Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Out of Focus area > The lounge

The lounge Relax, take a break from photo and camera talk - have a chat about something else for a change. Just keep it clean and polite!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 1st May 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,919
Thanks: 88
Thanked 267 Times in 235 Posts
Likes: 1,002
Liked 848 Times in 543 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naughty Nigel View Post
A lot of lines had closed in the 1950's owing to lack of use, changing transport patterns and geological problems. The Stainmore line, a strategic route that I have a particular fasciation for, closed in 1962; a year ahead of the Beeching report.
The Wensleydale line closed to passengers throughout and to freight East of Hawes in 1954. The line closed completely about ten years later. It was never heavily used but today, like the Settle-Carlisle line, it would be popular with tourists as it has similar scenery over much of its length, particularly west of Leyburn.

More capacity is undoubtedly needed between London and the North but I question the need for it to be high speed.
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
OM USer (1st May 2019)
  #32  
Old 9th May 2019
Harold Gough Harold Gough is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Reading UK
Posts: 5,642
Thanks: 56
Thanked 783 Times in 714 Posts
Likes: 40
Liked 3,100 Times in 1,666 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Some politician, on the Radio 4 Today programme this morning, said it was nothing to do with "high speed" we just need more capacity, suggesting that the trains will be numerous rather than fast. So its just "Number Two"?

Harold
__________________
The body is willing but the mind is weak.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 9th May 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,430
Thanks: 377
Thanked 546 Times in 461 Posts
Likes: 3,259
Liked 2,253 Times in 1,487 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harold Gough View Post
Some politician, on the Radio 4 Today programme this morning, said it was nothing to do with "high speed" we just need more capacity, suggesting that the trains will be numerous rather than fast. So its just "Number Two"?

Harold
If true we could achieve that by improving our existing railway network and by running longer and more frequent trains on it.

We could also increase capacity by reopening some of the strategic lines closed by acts of sheer political vandalism in the 1960's and 1970's.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 9th May 2019
Harold Gough Harold Gough is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Reading UK
Posts: 5,642
Thanks: 56
Thanked 783 Times in 714 Posts
Likes: 40
Liked 3,100 Times in 1,666 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naughty Nigel View Post
If true we could achieve that by improving our existing railway network and by running longer and more frequent trains on it.

We could also increase capacity by reopening some of the strategic lines closed by acts of sheer political vandalism in the 1960's and 1970's.
You can't run longer trains without longer platforms, which are very expensive to build.

Harold
__________________
The body is willing but the mind is weak.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
Otto (10th May 2019)
  #35  
Old 9th May 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,430
Thanks: 377
Thanked 546 Times in 461 Posts
Likes: 3,259
Liked 2,253 Times in 1,487 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harold Gough View Post
You can't run longer trains without longer platforms, which are very expensive to build.

Harold
Not as expensive as building new lines though.

The alternative is to build double-decker trains like those on the continent but that might cause problems with overbridges and tunnels. Access for wheelchair users and the infirm would also be more difficult if continental trains are anything to go by.

Actually the old Grand Central Line into London, closed by Ernest Marples, was built to a continental loading gauge and would have been ideal for double decker trains.

Perhaps if we had listened to Isombard Kingdom Brunell?
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
MJ224 (10th May 2019)
  #36  
Old 10th May 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,919
Thanks: 88
Thanked 267 Times in 235 Posts
Likes: 1,002
Liked 848 Times in 543 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naughty Nigel View Post
Perhaps if we had listened to Isombard Kingdom Brunell?
If we'd have listened to Brunel and stuck with the seven-foot gauge all our trains could already be high speed. Unfortunately the corollary is they wouldn't go round such sharp bends so we'd need to demolish a few towns and cities now!

Our loading gauge is quite a bit smaller than continental Europe's - as usual we were the pioneers and they learned from our mistakes, just as with the canals. Though to be fair, they weren't really mistakes, just a lack of experience and the necessary technology. You can build a bigger railway or a wider and deeper canal if you have machinery rather than just picks and shovels.
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
The Following Users Liked This Post:
MJ224 (10th May 2019), wornish (11th May 2019)
  #37  
Old 10th May 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,430
Thanks: 377
Thanked 546 Times in 461 Posts
Likes: 3,259
Liked 2,253 Times in 1,487 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
If we'd have listened to Brunel and stuck with the seven-foot gauge all our trains could already be high speed. Unfortunately the corollary is they wouldn't go round such sharp bends so we'd need to demolish a few towns and cities now!

