Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Search the maintenance guides for answers to 99.999% of Omega questions

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11   Go Down

Author Topic: HS 2 to be "reviewed "  (Read 2260 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Ashford, Kent
  • Posts: 4880
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #120 on: 10 September 2019, 18:24:11 »

The 28 schemes in the report above also include several major road improvements schemes, including a new lower Thames tunnel to ease M25 congestion as well as rail ones, so this must be a first for TB to be against that. :-[ :P

That is already at an advanced stage of public discussions about the plans drawn up, with test bore holes being sunk.

However, after 29,000 people responded, many very negatively, to the proposals it is yet another project being delayed by the NIMBY group! ::) ::) ::) :(
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 99533
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #121 on: 11 September 2019, 11:22:14 »

objections from TB and the anti-rail lobby
Not particularly anti rail, its just its an unviable, expensive and inefficient system.

If it could run without subsidies, ie those who use it pay for it, lets do it. But it can't, and it won't

But that is the thing TB, as you keep on reminding everyone the system is Victorian in origin and requires the billions now being pumped in to bring it up to 21st century+ standards that we all expect. This is after decades of a lack of government funding after it all was left to rot in 1963, and indeed before that going back to 1948. Someone has to pay for that, and it is you and me!! ::) ::) :D :D ;)
Forget the under-investment, the rail industry in the UK has NEVER broken even.  Thus unviable.

Would you expect your old retail empire to be taxpayer backed if it had failed to break even for 200 years?
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 99533
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #122 on: 11 September 2019, 11:26:08 »

The 28 schemes in the report above also include several major road improvements schemes, including a new lower Thames tunnel to ease M25 congestion as well as rail ones, so this must be a first for TB to be against that. :-[ :P

That is already at an advanced stage of public discussions about the plans drawn up, with test bore holes being sunk.

However, after 29,000 people responded, many very negatively, to the proposals it is yet another project being delayed by the NIMBY group! ::) ::) ::) :(
You can blame on NIMBYs or anything else. It just shows the public doesn't want it, but the rail industry - in business purely and only considerate of the rail industry - will plough ahead, wasting precious tax payer resources.

And remember, its the NIMBYs who have to tolerate years of disruption and inconvenience of construction, and the constant noise of running in life.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Doctor Gollum

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • In a colds and darks puddleses
  • Posts: 13846
  • If you can't eat them, join them...
    • Feetses.
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #123 on: 11 September 2019, 11:31:27 »

Some nimbies really don't have an argument...

I suspect that you can count on one hand all the people around Gatwick that predate the airfield...

And I would also wager that the bulk of those making the most noise use it at least four times a year 'because it's more convenient' than the alternatives...
Logged
Onanists always think outside the box.

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 99533
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #124 on: 11 September 2019, 11:41:15 »

Some nimbies really don't have an argument...

I suspect that you can count on one hand all the people around Gatwick that predate the airfield...

And I would also wager that the bulk of those making the most noise use it at least four times a year 'because it's more convenient' than the alternatives...
Don't forget the 3rd Heathrow strip of tarmac. Heathrow has been there an awful long time, and with a lot more noise before Concord(e) was retired.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Doctor Gollum

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • In a colds and darks puddleses
  • Posts: 13846
  • If you can't eat them, join them...
    • Feetses.
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #125 on: 11 September 2019, 11:59:12 »

The changes in noise isn't apparent until an older aircraft taxis past... The howl of a pair of RB211s at idle is several decibels up from the latest engines...
B757

A320 Neo
Logged
Onanists always think outside the box.

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Ashford, Kent
  • Posts: 4880
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #126 on: 11 September 2019, 13:33:32 »

objections from TB and the anti-rail lobby
Not particularly anti rail, its just its an unviable, expensive and inefficient system.

If it could run without subsidies, ie those who use it pay for it, lets do it. But it can't, and it won't

But that is the thing TB, as you keep on reminding everyone the system is Victorian in origin and requires the billions now being pumped in to bring it up to 21st century+ standards that we all expect. This is after decades of a lack of government funding after it all was left to rot in 1963, and indeed before that going back to 1948. Someone has to pay for that, and it is you and me!! ::) ::) :D :D ;)
Forget the under-investment, the rail industry in the UK has NEVER broken even.  Thus unviable.

Would you expect your old retail empire to be taxpayer backed if it had failed to break even for 200 years?

Here we go again... ;D ;D ;D ;D  Yes, the Big Four railway companies from 1st January 1923 did produce profits, some more than others, but they did.  Then came the 1930's depression, followed by WW2 and the non-recompensed war demands on the system generally that ruined what had been, with a British Railways from 1st January 1948  being 'run' by the awful management of the British Transport Commission until 1963, that completed the destruction of it's commercial viability.  Beeching came along and used his accounting eyes to cut out the non-profit making lines under an anti- railway government direction. Some lines had to be closed, it was inevitable.  But in the process it was not appreciated by the accountants that many branch lines fed the main lines with passenger and freight business, and the big 'duplications' of main lines actually were a highly valuable asset to provide addition main line capacity, especially during peak demand, or when the other line was blocked for any reason, whilst serving the many communities along their length.

