Be Excellent To Each Other

This, of course, is exactly correct. I remember watching Britain From Above's bit about trains -- they showed a number of major train lines around the country. There's literally no room on either side of any urban train line to expand, because the line routes were laid down a century or more ago and the cities grew tightly around them like a tree growing around a fence. Coupled with us making decisions about track gauge, bridge clearance, and so forth that seemed like a good idea at the time but bloody well aren't in hindsight and you have a situation where, if you wanted a truly world-class mass transit system in the 21st century, you were far better off waiting until well into the 20th to build it.

Similarly, I remember The Egg working on a route for the fabled Bristol tram they talk about every few years. It passed through (and hence required demolition of) several hundred-year-old trees, half a dozen listed buildings, a few cemeteries, and countless water, gas, and electric mains. This was the least controversial route a large group of skilled architects could devise. Our cities are simply too densely packed.

We could do with about a dozen properly designed new towns, really. Ones where the planners really thought about everything that you could do if you were building a town from scratch, rather than just building the same shitty old buildings and infrastructure but with more roundabouts.

Why would this succeed where the M25 and M60 failed?



Being completely blown to bits in WW2 did Mainland Europe a favour in this regard. I can think of a number of things off the top of my head that the rail industry in the UK has come to regret, including:
-Parliament forcing Brunel to adopt 'standard gauge' over broad gauge
-the late 80s/early 90s obsession with multiple units
-the current obsession with direct services, which means diesel trains running under the wires for the majority of their journeys
-abandoning the APT
-re-privatization

Beeching is obvious, in the same way cities in both the UK and North America are now wishing they hadn't scrapped their tram/streetcar networks in the 50s and 60s in favour of diesel buses.



And politicians too spineless, and the electorate too aware of this. For fear of angering the electorate and getting the vile press on their back, any new proposals end up so watered down they're often pointless. Europeans love grand projects like huge bridges and fast railways but the British find a reason to complain and scupper or neuter them. While Britain was building the Class 43 (Intercity 125), France was building the TGV, and Japan already had the Shinkansen. 30 years after the TGV is a long time to wait to finally build a domestic high speed rail network.

Britain is unique in being very compact and also comparatively uneven which is why stuff like the APT would have sufficed, but as even political will (often under media pressure) is lost and stuff ends up half finished. I'm quite surprised that simply putting some pretend grass on top of HS2 is one of the only concessions they've made.

As anyone who's played Transport Tycoon knows, bottlenecks jam any rail network up. While much has been spent in recent years improving on this, you can't ignore the fact that in so many areas, quadruple tracks are needed. Tile Hill is near Network Rail's huge training centre, and is on the WCML. The track is double, which means that the schedule has to be timed to accommodate the occasional stopping train calling at the station in between express services which want to go 125mph. The sensible solution, as it is out of London, is to have separate 'fast' tracks that allow the expresses to hammer past the local stoppers. Unfortunately, as per DocG's comments above, widening the railway would now likely upset the nesting pattern of the yellow-bollocked car shitter wrens which are so timid and might become stressed don't you know.

A high speed line to the border would ensure constant rotation of troops, and a quick surge in numbers from down south if the Scots get restless.

Yet we can widen motorways

Because they were built in the 60s with a view to future expansion, which kinda proves Doc's point.

Don't say that! He's a scientist, so therefore loves you to destroy his arguments so he can make better, more accurate ones.

The UK Rail Network is an living example of evolution, whereas motorways demonstration Creationism at its best.

Elevated trains!

In much the same way that people will write complaints to the rail industry regardless of whose fault the delay is, but if they're stuck in traffic I doubt they write to the Highways Agency or DFT!



Fads, shortsightedness. Much like tearing up tram lines in the 50s to replace with 'more flexible' trolley buses only to immediately start tearing those down in the 60s to replace with diesel buses.

While there are so many rail lines that could do with being redoubled, a great many more are now gone and their right of way exists to provide NIMBYs with a place to walk their pedigree dogs. The thought occurs: how much and what transport infrastructure would we be willing to pay for and build now in 2012 if it didn't already exist? The Chiltern protestors seems to have learned to accept the Chiltern mainline and M40 because they're there, now. Would we build the railway to Holyhead now if it didn't already exist? Of course not, we have airliners now. But so long as it's there, it's nice to have, right?

Fuck this shit, where are my flying cars? We were promised them by 2015!

The Rapture!

I think the protesters are upset because of where it is going. If someone decided to put a train track behind my house then I'd be a pissed off nimby too. Although I like to think I'd be honest enough to admit that I probably wouldn't give a shit if it was going in someone elses back garden. But whilst these things obviosuly sometimes have to be pushed through for the common good I think it's incredibly disingenuous to go sneering at people who are understandably upset because it will really affect them.

It's not actually in their back garden or even on the other side of their fence. It's going to be in cuttings and tunnels a lot both to to keep the track straight and level and also to mask the sound and sight of it.

