A warning for Brits: don't repeat the French mistake

Mikeuk · 25-03-2008, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolishUser

The French government, obedient to ecofascists, forbade any corporations to build any motorways (other than city bypasses like ringroads) in France. Do not repeat that mistake. Motorways (The US Interstate Highway System: 40 Year Report) are the best transport roads. The British network, while incomparably better than the Polish one, needs to be expanded.

How dare you, a foreigner, come on here telling us how we should ruin our country. I daresay they don't need motorways in Poland which I gather consists of thousands of square kilometers of near-desert crossed by carthorses, Trabants, and Mercedes stolen from Germany.

Don't tell me they're catching up and I should go there. I have no wish to spend my holidays supping borscht and enjoying the beauties of Soviet architecture.

This country wants no more motorways, fewer cars and above all, FEWER PEOPLE. As most of us (unlike the Poles) do not obey the Pope's command to have families the size of a regiment, that at least should be an achievable goal.

g hall · 25-03-2008, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeuk

How dare you, a foreigner, come on here telling us how we should ruin our country. I daresay they don't need motorways in Poland which I gather consists of thousands of square kilometers of near-desert crossed by carthorses, Trabants, and Mercedes stolen from Germany.

Don't tell me they're catching up and I should go there. I have no wish to spend my holidays supping borscht and enjoying the beauties of Soviet architecture.

This country wants no more motorways, fewer cars and above all, FEWER PEOPLE. As most of us (unlike the Poles) do not obey the Pope's command to have families the size of a regiment, that at least should be an achievable goal.

Colonel Blimp is alive and well and living in Fareham - how does he cope with the F****** W******

almost an ID-TEN-T

kernow · 25-03-2008, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian C

There is movement by various authorities to encourage passengers back to rail.
As for freight, road haulage could change to shuttle between premises and rail terminal as short term solution.

As was the case very successfully in Horse drawn Victorian and early Edwardian times! Unfortunately in motorised 1961, it took 14 days for my Moped to travel by train from Cambridgeshire to Devonshire even though I did the "Shuttle work" myself!

Mikeuk · 25-03-2008, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by g hall

Colonel Blimp is alive and well and living in Fareham - how does he cope with the F****** W******

I don't have to. We don't have any round here.

C_steam · 25-03-2008, 04:20 PM

Mike - you don't have any flaming weather?

Mikeuk · 26-03-2008, 03:06 PM

No we've certainly got that today.

Robin · 26-03-2008, 04:58 PM

If you want a freight on rail economy you have to have a freight on rail standard of living.

Besoeker · 26-03-2008, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

If you want a freight on rail economy you have to have a freight on rail standard of living.

Care to expand on that?

Robin · 27-03-2008, 06:56 PM

Our standard of living has surpassed what could be serviced by railfreight, even if it was given a top priority from the government.

Also remember that railfreight damages the rails, perhaps even more than a lorry on the road. The rails have to be repiared more often, mainly at night. This reduces a 24/7 service to passengers, which reduces the flexibilty of travelling by rail v travelling by car.

In case you think this is special pleading by a road haulier, I no longer do international haulage, or even have nights out in a truck. If freight did go by rail my services would be even more inn demand. I just think it`s a waste of a resource which could be put to better use.

Besoeker · 27-03-2008, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robin

Our standard of living has surpassed what could be serviced by railfreight, even if it was given a top priority from the government.

Also remember that railfreight damages the rails, perhaps even more than a lorry on the road. The rails have to be repiared more often, mainly at night. This reduces a 24/7 service to passengers, which reduces the flexibilty of travelling by rail v travelling by car.

The flexibility of travelling by car is also somewhat compromised by the volume of freight carried on the roads.

25-03-2008, 04:20 PM	#15 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,502	Mike - you don't have any flaming weather? __________________ -------------------------------------------------- Users on ignore list: None. I've got to have people to laugh at. Cowardly Posters* list: BobFM, Bellatrix.*People who post personal insults then refuse to reply .

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

26-03-2008, 03:06 PM	#16 (permalink)
Mikeuk Uber Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Fareham Posts: 5,650 Party: Conservatives	No we've certainly got that today.

26-03-2008, 04:58 PM	#17 (permalink)
Robin Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 759	If you want a freight on rail economy you have to have a freight on rail standard of living.

27-03-2008, 06:56 PM	#19 (permalink)
Robin Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 759	Our standard of living has surpassed what could be serviced by railfreight, even if it was given a top priority from the government. Also remember that railfreight damages the rails, perhaps even more than a lorry on the road. The rails have to be repiared more often, mainly at night. This reduces a 24/7 service to passengers, which reduces the flexibilty of travelling by rail v travelling by car. In case you think this is special pleading by a road haulier, I no longer do international haulage, or even have nights out in a truck. If freight did go by rail my services would be even more inn demand. I just think it`s a waste of a resource which could be put to better use.