"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:55:29 on Tue, 10 Dec 2019,
tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news
In message , at 18:45:13 on Mon, 9 Dec 2019,
tim... remarked:

you seem to be arguing that trucks hauling trailers, as opposed to
flat beds with a container on top, are somehow different on their
effect to other road users

don't see that distinction myself

The distinction is whether or not they can be abstracted from the road
by sticking them on a train.

for me, the distinction was the fact that you claimed it's an urban myth
that there's a minimal number of "containers" using road

No, I said it was an urban myth that *more* than a handful of containers
were using the road.

you need to explain how that's not the same thing

Because the public apparently look at curtain sided HGVs with UK domestic
brand logos, and identify it as a container that's arrived
from the Far East at Felixstowe (and should be on a train)

I had already understood that point

but how is "(not) more than a handful" different to "minimal number"?

Most people won't distinguish between containers and trailers

they are both annoying vehicles to have surrounding you and they have
both come off the ferry.

Not off the container ships. And probably not off the completely
separate RORO ferries. If you look at the HGVs on the A14 they are
predominately domestic-domestic.

even if they are, they are still using that route as a proxy for M25/A1
that they used to use

What has that got to do with moving containers onto rail?

nothing

the point is that people see "trucks"

and it is the trucks that they want taken off the road (were possible)

your fixation with people wrongly calling them containers has blinkered you
into thinking that they only want the containers removed

trying to tell people that "there aren't many containers off the ferry"
without making it clear that you aren't counting most of the trucks
because they are trailers, is daft

See above; I wasn't claiming that.

still don't see it

What's "it"? Containers on the A14, in which case I'll agree with you.

I still don't see that people only want the containers off the road, so that
you can say "but they are" because they have wrongly identified trucks
pulling trailers as flat bed containers

you're just scoring points in a logic exam, not adressing the actual problem

tim

In message , at 21:21:35 on Tue, 10 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message news:IcBsO7XkW67dF
...
In message , at 12:55:29 on Tue, 10 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message newsVw+cX8hmp7
...
In message , at 18:45:13 on Mon, 9 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:

you seem to be arguing that trucks hauling trailers, as opposed
to flat beds with a container on top, are somehow different on
their effect to other road users

don't see that distinction myself

The distinction is whether or not they can be abstracted from the
road by sticking them on a train.

for me, the distinction was the fact that you claimed it's an urban
myth that there's a minimal number of "containers" using road

No, I said it was an urban myth that *more* than a handful of
containers were using the road.

you need to explain how that's not the same thing

Because the public apparently look at curtain sided HGVs with UK
domestic brand logos, and identify it as a container that's arrived
from the Far East at Felixstowe (and should be on a train)

I had already understood that point

but how is "(not) more than a handful" different to "minimal number"?

You've got yourself tied in a knot (again). The urban myth is that the
A14 project exists so that:

trucks can save 10 mins on their way from Felixstowe instead of
putting the containers on trains where they should be.

Most people won't distinguish between containers and trailers

they are both annoying vehicles to have surrounding you and they
have both come off the ferry.

Not off the container ships. And probably not off the completely
separate RORO ferries. If you look at the HGVs on the A14 they are
predominately domestic-domestic.

even if they are, they are still using that route as a proxy for
M25/A1 that they used to use

What has that got to do with moving containers onto rail?

nothing

the point is that people see "trucks"

and it is the trucks that they want taken off the road (were possible)

your fixation with people wrongly calling them containers has blinkered
you into thinking that they only want the containers removed

The previous poster confirmed my view that local people (wrongly)
believe the port traffic is a crucial, or even significant, contributor
to the traffic congestion:

trucks ... on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the
containers on trains where they should be.


trying to tell people that "there aren't many containers off the
ferry" without making it clear that you aren't counting most of the
trucks because they are trailers, is daft

See above; I wasn't claiming that.

still don't see it

What's "it"? Containers on the A14, in which case I'll agree with you.

I still don't see that people only want the containers off the road,

See above.

so that you can say "but they are" because they have wrongly identified
trucks pulling trailers as flat bed containers

you're just scoring points in a logic exam, not adressing the actual problem

Which problem do you have in mind: easing the congestion itself, or
identifying the causes of the congestion?

You can't do the former properly, without having first done the latter.
Otherwise you end up with "solutions" that turn out to be white
elephants, or which have the commonly observed phenomenon of simply
moving the jam to somewhere else. That latter isn't inevitable, but is
merely a symptom of a poorly designed solution.