I've lived by (as in, able to easily hear if not see) railway lines in practically every house I've lived in since high school including my current one, and you really honestly get used to it. Yes, "coming to the hazard" where the railway was there first is a bit different to a new one being built but the way these folks are carrying on you'd think it was going to run through their front room and blow the pages of their Daily Mail around and give their Westie piles.

It's only 2012, dude.

Doubtless it will affect some people a great deal and others hardly at all unless this is gong to be a very curvy trainline. However I still think people who use terms like nimby are big fat hypocrites. To a man they would probably find reasons why whatever was being planned was a bad idea if it affected them rather than someone else.

If they ripped up half of my estate and put down train tracks it'd actually improve the place.

But I'd have expected to have heard of their release date by now.

Maybe we should apply the same thing we should apply for new windfarms.

"I object to this monstrosity, this eyesore disfiguring the landscape!"
"Fine, fine. We will not build the windfarm there."
"Good!"
"Lads, you heard the man. No more windfarm. We're building a nuclear power station there instead."
"What?"
"Windfarm doesn't sound so bad now, does it?"

Discussions of nimbyism has reminded me about the Southampton Biomass Plant that is being proposed at the moment. My mum is part of the 'No to Southampton Biomass' group, but I can't decide whether it's gross nimbyism, or completely valid (or somewhere in between).

Does anyone have any experience with these types of plants?

http://www.southamptonbiomasspower.com/
http://nosouthamptonbiomass.co.uk/

Seems a good way of producing energy.

I'm against these now. The concept is flawed for the UK at least, the one in Lockerbie is causing problems, mainly that it soaks up all low grade wood available and then burns it at poor efficiency.
I don't believe the emissions from the plant are especially a problem, either (which is what the Nimbies are probably mostly concerned about).

Without reading up on the issues for this one in particular, here's my hunch:
The clue is that it's in Southampton. That means the wood fuel will be brought in by boat, probably from Canada. That's enough to tell you it's a stupid idea.

I was amused to look at the area on Google Maps (look by Millbrook station) and see, just to the north of the site, an utterly colossal British American Tobacco factory.

I've also 'heard' that the wood won't be waste, but will be virgin trees. This seems all sorts of wrong, if true. I'm taking what the protesters say with a pinch of salt though.

Emissions is one thing, but apparently the whole thing will be fucking HUGE and dominate the landscape. Also it's not like it's miles out of town in the middle of nowhere - my parents live about two miles from the city centre and this plant will be right next to a busy dual carriageway.

Even more amusing is that my dad is a research scientist there (for another six months, anyway).

-edit- although there's no factory there anymore (just R&D these days), and even when it was, it was a fraction of the size of what the biomass plant is meant to be.

I wouldn't argue with that. We recently "hijacked" a 20T load of pine that was destined for the Lockerbie one. It was mostly dead, although freshly felled.
It would previously have gone into making OSB (board) and would have cost half as much. It was being trucked from Inverness to Lockerbie, with the diesel costing nearly as much as the load was worth. Something ain't right somewhere.



Well, I'm sure the busy dual carriageway is by far the greater nuisance than a quiet, gleaming powerplant. No sympathy for that sort of objection, although the number of trucks coulds be a valid concern.

I believe that is the issue that has been raised.

In any case, I didn't want to jump on the bandwagon without carefully analysing what was happening. I suppose I can look at it more objectively as I don't live there.

I'm not against Nimbies objecting to stuff if they're honest about it - i.e. it spoils my view or I'm worried about house prices. Then it can be assessed and possibly ignored on that basis. It's when they start dragging up really fucking thin or unproven arguments that they clearly don't care about either to support the case that I lose patience. Like "casting a shadow across a road" FFS.

The website says that quite clearly.

Indeed it does, I have only skim-read most of the site so far.

That does seem off, but then it will need a lot of stuff to burn..

That's true. We should round up every baby in the world and burn those too. After all, it'll need a lot of stuff to burn. It will also solve the population crisis.

I did not mean that in a flippant way. I guess for every tree harvested a new one is planted ( I can't think of the word) etc...

Sustainability?

Yes.... That is the one.

Brain is a mush been reviewing Tech Docs all day..

Your brain's always a mush.

That is a fair point.

It seems silly to be burning up trees when they could build a waste-to-energy plant and burn refuse instead.

Alas, the protests would be even stronger over the perceived clouds of black garbage smoke something like that must obviously produce (obviously) and so 'biomass' has to be used to try and placate the ignorant hysteria.

A shame, really, as burning garbage in a modern WTE incinerator means we not only get electricity from it but don't have to use up land to dump it whereupon it biodegrades and releases another greenhouse gas, methane.

Then again, there's an article on the BBC today claiming that the world is anti-nuclear because of James Bond and Dr. No, so there really is no hope for humanity.

That wasn't the point I was making at all. My point was that these sorts of things obviously have to be done sometimes despite objections but that deriding anyone who does object as a daily mail reading tosspot is just bollocks and shows a complete lack of empathy.

