Bernard Lamb Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 7 hours ago, wagonman said: Would £10 per mile be a realistic figure for cross country line re-opening where the old infrastructure is still intact – based on Edinburgh-Galashiels? Not counting the money spent on 'consultants' etc... Several things make a comparison invalid. It was several years ago. Much has changed since then. There was only one major bridge to build (over the by-pass). That took a fair chunk of the total cost. A figure for that section of the line would give a good idea as to costs in other parts of the country. There was just about room to lay a single track on a double track formation. Much of the line ran through open country and there was not a lot of new buildings close to or on the track bed to clear. It was in Scotland. Best not elaborate on that as it would get too political. Let us just say that there was a political will to build it. Except for one very small noisy group but they were ignored as usual in that part of the world. It was designed with a very limited service in mind and did not need a vast fleet of expensive new rolling stock. Bernard 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Oink, oink, is it a bird, is it a plane, NO it's a ……………………. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete the Elaner Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 14 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said: In other news, Worzel Gummidge promises every home in Britain will have freshly buttered toast and a fresh pot of tea, delivered to their front door, every morning at 8.00am...completely FREE ! So here it is, Merry Xmas Everybody's having fun Look to the future now It's only just begun...... . That's about as realistic as most of the promises in any of the UK political party's manifestos. 2 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 3 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said: Several things make a comparison invalid. It was several years ago. Much has changed since then. There was only one major bridge to build (over the by-pass). That took a fair chunk of the total cost. A figure for that section of the line would give a good idea as to costs in other parts of the country. There was just about room to lay a single track on a double track formation. Much of the line ran through open country and there was not a lot of new buildings close to or on the track bed to clear. It was in Scotland. Best not elaborate on that as it would get too political. Let us just say that there was a political will to build it. Except for one very small noisy group but they were ignored as usual in that part of the world. It was designed with a very limited service in mind and did not need a vast fleet of expensive new rolling stock. Bernard The above proves a point that applies equally to HS2 that what is shown to the public is final cost/total cost but does not show the cost of each item! The Borders Railway was done on the cheap hence all the single line sections and is now paying the price! There was also the new section of line at Millerhill under Edinburgh City Bypass as the original route was blocked. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted November 19, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 19, 2019 15 hours ago, woodenhead said: £500m buys a lot of consultancy that leads to 'no case to re-open' Lets not forget the first Beeching program involved a lot of biased consultancy and fact collection. I got involved in consultancy work for the Ebbw Vale reopening and one of the jobs I did was a peer review of the peer review of a peer review of the timetable proposal (prepared I think by Railtrack originally). The most interesting part of that bit of the process was attending a meeting which included somebody who had been involved in producing the original timetable proposal - which had subsequently been found somewhat wanting in various respects by a succession of peer reviewers to the extent that it had been totally rewritten. A few minutes talking to him quickly explained why - he had been parachuted into a long term planning job in London from Manchester and hadn't got a clue about the infrastructure, present or proposed, on the Ebbw Vale branch. So in that case at least one lot of peer reviewers had earned their fee but I'm not sure if it was the Germans who peer reviewed the original proposal or the Dutch who peer reviewed the German review but what I got to review actually made sense apart from the fact it wasn't pathed between Ebbw Junction and Cardiff (easily adjusted fortunately) 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejstubbs Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 (edited) 50 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said: There was also the new section of line at Millerhill under Edinburgh City Bypass as the original route was blocked. Ha, beat me to it! I was about to point out that the Borders Railway goes under the bypass, not over it, as Mark seemed to suggest. Although most of the solum was extant out in the countryside, my understanding is that a lot/most of it needed to be fairly comprehensively refurbished/re-engineered to meet current standards. But yes, the penny-pinching that led to most of it being single line was short-sighted in the extreme. (See also: longer trains instead of 6tph for EGIP. I understand that six longer trains per hour is already being looked at as passenger numbers continue to grow.) As for Mr J's waffle about "reversing Beeching", IMO it's simply designed to appeal to