As for running a normal commercial business without profit?  : No, of course not.  But the railways must be viewed as an essential public service that keeps the country moving and tens of thousands of businesses able to operate and be profitable, as well as here in the UK, not abroad. Can you imagine our big cities not being fed by the railway lines bringing in workers and goods? The simple answer is, if they did not, the commercial centres of those cities will collapse.

That is why the Socialists have always wanted the railways to be Nationalised again so it is under government control for the complete benefit of the Country.  That is of course where the arguments start about allowing governmental inefficiency, meddling in an industry that requires professional railwaymen running it, not ham fisted, uncommitted, and ignorant civil servants as back in the days from 1948 to 1994.  ;)
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 99533
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #127 on: 11 September 2019, 13:55:37 »

Yes, the Big Four railway companies from 1st January 1923 did produce profits, some more than others, but they did
The industry as a whole has NEVER made a profit. Beeching had the right idea, unprofitable lines should be shut. Only he was too much of a pussy, and only did a half arsed job.


As for running a normal commercial business without profit?  : No, of course not.  But the railways must be viewed as an essential public service that keeps the country moving and tens of thousands of businesses able to operate and be profitable, as well as here in the UK, not abroad. Can you imagine our big cities not being fed by the railway lines bringing in workers and goods? The simple answer is, if they did not, the commercial centres of those cities will collapse.
I get a feeling you don't actually use trains?  Their primary purpose is to get people who don't want to live in the shitholes they create into the shitholes they create for work.

Now electricity, water and arguably in this day and age, Internet are essential services.  Not *any* form of transport.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Ashford, Kent
  • Posts: 4880
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #128 on: 11 September 2019, 16:14:21 »

Yes, the Big Four railway companies from 1st January 1923 did produce profits, some more than others, but they did
The industry as a whole has NEVER made a profit. Beeching had the right idea, unprofitable lines should be shut. Only he was too much of a pussy, and only did a half arsed job.


As for running a normal commercial business without profit?  : No, of course not.  But the railways must be viewed as an essential public service that keeps the country moving and tens of thousands of businesses able to operate and be profitable, as well as here in the UK, not abroad. Can you imagine our big cities not being fed by the railway lines bringing in workers and goods? The simple answer is, if they did not, the commercial centres of those cities will collapse.
I get a feeling you don't actually use trains?  Their primary purpose is to get people who don't want to live in the shitholes they create into the shitholes they create for work.

Now electricity, water and arguably in this day and age, Internet are essential services.  Not *any* form of transport.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D  That is a sweeping general statement.  I have spent years of studying the history of the railways, but regretfully nowadays I have not got to hand the exact facts and figures relating to the accounts of the Big Four, especially for the 1930's :'( :'(  so I will summarize accordingly -

It is, and always was a very complicated picture across the industry, with the -

GWR - was always the most profitable throughout it's history
 SR - which was profitable, but lacked the advantage of heavy freight handing
 LMS - often struggling to maintain profitability as it's freight business declined significantly during the years of the depression
LNER - Suffered extremely badly, with loss of profitability, from 1929 with a major decline in their freight business, which included the movement of coad and steel.

It must not be forgotten though that these companies operated more than just trains.  They were a major operator of:
Hotels
Railway Air Services
Household removals, the largest in the country
Road transport, with the largest fleet in the country, including 15,000+ road passenger vehicles and 9,000 non-passenger vehicles
Ships and Ferries
Docks and Harbour facilities
Plus, the owners of 51,000 houses
112,000 workshops

Their empires were all encompassing, with the GWR in particular also producing many household items, fixtures and fittings in their workshops - indeed everything a family, especially those working for the company, living in their operating region required.

As I touched on before, the Great War and the Second World War severely damaged the railways in terms of extreme wear & tear, caused by massive increases in train movements, with locomotives in particular being left badly worn out.  All this was never recompensed, so no benefit was seen in the accounts of the railway companies, compounded by the fact that all the massive increases in costs, that severely damaged profits, was never compensated for. Especially after WW2 the Big Four were left broke, giving the government of the day the opportunity of Nationalising all of them.

As for me using trains; well not now, but on business I often had to when travelling into London and I loved them!  They  were, in the 1970's to 1990's, so much better than those trains I frequently was on travelling with my parents in the 1950's and early 1960's!  Especially the Intercity 125's out of Bristol were a pleasure to use 8) 8) 8)  But the infrastructure was out of date then, urgently requiring the massive investment that is at last taken place in the 21st century! :y :y :y

Sorry TB, but the age of the motor car is over; the new age of the train is just beginning! 8) 8) :D :D ;)
« Last Edit: 11 September 2019, 16:17:44 by Lizzie Zoom »
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 99533
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #129 on: 12 September 2019, 12:56:21 »

I clearly said the rail industry as a whole.  I was surprised to find out that, as I too thought the late Victorian railways were raking it in. But it appears by nowhere near enough to cover the loses on other parts.