I have empathy! It doesn't stop me thinking that, in this instance, they're complaining for complaining's sake!

I'm sure some are. Others perhaps not so much. I know if I'd worked to move away into the country and someone was going to put a train line through my bit, giving assurances such as "you'll get used to the noise" then I'd be pretty pissed off too. I'm just trying to be honest really. I'm not comfortable with characterising the objectors as small minded nimbys when I think most people would probably try to fight their own corner too.

Neat-o animation of the UK's rail network (and the pointlessness or otherwise of HS2). It's like seeing inside Perkies' mind or something.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... -animation

You'd be being an irrational, selfish twat then. Sorry, you are completely failing to convince me to feel empathy for these objections because all you have is 'oh, those poor people, I feel so sorry for them.'

What on earth is the noise of a high speed train passing going to prevent them from doing? Here's what one sounds like: link, and for balance, here's another: link. Bear in mind that's standing right next to the tracks! It's a wooshing noise, not unlike the wind, and also not unlike traffic on a road, except it'll be a lot less frequent than road traffic. Plus, about half of it is going to be in cuttings or tunnels. It takes all of three seconds to travel its own length. Are they thinking it's going to be echoing off the hills?

Ignoring the sound, the 'environmental impact'. They already have a motorway, and a mainline railway. Oh, and electrical power corridors too, huge ugly steel eyesores marching across the countryside raping badgers and chipping Royal Doulton figurines. Here's a map of those: linkypoo.

Where will it stop? They'll be coming and paving over my favourite pheasant shooting ground next, I won't stand for it. I don't actually grow anything on my land, that's hardly the point. It must stay entirely untouched, apart from all the infrastructure that already crosses it to supply me with gas, water, sewerage, electricity and roads so that my grandchildren can enjoy it, once they've sat in a traffic jam for two hours trying to get here. And my enormous wall to keep the undesirables out. We need to keep natural land and its scenic beauty as difficult to reach as possible! Now if you'll excuse me, we've booked tickets to travel on the Central Wales line, which I hear is one of the most scenic in the country. I say! Who are you calling an ignorant hypocrite? I have it on good authority that the construction workers will slash and burn the entire Chilterns, not just the path of the railway itself, and will pour acid into badger sets, and punch barn owls in the face, or something. Plus the people who'll travel on it will be sodomites having relations with people from the Asian Subcontinent out of wedlock. You know, wogs. How dare you, some of my best friends are wogs. Yes, off with you. Move your car too, I can't get my Range Rover out. Honestly.



It would be a lot better if it was show at the resolution it was originally rendered at, as opposed to blur-o-vision. Watching my area, I was quite impressed that most of the little dots seemed to be stopping as per the actual schedule, though the map eventually obscures most of it, and the remaining bits (mostly the Valley Lines) are so smeared it's all but impossible to tell.

I still think that people are behaving in a manner consistent with normal human nature. And it's a lot easier to deride them all as irrational and selfish when you aren't the one who will be affected by the massive civil engineering project which will go right through their area. It will affect them too, this is Great Britain after all, it will therefore be executed with utter incompetence and take about twice as long as anyone reckons.

Expecting that people will warmly welcome their compulsory purchase orders as it is for the common good seems staggeringly naive.

I've got an overrunning bicycle lane being built outside my house. It's making the road a bit narrower, there's backhoes and dumptrucks coming and going, and it's been going for months. There was a traffic jam and lots of noise today.

Can I have some empathy please? I mean, the only people who'll use this cycle lane will obviously be lycra-clad cunts who flaunt the Highway Code and never take their flashlight-fitted helmets off even in the bath, plus the noise of their smug will spoil my enjoyment of ArmA2. I tried to block it going through the local council but when I turned up all sour faced in a flat cap they just laughed at me.

A bit late, but yes double decker trains are cool.

They have those in Sydney, but the really neat part is that on most of the trains the backs of the seats can be flipped over so that you can choose which direction to face. If you are travelling in a group you can sit face-to-face, and if you are by yourself or in a couple and don't want to see people's ugly faces you can flip the seat over look at the back of their heads instead. It's a simple thing, but when I saw it for the first time i was really impressed.

Yeah, it's going to be just like a cycle lane

Oh, but it's public money being spent on improving infrastructure that's not directly beneficial to me while I can think of things they could spend it on that would benefit me me me!

There's been disruption and noise and inconvenience while the construction, which is overrunning I might add, has been carried out!

I'm sure it will somehow spoil my lifestyle here, it makes the side of the road unsightly and when you walk or ride on it the red grippy coating crunches noisily, not to mention all the ants and other insects, CRUCIAL to the ecosystem, that will be crushed when bicycles start using the path.

Do you fucking see?

Yes but it depends how much difference it will actually make to you. I've said all along that some people probably are just complaining for the sake of it but I saw someone interviewed for whom the train line would run right behind their house.

But yeah as you've said a few times they probably voted Tory and read the wrong paper so it shouldn't matter.

How close is "right behind"?

From the internal website at work: