Show Posts
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 27
|
34
|
All across the Great Western territory / Buses and other ways to travel / Re: Parliamentary bus?
|
on: October 27, 2021, 12:32:22
|
This has occurred for years. The council in Reading replaced the Henley Road terminus stop some years back on a stretch of road that you would struggle to get a single deck bus down as it’s so overgrown. There doesn’t appear to be much communication between the bus operators and the local councils with many infrastructure mistakes happening. Kassel kerbs on the wrong side of the road of a one way terminal loop and the changing of the road layout at a terminus so buses could no longer turn without a reverse is two I can think of locally.
|
|
|
35
|
All across the Great Western territory / Buses and other ways to travel / Re: Priority bus route Bristol to Bath
|
on: October 24, 2021, 14:38:26
|
New 'priority' bus corridors are sure to be branded 'MetroBus'. That is a tainted brand for many of us here, but perhaps not for the travelling public.
In Reading we’ve gone for BRT▸ as the title of new and planned bus lanes along roads that pass where nobody lives. The bus company like to put ‘track’ or ‘wave’ after particular routes but they are simply limited stop buses that don’t serve much purpose outside of the standard Monday to Friday working hours, they also come with rather complicated routings. I’ve never been a fan of branding, build something fine but don’t try to sell it as a glamorous lifestyle choice. If it improves things for several bus routes I think people are relatively happy but branding a section of road is ridiculous.
|
|
|
37
|
All across the Great Western territory / Looking forward - after Coronavirus to 2045 / Re: UK government's Transport decarbonisation plan
|
on: October 20, 2021, 22:40:19
|
I’m guessing that the government and industry are applying the same rules as other areas on climate change, the idea that technology will have exponential improvement if we wait long enough. For some odd reason perhaps we will think that tried and tested technology, that has been for most of the last century, will no longer work if technology gets better, or perhaps it will be an embarrassment from the eyes of the rest of the world. The more likely reason is that this particular government doesn’t want any responsibility for any infrastructure in the future and neither do the private companies.
Technology will always improve. Most of us here remember the introduction of the energy saving bulb - the curly neon 11W replacement for the tungsten filament 60W bulb, now itself a fading memory following the introduction of the 4W LED. Internal combustion engines have got far more efficient, with cars doing the sort of MPG that even Minis couldn't manage back in the day. Carburretor? Brilliant invention, now serving only a niche. High bypass jet engines are much more economical and reliable than their predecessors. Batteries? We have gone from lead acid (although still in use where it is the best fit) to lithium ion, and there are new types appearing regularly. So yes, the old still works, but changing to the new will save in the long term. The difficulty is in knowing when, and in persuading someone to part company with something they invested a lot of cash in. Some things become practically obsolete overnight - a modern smartphone does more than every gadget in my office did at the dawn of my "career", but not all. All that said, I can think of no real practical alternative to 25 KV OHLE for getting big trains moving at big speed without emissions on the way, and electricity is still made by spinning things. Even nuclear largely boils water to spin things, unless it's in space. Battery seems the wrong way of doing for trains. My carpenter / property maintenance guy son in law buys the expensive tools that most DIY'ers avoid, because cheap ones are a false economy to him. The batteries are the usual cause of death, although he has noticed an improvement from about 6 months to about 8 months. The cost of a replacement battery is sometimes more than replacing the whole lot. I haven't seen much top persuade me that batteries are a long-term solution for trains, and the same may prove to be true of HGVs too, without a quantum leap in useful life. That leads me to the tried and tested old-fashioned OHLE for the foreseeable. The technology at either end might change dramatically, but you can't beat a copper wire for the bit in between. I agree with most of this, but is this not the first time in history we are simply waiting for technology to improve rather than just embracing the new technology as it occurs after much scrutiny? It appears that we shun what’s available now in favour of what’s around the corner and we’ve been doing that for several decades where road transport is concerned. This is easy to do as it requires no commitment and the private companies with interest in their particular market can introduce technologies as and when they feel. Variable valve timing, 16 instead of 8 valves, fuel injection over carbs, all moving on but essentially no better for the environment as it’s still burning stuff at the point of use for traction so, as I see it, the same as it was when it became the chosen form decades ago. Yes, technology moves on but you must admit the internal combustion engine has been the only choice for over 100 years in some transport. The current situation with climate change should require us to move towards the obvious rather than delay for the latest. The underground lines in London all use technology that is old but still does the job and so will potential future electrified lines in 100 years if we press on with them now instead of trying to avoid doing anything for fear of future cost. The basic principles of transport are there we just need to choose the right power source to make it favourable for future generations. Now, where battery technology is concerned, yes it has and will move on but can we predict the effects of sudden change? The demand for the raw materials? The effects of mining and recycling those materials? We don’t want to end up with another problem in years to come so why not reduce the battery requirement? If a transport route is fixed why not electrify it by other means and keep the battery use down until the facts are established? No permanent wiring this time around will ever be redundant if built, it will all still be better for the environment than the internal combustion engine regardless of how technology improves and the internal combustion engine we are currently reliant on for every aspect of our lives. Can we risk the battery being involved in every aspect of our lives the same way if it’s only slight improvements over time?
|
|
|
39
|
All across the Great Western territory / Looking forward - after Coronavirus to 2045 / Re: UK government's Transport decarbonisation plan
|
on: October 20, 2021, 13:50:13
|
Am I reading too much into this, but why are they not expressly committing to the most tried and tested means of reducing carbon use on the railways, namely electrification of as much of the network as reasonably possible?
