Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 08:55 19 Mar 2024
- Potholes leave nations' roads at 'breaking point'
- The US Navy's relentless battle against Houthi attacks
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 tomorrow - WWRUG AGM
23/03/24 - Trains restart - Minehead
02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber

No 'On This Day' events reported for 19th Mar

Train RunningCancelled
08:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
08:43 Filton Abbey Wood to Bristol Temple Meads
08:59 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington
09:50 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
10:41 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
Short Run
07:12 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
07:24 Taunton to London Paddington
07:25 Worcester Shrub Hill to London Paddington
07:28 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
08:32 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa
PollsOpen and recent polls
Open to 25/03 16:00 Easter Escape - to where?
Closed 2024-03-16 Should our rail network go cashless
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 19, 2024, 08:59:01 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[159] A daily picture from my recent travels
[78] Where would you recommend for an Easter Escape?
[68] More travels ... more looking at how others do it ...
[66] M25 motorway issue: a most illuminating Twitter thread.
[55] Briefing on forthcoming changes - from GWR on 14.3.2024
[35] Europeran Rail Timetable
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 47 48 [49] 50 51 ... 63
  Print  
Author Topic: MetroBus  (Read 235462 times)
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5180


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #720 on: November 20, 2018, 21:53:26 »

As if by royal command I have just taken a look at the Bristol Post website on my mobile and there is a repeat of the artists impression of the GPL (Ground Position Light) bridge that I referred to in an earlier post this evening. This does. as my earlier post stated, show a single decker travelling towards the artist but as if to validate the artists impression a double decker has been added in this published version. Looking at the headroom remaining over the top of the single decker I doubt whether the double decker would emerge the other side of the new GPL bridge without conversion to a. err. open topper. Also artists licence has given the artist responsible for this impression the vision to install the overhead catenary over the projected rail overbridge. seemingly, just one Metrobus length apart.

By the way, January 9th is the start date of route m1, brought forward a week to coincide with the start of the University's new term. It was previously announced as commencing on January 16th.

I agree. It's a shame their artist didn't hang around to imagine the subsequent carnage. Let's hope that when they build it, they choose to follow the plans - allowing 5.8m headroom - rather than the Evening Bristol's artistic rendering of them:



Image: Bristol Post
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1941


View Profile
« Reply #721 on: November 20, 2018, 22:02:48 »

Lowering the road that much does make me worry about flooding. I'm sure there are drains but even so, drain covers get overwhelmed by exceptionally heavy rain (the type of exceptional that seems to happen every spring), especially if they're bunged up.

Agreed and to add to your concerns, if you didn't know, there is a stream next to Station Road which leads from GPL (Ground Position Light) to Patchway station which is currently culverted under GPL. It then follows the curve of the embankment of the Patchway to Parkway line until the stream reaches a point where excesses can flow into a catchment/overflow reservoir adjacent to Hatchet Lane.  
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7148


View Profile
« Reply #722 on: November 20, 2018, 23:30:57 »

Lowering the road that much does make me worry about flooding. I'm sure there are drains but even so, drain covers get overwhelmed by exceptionally heavy rain (the type of exceptional that seems to happen every spring), especially if they're bunged up.

Agreed and to add to your concerns, if you didn't know, there is a stream next to Station Road which leads from GPL (Ground Position Light) to Patchway station which is currently culverted under GPL. It then follows the curve of the embankment of the Patchway to Parkway line until the stream reaches a point where excesses can flow into a catchment/overflow reservoir adjacent to Hatchet Lane.  

You'll be reassured to know there is a drainage strategy among the plans. Mostly that is based on the existing discharges to the nearby watercourses, and perhaps you'd be a bit less reassured that they don't know where the existing discharges are half the time.

