Hmmm, 200 Years Of The Railways.

Chocolatelovinggran

Well, David, I prefer to see my little grandchildren in person from time to time., so do need to travel long distances, one by rail, the other by plane...if that's ok with you, of course..
I'm astonished that you feel comfortable making sweeping statements about us not needing to travel. The four year old is pretty rubbish at WhatsApp calls.

I'm surprised too. My children each lives about four hours' drive from me. It's much quicker by train. Not only that, but I'm beginning to dislike driving more than an hour or so and prefer to sit on a train with a drink and a good book.

MaizieD

^If any rail expansion is done in the way HS2 has been organized we will go bankrupt first^

We will never go bankrupt, David. We're not a business or a household.

HS2 might be a vast white elephant, but it's economic activity and contributing to GDP.

No Maisie but our cost of living and therefore inflation could wreck the economy. The HS2 economic activity could have put into a useful asset instead of a White Elephant, or are you denying that £ 100 billion could not have been used usefully elsewhere

growstuff

Chocolatelovinggran

Well, David, I prefer to see my little grandchildren in person from time to time., so do need to travel long distances, one by rail, the other by plane...if that's ok with you, of course..
I'm astonished that you feel comfortable making sweeping statements about us not needing to travel. The four year old is pretty rubbish at WhatsApp calls.

I'm surprised too. My children each lives about four hours' drive from me. It's much quicker by train. Not only that, but I'm beginning to dislike driving more than an hour or so and prefer to sit on a train with a drink and a good book.

The only way to reduce traffic congestion is to travel less, building more roads or rail encourages more travel. We are supposed to be reducing CO2 emissions and pollution yet demand the right to travel more. A 3rd runway is being built at Heathrow to increase travel more, that means Net Zero is harder to achieve

That’s exactly it David49 when it comes down to it people put desire to travel before any green credentials.It was always going to be that way.

David49

growstuff

Chocolatelovinggran

Well, David, I prefer to see my little grandchildren in person from time to time., so do need to travel long distances, one by rail, the other by plane...if that's ok with you, of course..
I'm astonished that you feel comfortable making sweeping statements about us not needing to travel. The four year old is pretty rubbish at WhatsApp calls.

I'm surprised too. My children each lives about four hours' drive from me. It's much quicker by train. Not only that, but I'm beginning to dislike driving more than an hour or so and prefer to sit on a train with a drink and a good book.

The only way to reduce traffic congestion is to travel less, building more roads or rail encourages more travel. We are supposed to be reducing CO2 emissions and pollution yet demand the right to travel more. A 3rd runway is being built at Heathrow to increase travel more, that means Net Zero is harder to achieve

Moving people by rail is more cost effective than individual car journeys, and with increased electrification (which should have been done years ago) rail travel will reduce the CO2 emissions associated with travelling. Rail travel should be encouraged as a substitute for road.

You cannot stop long distance travelling', all you can do is encourage the most efficient and environmentally friendly methods of moving large numbers of people. Rail seems to fit the bill though the high cost to individuals is a disincentive.

However, when you factor in the full costs of car ownership and usage, not to mention pollution, for each car journey rail doesn't look such a bad choice. Particularly if it is part of an integrated transport plan.

There was a recent thread about the relationship between grandchild and grandparents, on which someone working with adults commented on how important such was to them growing up.
What would you suggest, David and Oreo- should I stay home and be green, or go where I might be needed?

I love travelling by train. Now that it's just me and my senior railcard, the cost is pretty much the same as the cost of driving, and much less tiring. But for even an elderly couple, it would seem a lot, when the car is there and you can share the driving.

The trains in my town are abysmal, not too long ago they cancel 4 trains on the trot then sent a 12 seater bus to collect 30 people! Trains running north are often just cancelled. At the moment no trains to Sellafield, a very big employer. It looks like its going to go on for months. Our trains are dirty and very old, because we are in the north we get the drag ends. HS2, maybe it should have started in the north. Then it would have been finished.

Took a fantastic train holiday 2 years ago to Sarajevo from Leeds ! All on time but did have to take a couple of buses in Bosnia!
Recommend as it was so interesting and comfortable
Did a day trip to London on Wednesday from leeds and all went fine
When it works it is amazing

“Moving people by rail is more cost effective than individual car journeys, and with increased electrification (which should have been done years ago) rail travel will reduce the CO2 emissions associated with travelling. Rail travel should be encouraged as a substitute for road.”

I agree, ( doesn’t happen often) but we didn’t go down that road in 1964 every one wanted the freedom of a car and trucks were cheaper for freight. Now changing back to rail is simply not on the agenda anywhere. The only time we use the train is to go into either London or Birmingham because taking a car is so much hassle, so making car travel more expensive, unpleasant and difficult is the only way to force people back to public transport.
It cant be done by subsidizing public transport, that hasn’t worked

Actually we use the train a lot in West Yorkshire as our bus pass gives us half price on the trains here so I never drive into the city !

If you want to see a brilliant rail system, try Switzerland! No such thing as late trains, leaves on the line, etc…

Ashcombe

Not only did Beeching desecrate the railways, Thatcher's privatisation changed the whole industry into a profit making concern for shareholders which is why our journeys by rail are so much more expensive than in most of Europe.

I know half of Gransnet still loathes the Thatch, but rail privatisation happened several years after she was ousted.