--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 21:21:35 on Tue, 10 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message news:IcBsO7XkW67dF
...
In message , at 12:55:29 on Tue, 10 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message newsVw+cX8hmp7
...
In message , at 18:45:13 on Mon, 9 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:

you seem to be arguing that trucks hauling trailers, as opposed
to flat beds with a container on top, are somehow different on
their effect to other road users

don't see that distinction myself

The distinction is whether or not they can be abstracted from the
road by sticking them on a train.

for me, the distinction was the fact that you claimed it's an urban
myth that there's a minimal number of "containers" using road

No, I said it was an urban myth that *more* than a handful of
containers were using the road.

you need to explain how that's not the same thing

Because the public apparently look at curtain sided HGVs with UK
domestic brand logos, and identify it as a container that's arrived
from the Far East at Felixstowe (and should be on a train)

I had already understood that point

but how is "(not) more than a handful" different to "minimal number"?

You've got yourself tied in a knot (again).

No

I was just asking you how your correction of my comment was any different to
that which I posted?

The urban myth is that the
A14 project exists so that:

trucks can save 10 mins on their way from Felixstowe instead of
putting the containers on trains where they should be.

Can't say that I've ever seen anybody claim this (except boltar) so it
certainly isn't a factor in my posts

I've driven that road many times. I know why it needed to be updated.

But I also know that the number of trucks on the road is far more than a
handful.

And I will confess that I would have suggested that these trucks had come
from the Essex ports, and I would have probably suggested that they were
containers.

I'm quite happy for you to correct me that they are not containers, but even
so, the trucks are there and they must have come from somewhere.


Most people won't distinguish between containers and trailers

they are both annoying vehicles to have surrounding you and they
have both come off the ferry.

Not off the container ships. And probably not off the completely
separate RORO ferries. If you look at the HGVs on the A14 they are
predominately domestic-domestic.

even if they are, they are still using that route as a proxy for
M25/A1 that they used to use

What has that got to do with moving containers onto rail?

nothing

the point is that people see "trucks"

and it is the trucks that they want taken off the road (were possible)

your fixation with people wrongly calling them containers has blinkered
you into thinking that they only want the containers removed

The previous poster confirmed my view that local people (wrongly)
believe the port traffic is a crucial, or even significant, contributor
to the traffic congestion:

trucks ... on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the
containers on trains where they should be.

would that have been boltar - you know his claims have no credibility

and there's no evidence that the post came from someone with local knowledge

It just came from someone with a "goods should be carried by rail" prejudice
(and to be fair there's nothing actually wrong with thinking that)

trying to tell people that "there aren't many containers off the
ferry" without making it clear that you aren't counting most of the
trucks because they are trailers, is daft

See above; I wasn't claiming that.

still don't see it

What's "it"? Containers on the A14, in which case I'll agree with you.

I still don't see that people only want the containers off the road,

See above.

doesn't help because you're the one who's gone done the path of not
understanding the point

so that you can say "but they are" because they have wrongly identified
trucks pulling trailers as flat bed containers

you're just scoring points in a logic exam, not adressing the actual
problem

Which problem do you have in mind: easing the congestion itself, or
identifying the causes of the congestion?

the cause, or more specifically establishing what percentage of the cause is
trucks.

You can't do the former properly, without having first done the latter.

At no time in this thread have I been discussing anything other than
counting "trucks" on the road

so any other points are irrelevant

tim

In message , at 08:58:44 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:

for me, the distinction was the fact that you claimed it's an urban
myth that there's a minimal number of "containers" using road

No, I said it was an urban myth that *more* than a handful of
containers were using the road.

you need to explain how that's not the same thing

Because the public apparently look at curtain sided HGVs with UK
domestic brand logos, and identify it as a container that's arrived
from the Far East at Felixstowe (and should be on a train)

I had already understood that point

but how is "(not) more than a handful" different to "minimal number"?

You've got yourself tied in a knot (again).

No

I was just asking you how your correction of my comment was any
different to that which I posted?

I can't help you any further on the un-knotting.

The urban myth is that the
A14 project exists so that:

trucks can save 10 mins on their way from Felixstowe instead of
putting the containers on trains where they should be.

Can't say that I've ever seen anybody claim this (except boltar) so it
certainly isn't a factor in my posts

As you've stumbled into a conversation between me and Boltar, what *is*
a factor in your posts other than to agree with either him or me?

It's also a topic which has cropped up over and over again in
newsgroups, this idea that the A14 would be fine if it wasn't for the
port traffic.

I've driven that road many times. I know why it needed to be updated.

But I also know that the number of trucks on the road is far more than
a handful.