Water from the road under the bridge does currently go into that stream next to it, and that outfall will be reused. They identify the roadway lowering as meaning gravity won't suffice to get the water out fast enough, so there will be pumps. There will also be big pipes to carry water to the pumps, oversized to provide storage to buffer peak flows (aka attenuation). The actual sizes vary between documents, but one plan shows a pair of pipes of 1050 mm diameter - now that is really big. There are to be two pumps rated at 9 l/s, each with a backup, in a sump.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2018, 16:10:45 by stuving » Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6432


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #723 on: November 21, 2018, 14:21:17 »

Meantime,  word  reaches me that  two of the  MetroBust M2 buses  were  vandalised last night, and that the  replacement vehicles  can't use the misguided busway. Pasengers wanting to board at Cumberland Basin, Ashton Gate or Ashton Vale are advised  to schlep over to either the Long Ashton Park and Ride or SS Gert Britain. It raises a few  questions:
How many adapted buses are there?
If they cost best part of  £400K apiece, where are  they kept   overnight?
Does Tony (Formerly Four Track, Now!) have an aliibi?
(The answer to the last one is "Yes", and my EasyJet account will confirm it.)
Logged

Now, please!
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #724 on: November 21, 2018, 14:46:38 »

Lowering the road that much does make me worry about flooding. I'm sure there are drains but even so, drain covers get overwhelmed by exceptionally heavy rain (the type of exceptional that seems to happen every spring), especially if they're bunged up.

Agreed and to add to your concerns, if you didn't know, there is a stream next to Station Road which leads from GPL (Ground Position Light) to Patchway station which is currently culverted under GPL. It then follows the curve of the embankment of the Patchway to Parkway line until the stream reaches a point where excesses can flow into a catchment/overflow reservoir adjacent to Hatchet Lane.  

You'll be reassured to know there is a drainage strategy among the plans. Mostly that is based on the existing discharges to the nearby watercourses, and perhaps you'd be a bit less reassured that they don't know where the existing discharges are half the time.

Water from the road under the bridge does currently go into that stream next to it, and that outfall will be reused. They identify the roadway lowering as meaning gravity won't suffice to get the water out fast enough, so there will be pumps. There will also be big pipes to carry water to the pumps, oversized to provide storage to buffer peak flows (aka attenuation). The actual sizes vary between documents, but one plan shows a pair of pipes of 1050 mm diameter - not that is really big. There are to be two pumps rated at 9 l/s, each with a backup, in a sump.
Those sound like mighty pumps. Glad they're there! Would be even better if they weren't needed, but I guess the only other way to achieve clearance under the bridge would be to raise the bridge itself, which would surely involve more disruption especially to the railway.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
WelshBluebird
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 158


View Profile Email
« Reply #725 on: November 21, 2018, 15:06:14 »

Meantime,  word  reaches me that  two of the  MetroBust M2 buses  were  vandalised last night, and that the  replacement vehicles  can't use the misguided busway. Pasengers wanting to board at Cumberland Basin, Ashton Gate or Ashton Vale are advised  to schlep over to either the Long Ashton Park and Ride or SS Gert Britain. It raises a few  questions:
How many adapted buses are there?
If they cost best part of  £400K apiece, where are  they kept   overnight?
Does Tony (Formerly Four Track, Now!) have an aliibi?
(The answer to the last one is "Yes", and my EasyJet account will confirm it.)

Based on some comments on Twitter it sounds like at least one of the buses was targeted whilst in service?
According to local media there have been recent attacks on buses in service, so would add up.
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6432


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #726 on: November 21, 2018, 17:39:24 »

Sadly,  for some inexplicable reason I am banned from MetroBust's Twitter feed, despite all the nice things I have  said about it over the years.


I agree. It's a shame their artist didn't hang around to imagine the subsequent carnage. Let's hope that when they build it, they choose to follow the plans - allowing 5.8m headroom - rather than the Evening Bristol's artistic rendering of them:



Image: Bristol Post

I  may be missing something, but that looks a lot less of a public transport scheme than it resembles a road-widening plan.  I have no objection to  GPL (Ground Position Light) having a bridge wide enough  and high enough to let modern traffic through. What I do not like is schemes such as this being loosely disguised as  MetroBust. There are funds for building roads, and funds for public transport, and using the latter as a Trojan horse  to pay for the former is dishonest, and means that public transport will not prosper.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2018, 18:34:28 by Tony (Formerly Four Track, Now!) » Logged

Now, please!
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1941


View Profile
« Reply #727 on: November 21, 2018, 19:59:50 »


The element of cynicism in my brain suggests the developers of the former Rolls-Royce site beyond the bridge to the left planning section 106 contribution screwed out of the developer by South Glos Council will form a large proportion of the cost of this project.
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5180


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #728 on: November 21, 2018, 20:32:24 »

I  may be missing something, but that looks a lot less of a public transport scheme than it resembles a road-widening plan.  I have no objection to  GPL (Ground Position Light) having a bridge wide enough  and high enough to let modern traffic through. What I do not like is schemes such as this being loosely disguised as MetroBust. There are funds for building roads, and funds for public transport, and using the latter as a Trojan horse  to pay for the former is dishonest, and means that public transport will not prosper.

