About Us

Roland Perry · April 21st 17, 06:57 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In message , at 13:32:47
on Thu, 20 Apr 2017, remarked:

The licencing authority doesn't want tourists arriving at
the station to be greeted by a load of scruffs in beaten up
taxis.

The train company, more likely. They control access to the
station forecourt. It's not part of the public highway.

No, it's the council.

On what basis do you make that mendacious claim?

Reading between the lines of the article in the Ely Standard.

I'm not certain about the position in Ely but I am in Cambridge.
It's railway land and I think the Ely station forecourt is too.
What did the article say exactly?

"promotes public safety and a professional taxi service in the
district."

What does that say that implies the station forecourt is not railway
land? Do taxis require a permit to ply for hire at the station? If
they do it confirms it is railway land. Councils don't issue such
permits.

That's all an irrelevant sideshow. You claimed it was the railways
who wanted the dress code - I disagree and say it's the council.

No. I said the railway controls access to station forecourts with
whatever conditions they deem appropriate.

Which is irrelevant to new rules from the council.

True. I don't understand why you think council rules on dress code are
anything to do with taxi access to the station.

I don't. It was a red herring you introduced.

You mentioned dress code, not me.

Yes, in a report of the proposed new taxi-code from the COUNCIL.

You then disputed that the [new] dress code was something the council
wanted.

It's not a local feature in Cambridge.

One possible explanation is that Cambridge drivers voluntarily dress
smarter?
--
Roland Perry

[email protected] · April 21st 17, 08:49 AM posted to uk.transport.london

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 13:32:46 -0500
wrote:
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 08:19:03 on Thu, 20 Apr
2017, d remarked:
On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:14:24 -0500
wrote:
This is probably true but the unguided section at Orchard Park probably
and the approach section to Cambridge North station definitely are
unguided on cost grounds.

Comparing to clearing the ground, casting the concrete and moving into
place, how much extra in percentage terms would bolting a pair of steel
guiderails into place cost? It can't be that great and I'd be surprised
if they didn't recycle the old rail track to create them.

I suggest you come to Cambridge and have a closer look at Guided Busway
construction. You wouldn't then spout that nonsense.

What nonsense? Are you saying guideway rails are made of some special type of
highly expensive Unobtainium and the steel from recycled rails just isn't up to
the job? Its a ****ing busway, not a railgun launch platform! Its primitive
construction personified - it doesn't even require points FFS.

Which has other benefits, such as not being restricted to
buses-with-guide-wheels.

Not so. The steel guide rails at the entrance and exit to the roadway
prevent anything other than guided buses from entering. There's a similar
arrangement controlling access from the guideway across Harrison Way at St
Ives.

I'm pretty sure plenty of bus drivers with good judgement could get an unguided
bus between those rails.

Still, perhaps like in Edinburgh, sense might one day prevail and the whole
pathetic system is ripped up and replaced by a tramway. And don't say there
isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly nottinghams market
square and weave one around the centre of manchester they could do it in
cambridge too.

--
Spud

[email protected] · April 22nd 17, 12:51 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , d () wrote:

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 13:32:46 -0500
wrote:
In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at 08:19:03 on Thu, 20 Apr
2017, d remarked:
On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:14:24 -0500
wrote:
This is probably true but the unguided section at Orchard Park
probably and the approach section to Cambridge North station
definitely are unguided on cost grounds.

Comparing to clearing the ground, casting the concrete and moving into
place, how much extra in percentage terms would bolting a pair of
steel guiderails into place cost? It can't be that great and I'd be
surprised if they didn't recycle the old rail track to create them.

I suggest you come to Cambridge and have a closer look at Guided Busway
construction. You wouldn't then spout that nonsense.

What nonsense? Are you saying guideway rails are made of some special type
of highly expensive Unobtainium and the steel from recycled rails just
isn't up to the job? Its a ****ing busway, not a railgun launch platform!
Its primitive construction personified - it doesn't even require points
FFS.

They're not rails. And there is no guideway at junctions either. I'm afraid
you are talking out of your posterior. They aren't rails for starters.

Which has other benefits, such as not being restricted to
buses-with-guide-wheels.

Not so. The steel guide rails at the entrance and exit to the roadway
prevent anything other than guided buses from entering. There's a similar
arrangement controlling access from the guideway across Harrison Way at
St Ives.

I'm pretty sure plenty of bus drivers with good judgement could get an
unguided bus between those rails.

Not safely which is why it's verboten.

Still, perhaps like in Edinburgh, sense might one day prevail and the
whole pathetic system is ripped up and replaced by a tramway. And don't
say there isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly
nottinghams market square and weave one around the centre of manchester
they could do it in cambridge too.

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the better
solution for St Ives.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Roland Perry · April 22nd 17, 08:01 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In message , at 19:51:45
on Fri, 21 Apr 2017, remarked:

Still, perhaps like in Edinburgh, sense might one day prevail and the
whole pathetic system is ripped up and replaced by a tramway. And don't
say there isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly
nottinghams market square and weave one around the centre of manchester
they could do it in cambridge too.

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the better
solution for St Ives.

St Ives is not nearly large enough to justify a new heavy rail station.
And remember the guided bus serves not just a field outside St Ives, but
many of the local villages, and Huntingdon.