Port traffic containers was the subject. Not trucks completely
disassociated with the ports.

And I will confess that I would have suggested that these trucks had
come from the Essex ports, and I would have probably suggested that
they were containers.

I'm quite happy for you to correct me that they are not containers, but
even so, the trucks are there and they must have come from somewhere.

Ordinary domestic trucking between suppliers, warehouses and customers
(many of whom are shops).

Most people won't distinguish between containers and trailers

they are both annoying vehicles to have surrounding you and they
have both come off the ferry.

Not off the container ships. And probably not off the completely
separate RORO ferries. If you look at the HGVs on the A14 they are
predominately domestic-domestic.

even if they are, they are still using that route as a proxy for
M25/A1 that they used to use

What has that got to do with moving containers onto rail?

nothing

the point is that people see "trucks"

and it is the trucks that they want taken off the road (were possible)

your fixation with people wrongly calling them containers has blinkered
you into thinking that they only want the containers removed

The previous poster confirmed my view that local people (wrongly)
believe the port traffic is a crucial, or even significant, contributor
to the traffic congestion:

trucks ... on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the
containers on trains where they should be.

would that have been boltar - you know his claims have no credibility

and there's no evidence that the post came from someone with local knowledge

It just came from someone with a "goods should be carried by rail"
prejudice (and to be fair there's nothing actually wrong with thinking
that)

He was quoting what I believe to be mis-informed locals.

trying to tell people that "there aren't many containers off the
ferry" without making it clear that you aren't counting most of the
trucks because they are trailers, is daft

See above; I wasn't claiming that.

still don't see it

What's "it"? Containers on the A14, in which case I'll agree with you.

I still don't see that people only want the containers off the road,

See above.

doesn't help because you're the one who's gone done the path of not
understanding the point

I completely understand the point I was making, which is that it's
absolutely not the port traffic which is congesting the A14.

so that you can say "but they are" because they have wrongly identified
trucks pulling trailers as flat bed containers

you're just scoring points in a logic exam, not adressing the actual
problem

Which problem do you have in mind: easing the congestion itself, or
identifying the causes of the congestion?

the cause, or more specifically establishing what percentage of the
cause is trucks.

I gave the figures earlier. On the section of A14 in question, 1/7 of
vehicles are a truck, and 1/30 vehicles has a source/sink east of
Cambridge on the A14.

If we assume (which I didn't) that the east-of-Cambridge traffic has the
same truck/non-truck ratio, that's 1/210. And of that half a percent of
the traffic, most of the trucks will be servicing routine commercial
end-points in south Norfolk, and Suffolk, which aren't the ports.

You can't do the former properly, without having first done the latter.

At no time in this thread have I been discussing anything other than
counting "trucks" on the road

so any other points are irrelevant

What you mean is, you are posting at cross purposes.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:19:11 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:58:44 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:
It just came from someone with a "goods should be carried by rail"
prejudice (and to be fair there's nothing actually wrong with thinking
that)

He was quoting what I believe to be mis-informed locals.

As I said if anyobe had bothered to read - I have relatives living in a
village near Huntingdon directly impacted by this bloody bypass. The amount
of farmland concreted over for it just so some drivers can save 15 mins is
obscene and thats before the extra pollution and noise is taken into account.

In message , at 16:19:11 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, remarked:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:19:11 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:58:44 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:
It just came from someone with a "goods should be carried by rail"
prejudice (and to be fair there's nothing actually wrong with thinking
that)

He was quoting what I believe to be mis-informed locals.

As I said if anyobe had bothered to read - I have relatives living in a
village near Huntingdon directly impacted by this bloody bypass. The amount
of farmland concreted over for it just so some drivers can save 15 mins is
obscene and thats before the extra pollution and noise is taken into account.

You also wrote, and I bothered to read: "All so trucks can save 10 mins
on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the containers on trains
where they should be."

Which is less than 1% of the traffic.

About half the traffic is going to and from Cambridge, mainly cars, and
this has increased over the years, and will continue to increase due to
local house building at Northstowe, St Ives etc.

The time which will be saved between Huntingdon and Girton is well over
15 minutes.

Then there's the viaduct over the East Coast mainline, which has been
crumbling down for years. Rather than try to rebuild what's really a
Huntingdon inner ring road, the answer is a proper bypass.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 17:59:15 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:19:11 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, remarked:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:19:11 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:58:44 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:
It just came from someone with a "goods should be carried by rail"
prejudice (and to be fair there's nothing actually wrong with thinking
that)

He was quoting what I believe to be mis-informed locals.

