Rubber Tracks & Sprint

Here is a link to a new invention that will allow trams and cars to use the same surface.
http://www.iee.org/oncomms/sector/manufacturing/SectionNews/Object/188F0EEC-02E1-BCAD-F93E51FC08E6C871

Quote from the above link :

"With so many light rail projects under threat, community lines struggling and axed lines lying disused, there is real need for new and affordable options to realise much needed infrastructure opportunities."

Presumably , the struggling community lines reffered to are the similiar to the ones listed below.

Here are some Cornish Branch Line passenger figures since 2001 :

Par - Newquay - up 40%
St Erth - St Ives - up 25%
Liskeard - Looe - up 16%

Here is a Times article on this.
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22749-2203763.html

Quotes from the above link :

“Unlike ordinary roads, there is no problem with potholes because a damaged panel can easily be replaced. Rather than have an endless debate about whether we should be investing in road or rail, we can allow trains and cars to use the same corridor.”

"Holdfast, which has installed its rubber panels at hundreds of level crossings, has held discussions with tram companies about converting lines for dual use. “There are many lines which would be too lightly used to justify restoring rail services but which would be commercially viable if cars could use them too,” he added.

The cost of reopening a line could be covered by charging drivers a toll to use it.

Holdfast has calculated that the cost of installing rubber panels on the seven-mile line between Newton Abbot and Torquay in Devon could be recouped within four years by charging cars £1 each.

Holdfast has drawn up a list of dozens of potential lines and believes the strongest candidates for rubber highways are in Dagenham, East London, Croydon, Cheltenham and several routes around Bristol.

Iain Coucher, deputy chief executive of Network Rail, which owns Britain’s 20,000 miles of track, said: “It is an interesting idea and we are looking at it.” "

I would disagree with a couple of points from this :

1) Many lines closed during the Beeching era cannot be re-opened because the trackbed has been built on.

2) The following link explains the cost difference between a train service and a bus service.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=210.msg509#msg509

A potential danger (which may not have been envisaged by HoldFast) is that a significant number of branch lines could be "mothballed" (tracks remaining in place but not used) , their train services replaced by bus services , and the Hold Fast method used to turn the trackbed into a road.

The article below refers to the concept of "mothballing".
http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/articles/independent/jan29,06.shtml

"The consultation paper revives the Beeching idea of "mothballing" lines. In practice nearly all lines mothballed in the 1960s decayed and never reopened."

The consultation paper referred to is this one (otherwise known as the DfT Closure Guidance.)
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_railways/documents/divisionhomepage/611062.hcsp

Here is an article that covers a couple of important areas related to this issue.
http://www.rmtbristolrail.org.uk/archives/00000717.shtml

The Cambridgeshire Guided Busway / CAST IRON saga is covered in depth in the link below.
http://www.castiron.org.uk/index.php

Of course , the HoldFast method would not be suitable for the majority of secondary lines which in many cases are projected to achieve medium or high - level growth. One idea that is currently being consulted upon has as its focus the Coventry - Nuneaton corridor. (link below.)
http://www.sprint-there.co.uk/

Here is a map of the proposed route , which also serves Bedworth.
http://www.sprint-there.co.uk/downloads/plan.pdf

Here is a link to some technical information on Sprint , which is described as "The bus that thinks it's a tram"
http://www.sprint-there.co.uk/content.asp?ThreadNo=3&PagesID=561&size=

As you can see from the photo contained in the link above , one of the vehicles compatable with Sprint is First's "Streetcar" (link below.)
http://www.firstgroup.com/ftr/home.php

Sprint is part of the "Futurebus" concept unveiled by Douglas Alexander in York recently. Here is a link to his speech on this. Sections 1 - 6 are relevant to Sprint.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_about/documents/page/dft_about_611647.hcsp

Here are some links to the Future Of Transport White Paper.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_about/documents/page/dft_about_031274.hcsp

Quotes from the above link :

"5.17 We intend to give Passenger Transport Authorities the ability to choose whether to channel subsidy towards rail or other forms of public transport. In some cases, buses might provide both a better service and better value for money.

5.18 We recognise that Passenger Transport Authorities may not be willing to consider this unless they can be certain that bus routes, timings and fares will meet passenger needs and work well with the national timetable. We will amend the Transport Act 2000 to make it easier for Passenger Transport Authorities to introduce Quality Contracts as part of a strategy that includes modification of rail services.

