Diesel trains are really bad for you, Like Seriously

[pbx2]

Pretty much explains my point, Plus shows how terrible central london  air is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35717927

 

Poor train air con designs don't help:

 

If you want to support my cause to get poorly designed diesel trains off the tracks, Visit here: https://www.change.org/p/stagecoach-remove-the-dirty-diesels-from-your-train-line

[Monkey Dust]

The trouble is those trains are so numerous, and it's not just stagecoach who use them. Replacing all of them will be incredibly expensive, and would take years, not to mention all the even older diesel trains. For example the high speed (diesel) trains that operate between the west country and London, are all over 35 years old, I believe some are over 40. Efforts could be made to improve the emissions of these trains, but even that would be expensive. 

 

Then there is electrification; the GWR mainline electrification project has had a chunk of it 'deferred' recently, by which the government means cancelled. They are not going to electrify as far as Bristol Temple Meads (Bristol being by far the biggest city in the West country for those unfamiliar with it, and TM being the main station there), electrification will stop at Bath a mere 12ish miles away because that makes so much sense??????  I can't see them electrifying all the way to Exeter any time soon, central government hate spending money outside the M25, and it's not like Devon could apply for EU funding now...

[MorganO]

2 hours ago, pbx2 said:

-snip-

where i used to live, uses exclusively deisel traction for the trains i see there will be no change there for the future.

 

you cannot do anything the cost of replacing the trains is far too expensive

 

i highly doubt anything will change

[Teddy07]

I live in the inner city of a city with 75.000 citizens and I hate it because the cars for sure pollute the air I breathe. I like to jog but I hate it at the same time but I breathe even more shitty air then. 

I will move as soon as I can after my degree to a place to the edge of a city.

[pbx2]

3 hours ago, Monkey Dust said:

The trouble is those trains are so numerous, and it's not just stagecoach who use them.

 

I'm more after the More popular diesel trains that actually have a bigger overall impact. I'm not after the people in Oban, Scotland that use Tiny two car 156's.  

Since the line i am after is actually a main link to london it is much more important.

[pbx2]

3 hours ago, KOMTechAndGaming said:

where i used to live, uses exclusively deisel traction for the trains i see there will be no change there for the future.

 

you cannot do anything the cost of replacing the trains is far too expensive

 

i highly doubt anything will change

 

Since the replacement of the trains is actually coming up, I think there might be a chance that they can get rid of diesels altogether. If they don't... Maybe i will try to get a "Congestion Charge" for trains that go into central london (Kings Cross, Waterloo, Paddington & St pancreas ) since that will be an incentive for more companies to change.

[Thunderpup]

if you are going to advocate doing away with something bad you need to provide examples of viable alternatives.  Because without those trains people would be driving into and out of London which would be a lot worse than the current situation. You'll need to take cost into account as well as the ability to pay for it using either existing tax revenue or levying a new tax.  A new tax can, and likely will, result in lower public support.   

[pbx2]

9 minutes ago, Thunderpup said:

if you are going to advocate doing away with something bad you need to provide examples of viable alternatives.  Because without those trains people would be driving into and out of London which would be a lot worse than the current situation. You'll need to take cost into account as well as the ability to pay for it using either existing tax revenue or levying a new tax.  A new tax can, and likely will, result in lower public support.   

 

 

Bus services can be done to Basingstoke since lots of services to waterloo start there.

as for Exeter, other diesel trains leave there and head to paddington, etc (And some are FASTER)

 

No new taxes will exist since its a private company that will upgrade the trains

and i don't believe national rail can create taxes although it is government supported.

 

If you did read my campaign, you would have seen that i pointed out how it could be done, 3rd rail electric trains (I didn't state these could be uused, but it is the obvious solution since the rest of the rail network relies on it), Or overhead from baisingstoke to allow for high speed trains (class 800 anybody) to operate.]

 

 

[pbx2]

10 minutes ago, Thunderpup said:

if you are going to advocate doing away with something bad you need to provide examples of viable alternatives.  Because without those trains people would be driving into and out of London which would be a lot worse than the current situation. You'll need to take cost into account as well as the ability to pay for it using either existing tax revenue or levying a new tax.  A new tax can, and likely will, result in lower public support.   

 

I forgot, Since loads of class 458 trains will be disused (thanks to the new class 707 trains) there will only be the cost of electrifing the line, since trains (Pretty new ones too, compared to some of the other trains that they use on SWT) will be available for use.

