and-tnt-tests-express-rail-logistics.htmlRailway Gazette posted:Colas Rail and TNT test express rail logistics
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
New consultation open on Crossrail 2 - https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/crossrail/june-2014/ they're going for the more expensive 'regional' option over the cheaper 'metro' option, which is nice. this part is interesting, because I'd lol if after 30-odd years of work the final version of the "Chelesea-Hackney" line they decide on ends up not even going to Hackney. quote:Further work to reduce the overall cost of the scheme and to minimise environmental impacts during both construction and operation has resulted in a potential change to the proposal for Crossrail 2 in this area. Rather than the route splitting at Angel with one tunnel going via Dalston and the other via Hackney, a single route would continue as far as Stoke Newington or Clapton, at which point the line would split, with one branch towards Seven Sisters and New Southgate and the other towards Tottenham Hale and Hertford East. This is illustrated in the map above.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
Cerv posted:New consultation open on Crossrail 2 - https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/crossrail/june-2014/ Well Overground has happened in the intervening time and I think they're going to be taking over the Lea Valley lines soon so Hackney and the area west of the Lea Valley are nowhere near as underserved by public transport as once they were, meaning Stoke Newington is now the big blank spot on the coverage map, so it makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
I like the option of "aah gently caress Chelsea/King's Road they don't need a station" though. Don't want poshos grubbing up the people's trains.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 11:50
|
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:I like the option of "aah gently caress Chelsea/King's Road they don't need a station" though. Don't want poshos grubbing up the people's trains. the objections that the line should go straight victoria to clapham are coming from the poshos. chelsea locals not wanting a station lowering the tone and bringing in more people from outside to shop on the king's rd and eating at the cafes / restaurants around there. you don't have to worry about them "grubbing up the people's trains". they'll continue to get black cabs to & from the west end even with a direct line to tottenham court right on their doorstep.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 12:14
|
|
|
I don't see why we should be spending billions on a rich man's toy when the money could be spent more wisely improving the already existing infrastructure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:04 |
|
|
TinTower posted:I don't see why we should be spending billions on a rich man's toy when the money could be spent more wisely improving the already existing infrastructure. CR2's main job is to take pressure off that existing infrastructure, particularly the massive bottleneck at Clapham Junction-Waterloo and the attendant overcrowding on Underground lines that pass through Waterloo. Everything else is just window-dressing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 14:51
|
|