On a trip to Italy a couple of years ago with our DD we booked train tickets from lake Garda to Milan the cost using the train line Europe app was less than £10 per person return. The trains ran on time were extremely clean which is more than we can say about Scotrail trains which are operated via the Scottish government.

Coming from a railway town and family, I choose to use public transport whenever possible.
There is a big celebration of 200 years of rail travel at the new Hopetown site in Darlington. Very well thought out being fun and informative at the same time. Lots of interactive things to do.
From Darlington's Bank Top station it is a 2 minute journey to North Road Darlington on the Saltburn to Bishop Auckland line.

pen50

Ashcombe

Not only did Beeching desecrate the railways, Thatcher's privatisation changed the whole industry into a profit making concern for shareholders which is why our journeys by rail are so much more expensive than in most of Europe.

I know half of Gransnet still loathes the Thatch, but rail privatisation happened several years after she was ousted.

AI Overview
“Margaret Thatcher's government significantly impacted the British railway system through policies focused on privatization and cost-cutting. A key event was the Serpell Report, commissioned to examine the state and future of British Rail. This report, produced in 1982, analyzed the railway's finances and explored various future network options. While the report itself didn't directly lead to closures, it laid the groundwork for future reforms and privatization”.
Imo she had no time fir the railways and favoured the road transport lobby…

Sadly the boat has mostly sailed but there are old railway lines and stations being reopened such as Portishead which will ease congestion on the commuter run into Bristol. There are also new stations being approved such as Wellington, both in the South West. The Elizabeth line in London has made a huge difference for travellers into the City. Heritage railways are reopening lines which have not been built over so I don’t think we’ve seen the end of them and they have an important role to play as part of our future sustainabile transport system. There are buses that can run out the tracks as well.

BTW it was Churchill who denationalised the railways. Also the railways cut back on the number of trains in the late 50’s forcing people to find alternative means of transport. Beeching was then able to say certain lines were underused and axe them altogether.

Churchill who denationalised the roads I meant to say.

I remember reading how Dr Beeching researched the stations to see which were underused.

It was a bit random as his researchers just hopped on trains at odd times of day and if they happened to be on busy commuter train route that was nearly empty late morning or early afternoon they reported back that it was underused.

I regularly travel by train. My disability railcard gives me a third off. Another angle to this discussion is that train lines have always been on a north-south basis. We have never had a proper intercity route across the middle of England. There are services but they are lengthy, spasmodic and have far too few carriages for the numbers of passengers. There should be a regular Norwich to Birmingham service via Peterborough and Ipswich to Birmingham via Cambridge. It would be much easier to change to other parts of the country, such as the West Country, Wales or the north-west rather than having to go to London and the stress of crossing London. It would almost certainly be cheaper, too. Oh, wait... London is all-important, isn't it?

Many years ago when I was in secondary school, where I lived there was no school apart from primary. We had to take the train, no option, half hour train journey then another 20 minute walk to get to school. In all weathers. Done people need a train journey. Where I live now the only transport is a bus or car. Nearest train station is a 20 minute drive on a good day. The nearest town to me has three stations, and all are used daily by many commuters. My first job involved taking a train to work. Trains are a necessity to many people. They keep many cars off already congested roads.

DS works for a company that doesn't allow employees to travel by car, wherever possible. They are focused on trains and rail travel for the health, safety and security (sensitive nature) of their workforce. This means fewer risks, less stress, fewer accidents etc and more productivity as work can be done on the train.
It all comes at a cost though. DS travels to London on the first train twice a week. That's £300 a time which isn't affordable for the general public.
When I travel in France, fares are a fraction of the cost of the UK journeys.

David49

“As for long distance journeys, why wouldn't we want or need to make them? What an odd statement.”

They are mainly discretionary you don’t have to work 50 miles from home you don’t have to travel to Spain four a holiday you do it by choice and pay the cost and cause the pollution, you and I are causing most of the pollution.

Yes milk and vegetables as well as other goods were delivered to the cities next day because lorries were not available.
Rail transport is always subsidized, road transport is simply cheaper, in fact even air transport is cheaper than rail, wherever you are a cheap rail or bus ticket is being paid for from taxation.
Personally I believe we should have electrified rail connecting distribution hubs but successive governments have gone in the opposite direction because it costs less. If any rail expansion is done in the way HS2 has been organized we will go bankrupt first

Rail transport is always subsidised? Who pays for the road infrastructure? Not the road users! People complain about how much HS2 costs but what about the costs of building new roads? They don't grab the headlines because people take it for granted that new roads are essential and new railways are not.

MaizieD

Ah, yes. Dr Beeching’s report received and implemented by Transport Minister Ernest Marples. Who wasn’t at all influenced by his interests in construction firms engaged in motorway building…

Incidentally, according to Wikipedia, Marples died in Monaco, where he had gone to avoid being prosecuted for fraud in the UK…

Quite shocking to read this!

Magenta8

I remember reading how Dr Beeching researched the stations to see which were underused.

It was a bit random as his researchers just hopped on trains at odd times of day and if they happened to be on busy commuter train route that was nearly empty late morning or early afternoon they reported back that it was underused.

I agree FGT. It might explain why the research was so haphazard as well (see above). Flawed methodology and corruption in high places is nothing new.