 

This is a very viable solution for SWT and network rail.

[Monkey Dust]

10 minutes ago, pbx2 said:

Bus services can be done to Basingstoke since lots of services to waterloo start there.

as for Exeter, other diesel trains leave there and head to paddington, etc (And some are FASTER)

 

No new taxes will exist since its a private company that will upgrade the trains

and i don't believe national rail can create taxes although it is government supported.

 

If you did read my campaign, you would have seen that i pointed out how it could be done, 3rd rail electric trains (I didn't state these could be uused, but it is the obvious solution since the rest of the rail network relies on it), Or overhead from baisingstoke to allow for high speed trains (class 800 anybody) to operate.]

 

 

Buses use diesel, from a pollution point of view they are worse due to higher rolling resistance.

 

From Exeter to London (in fact from Penzance to London) there are hybrid trains coming, currently 2019 unless they get delayed again, so will use electric where overhead lines exist. Though obviously it will take a while to replace the diesels currently servicing this route. As regards no taxes being used to replace rolling stock I wouldn't be so sure, if the government want to replace trains before the end of their serviceable life they'll have to cough up big for it.

 

3rd rail isn't used by the rest of the rail network, it's just a south east thing I believe, everywhere else that is electric is overhead. And a quick google search indicates that 3rd rail has limitations that means we probably don't want to expand it, such as an 80mph speed limit.

 

Unfortunately cleaning up our rail network will cost a lot, and it's not clear where the money could come from.

[Thunderpup]

1 hour ago, pbx2 said:

Bus services can be done to Basingstoke since lots of services to waterloo start there.

as for Exeter, other diesel trains leave there and head to paddington, etc (And some are FASTER)

 

No new taxes will exist since its a private company that will upgrade the trains

and i don't believe national rail can create taxes although it is government supported.

 

 

To your first point: Buses not efficient means of moving people into and out of the city.  The amount of diesel burned moving the same amount of people would be higher.  Unless you utilize some form of hybrid or electric bus as well, but that too would wouldn't solve the added congestion the extra buses would create.

 

To your second point: Whether taxes are raised to fund new trains or the private company raises their fares for passengers, the end result is the same.  People will be paying more money for a service they already get.  

[Donut417]

You can always be like Michgian and have to drive every where. Even Detroit dont have much of a rail system. The people mover doesn't cover the whole city and you have to rely on bus service on congested shit roads. I live out in Romulus a mile away from Detroit Metro Airport. The nearest bus stop to me, the bus only runs twice a day. So at least you have shitty trains that can move you. Instead of having to drive with idiots on the road and hope you dont die as a result. Oh did I mention the country I live in has the highest accident rate in the state. As well as the highest insurance rates. Id love to have a subway or something. It would be cheaper as well as less stress from having to dodge the pot holes. 

[Thunderpup]

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

-snip-

Where i live in VA we don't even have that much.  Your options are still mostly limited to your own vehicle or a bus/taxi.

 

We do have a "light rail" line, which is an electric train, but it's only in one city and the line only services a small section of that one city.

 

We do have an Amtrak line that runs north, but its only for long distance travels; and the speed and cost is worse than driving yourself. For instance it would cost more and take just as long, if not longer,  to take the train to DC than to drive.  

[Zodiark1593]

From an objective standpoint, Diesel still remains the best primary power source for trains as electrifying every railway within a country (even as small as Britain) can be very costly. 

 

However, most diesel trains do not utilize a gear driven transmission, rather, the diesel engine acts as a generator, and the train is driven electrically. Theoretically, if one can provide electric rails in pollution sensitive areas to provide supplemental power to trains, it should only be a minor modification to the design of the trains to accommodate. If trains are being replaced anyway, cost shouldn't be astronomically higher. 

 

Of course, I'm no engineer, and can be completely wrong. 

[pbx2]

On 18/02/2017 at 2:45 PM, Thunderpup said:

To your first point: Buses not efficient means of moving people into and out of the city.  The amount of diesel burned moving the same amount of people would be higher.  Unless you utilize some form of hybrid or electric bus as well, but that too would wouldn't solve the added congestion the extra buses would create.

 

To your second point: Whether taxes are raised to fund new trains or the private company raises their fares for passengers, the end result is the same.  People will be paying more money for a service they already get.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since Basingstoke isn't far from Salisbury it's workable, I am calling it a success if i at least get third rail to Salisbury as that will have a fair amount of services that can be fully electric.