The only reason *anything* was done is to serve Northstowe, and love it
or hate it the bus is better than 1tph 2-car DMU shuttling between
Cambridge and St Ives Parkway.
--
Roland Perry

[email protected] · April 22nd 17, 03:04 PM posted to uk.transport.london

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 19:51:45 -0500
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
What nonsense? Are you saying guideway rails are made of some special type
of highly expensive Unobtainium and the steel from recycled rails just
isn't up to the job? Its a ****ing busway, not a railgun launch platform!
Its primitive construction personified - it doesn't even require points
FFS.

They're not rails. And there is no guideway at junctions either. I'm afraid

No ****. Perhaps thats why I said it doesn't require points.

you are talking out of your posterior. They aren't rails for starters.

They're guiderails.

say there isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly
nottinghams market square and weave one around the centre of manchester
they could do it in cambridge too.

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the better
solution for St Ives.

I do wonder if some brown envelopes changed hands to get this busway built.
I can't see any other good reason for a perfectly servicable railway to be
ripped up and replaced with an inferior alternative.

--
Spud

[email protected] · April 23rd 17, 06:41 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
19:51:45 on Fri, 21 Apr 2017, remarked:

Still, perhaps like in Edinburgh, sense might one day prevail and the
whole pathetic system is ripped up and replaced by a tramway. And don't
say there isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly
nottinghams market square and weave one around the centre of manchester
they could do it in cambridge too.

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the
better solution for St Ives.

St Ives is not nearly large enough to justify a new heavy rail
station. And remember the guided bus serves not just a field outside
St Ives, but many of the local villages, and Huntingdon.

The only reason *anything* was done is to serve Northstowe, and love
it or hate it the bus is better than 1tph 2-car DMU shuttling between
Cambridge and St Ives Parkway.

That wasn't the rail plan which for through trains and electrification.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

[email protected] · April 23rd 17, 06:41 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , d ()
wrote:

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 19:51:45 -0500
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
What nonsense? Are you saying guideway rails are made of some special
type of highly expensive Unobtainium and the steel from recycled rails
just isn't up to the job? Its a ****ing busway, not a railgun launch
platform! Its primitive construction personified - it doesn't even
require points FFS.

They're not rails. And there is no guideway at junctions either. I'm
afraid

No ****. Perhaps thats why I said it doesn't require points.

you are talking out of your posterior. They aren't rails for starters.

They're guiderails.

They are concrete structures providing channels for wheels. Have a good look
at them. I have!

say there isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly
nottinghams market square and weave one around the centre of manchester
they could do it in cambridge too.

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the
better solution for St Ives.

I do wonder if some brown envelopes changed hands to get this busway
built. I can't see any other good reason for a perfectly servicable
railway to be ripped up and replaced with an inferior alternative.

You obviously didn't look at the state the railway was in after the sand
trains ceased. It would have been costly to get a proper railway line
reinstated.

The government decided they could get "high quality public transport" on the
cheap and gave the County Council no realistic rail option. The government
was paying. He who pays the piper picks the tune.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Roland Perry · April 23rd 17, 07:50 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In message , at 01:41:40
on Sun, 23 Apr 2017, remarked:
Still, perhaps like in Edinburgh, sense might one day prevail and the
whole pathetic system is ripped up and replaced by a tramway. And don't
say there isn't the room - if they can squeeze a tramway into hilly
nottinghams market square and weave one around the centre of manchester
they could do it in cambridge too.

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the
better solution for St Ives.

St Ives is not nearly large enough to justify a new heavy rail
station. And remember the guided bus serves not just a field outside
St Ives, but many of the local villages, and Huntingdon.

The only reason *anything* was done is to serve Northstowe, and love
it or hate it the bus is better than 1tph 2-car DMU shuttling between
Cambridge and St Ives Parkway.

That wasn't the rail plan which for through trains and electrification.

Even harder to justify on cost/benefit grounds (especially as we now
know about the need for a new Ouse viaduct).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry · April 23rd 17, 07:53 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In message , at 15:04:54 on Sat, 22 Apr
2017, d remarked:

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the better
solution for St Ives.

I do wonder if some brown envelopes changed hands to get this busway built.

Most of the money was a government grant (until the project went into
crazy-overspend mode).

I can't see any other good reason for a perfectly servicable railway to be
ripped up and replaced with an inferior alternative.

It wasn't serviceable, and all the stations were gone.
--
Roland Perry

[email protected] · April 24th 17, 01:23 AM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 15:04:54 on Sat, 22 Apr
2017, d remarked:

There I agree with you, though I think heavy rail would have been the
better solution for St Ives.

I do wonder if some brown envelopes changed hands to get this busway
built.

Most of the money was a government grant (until the project went into
crazy-overspend mode).

I can't see any other good reason for a perfectly servicable railway to
be ripped up and replaced with an inferior alternative.

It wasn't serviceable, and all the stations were gone.

No they weren't. Indeed some of the buildings and platforms are still there.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Woking to Heathrow	[email protected]	London Transport	0	April 27th 17 09:16 PM
Woking to Heathrow	[email protected]	London Transport	0	April 6th 17 06:24 PM
Jetpod - Woking to London in 4 minutes	John Rowland	London Transport	8	January 6th 05 01:32 PM

Menu

About Us