the "everything was better in the fifties" world view of certain elements of the British public (by no means solely confined to members and supporters of the his party, I would add, before I risk running foul of rule..er, where are the forum rules these days?) This opinion would appear to be borne out by the discussion above about whether or not any new money would really be involved (and that's before you get on to what could actually be achieved with the sum of money proposed*). * I have a personal theory which I call "the lie of the big number": politicians of all hues like to bandy big-sounding numbers around - preferably ones with an "illion" on the end - as absolute figures. They almost never express things in percentage or proportional terms. I believe the reason is that they know damn well that a non-trivial proportion of the public at large are readily impressed/shocked/frightened/outraged or otherwise misled by such big numbers, and almost never look further in to the detail behind them. There are plenty of recent examples that I could cite, but probably shouldn't on account the Rule That Shall Not Be Numbered(!) ** For clarity, I accept that some people do genuinely have trouble dealing with numbers, but I suspect a far greater proportion are just lazy and/or resistant to awkward facts (see The Backfire Effect - and yes, we're all susceptible to it). Edited November 19, 2019 by ejstubbs 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
locoholic Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 32 minutes ago, ejstubbs said: As for Mr J's waffle about "reversing Beeching", IMO it's simply designed to appeal to the "everything was better in the fifties" world view of certain elements of the British public (by no means solely confined to members and supporters of the his party, I would add, before I risk running foul of rule..er, where are the forum rules these days?) This opinion would appear to be borne out by the discussion above about whether or not any new money would really be involved (and that's before you get on to what could actually be achieved with the sum of money proposed*). * I have a personal theory which I call "the lie of the big number": politicians of all hues like to bandy big-sounding numbers around - preferably ones with an "illion" on the end - as absolute figures. They almost never express things in percentage or proportional terms. I believe the reason is that they know damn well that a non-trivial proportion of the public at large are readily impressed/shocked/frightened/outraged or otherwise misled by such big numbers, and almost never look further in to the detail behind them. There are plenty of recent examples that I could cite, but probably shouldn't on account the Rule That Shall Not Be Numbered(!) ** For clarity, I accept that some people do genuinely have trouble dealing with numbers, but I suspect a far greater proportion are just lazy and/or resistant to awkward facts (see The Backfire Effect - and yes, we're all susceptible to it). It's easy to be cynical - try living in a town that lost its trains due to Beeching and is left dozens of miles from any railway station, and access to the nearest stations is now awful due to traffic congestion and lack of parking. I do agree about the money, though, although it is galling to see shedloads of dosh being hurled at HS2, to benefit people who already have access to trains. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, locoholic said: It's easy to be cynical - try living in a town that lost its trains due to Beeching and is left dozens of miles from any railway station, and access to the nearest stations is now awful due to traffic congestion and lack of parking. I do agree about the money, though, although it is galling to see shedloads of dosh being hurled at HS2, to benefit people who already have access to trains. Try living in one on a main line that is not a major station as local trains have been sacrificed over the years and now it is for speed! Even Northallerton is losing services as a sacrifice to paths! There is now the strange situation where Transpennine have a departure from York to Newcastle that is first stop Durham. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 2 hours ago, ejstubbs said: Ha, beat me to it! I was about to point out that the Borders Railway goes under the bypass, not over it, as Mark seemed to suggest. Me not mark, I have not travelled on the new line, yet. I was going from the sight of the scar as the track bed was cleared as it approached the bypass and for some reason the image stuck in my mind. I used the bypass quite frequently a few years ago. Sorry for the confusion. Over or under, it is a very expensive half mile or so. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caradoc Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Regarding the Borders Railway; Had the line been planned as double track the cost would have been so great it would never have been rebuilt at all. Apart from their panacea for everyhting, nationalisation, what rail developments are the opposition proposing ? (Perhaps Boris will ask that question tonight !) 