[sclug] OT: convert rail tracks to tarmac for private coach network which saves billions and provides a better service!

Alex Butcher lug at assursys.co.uk
Thu Sep 10 17:21:47 UTC 2009

On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Tom Carbert-Allen wrote:

>> Anyway, my point really was that rail and roads (should) solve different
>> types of problems and you probably want both. The rest is just a simple
>> matter of getting people to use the right method, rather than petulantly
>> whining "but I want good, fast AND cheap!"
>> I doubt we'll ever judge that >100mph road-type mass transit to be safe
>> enough, as a society. Likewise, we'll never get literal-door-to-door rail.
>> Best Regards,
>> Alex
> I totally agree with you. We do want both unmanaged public lane system and a 
> private managed lane system. I am suggesting changing the technology used to 
> contact the ground the private managed system to a more efficient one, not to 
> mix the two systems.

Firstly, by abandoning rail, you'd lose access to 300mph land travel. I
would expect that people and cargo that needed that speed would then be
forced to fly instead. Fail.

Secondly, once the land used by railways was turned into roads in all but
name, I would expect that an increasing number of operators would lobby to
be allowed to use it instead, or even as well as the existing roads.
Eventually, I think, the private individuals and organisations would lobby
to be allowed to use it too, leaving the end effect of a massive expansion
in roads and destruction of the railways (i.e. only the 'good and cheap'
option, no 'good and fast').

> (at the moment we can't put more trains on because capacity has already
> been reached, so everyone just puts up with standing which makes trains
> seem un-attractive to commuters)

Perhaps a rail buff can enlighten us as to why double-decker trains, as seen
in mainland Europe, aren't possible here...

Best Regards,

More information about the Sclug mailing list