And currently, rail companies are allowed to make 2% profit approx, and remember that's with a 60% subsidy.  I'm taking that to be a massive loss on every line.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Ashford, Kent
  • Posts: 4880
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #130 on: 12 September 2019, 16:31:45 »

I clearly said the rail industry as a whole.  I was surprised to find out that, as I too thought the late Victorian railways were raking it in. But it appears by nowhere near enough to cover the loses on other parts.

And currently, rail companies are allowed to make 2% profit approx, and remember that's with a 60% subsidy.  I'm taking that to be a massive loss on every line.


That's right, and those railways varied greatly in terms of the areas covered and the business potential from the cities, towns, or very rural districts (that would always struggle to meet their operating costs) and the profits enjoyed.  The very considerable costs in the original build of each line also affected them.  All that is why the grouping of 1st January 1923 took place to form four powerful controlling companies out of the 123 companies then in existence, to give them a more stable business model.  Of course, the Great Western Railway was the only one to remain very much as was all the way through, just taking on the assorted mineral lines of South Wales in particular.

As for the current railway companies, they are being made to invest very large sums of their money to upgrade the rolling stock across their whole range of operations, that the old Big Four did not have to do, with them concentrating their investments in the premier, main line, services, which particular applied to the LMS and LNER in the 1930's, fighting each other for the passenger business from main northern centres to London. That cost a lot of money.

Of course the current railway companies do not own the infrastructure, nationalised Network Rail does, which of course is sinking billions of Government / public money to upgrade it all, with the private companies paying serious sums to NR for 'their' facilities. It is a situation that, in my opinion, is too complicated, inefficient, and expensive that is a mis-match between private and nationalised companies.  Wastage and mismanagement is the result.  But, we NEED those railways, with or without HS2, for now and especially the future, so it needs political will and determination to resolve the issues that are so public most days of the week.  Running the railways is not, and never was cheap.  Obtaining a profit is always a real challenge, just like in any other business.  In all honesty I am not aware of the 2% limit on profits, but with the heavy investment going on, and 1 billion paid to shareholders of those companies over the last 6 years, I do not think that is a problem. What I do know is it is not a field I would want to manage in!

Indeed, just look as to what has happened to the companies running the East Coast main line; not enough profits there to keep even Virgin interested!

No, all of us must be realistic. Running railways is hard, especially when trying to bring them up to 21st century standards after decades of neglect.  Other companies could well suffer with declining profits as they are forced to invest big money in rolling stock upgrades, increasing payments to Network Rail, and then re-payments on eye-watering loans.  But, strangely, as I had attempted to indicate before, I am one business manager who must recognise that the normal operational requirements of Making Profit, nothing more, nothing less, cannot apply in the same way to the railways which are, I repeat, an essential national public service.  Does that mean we are reaching a stage where the railways MUST be nationalised, contrary to my instincts, the history of BR, and knowing that the capitalist system is best for creation and development, not the stifling, lacking in imagination, socialist resolution?  Frankly I am not that sure now!!  But I want the railways to work and do what they are good at; the transit of mass volumes of human and freight traffic. ;)
« Last Edit: 12 September 2019, 16:36:13 by Lizzie Zoom »
Logged

STEMO

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Up North
  • Posts: 12895
    • Astra 2.0 diesel
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #131 on: 12 September 2019, 16:34:28 »

FFS.....who cares any more?
Logged
If you are offended by anything I post, sorry. Just thought I'd get that in now.

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Ashford, Kent
  • Posts: 4880
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #132 on: 12 September 2019, 16:38:26 »

FFS.....who cares any more?

If you are one of the millions using the railways everyday, you would care, especially when your fares are going up out of line with your wages, or you are a commercial concern relying on the railway network to move your goods! ::) ::) :D ;)
Logged

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Ashford, Kent
  • Posts: 4880
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #133 on: 12 September 2019, 16:47:34 »

..........................also we must recognise that you would care if the proposed route of the HS lines, or if the old lines are re-opened, are going to affect your property ::) :D :D ;)
Logged

STEMO

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Up North
  • Posts: 12895
    • Astra 2.0 diesel
    • View Profile
Re: HS 2 to be "reviewed "
« Reply #134 on: 12 September 2019, 16:59:37 »

Yes......but who, on here, cares any more? Turning into another bus thread.
Logged
If you are offended by anything I post, sorry. Just thought I'd get that in now.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.224 seconds with 21 queries.