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said: I got involved in consultancy work for the Ebbw Vale reopening and one of the jobs I did was a peer review of the peer review of a peer review of the timetable proposal (prepared I think by Railtrack originally). The most interesting part of that bit of the process was attending a meeting which included somebody who had been involved in producing the original timetable proposal - which had subsequently been found somewhat wanting in various respects by a succession of peer reviewers to the extent that it had been totally rewritten. A few minutes talking to him quickly explained why - he had been parachuted into a long term planning job in London from Manchester and hadn't got a clue about the infrastructure, present or proposed, on the Ebbw Vale branch. So in that case at least one lot of peer reviewers had earned their fee but I'm not sure if it was the Germans who peer reviewed the original proposal or the Dutch who peer reviewed the German review but what I got to review actually made sense apart from the fact it wasn't pathed between Ebbw Junction and Cardiff (easily adjusted fortunately) If the Dutch and the Germans were consultants, as you were, that is not peer review Mike. That is Third party review, or "Consultancy". Clearly, for various reasons, NR's ability to peer review timetabling has been stymied, hence the need to use Third Parties. They are, reportedly, under New Broom Haines, bumping back up the number of timetablers available to the nation, but that will not be a quick job. Internal Peer review on almost all other aspects of projects (with perhaps electrification still being problematic,) should be mandatory by now, as per GRIP guidance re-issued even when I was still with them. That should be carried out well before any third party insists on a third party review..... The key issue remains about the extent to which reporting (and pricing) risk overrides the need to get projects funded. The pendulum seems to have swung a long way in the opposite direction, after GWEP. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philately Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Reopening the Blyth/Ashington/Newbiggin route has been in the local news on and off for some time in Northumberland (my home County), and the County Council seems likely to publish a proposal at the end of the year. Double track (mostly) and semaphore signalling is still in place, albeit with electric illumination. Level crossings are fully operational as there's quite a lot of freight traffic. There are 2 platforms still intact at Ashington (covered in weeds), likewise at other places on the route. So it's not just an Election special but there will still be a lot of persuading to do... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsforever Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 Surprised reopening the GC main line was not included it gets suggested every so often maybe If the will had been there in the sixties the line might still be here.I can remember clearly travelling on trains in the fifties they were dirty, slow but we had to use them as cars were in short supply .But overall life was pretty good then no email or texts but I might have rose tinted glasses on so maybe some lines will come back this time in England for a change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 33 minutes ago, lmsforever said: Surprised reopening the GC main line was not included it gets suggested every so often maybe If the will had been there in the sixties the line might still be here. I think that even the politicians accept that the route has been so mucked about with that any chance of a revival is totally out of the question. Land values to buy back the missing bits, in particular at the southern end, must surely render it a non-starter. The Borders and the North of England are a different kettle of fish. Bernard 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ess1uk Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 I’ll bet none of it happens 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Chris116 Posted November 23, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 23, 2019 Without wishing to break forum rules about politics I think it is known by most voters that anything that is only promised in the four weeks before an election is probably going to be forgotten if the person who made the promise gets into power. That appears to be true of all the parties who have got into power over the last 30 years. I have got to the stage that the fewer promises a candidate makes, the more likely I am to trust them with my vote. Having studied what has been said by our local candidates I am nearly to the stage of hoping that we have a "Monster Raving Looney Party" candidate stading as at least we will know what to expect! 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted November 24, 2019 Share Posted November 24, 2019 23 hours ago, Chris116 said: Without wishing to break forum rules about politics I think it is known by most voters that anything that is only promised in the four weeks before an election is probably going to be forgotten if the person who made the promise gets into power. That appears to be true of all the parties who have got into power over the last 30 years. I have got to the stage that the fewer promises a candidate makes, the more likely I am to trust them with my vote. Having studied what has been said by our local candidates I am nearly to the stage of hoping that we have a "Monster Raving Looney Party" candidate stading as at least we will know what to expect! Aim low avoid disappointment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdvle Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Thanks to post in the Okehampton thread, there are some more details in this Devon news article https://www.radioexe.co.uk/news-and-features/local-news/decision-expected-soon-on-rail-restoration-study/ Specifically, at least for the first (only?) round the government will only pay up to a maximum of £50,000 towards the cost of studies on restoring service, and the local council has to pay 25% of the cost. Don't know what kind of a study you will get for just under £67,000 but suspect it won't be very detailed. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted February 22, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 22, 2020 You don't get much for £67k...... probably not much more than a quick literature review and a scoping exercise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 3 hours ago, mdvle said: Thanks to post in the Okehampton thread, there are some more details in this Devon news article https://www.radioexe.co.uk/news-and-features/local-news/decision-expected-soon-on-rail-restoration-study/ Specifically, at least for the first (only?) round the government will only pay up to a maximum of £50,000 towards the cost of studies on restoring service, and the local council has to pay 25% of the cost. Don't know what kind of a study you will get for just under £67,000 but suspect it won't be very detailed. True, but it appears to be only for an "initial" business case to be put forward for consideration of further, detailed studies, in a competition for the second round of funding. The initial business case will concentrate on the benefits that the scheme would generate, against a very outline cost. I would guess those schemes that show the largest benefits over cost ratios, will make it forward. The big question will be how realistic the costs are. That is where the bulk of development funding goes, and even then, it is often way out. I just don't know how the judgement will be made. Apparently, only £300k has been allocated for such funding, which will not go very far, nationally. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/north-east-rail-revolution-begins-with-beeching-reversal-and-fund-for-new-trains-across-tyne-and-wear Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 22, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, mdvle said: Thanks to post in the Okehampton thread, there are some more details in this Devon news article https://www.radioexe.co.uk/news-and-features/local-news/decision-expected-soon-on-rail-restoration-study/ Specifically, at least for the first (only?) round the government will only pay up to a maximum of £50,000 towards the cost of studies on restoring service, and the local council has to pay 25% of the cost. Don't know what kind of a study you will get for just under £67,000 but suspect it won't be very detailed. It would appear that certain councillors don't even know what is happening in their own territory; Councillor Richard Hosking wants a study into the Brent to Kingsbridge line but if he bothered to take a stroll through the area he represents he will find fairly recent housing development which has sterilised yet more of that route. (in addition to parts of it returned to agriculture, previous housing developments impinging on it, and the dual carriageway A38 being built straight across it. Where do they find these people? Edited February 22, 2020 by The Stationmaster correct typos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 5 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said: It would appear that certain councillors don't even know what is happening in their own territory; Councillor Richard Hosking wants a study into the Brent to Kingsbridge line but if he bothered to take a strill through the area he represents he will find fairly recent housing development which has sterilised yet more of that route. (in addition to parts of it returned to agriculture, previous housing developments impl pinging on it housing and the dual carriageway A38 being built straight across it. Where do they find these people? On here, maybe? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdvle Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 4 minutes ago, Mike Storey said: On here, maybe? I was going to mark your post as funny, but then decided it was too depressing because it likely had some truth in it. But, as always, we get the politicians that the public at large vote for, and a system that in many ways discourages qualified people from running from office. In some fairness to Richard Hosking, I imagine there is some/all of the following: if Tavistock and Okehampton are getting a railway, his voters feel (why can't we / we deserve one to) the roads are too congested, why can't I take the train a rail line would solve our tourist decline being seen to be doing something for his voters, even if he knows it is nonsense - because he can point to the media coverage / meeting minutes and say "see, I tried" at the next election negotiate with the other Councillors, and quietly drop his demands for a rail line in exchange for something else while he supports the Okehampton/Tavistock funding. etc. 1 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PM47079 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 I don't know if anyone has noticed this but 250million has been taken out of the control period 6 period as per the manifesto so its actually really costing the government 250 million extra 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, PM47079 said: I don't know if anyone has noticed this but 250million has been taken out of the control period 6 period as per the manifesto so its actually really costing the government 250 million extra Robbing Peter to pay Paul and claim the glory for the bigger number! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now