As I said if anyobe had bothered to read - I have relatives living in a
village near Huntingdon directly impacted by this bloody bypass. The amount
of farmland concreted over for it just so some drivers can save 15 mins is
obscene and thats before the extra pollution and noise is taken into account.

You also wrote, and I bothered to read: "All so trucks can save 10 mins
on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the containers on trains
where they should be."

Last time I looked lorries were still driven by drivers. The reasons are
irrelevant, the bypass is the problem. If the old A14 were to be dug up
and returned to farmland it wouldn't be so bad but we all know the chances of
that happening are zero.

About half the traffic is going to and from Cambridge, mainly cars, and
this has increased over the years, and will continue to increase due to
local house building at Northstowe, St Ives etc.

The time which will be saved between Huntingdon and Girton is well over
15 minutes.

No one cares apart from those commuting.

Then there's the viaduct over the East Coast mainline, which has been
crumbling down for years. Rather than try to rebuild what's really a
Huntingdon inner ring road, the answer is a proper bypass.

Though oddly the viaduct has already been re-designated the A1307. Apparently
the danger of it falling down seem to have disappeared.

In message , at 12:08:39 on Thu, 12 Dec
2019, remarked:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 17:59:15 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:19:11 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, remarked:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:19:11 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:58:44 on Wed, 11 Dec
2019, tim... remarked:
It just came from someone with a "goods should be carried by rail"
prejudice (and to be fair there's nothing actually wrong with thinking
that)

He was quoting what I believe to be mis-informed locals.

As I said if anyobe had bothered to read - I have relatives living in a
village near Huntingdon directly impacted by this bloody bypass. The amount
of farmland concreted over for it just so some drivers can save 15 mins is
obscene and thats before the extra pollution and noise is taken into account.

You also wrote, and I bothered to read: "All so trucks can save 10 mins
on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the containers on trains
where they should be."

Last time I looked lorries were still driven by drivers.

I honestly can't make sense of that remark's relevance to the urban myth
regarding port traffic.

The reasons are irrelevant, the bypass is the problem.

The new bit of bypass is just one part of the scheme. The more important
section from Cambridge services to Girton isn't open yet. That's just a
widening project.

If the old A14 were to be dug up and returned to farmland it wouldn't
be so bad but we all know the chances of that happening are zero.

The "old A14" (that's been bypassed) *is* being dug up, and returned to
urban roads within central Huntingdon. People still need to be able to
get from central Huntingdon to Girton and beyond, so a reduced capacity
route is being created, along the old alignment, south to the Cambridge
Services, and beyond.

About half the traffic is going to and from Cambridge, mainly cars, and
this has increased over the years, and will continue to increase due to
local house building at Northstowe, St Ives etc.

The time which will be saved between Huntingdon and Girton is well over
15 minutes.

No one cares apart from those commuting.

The other half of the traffic cares too, because they are currently
stuck in jams created by the volume local commuters.

Then there's the viaduct over the East Coast mainline, which has been
crumbling down for years. Rather than try to rebuild what's really a
Huntingdon inner ring road, the answer is a proper bypass.

Though oddly the viaduct has already been re-designated the A1307.

That's because the A14 now goes *around* Huntingdon.

Apparently the danger of it falling down seem to have disappeared.

Look again. That section of road of road has been closed to traffic, and
the next stage is to demolish the viaduct. Then rebuilt as a single
carriageway with the crossing of the railway achieved by new access
roads down from the upper level to ground level, across the railway on
an existing local bridge and back up again the other side.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 08:10:17 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
The new bit of bypass is just one part of the scheme. The more important
section from Cambridge services to Girton isn't open yet. That's just a
widening project.

Befo

https://goo.gl/maps/kQdqXtiP4Rso1T287

After:

https://goo.gl/maps/wa16mwZvgt9t7TnB9

And apparently its not even important. Still, some commuters will save 15 mins
so thats nice.

In message , at 09:51:28 on Fri, 13 Dec
2019, remarked:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 08:10:17 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
The new bit of bypass is just one part of the scheme. The more important
section from Cambridge services to Girton isn't open yet. That's just a
widening project.

Befo

https://goo.gl/maps/kQdqXtiP4Rso1T287

After:

https://goo.gl/maps/wa16mwZvgt9t7TnB9

That's a work in progress, it'll green up later.

And apparently its not even important. Still, some commuters will save 15 mins
so thats nice.

The road has 85k vehicles a day, which adds up even if it's only 20mins
per vehicle.

And don't forget it's removing a trunk road from the centre of
Huntingdon, too.
--
Roland Perry