Congestion????!!?! You think that is that bad? No, it's not bad at all near Salisbury and apparently not too bad by Basingstoke. This is not Central London. As for the extra diesel burnt, At least it won't be circulated into the cabin and it will only be temporary while third rail is installed.

 

Electric is cheaper to run so fares are going to be about the same (While they pay off the trains) and possibly drop once paid off (Unlikely but still, £20 quid for me to travel between two places is silly, cheaper to use a car.)

On 18/02/2017 at 2:06 PM, Monkey Dust said:

 

From Exeter to London (in fact from Penzance to London) there are hybrid trains coming, currently 2019 unless they get delayed again, so will use electric where overhead lines exist. Though obviously it will take a while to replace the diesels currently servicing this route. As regards no taxes being used to replace rolling stock I wouldn't be so sure, if the government want to replace trains before the end of their serviceable life they'll have to cough up big for it.

 

3rd rail isn't used by the rest of the rail network, it's just a south east thing I believe, everywhere else that is electric is overhead. And a quick google search indicates that 3rd rail has limitations that means we probably don't want to expand it, such as an 80mph speed limit.

 

 

 

 

3

That service is unlikely to pass through Grateley, Overton, Andover etc. since its GWR creating that route and the route i am talking about is SWT. So your point is not valid.

20 years is not long for SWT, Class 707 trains are replacing the class 444 and 458 that used to run on the Hounslow loop and Windsor and Eaton riverside route, and those aren't that old.

 

Rest of the electrified SWT network uses 3rd rail, And some southern trains use overhead. 3rd rail is 90MPH which is same as the current speeds of the 158/159. Its fine for city services, but outer services should all use overhead because it is better in many ways. Including Speed, Cost to maintain, Lifetime, and power efficiency. that is really what i am after here, but since 3rd rail is cheaper, in the beginning, i am assuming that it will be chosen.

 

On 18/02/2017 at 4:56 PM, Donut417 said:

You can always be like Michgian and have to drive every where. Even Detroit dont have much of a rail system. The people mover doesn't cover the whole city and you have to rely on bus service on congested shit roads. I live out in Romulus a mile away from Detroit Metro Airport. The nearest bus stop to me, the bus only runs twice a day. So at least you have shitty trains that can move you. Instead of having to drive with idiots on the road and hope you dont die as a result. Oh did I mention the country I live in has the highest accident rate in the state. As well as the highest insurance rates. Id love to have a subway or something. It would be cheaper as well as less stress from having to dodge the pot holes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your argument is valid and not valid at the same time. Fuel is £1.17 per litre here, times that by 4.5 because gallons and you get £5.26, convert that to dollars (6.55 US Dollar) and you get how much we have to pay per gallon (ish), compare that with your $2.20 per gallon (Even your highest recorded price is still cheaper than us) Now you see why you don't have very good rails, Fuel is cheapo. so the rail companies are like F this, not worth it.

 

We CAN complain because we are very heavy on rails here, Looking at the underground, Eurostar, Crossrail, Main line, Even Scotland has rails.

We rely on it like you Americans rely on cheap fuel and massive cars (2nd biggest polluter is America BTW - http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html)

On 18/02/2017 at 6:11 PM, Thunderpup said:

We do have an Amtrak line that runs north, but its only for long distance travels; and the speed and cost is worse than driving yourself. For instance it would cost more and take just as long, if not longer,  to take the train to DC than to drive.  

 

 

 

3

Speed is OK here (90MPH is highest but it's stop-start) on the current trains, But it costs nearly £40 (One way) to get from Salisbury to Richmond (Just an example) wow much price, Such good and £70 for an open return

On 18/02/2017 at 7:46 PM, Zodiark1593 said:

From an objective standpoint, Diesel still remains the best primary power source for trains as electrifying every railway within a country (even as small as Britain) can be very costly. 

 

However, most diesel trains do not utilize a gear driven transmission, rather, the diesel engine acts as a generator, and the train is driven electrically. Theoretically, if one can provide electric rails in pollution sensitive areas to provide supplemental power to trains, it should only be a minor modification to the design of the trains to accommodate. If trains are being replaced anyway, cost shouldn't be astronomically higher. 

 

Of course, I'm no engineer, and can be completely wrong. 

 

 

 

 

 

Depending on the type of electrification.