Our loading gauge is quite a bit smaller than continental Europe's - as usual we were the pioneers and they learned from our mistakes, just as with the canals.
The old Grand Central line into London was built to a continental loading gauge, and was originally intended to continue to the docks in Dover. London was only planned as a stopping point. Unfortunately the line was closed by Beeching in the 1960's.

The problem with Brunel's 7' " gauge is that he was just too late as the 'standard' gauge of 4' 8" was already well established elsewhere. Whilst the Brunel gauge offered many theoretical advantages including higher speeds and bigger, more powerful engines in practice these advantages were never realised and development of standard gauge locomotives soon overtook Brunel's designs.

But how did we arrive at a 'standard gauge' of 4' 8" in the first place?
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10th May 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,919
Thanks: 88
Thanked 267 Times in 235 Posts
Likes: 1,002
Liked 848 Times in 543 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naughty Nigel View Post
But how did we arrive at a 'standard gauge' of 4' 8" in the first place?

The usual story traces it back to the width of the Roman chariot but I'm a bit sceptical about that!
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10th May 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,430
Thanks: 377
Thanked 546 Times in 461 Posts
Likes: 3,259
Liked 2,253 Times in 1,487 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
The usual story traces it back to the width of the Roman chariot but I'm a bit sceptical about that!
I have heard that too but I am doubtful that early railway engineers such as Stephenson would have been influenced by the customs of the Roman empire.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10th May 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,919
Thanks: 88
Thanked 267 Times in 235 Posts
Likes: 1,002
Liked 848 Times in 543 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

As always Wiki has the answer - nobody really knows!
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 10th May 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,430
Thanks: 377
Thanked 546 Times in 461 Posts
Likes: 3,259
Liked 2,253 Times in 1,487 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
As always Wiki has the answer - nobody really knows!
It probably had something to do with the width of horse drawn carts at the time and the space needed for a horse or two drawing them.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10th May 2019
DerekW DerekW is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 3,053
Thanks: 87
Thanked 331 Times in 258 Posts
Likes: 32
Liked 530 Times in 370 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

and the gauged tracks in the roads caused by the wheels cutting into the road surface

afterall why would you want to have more than two horses abreast pulling a cart
__________________
This space for rent
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10th May 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,919
Thanks: 88
Thanked 267 Times in 235 Posts
Likes: 1,002
Liked 848 Times in 543 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

That makes sense. But why the extra quarter inch on Brunel's broad gauge of 7' 0" ? Apparently "The gauge initially proposed by Brunel was 7 ft (2,134 mm) exactly but this was soon increased by 1⁄4 in (6 mm) to 7 ft 1⁄4 in (2,140 mm) to accommodate clearance problems identified during early testing." (Wiki)
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11th May 2019
Naughty Nigel's Avatar
Naughty Nigel Naughty Nigel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Land of the Prince Bishops
Posts: 9,430
Thanks: 377
Thanked 546 Times in 461 Posts
Likes: 3,259
Liked 2,253 Times in 1,487 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
That makes sense. But why the extra quarter inch on Brunel's broad gauge of 7' 0" ? Apparently "The gauge initially proposed by Brunel was 7 ft (2,134 mm) exactly but this was soon increased by 1⁄4 in (6 mm) to 7 ft 1⁄4 in (2,140 mm) to accommodate clearance problems identified during early testing." (Wiki)
Yes; I was curious about that too. Likewise why 4' 8" and not a straightforward 4' 8"?.

Presumably the 'clearance' is that between the wheel flanges and the rails?

I can only think that once the wheel sets and bogies were made that it was easier to adjust the gauge than the wheels but the mind boggles at the logistics of doing this.
__________________
---------------

Naughty Nigel


Difficult is worth doing
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 13th May 2019
bigsambwfc bigsambwfc is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: banbury
Posts: 490
Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
Likes: 268
Liked 495 Times in 138 Posts
Re: Do we actually need HS2?

Of course we need to spend billions on Victorian technology so that we can get to London 20 minutes quicker paying vast fares and destroying more countryside building it.It will keep the tory party going for decades.
Should have been Maglevs adjacent to the motorways, that as far as I know speed wise are virtually future proof, admitted the cost would be about 100 times greater than trains balancing on rails but it would show the world engineering at its best (if we have any left in the uk these days) Thanks Maggie for cutting apprentice school grants, can you imagine the Germans ever doing that!
Just to complete my rant 2 people largely contributed to the transport demise and nanny state we are in now, dr beeching for his cuts in rail,and jimmy Saville with his clunk click campaign, seats belts,crash helmets yes, compulsion no.the start of big brother as far as I am concerned.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:53 PM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger