RailUK Forums
RailUK Forums > UK Railway Forums > Infrastructure & Stations

Click to buy your tickets through RailUK Booking engine

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 13th September 2017, 19:20   #31
AndrewE
Member
 
Join Date: 9 Nov 2015
Posts: 905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekC View Post
A bidirectional single track tramway on a long distance road? Sounds very scary. How long is the "rockfall section" where road and rail would share and how fast would the tram-trains be running? There's also the problem of a single track railway not being wide enough for a decent highway.
Do it like this - if a bit longer!
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Location...arjedalen.html
After stopping all the traffic initially you could release the stuff to follow the train, then open both directions when the train was clear of the shared sections.
AndrewE is offline   Reply With Quote
Registered users do not see these banners - join today!
Old 13th September 2017, 20:46   #32
lejog
Member
 
Join Date: 27 Feb 2015
Posts: 1,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by najaB View Post
My reading of the report is that they don't seem to considering the entire 4.5km section. I don't think it's considerably longer than the area covered by the 2012 solution.
What makes you reach that conclusion? The report in post #1 says:

Quote:
The site visit identified that the delivery of geotechnical engineering works that are required to provide a full length, at grade interlaced rail and highway section, or a number of discrete interlaced rail and highway sections presents no significant engineering problems, other than the risk of rock fall and the requirement for the development of an appropriate rail and highway traffic management system.
Talk of a full length solution or a number of discrete interlaced sections suggests a total length greater than 150m to me.
lejog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2017, 20:48   #33
najaB
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 28 Aug 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 14,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lejog View Post
Talk of a full length solution or a number of discrete interlaced sections suggests a total length greater than 150m to me.
The fact that they speak about a treadle operated signalling system says short section to me.
__________________
Favourite saying: "There's no difference between theory and practice. In theory."
najaB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2017, 23:35   #34
Millisle
Member
 
Join Date: 7 Jul 2013
Posts: 90
Default

It is interesting thinking back all those years that the road in the form it still has was expected to be temporary and that the carriageway would be extended over the railway solum at its anticipated closure, thus eliminating the problem. It felt a little incongruous at the time travelling over a section of new single track A road when the push in the north was all for rebuilding single track roads.
Once roads were improved and especially after the transfer in 1973 of the Lewis ferry to Ullapool the government was disposed to closure, which had been set for the end of that year, was postponed, and only definitely cancelled in 1974 after intense campaigning and the argument that it might be useful for oil industry freight, which it was briefly.
Millisle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:05.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8
© RailUK Forums 2005 - 2017