BBC Home

Explore the BBC


19th October 2019
Accessibility help
Text only

BBC Homepage

Channel Islands
Guernsey
Jersey


Contact Us


Like this page?
Send it to a friend!

 

or register to join or start a new discussion.


Discussion:

Rural Rail Closures

Messages  1 - 20 of 27

 
< Previous 1  2  Next >
 

Message 1 - posted by U2448401, Jan 29, 2006

Todays' papers indicate that there are advanced plans to save the many millions spent in rail subsidies spent on many lesser country lines. Apparently a law quietly passed last year removed the right of the public to raise objections.We might assume that the lines most likely to be hit locally are those to Calstock Topsham and Barnstaple. Does anyone have any information about the proposals?
Complain about a message      

Message 2 - posted by U2379384 - alt id 3, Jan 29, 2006

See 'The Independent on Sunday' of 29th January 2006 front page and page 2. Scarey or what?
Complain about a message      

Message 3 - posted by U2487692, Jan 29, 2006

What about Looe Padstow and Newquay?
Complain about a message      

Message 4 - posted by U2426416 - alt id 6, Jan 30, 2006

But most of the lines are hardly used and the routine maintenance astronomically expensive.
Complain about a message      

Message 5 - posted by harveyshideout, Jan 31, 2006

I guess there is nothing we can do about it, if the goverment and business are not making money then its doomed like the previous closed lines, they closed because no one used them, and most of them dont go far enough.
Complain about a message      

Message 6 - posted by lancsdb, Jul 17, 2006

Not many people may use them, but the question is Where do these people go? If they go a long way by train, closing the branch line may stop them from using the train altogether. This will put more traffic on the roads and create more danger. So, it's not just a question of saving money as quickly as possible. More danger on the roads could cancel out any 'savings' by closing the lines down.
But most of the lines are hardly used and the routine maintenance astronomically expensive.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 7 - posted by U3775715 - alt id 1, Jul 18, 2006

So how much would you subsidise these journeys by? 5000%? It might have to be much more even than that.
Complain about a message      

Message 8 - posted by lancsdb, Jul 19, 2006

What is worse - paying a bit more tax or paying an average of 1 million per road death and approx 100,000 per injury? Or is money more important that safety?

So how much would you subsidise these journeys by? 5000%? It might have to be much more even than that.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 9 - posted by Wirral Red, Dec 12, 2006

This will put more traffic on the roads and create more danger. So, it's not just a question of saving money as quickly as possible. More danger on the roads could cancel out any 'savings' by closing the lines down.

Quoted from this message


I've been thinking - I think it's about time more heavy freight was sent by rail where possible. All these heavy lorries are causing terrible congestion on our roads and motorways so why not move the freight onto the railways? There are plenty of advantages of sending freight by rail:

It's quicker - trains can travel at up to 110 mph depending on the type of freight, whereas lorries on motorways are resticted to 60 mph.

It's generally more efficient - because you don't have traffic jams on railway lines, goods will be more likely to arrive on time.

More freight can be carried in one movement - one train can carry as much as 40 or 50 lorries - an obvious advantage in reducing congestion!

Of course, not every town has a rail connection - I recently found out that the largest twon in Britain without a railway station is Corby in Northamptonshire - but if it's possible to take the freight at least part of the way by rail then it should be done.
Complain about a message      

Message 10 - posted by John of Paddington, Dec 12, 2006

The real plan is to close the Railway at Exeter. The Dawlish streatch will be the excuse and the reason put down to Global warming. No one then can be held to blame. This does not look good for Devonport Dockyard. As for Motorways, well they stop at Exeter too. The South west does not vote labour so it can lose its Post Offices, Hospitals, Railways, and no problem regarding marginal constiuancies.
Complain about a message      

Message 11 - posted by jofphater, Dec 13, 2006

The real plan is to close the Railway at Exeter. The Dawlish streatch will be the excuse and the reason put down to Global warming. No one then can be held to blame. This does not look good for Devonport Dockyard. As for Motorways, well they stop at Exeter too. The South west does not vote labour so it can lose its Post Offices, Hospitals, Railways, and no problem regarding marginal constiuancies.

Quoted from this message



Where on earth do you get thease half baked idaes from Janet? <yikes>
Complain about a message      

Message 12 - posted by jofphater, Dec 13, 2006

This will put more traffic on the roads and create more danger. So, it's not just a question of saving money as quickly as possible. More danger on the roads could cancel out any 'savings' by closing the lines down.

I've been thinking - I think it's about time more heavy freight was sent by rail where possible. All these heavy lorries are causing terrible congestion on our roads and motorways so why not move the freight onto the railways? There are plenty of advantages of sending freight by rail:

It's quicker - trains can travel at up to 110 mph depending on the type of freight, whereas lorries on motorways are resticted to 60 mph.

It's generally more efficient - because you don't have traffic jams on railway lines, goods will be more likely to arrive on time.

More freight can be carried in one movement - one train can carry as much as 40 or 50 lorries - an obvious advantage in reducing congestion!

Of course, not every town has a rail connection - I recently found out that the largest twon in Britain without a railway station is Corby in Northamptonshire - but if it's possible to take the freight at least part of the way by rail then it should be done.

Quoted from this message



Totally agree, would make sence! I do feel not enough is done to encorage road users on to trains. Rail travel needs to be cheaper, and more convient before people can be bothered to use trains. We do need a better rural train service. Unfortunatly in the 60's with a total lack of foresight small stations were closed, and rural services axed. Looks like bad ill informed political desions are not a new thing!!
Complain about a message      

Message 13 - posted by John of Paddington, Dec 13, 2006



Yes closing the small station and ripping up the branchlines was a mistake, but not nearly so serious as the closing of the rual Post Offices.
As the small stations fed the main line so the small post offices feed the Royal mail.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 14 - posted by jofphater, Dec 14, 2006

What a load of nonsence Janet!! A good transport infrastructure is far more important than rural post offices! Will a rural post office get you to see relatives, or to the nearest town to buy clothes? you make such odd statements!!
Complain about a message      

Message 15 - posted by Wirral Red, Jan 2, 2007

As the small stations fed the main line so the small post offices feed the Royal mail.

Quoted from this message


Funnily enough, someone I know suggested that if Beeching hadn't been challenged in some cases there was a real danger the whole system could've collapsed. Thinking about it I suppose he's right, because as you say many of the branch lines fed the main lines, so if too many of them had closed then the main lines would've lost a lot of traffic and may well have become uneconomical themselves.
Complain about a message      

Message 16 - posted by John of Paddington, Jan 2, 2007

The problem now is overcrowding. The Government, it its invenant wisdom, has decided to price the people off the railway rather than improve the service.
Complain about a message      

Message 17 - posted by Wirral Red, Jan 2, 2007

The problem now is overcrowding. The Government, it its invenant wisdom, has decided to price the people off the railway rather than improve the service.

Quoted from this message


There was a suggestion that the way to increase income may be to REDUCE the fares to make more people want to use the train - same as cheap air fares make people want to fly more.
Complain about a message      

Message 18 - posted by DaveHarries, Jan 8, 2007

I live in Bristol and I am guessing that Temple Meads - Severn Beach could fall to this which would be a disaster as it is well used in the peak hours. Attempts have already been made to cut the service back but these came to naught through public protest. As for this law, it will be a disaster: we do not need a dictatorship but that is the way things are heading.

Whilst staying near Gunnislake late in 2006 I went to Plymouth for the afternoon accompanied by a most enjoyable train ride each way between Plymouth & Gunnislake. Glosure of this route would be a disaster for rural communities. The trains each way were well used so the closure of the Plymouth - Gunnislake would be a shocker.

I may come to Barnstaple by train later this month: it will be a first timie for riding between Exeter & Barnstaple - lets hope it won't be the last.

Dave
Complain about a message      

Message 19 - posted by John of Paddington, Jan 8, 2007

Don't bank on it Dave, you may well find yourself on a bus pretending its a train.
Complain about a message      

Message 20 - posted by DaveHarries, Jan 8, 2007

I should have said in my last message that the main reason against closure of Exeter - Barnstaple woould be that Barnstaple is the railhead for all of North Devon and Exmouth is likewise the railhead for much of South Devon.

Would be against the closure of Par - Newquay. I can understand that route not getting much use outside of the summer season but it would inevitable be useful in the summer as there are through trains from London to Newquay.

I would vote for the complete abolition of Network Rail but I have left a separate post on this board for that.

Cheers,

Dave
Complain about a message      
< Previous 1  2  Next >

This discussion is tagged with:
- Devon
- trains
- railways
- rural

getting involved How to reply to messagespopup icon
complain  Alert us about a messagepopup icon
online safety Are you being safe online?popup icon

Messages  1 - 20 of 27

 


About the BBC | Help | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies Policy