On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:40:01 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

As the Island Line is a financial basket case, I suspect hand-me-down
Tube stock is the cheapest option, and as such is probably the best
one short of getting into a debate about closure and bustitution.


Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin, there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.

The Isle of Wight Steam Railway could then extend its route the short
distance from Smallbrook Junction to Ryde St John's Road for
interchange with the shuttles.

I doubt very much whether the Isle of Wight Steam Railway would be
interested in taking over the route from Smallbrook Junction to
Shanklin. As you say, it is a financial basket case.

I know you didn't want to discuss the option of bustitution, but there
is a very clear case for it here. There are already buses from Ryde
to Shanklin and Ventnor, and they serve those communities far better
than the trains can - the railway is of no use at all to people
travelling to/from Ventnor.

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:57:44 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin, there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.

Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most people
seem to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car,
and a minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus
station for anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk. Far cheaper
than maintaining the infrastructure.

Or absent the railway - is the Ryde ferry actually needed, and could
it more sensibly be sent somewhere else, thus removing the need to
maintain the pier (which looks in a poor condition) at all? Is there
somewhere near Ryde where a terminal could be built without a need for
the pier?

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:24:52 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most people
seem to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car,
and a minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus
station for anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk.


Let me guess: You have only seen the pier in summer and in good
weather.

In winter, at high water, with a choppy sea and a gale blowing, people
would succumb to exposure before they reached Ryde Esplanade.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:24:52 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:57:44 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin, there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.

Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most people seem
to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car, and a
minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus station for
anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk. Far cheaper than
maintaining the infrastructure.

Walking along the pier on a nice sunny day might be pleasant.
In November with a strong North Easterly gale it would be awful so
you need something along the Pier.

Like a perspex tunnel, you mean?

tom

--
Mass motoring effects an absolute triumph of bourgeois ideology on the
level of daily life. It gives and supports in everyone the illusion
that each individual can seek his or her own benefit at the expense of
everyone else. -- Andre Gorz

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:44:54 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:24:52 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:57:44 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin, there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.

Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most people seem
to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car, and a
minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus station for
anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk. Far cheaper than
maintaining the infrastructure.

Walking along the pier on a nice sunny day might be pleasant.
In November with a strong North Easterly gale it would be awful so
you need something along the Pier.

Like a perspex tunnel, you mean?


A perspex tunnel would need a strong structural frame to support the
weight of the perspex and also resist the much greater loads imposed
on the perspex structure by the weather. You would then need to carry
out a major strengthening of the pier structure to support the perspex
tunnel and the loads it would impose on the pier structure, mostly
from the weather.

That would not be a trivial undertaking, nor a cheap one. Victorian
piers were built light and spindly, and not covered in, for a reason -
it massively reduced the loads on the structure.

Also, the walk from the landing stage to the kerb at the Esplanade is
slightly over 400 metres - it is longer than the train journey because
the train cuts off a corner at the pier head. So those who think "it
isn't *that* far" are somewhat wide of the mark. As I already stated,
a shuttle service of some kind would definitely be needed.

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:44:54 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:24:52 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:57:44 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin,
there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier
Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.

Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most
people seem
to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car,
and a
minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus
station for
anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk. Far cheaper than
maintaining the infrastructure.

Walking along the pier on a nice sunny day might be pleasant.
In November with a strong North Easterly gale it would be awful
so
you need something along the Pier.

Like a perspex tunnel, you mean?


A perspex tunnel would need a strong structural frame to support the
weight of the perspex and also resist the much greater loads imposed
on the perspex structure by the weather. You would then need to
carry
out a major strengthening of the pier structure to support the
perspex
tunnel and the loads it would impose on the pier structure, mostly
from the weather.

That would not be a trivial undertaking, nor a cheap one. Victorian
piers were built light and spindly, and not covered in, for a
reason -
it massively reduced the loads on the structure.

Also, the walk from the landing stage to the kerb at the Esplanade
is
slightly over 400 metres - it is longer than the train journey
because
the train cuts off a corner at the pier head. So those who think
"it
isn't *that* far" are somewhat wide of the mark. As I already
stated,
a shuttle service of some kind would definitely be needed.