 

Your idea would work, But there is a reason it was not done, The switchover would require a startup (And inspection of train i believe) and would require extra waiting time at stations, also there is a massive cost factor involved with duel powering trains, And the only trains that currently use "Electro-Diesel" are the Thunderbird trains (Recovery for broken down trains) (SWT only has one, and it's a separate Loco)

 

Next?

 

 

[Tech_Dreamer]

@WinNut

[Donut417]

10 minutes ago, pbx2 said:

Your argument is valid and not valid at the same time. Fuel is £1.17 per litre here, times that by 4.5 because gallons and you get £5.26, convert that to dollars (6.55 US Dollar) and you get how much we have to pay per gallon (ish), compare that with your $2.20 per gallon (Even your highest recored price is still cheaper than us) Now you see why you don't have very good rails, Fuel is cheapo. so the rail companies are like, F this, not worth it.

 

We CAN complain because we are very heavy on rails here, Looking at the underground, Eurostar, Crossrail, Main line, Even Scotland has rails.

We rely on it like you americans rely on cheap fuel and massive cars (2nd biggest polluter is america BTW - http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html)

Your not taking in to account. Michgian REQUIRES you to have a minimum of No Fault Car insurance. I pay over $1060 a year for full coverage. On top of the fact they raised registration fees for vehicles. I think its done by weight, but all I can tell you if you have to pay these yearly. On top of the fact Fuel prices are also going to be going up. Michigan raised the gas tax, because our roads are shit, because the MOB owns all the construction companies and dont build the roads right. 

 

Also should ad the fact that driving in Michigan, especially in the Metro Detroit area, Which by the way has the highest insurance rates due to car jackings and accidents. You have road rage. Hell my road rage is inflamed about every time I drive, because they dont give a shit if you can drive or not, they just want that money for license renewal and the renewal of the registration. 

 

What Im saying is I rather pay a little more and not drive, so I dont have to grab some ass hole by the back of the head and beat his sorry head in the the steering wheel. Because I have felt that before. And the reason we dont have rail is:

 

A) Amtrack which is a long range passenger train service, has to share the tracks with freight trains. Trust me when I say, these rail roads dont give two fucks about inconveniencing a passenger train. 

B) People whine moan and bitch because Tax dollars have to be spent. Because yeah, the construction companies aint fixing the same stretch of road every 5 years. 

C) With how sprawled out the Metro Detroit area is, it would be a nightmare to build something like this. Like I said, we barely have any bus service. 

[pbx2]

13 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Your not taking in to account. Michgian REQUIRES you to have a minimum of No Fault Car insurance. I pay over $1060 a year for full coverage. On top of the fact they raised registration fees for vehicles. I think its done by weight, but all I can tell you if you have to pay these yearly. On top of the fact Fuel prices are also going to be going up. Michigan raised the gas tax, because our roads are shit, because the MOB owns all the construction companies and dont build the roads right. 

 

Also should ad the fact that driving in Michigan, especially in the Metro Detroit area, Which by the way has the highest insurance rates due to car jackings and accidents. You have road rage. Hell my road rage is inflamed about every time I drive, because they dont give a shit if you can drive or not, they just want that money for license renewal and the renewal of the registration. 

 

What Im saying is I rather pay a little more and not drive, so I dont have to grab some ass hole by the back of the head and beat his sorry head in the the steering wheel. Because I have felt that before. And the reason we dont have rail is:

 

A) Amtrack which is a long range passenger train service, has to share the tracks with freight trains. Trust me when I say, these rail roads dont give two fucks about inconveniencing a passenger train. 

B) People whine moan and bitch because Tax dollars have to be spent. Because yeah, the construction companies aint fixing the same stretch of road every 5 years. 

C) With how sprawled out the Metro Detroit area is, it would be a nightmare to build something like this. Like I said, we barely have any bus service. 

 

 

If you don't like it, Move.

The same cannot apply to me, however. I have a legal reason to be where i have to be and if i am not there i am in the wrong.

 

I am complaining not just because of the fact i have to use it, its the fact it's such a busy line, It runs 8 Car trains quite often and even more often you cannot get a seat because all of them are taken (Think the tube but less overkill).

So if you are going from Waterloo to Grateley you need to stand up for most of your two hours (ish) ride. How horrible.

 

Again the Amtrak thing is because of your low fuel prices, It's not economical to build more railways. So more money is spent on bullsh*t like polluting. (Dakota access pipeline anyone?).

It's completely America's fault, You are too busy spending your money on rubbish to actually invest in important things. 

