Quote For the cost of one bridge and a mile or so of new track

Well for £95m actually which makes it an incredibley expensive bridge and
mile of track.

Kevin

On May 2, 12:13*pm, "Zen83237" wrote:
Quote *For the cost of one bridge and a mile or so of new track

Well for £95m actually which makes it an incredibley expensive bridge and
mile of track.

Kevin

What WAS that price for a mile of motorway?

"1506" wrote in message
...
On May 2, 12:13 pm, "Zen83237" wrote:
Quote For the cost of one bridge and a mile or so of new track

Well for £95m actually which makes it an incredibley expensive bridge and
mile of track.

Kevin

What WAS that price for a mile of motorway?

Roads are a hell of a lot cheaper in England and elsewhere. For the very
high cost of rail, it only carries about 5% of the people in England.
Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads. Go tell
them your opinions at uk.transport and see how they attack you with your
highly destructive opinions.

http://www.transwatch.co.uk/transport-fact-sheet-8.htm

1.. Tables 6.2 and 4.1 of Transport statistics Great Britain 2004 provides
41 billion passenger-km and 19 billion tonne-km via national rail. Dividing
the passengers by 20 yields 2.05bn coach-km. Dividing the freight by 15
yields 1.27 lorry-km. Adding the two yields 3.32bn (bus plus lorry)-km.
Maintenance and renewals for the system may be running at between £2 and £3
billion annually for the decade (Table 8.2 of Network Management Statement
2001). On that basis the cost per equivalent bus/lorry vehicle-km has the
range (60-90) pence. (If the equivalent bus flows are eliminated from the
sum on the basis that it would be lorries that do the damage then the cost
has the range (157-236) pence per equivalent lorry-km). Alternatively divide
the £(2-3) billion by the 32,000 km of track length and get £62,000- £94,000
per track-km per year. Alternatively again, if we set one tonne as
equivalent to one passenger then the infrastructure maintenance cost per
(passenger + tonne)-km has the range 3.3 pence to 5 pence.

a..
1.. For roads we here consider the Motorway and Trunk road Network only.
All maintenance costs are assigned to the heavier class of lorries, namely 4
axle rigids, and all artics, since it is those classes of vehicle that do
most of the structural damage. Further maintenance costs have been set to
the current account cost plus half the capital expenditure on the basis of
discussions with the DfT. On that basis the emboldened data in table
following show:
1.. (a)
That the cost per lorry-km was 12 pence (compared with the (60-90)
pence by rail).
(b) The annual cost per lane km has the range £25,000-£33,000
(compared with £62,000-94,000 per track-km for rail).
(c) The cost per (person + tonne)-km is 0.5 pence, one-sixth to
one-tenth the value for rail.



1.. The comparison is biased in favour of rail since (a) buses on trunk
roads and motorways amount to one tenth of the heavy lorry flow but are
ignored when calculating the factors (b) substantial elements of road
maintenance such as signs, lighting, verges, hard shoulders, winter
maintenance, and some wear and tear should be attributed to vehicles other
than to lorries alone.

Jack May wrote:

Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads.

When most of Britain's railways were built, crumbled was the natural
state of most of the roads.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857114.html
(31 138 at Birmingham New Street, Oct 1987)

Chris Tolley wrote:
Jack May wrote:

Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads.

When most of Britain's railways were built, crumbled was the natural
state of most of the roads.

For the information of UK posters, many of whom may not be familiar with
Mr May, he is a far right Californian fanatic carhead, a kind of one man
Waffen-AA.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Martin Edwards wrote:

Chris Tolley wrote:
Jack May wrote:

Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads.

When most of Britain's railways were built, crumbled was the natural
state of most of the roads.

For the information of UK posters, many of whom may not be familiar with
Mr May, he is a far right Californian fanatic carhead, a kind of one man
Waffen-AA.

Whoever and whatever he is, he's as entitled to historical facts as
anyone else, while he continues to demonstrate his lack of them.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p11938654.html
(55 014 at Newark North Gate, 15 Jul 1980)

Chris Tolley wrote:
Martin Edwards wrote:

Chris Tolley wrote:
Jack May wrote:

Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads.
When most of Britain's railways were built, crumbled was the natural
state of most of the roads.
For the information of UK posters, many of whom may not be familiar with
Mr May, he is a far right Californian fanatic carhead, a kind of one man
Waffen-AA.

Whoever and whatever he is, he's as entitled to historical facts as
anyone else, while he continues to demonstrate his lack of them.

Sure, no contest.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

On Sat, 3 May 2008, Martin Edwards wrote:

Waffen-AA

YOU WIN A PRIZE!

tom

--
Life finds a way. -- Ian Malcolm

On May 3, 6:04*am, Martin Edwards wrote:
Chris Tolley wrote:
Jack May wrote:

Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads.

When most of Britain's railways were built, crumbled was the natural
state of most of the roads.

For the information of UK posters, many of whom may not be familiar with
Mr May, he is a far right Californian fanatic carhead, a kind of one man
Waffen-AA.

Or, Waffen-AAA! Is May from California? I know him to be a merchant
banker who visits Los Angeles from time to time. He then writes utter
drivel about her young and developing rail system.

He will tell you that LA's rail system carries no more people today
than before it was build. In those days it carried 0 people (how
could it?). It now caries between 100,000 and 200,000 passengers per
day on a very limited system.

May is utterly incapable of logical thought.

1506 wrote:
On May 3, 6:04 am, Martin Edwards wrote:
Chris Tolley wrote:
Jack May wrote:
Brits are really ****ed with all rail building draining money from roads
along with causing high congestions and the crumbling of the roads.
When most of Britain's railways were built, crumbled was the natural
state of most of the roads.
For the information of UK posters, many of whom may not be familiar with
Mr May, he is a far right Californian fanatic carhead, a kind of one man
Waffen-AA.

Or, Waffen-AAA! Is May from California? I know him to be a merchant
banker who visits Los Angeles from time to time. He then writes utter
drivel about her young and developing rail system.

He will tell you that LA's rail system carries no more people today
than before it was build. In those days it carried 0 people (how
could it?). It now caries between 100,000 and 200,000 passengers per
day on a very limited system.

May is utterly incapable of logical thought.

I believe that he works in or near San Jose. This Jack May claims to be
an engineer, though he has never clarified what kind. It could be a
variation of the guys of which every bar has one, who used to be in the
Special Forces.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”