A political party with a sensible policy? No chance of them getting elected then.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8603009.stm
Lib Dems plan rail expansion by cutting road projects
Moderator: Peak Moderation
-
biffvernon
- Posts: 18538
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Lincolnshire
- Contact:
-
adam2
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10907
- Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
- Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis
Indeed a sensible policy, but the chances of a lib dem victory are insignificant.
We need more rail routes, and more capacity on existing routes.
On lightly used routes (new or existing) I believe that safety standards could be simplified and even perhaps relaxed a little.
On high speed main lines, elaborate signalling systems are required, with even more elaborate safegaurds against mechanical failure or human error.
This is very expensive, and perhaps OTT for a lightly used branch line with one train an hour and a max speed of say 40MPH.
In some cases driving by sight alone would be safe, without any signals. In many other cases a very much simpler system could be used than at present, solar powered, fully automatic, and providing very good protection against accident at minimal cost.
Likewise, on a lightly used branch line, do we really need a footbridge over the line (with a wheelchair lift each end, and a standby generator for the lifts) What about a ramp and a sign saying "look both ways before crossing"
After all a train moving at 40MPH, visible for 300 yards, and confined to the track is arguably less of a risk than an HGV approaching round a tight curve at 60MPH, and we dont expect disabled accesable footbridges over country roads. Many such roads have more HGVS in an hour than a branch line has trains.
We need more rail routes, and more capacity on existing routes.
On lightly used routes (new or existing) I believe that safety standards could be simplified and even perhaps relaxed a little.
On high speed main lines, elaborate signalling systems are required, with even more elaborate safegaurds against mechanical failure or human error.
This is very expensive, and perhaps OTT for a lightly used branch line with one train an hour and a max speed of say 40MPH.
In some cases driving by sight alone would be safe, without any signals. In many other cases a very much simpler system could be used than at present, solar powered, fully automatic, and providing very good protection against accident at minimal cost.
Likewise, on a lightly used branch line, do we really need a footbridge over the line (with a wheelchair lift each end, and a standby generator for the lifts) What about a ramp and a sign saying "look both ways before crossing"
After all a train moving at 40MPH, visible for 300 yards, and confined to the track is arguably less of a risk than an HGV approaching round a tight curve at 60MPH, and we dont expect disabled accesable footbridges over country roads. Many such roads have more HGVS in an hour than a branch line has trains.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"