That's the beauty of MetroBus - it's just a bus, and buses are public transport, and they go on roads, and the money's being spent improving roads so that buses can use them more easily... it's hard to argue that this does not constitute a proper use of the money.

For it to be improper, you'd have to spend public transport money to build a stretch of road that had failed to get funding for decades as a pure road scheme, in the full knowledge that no operator was ever going to run a bus down it. But surely that would never happen.

The element of cynicism in my brain suggests the developers of the former Rolls-Royce site beyond the bridge to the left planning section 106 contribution screwed out of the developer by South Glos Council will form a large proportion of the cost of this project.

Isn't it right that the developer of the adjacent site should make an S106 contribution to this? Presumably it'll improve the value of their site.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 587


View Profile Email
« Reply #729 on: November 22, 2018, 08:46:54 »

The widening of this road will probably add very little to the East Site development. That development will be finished long before this bridge is replaced.

One thing it will do is remove one of the main causes of some of the terrible traffic jams in the area.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #730 on: November 22, 2018, 09:10:17 »

Removing traffic jams on your doorstep is going to add to property value, I'd have thought, though by what amount is arguable.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 587


View Profile Email
« Reply #731 on: November 22, 2018, 09:18:05 »

To be honest, I think the traffic jams will remain, just be moved to the traffic lights at GPL (Ground Position Light) on the A38.

The only way to eliminate the traffic jams is to persuade people not to drive, and for that we need the carrot of good, reliable and affordable public transport, and the stick of congestion and pollution charges. This is now the job of WECA» (West of England Combined Authority - about), I believe!
« Last Edit: November 22, 2018, 11:42:26 by simonw » Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5180


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #732 on: November 22, 2018, 09:59:27 »

To be honest, I think the traffic jams will remain, just be moved to the traffic lights at GPL (Ground Position Light) on the A38.

The only way to eliminate the traffic jams is to persuade people not to drive, and for that we need the carrout of good, reliable and affordable public transport, and the stick of congestion and pollution charges. This is now the job of WECA» (West of England Combined Authority - about), I believe!


For road journeys originating to the west of the SWML (South Western Mail Line), the quickest way to the motorway network will most likely be be via the A38 and Almondsbury; this traffic, as you point out, will still have to negotiate the Gipsy Patch - A38 junction. That suggests that the biggest benefit of the new bridge is that it will be possible to fit a 'decker under it; the current bridge is limited to 4m which is too low. So (for fear of banging on!) this is to a large extent a public transport improvement, with the additional benefits that it will make things safer for cyclists and pedestrians too.

There are many ways to reduce traffic jams, the best of which is to use the planning system to reduce car dependency. This takes decades to have an effect though, and for the moment much of what is happening in South Glos seems to be heading in the wrong direction, with low-density dormitory suburbs connected by big roads still being built. As to carrots and sticks: sticks are cheap, and carrots are expensive - so expect more of the former, and precious few of the latter!
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
WelshBluebird
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 158


View Profile Email
« Reply #733 on: November 22, 2018, 11:18:10 »

A couple of articles on the Bristol Post site that seem to concur with the vandalism of the Metrobus buses happening in service with rocks being thrown at buses. A few photos showing the damage, including broken windows too. Looks like the yobs who have been attacking the 75/76 buses and the A4 Bath - Bristol Airport buses have found new targets.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #734 on: November 22, 2018, 13:07:25 »

A couple of articles on the Bristol Post site that seem to concur with the vandalism of the Metrobus buses happening in service with rocks being thrown at buses. A few photos showing the damage, including broken windows too. Looks like the yobs who have been attacking the 75/76 buses and the A4 Bath - Bristol Airport buses have found new targets.
Worrying.

There are many ways to reduce traffic jams, the best of which is to use the planning system to reduce car dependency. This takes decades to have an effect though, <snip>
Though local effects can be felt immediately on completion. That was the case with Gorgeous George's RPZs, for instance, and it might be the case with this bridge too, at the bridge itself.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 47 48 [49] 50 51 ... 63
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page