The official name for the DfT Closure Guidance is "Railways act 2005: Implementation of network modification provisions."

5.19 Passenger Transport Authorities will be able to decide whether to take greater control of their bus routes and associated budgets by deciding which rail routes are best value and which would be more efficiently replaced by bus services."

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_about/documents/page/dft_about_031273.hcsp

Quotes from the above link :

"There will be an increased role for the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly Government and the London Mayor, and more local decision-making in England

Central government is not always best placed to take decisions on the transport needs of different communities. In future, the devolved administrations will take on increased responsibilities for passenger services and, where appropriate, infrastructure. In England, the Passenger Transport Authorities (which manage transport provision in some of the main metropolitan areas) will be able to buy additional services, and to transfer funding between rail and other transport modes. Transport for London will also have an increased role with regard to rail services in the capital. And the Government will promote the role of Community Rail Partnerships in improving the management of local branch lines. "

"A better deal for freight will enable the industry and its customers to invest for the long term
Because of the high up-front investment costs for rail freight, businesses using these services need to be sure about their access to the network. But this has to be balanced with the fact that freight users only pay for the cost of operating their services and not for the costs of the underlying infrastructure. Freight operators will be given greater certainty about their rights on the national network, and a group of key routes will be identified on which freight will enjoy and pay for more assured rights of access."

" 4.25 While central Government will have overall control of our rail network, regional and local players need to have the means to influence services in their own areas. Rail may not always be the most cost-effective or appropriate transport solution. Rail should be considered alongside other forms of transport, including bus and light rail, to provide a coherent solution to local issues that delivers the best service for the lowest cost. We believe that decisions are often best taken at a local level, and will ensure that an effective system is put in place. We will give local players an incentive to invest or find savings. "

Here is a link to the Network Rail Business Plan.
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documents/3115_Route%2017%20West%20Midlands.pdf

Page 10.

"The SRA Gauging Policy set out a proposed
intermodal freight network cleared for the
transportation of 9’6” high containers. The following
routes were identified as priority routes, for which
there was believed to be a business case for
gauge clearance but for which no funding was
available:

Leamington – Coventry – Nuneaton"

Pages 11 & 12.

"The rail freight industry has recently provided to
Network Rail a set of 10 year traffic forecasts, and
we are presently assessing their implications. The
key route section within this route that has been
identified as a fragile route and has clearly defined
additional tonnage/ train numbers projected by the
industry is Coventry – Nuneaton. The extensive
track renewals recently undertaken on the
Coventry to Nuneaton line has meant that this route
can be removed from the fragile routes list in the
near future."

Page 13.

"On the Coventry – Nuneaton line, studies have
been undertaken by Warwickshire County and
Coventry City Councils in conjunction with Centro
to assess the relative benefits of increasing heavy
rail frequency, train-tram services on shared track
or alternative adjacent bus routes. These options
are currently under evaluation, with Network Rail
acting in an advisory role. Recently on this line, rail
services were restored following bus substitutions.
This allowed extensive track renewals works, as
part of a programme to remove certain long-term
TSRs on this section."

Here is a link entitled "The benefits of Sprint"
http://www.sprint-there.co.uk/content.asp?ThreadNo=3&PagesID=555&size=

What has all this got to do with Melksham?

Andrew Griffiths , who is First's Regional Manager for the Severn / Solent area , confirmed the information regarding service 234 contained in the link below at the Melksham Rail Development Group meeting on May 12 2006. He also hinted that service 234 could still be re-routed via Chippenham Railway Station.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=221.msg554#msg554

Here is a link regarding a Parliamentary Question on buses to replace trains.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=217.msg539#msg539

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether it is his policy to replace rail services with bus services on the (a) Par to Newquay, (b) Liskeard to Looe, (c) Totnes and Ivybridge to Plymouth, (d) Chippenham to Frome and (e) Severn Beach routes. [64774]

Derek Twigg: Other than the continuation of existing arrangements whereby buses provide some services between Avonmouth and Severn Beach, there is no policy to replace rail services with buses on any of these routes.

Here is a recent Save The Train daily update.
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/update/archives/2006/06/how_to_catch_th.html

The transport minister says that there is no policy to replace rail services with buses on any of these routes , yet Transport Direct , which is an "official" site, sponsored by the Department for Transport , refers to the 18:04 bus as a Rail Replacement.

They cant both be right.