Another point is the fact America is super spread out, however, the south of the UK is dense.

Wages are higher in the US also, so don't bitch about how much money you have to spend.

 

My final point is, Diesel should be reserved for tiny two car trains that don't need capacity, but all Rails in the south should be electric (With the exception on places like Doleham and places that run two car class 170 or 156)

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, pbx2 said:

Wages are higher in the US also

HA HA HA HA. NO they aint. Most people can barley afford to live on what they have. Most of America's so called wealth is in the hands of the 1%ers. The rest of us are just slaves to corporate America. Keep in mind in the UK Minimum wage is higher. Here in America is very little. Many people have to work 2 or more jobs just to stay a float. All because the pecker heads in D.C. dont want to give us a living wage. 

 

I like how all these fuckers think America is so rich. Most of our tax dollars go to feed the military industrial complex. Those who dont support that are labeled as protesters and undesirables. Its not our fault. Its corporate america and our Governments fault. We didnt tell the Government to spend more money on our military then the next 17 nations of the world combined. All they had to do is give us our guns. Us citizens can handle security.  And now we have what I would consider to be a mentally challenged person in our Presidency. 

 

Id move but I dont think Canada would take me as a refugee. So the only thing I can do is sit and watch my country burn. Possibly the world if Trump decided to nuke some one. 

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, pbx2 said:

If you don't like it, Move

 

Another point is the fact America is super spread out, however, the south of the UK is dense.

Wages are higher in the US also, so don't bitch about how much money you have to spend.

 

 

There are a few dense cities around where most necessities are within walking distance (New York, San Francisco for a couple examples), but away from these anomalies, most cities here are heavily reliant on private vehicle ownership as public transport tends to be less than robust, and non existent in (the relatively common) rural areas. 

 

[pbx2]

8 hours ago, Donut417 said:

HA HA HA HA. NO they aint. Most people can barley afford to live on what they have. Most of America's so called wealth is in the hands of the 1%ers. The rest of us are just slaves to corporate America. Keep in mind in the UK Minimum wage is higher. Here in America is very little. Many people have to work 2 or more jobs just to stay a float. All because the pecker heads in D.C. dont want to give us a living wage. 

 

I like how all these fuckers think America is so rich. Most of our tax dollars go to feed the military industrial complex. Those who dont support that are labeled as protesters and undesirables. Its not our fault. Its corporate america and our Governments fault. We didnt tell the Government to spend more money on our military then the next 17 nations of the world combined. All they had to do is give us our guns. Us citizens can handle security.  And now we have what I would consider to be a mentally challenged person in our Presidency. 

 

Id move but I dont think Canada would take me as a refugee. So the only thing I can do is sit and watch my country burn. Possibly the world if Trump decided to nuke some one. 

 

Wages are higher and prices are higher. Look it up.

Your citizens cannot handle security, They abuse guns. Look at all the shootings.

8 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

There are a few dense cities around where most necessities are within walking distance (New York, San Francisco for a couple examples), but away from these anomalies, most cities here are heavily reliant on private vehicle ownership as public transport tends to be less than robust.

 

 

This is because of fuel prices, They probably had a good service at the start but nobody was using it, So they had to cut back.

[dalekphalm]

10 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Michgian REQUIRES you to have a minimum of No Fault Car insurance. I pay over $1060 a year for full coverage.

Just saying, that's really not very expensive insurance, compared to many places. For example, I currently pay around $1700 a year for my insurance. Granted, that's a bit high (I got dinged for doing a rolling stop at a Stop Sign 2 and a half years ago), but still, even without the ticket, I'd likely be paying more than $1000 a year.

[Guest Kloaked]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

Just saying, that's really not very expensive insurance, compared to many places. For example, I currently pay around $1700 a year for my insurance. Granted, that's a bit high (I got dinged for doing a rolling stop at a Stop Sign 2 and a half years ago), but still, even without the ticket, I'd likely be paying more than $1000 a year.

I only pay a little over $700 a year even with a V8 vehicle.  I'm also a straight white male.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

I only pay a little over $700 a year even with a V8 vehicle.  I'm also a straight white male.

Insurance rates vary a lot regionally. You live in the US, I live in Canada. Even among Canadians, the rate can vary a lot per province or per city.

 

How old is your car? How valuable is it? How often is it stolen, etc? These are all contributing factors.

[DragonTamer1]

Yeah, diesel trains are bad for you. Everyone knows that steam trains are better for your health and the environment!