I’m guessing that the government and industry are applying the same rules as other areas on climate change, the idea that technology will have exponential improvement if we wait long enough. For some odd reason perhaps we will think that tried and tested technology, that has been for most of the last century, will no longer work if technology gets better, or perhaps it will be an embarrassment from the eyes of the rest of the world. The more likely reason is that this particular government doesn’t want any responsibility for any infrastructure in the future and neither do the private companies.
|
|
|
40
|
Journey by Journey / London to Reading / Re: Reading Trainspotting
|
on: October 17, 2021, 20:09:39
|
It does depend if the multiple units that terminate have your interest. All through traffic can be seen from the western end of any of the main platforms, the up main line probably the best. Give both ends of the main platforms a go then maybe have a look at West station for the container trains. Enjoy.
|
|
|
41
|
Journey by Journey / Thames Valley Branches / Re: Reading Green Park
|
on: October 14, 2021, 08:47:04
|
Why are they never tidied up just a little bit?
They are Stuving, but normally in a haphazard way, generally when there's an urban area spreading into an adjoining (different) county - for example Caversham became part of Reading Borough in (I think) the 1920s, and further bits have transferred since, such as Caversham Park Village, all transferred out of Oxfordshire. This is why you encounter a "Mapledurham" sign on the Woodcote Road before you leave Reading Borough. 1974 was the last time the boundary was moved up in Caversham Heights I think, from where that sign is to the current one on Upper Woodcote Road. You may also notice that street lamps are not on the upper stretch either.
|
|
|
42
|
All across the Great Western territory / The Wider Picture - related rail and other transport issues / Re: Birmingham to become a super-sized low-traffic neighbourhood
|
on: October 07, 2021, 19:44:28
|
Clearly some of the public think there is no alternative but for private cars to continue but what percentage of the population would you think that was? Are the media and government making it seem like it’s the overwhelming majority? A report on climate change this morning on the BBC» covered multiple areas of change but on the transport segment simply mentioned the targets for car charging points (which I think was a quarter of a million before 2030?!?). Why does nobody want add in the addition of congestion caused by cars whether ICE or electric? Can we really swap every vehicle to batteries and keep putting money into charging points rather than improve the other means of mobility? A lot of questions but I’m interested on whether the penny is ever going to drop anytime soon for our country as a whole.
|
|
|
43
|
All across the Great Western territory / The Wider Picture - related rail and other transport issues / Re: Birmingham to become a super-sized low-traffic neighbourhood
|
on: October 07, 2021, 13:13:07
|
This is indeed true but I imagine many people currently not cycling as a means of getting from one place to another are rather intimidated by the speed and volume of traffic even on the smaller roads. A long long time ago I would ride a bike in the summer holidays round the villages of the Berkshire downs on roads which many barely knew about. Almost 40 years later these very same roads are markedly busier and faster nowadays. Satellite navigation has made some quiet country roads an unpleasant experience to cycle. Anywhere I go on a bike now is planned by map to avoid the busiest roads but sometimes you simply have no choice. The basic provision of a wide pavement between somewhere like the Reading boundary and Burghfield would give many more the option of comfortably cycling or walking to other places. There is of course no perceived profit available in this.
|
|
|
44
|
All across the Great Western territory / The Wider Picture - related rail and other transport issues / Re: Birmingham to become a super-sized low-traffic neighbourhood
|
on: October 06, 2021, 13:27:55
|
Wasn’t a small part of demolition done for this plan in Bath?
The area around The Podium - where Waitrose is - formed part of Buchanan's scheme, as did the road system south of the Avon by the station. Other areas such as New King St, Chapel Row and many more were blighted for years. The tide looks to have turned though. At Bath Quays North, for example, the original street plan is being restored and the brutalist Avon St multi-story car park is being removed. Other schemes such as the Security Zone and, of course, the Clean Air Zone are all helping to tilt the balance. Wandering round Bath in the summer, I was struck by the number of people out on the streets - eating, drinking, chatting, wandering round, browsing shops, and spending money. That’s great, and we could have this everywhere. If you get stuff beyond politics and built everyone always agrees it’s a good thing (metrobus aside. Poorly planned token transport). Regardless of how much people love the convenience of a car, they also like space for people. Most I imagine walk further than they realise when the environment is right and it’s not alongside a dual carriageway or arterial road. Our town centres aren’t dying off, we’re killing them off through our inability to adapt. They will all thrive if we create access in the right method and that isn’t a multi storey.
|
|
|
45
|
All across the Great Western territory / The Wider Picture - related rail and other transport issues / Re: Birmingham to become a super-sized low-traffic neighbourhood
|
on: October 06, 2021, 12:26:02
|
Wasn’t a small part of demolition done for this plan in Bath?
Scandalous that plans like this did get built in some places. I find it incredible that for such a small island with many villages, towns and cities based on medieval streets that we chose the American model. I’m aware other European countries did this too but many places have realised that it was a mistake long ago and are well ahead (including cities in America) while we still press on with the dream. Don’t get me wrong I was as guilty as everyone else when I passed the test back in the early 90’s, when Ford’s were 100 quid with one years tax and MOT, but the realisation happened to me before that decade was up, and at that point I still didn’t take the car to the town centre as it was a burden finding somewhere to put it. I can thank my parents for instilling that in me. Now I have the attitude of simply make room for public transport regardless of space taken away from cars, be that parking or lanes. Make it hard work to move about in a car, however the argument that is becoming popular for closing streets to traffic is the emergency services access one. Which is odd as traffic by its very nature can hold up emergency services as well as continuing road repairs and motor vehicles colliding with each other. Then there is the argument that you couldn’t possibly have trams or the like on anything but reserved track, but you have to start somewhere and the idea of the transport like a tram is to largely replace that very traffic. No politician wants to face the truth with any of this as it’s bad for business. It’s a stand off where nothing changes. Keep dithering and hoping that technology will save the situation. This must be the first time in history where we are simply waiting for technology to get better to apply it, assuming it does that is.
|
|
|
|