Concrete them over. Pt. II
I have mentioned it before that the best thing to do with the railways is to Concrete them over.
Looking back I noticed this comment -
What makes you think that road transport can carry more people per hour, is less polluting and safer than rail? None of these things is remotely true. And have you any idea how many coaches would be needed to replace trains (for example, to carry a quarter of a million people into London every day), and what they would do to our already congested roads?
Bit late for an April Fool suggestion.
Posted by: Goswell Frand at April 5, 2004.
Well dear old Gossie the answer is here - ( I hope you still drop by to read this) Transport Watch UK - Road/rail comparisons across the uk
Very much against public and political sentiment roads managed to avoid congestion would offer 3 to 4 times the capacity to move freight and people at one quarter the cost of rail while using 30% to 40% less energy and reducing casualty costs suffered by rail passengers by a factor of 2.
The problem with the proposition is that (a) it is so very much against expectation (b) the numbers are so overwhelming as to inspire disbelief rather than belief (c) few people have ever seen a motor road managed to avoid congestion - the UK road network is (with the exception of motorways and some modern single carriageways) a collection of access roads never designed for motor traffic (d) rail is so romantic.
The primary proposition is expanded below. Nearly all the statements were tested at the Public Inquiry into the West Coast Main Line Modernisation Programme. There, Railtrack's immensely expensive Inquiry Team could do nothing in the face of the research presented. Any person who doubts that may have copies of the relevant closing statements in PDF Format. Additionally, the whole is supported by a series of facts sheets also available in PDF format, list appended.