Meanwhile, the hovercraft deposits its load MUCH closer to the main
road. Pity its Southsea terminus is at Southsea, and not anywhere near
the rail station....

Main reason Ryde Pier is so long, is that the tide goes out a long
way, and the need to land at all states of the tide. That is also the
reason for the continued success of the hovercraft, which can travel
over the sandbanks exposed at lowtide as if they did not exist.

On 13/07/2010 09:33, Ian wrote:
wrote in message
he hovercraft deposits its load MUCH closer to the main
road. Pity its Southsea terminus is at Southsea, and not anywhere near
the rail station....

Main reason Ryde Pier is so long, is that the tide goes out a long
way, and the need to land at all states of the tide. That is also the
reason for the continued success of the hovercraft, which can travel
over the sandbanks exposed at lowtide as if they did not exist.

From this perspective Southport is interesting. It has a long pier -
but even at high tide the water is somewhat shallow at the end!

When Queen Victoria was on the throne, they built a statue to her on top
of the promenade, at the end of Neville Steet. In those days the sea
would come in as far as that. Now you go several miles to find the sea.
(alluvial deposits from the Mersey and the Ribble) When the pier was
built the sea would come into the land based end!

Old Liverpool joke - Southport beach, the only beach in the world where
the coastguards ride camels.


--
John Wright

Blasphemy - a victimless crime.

In message , john wright
writes
From this perspective Southport is interesting. It has a long pier -
but even at high tide the water is somewhat shallow at the end!
Funny, that. I noticed how, when the tide comes in, the water's always
shallow at the edge.
--
Clive

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, Bruce wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:44:54 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 23:24:52 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:57:44 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

Even if there was an intention to close the line to Shanklin, there
would still need to be a shuttle train service from the Pier Head to
and from Ryde Esplanade, and probably to Ryde St John's Road, to
connect with the ferries.

Why? Many people would walk (it isn't *that* far, and most people seem
to use trolley luggage these days), many are collected by car, and a
minibus shuttle could be run between the ferry and the bus station for
anyone who couldn't or didn't want to walk. Far cheaper than
maintaining the infrastructure.

Walking along the pier on a nice sunny day might be pleasant. In
November with a strong North Easterly gale it would be awful so you
need something along the Pier.

Like a perspex tunnel, you mean?

A perspex tunnel would need a strong structural frame to support the
weight of the perspex and also resist the much greater loads imposed on
the perspex structure by the weather. You would then need to carry out
a major strengthening of the pier structure to support the perspex
tunnel and the loads it would impose on the pier structure, mostly from
the weather.

So a pier which currently has a railway and trains on it isn't strong
enough for a perspex tunnel? Absolute horse****, i'm afraid.

Also, the walk from the landing stage to the kerb at the Esplanade is
slightly over 400 metres - it is longer than the train journey because
the train cuts off a corner at the pier head. So those who think "it
isn't *that* far" are somewhat wide of the mark. As I already stated, a
shuttle service of some kind would definitely be needed.

Bicycle hire!

tom

--
The players listen very carefully and respectfully to all that the clever
men have to say about what is to happen in the next generation. They
players then wait until all the clever men are dead, and bury them
nicely. Then they go and do something else. -- The Napoleon of Notting
Hill, G. K. Chesterton

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:33:03 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

So a pier which currently has a railway and trains on it isn't strong
enough for a perspex tunnel? Absolute horse****, i'm afraid.


Don't be afraid. It's only your ignorance of structural engineering
that prevents you from understanding my post, and that's nothing to be
embarrassed about. ;-)


Also, the walk from the landing stage to the kerb at the Esplanade is
slightly over 400 metres - it is longer than the train journey because
the train cuts off a corner at the pier head. So those who think "it
isn't *that* far" are somewhat wide of the mark. As I already stated, a
shuttle service of some kind would definitely be needed.

Bicycle hire!


More horse****?

Perhaps reinstating the horse trams is not such a bad idea. ;-)