Rail lines that could be converted in to busways?

[gingerheid]

Isn't a fence the obvious solution? Although having looked at the photos, I'm not sure how that is any different from any other road on the entire planet

Exactly my view of the situation.

This came about because a cyclist fell into the path of a bus and died, in exactly the same way as could have happened from pretty much any cycle way in the vicinity of a road (which is almost all of them) or any road.

The argument is that the bus couldn't have swerved to avoid him and that is true, but given the inherent dangers posed by swerving buses I would argue that buses being more likely to be in a known location makes things safer overall.

This is bourne out by accident figures for this route and the alternative roads around it. There would then have been an interesting situation if the authorities had (as I believe they ought to have) insisted tht the busway took priority and if the footpath couldn't co-exist then it needed to go!

I feel that the Cambridgeshire busway has demonstrated how success could happen; in operation and use it is great. Only in building and management has it failed. I would like to see busways to Newmarket and Mildenhall, and Haverhill. These places could do with the bus service improvements St Ives has seen and there's no realistic prospect of the lines reopening. However they need to not be overseen by Cambs County Council!

 

[randyrippley]

Interesting, looks like the over bridge of Lower Town is over 10m wide, possibly as it was broad gauge? Marsh Lane is new and easily 10m. Though if you look at the bridge with Montacute Road, it certainly would fall foul of standards now as it looks 7m wide, there certainly isn't a verge.

The Montacute Rd bridge is one of the two where the foundations had to be underpinned and the road dropped by several feet to get the required width overhead

 

[AHBD]

Exactly my view of the situation.

This came about because a cyclist fell into the path of a bus and died, in exactly the same way as could have happened from pretty much any cycle way in the vicinity of a road (which is almost all of them) or any road.

The argument is that the bus couldn't have swerved to avoid him and that is true, but given the inherent dangers posed by swerving buses I would argue that buses being more likely to be in a known location makes things safer overall.

This is bourne out by accident figures for this route and the alternative roads around it. There would then have been an interesting situation if the authorities had (as I believe they ought to have) insisted tht the busway took priority and if the footpath couldn't co-exist then it needed to go!

I feel that the Cambridgeshire busway has demonstrated how success could happen; in operation and use it is great. Only in building and management has it failed. I would like to see busways to Newmarket and Mildenhall, and Haverhill. These places could do with the bus service improvements St Ives has seen and there's no realistic prospect of the lines reopening. However they need to not be overseen by Cambs County Council!

The bus should be passing the cyclist with a space the same as required on a road on Mainland Uk: the gap is now specified by Highway code as 1.5m (wheel to wheel). Do you think it is acceptable for drivers to almost remove cyclists elbows when driver is on ordinary roads? The fact the cyclist is in a separate lane/ track does not remove the passing at speed driver's responsibility to leave a safe gap when passing. Close passing is the bane of narrow cycle lanes and is wrong.

 

[Trainguy34]

A busway there would allow the route to easily continue to bromley south on dual carriageway and at North end to....[resists the urge]

Why resist? I now really want to know where to.

 

[SynthD]

Can double decker buses safely go over a narrow bridge? There are some road overbridges on that route which look too low. How would the bus reverse at Bourne End? Some of the other suggestions I see don’t pass these checks either. Cambridge manages with some single deckers, but not much elevation.

 

[Elecman]

Yeadon Way in Blackpool follows the direct line into Blackpool Central

But it doesn’t have a verge or pavement on its entire length

 

[randyrippley]

But it doesn’t have a verge or pavement on its entire length

From memory walking and cycling along it is banned. Safest solution.

 

[The Ham]

Could a two track formation actually conform to the standard width for a two lane road? The DMRB (design manual for roads and bridges) states that a two lane all purpose rural road needs 1m hard strips on both sides with 3.65m wide lanes. That is a total of 9.3 metres wide with no allowance for a verge. If you consider an old fashioned railway width of a cess, 4 foot, 6 foot, 4 foot, cess you are at 14 feet/4,3m plus whatever cess width.

DMRM is a helpful starting point, however you can go lower - it's purpose is for trunk roads rather than local roads.

Manual for streets (MfS) gives guidance with narrower roads (for instance 4.1m for two cars passing each other), roads for bus routes can be 6.1m.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Single decker buses are usually less than 3m tall, they would comfortably fit - the 484s are 3.6m.

Single deckers fair enough, but you'd need double deckers to get anywhere near an improvement on the passenger carrying capacity of the Island Line.

The problem isn't the width of the busway as such, it's because they squeezed both the busway and a shared use pedestrian/cycle path alongside it into too little width, resulting in in very little clearance between the two. You'd have the same safety issue with a tramway plus a busy pedestrian/cycle path right alongside it with trams going past at speed (a quick search suggests modern trams are typically a bit wider than a bus).

While I appreciate the tramway would have similar issues with centrifugal forces, aren't 2 parallel concrete rollways of a guided busway wider than than the loading gauge envelope of a tramway? So, in the tram version (e.g. a Bombardier M5000 as used on Metrolink), the tram is 2.65m wide and, yes, a modern bus example (e.g. Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC) is 2.44 wide, but the need for a guide wheel protruding from the bus, and the margin of error width on the concrete rollway makes it wider and, hence, wastes space that could have been used for a fence separating the cycle path and the busway.

The problem isn't the width of the busway as such, it's because they squeezed both the busway and a shared use pedestrian/cycle path alongside it into too little width, resulting in in very little clearance between the two. You'd have the same safety issue with a tramway plus a busy pedestrian/cycle path right alongside it with trams going past at speed (a quick search suggests modern trams are typically a bit wider than a bus).

OK, upon further research, I found out that the Alstom Citadis, CAF Urbos 3 and Stadler Variobahn trams (available among others) have been recently supplied, and are still available in a 2.4m width configuration. So much narrower overall than say an Enviro200 MMC on a guided busway with a guide wheel protruding. So the fatality would have never happened had it been a tram line, because there would have been space for a fence with 2.4m trams.

 

[stuu]

Single deckers fair enough, but you'd need double deckers to get anywhere near an improvement on the passenger carrying capacity of the Island Line.

You really wouldn't. A single decker bus has about the same number of seats as each car of the 484s, so you only need to run 4 buses an hour to have broadly similar capacity.

 

[Bevan Price]

Given enough money, I would go in the opposite direction, and convert misguided bus routes back into rail or tram routes..........

 

[778]

I can't remember his name, but wasn't there an ex engineer who had an obsessive hatred of railways and wanted to convert the entire rail network into busways? I think he died a few years ago. He may have been behind the idea for Marylebone to be converted into a coach station, and did not approve of the Chiltern Main line being connected to the Bicester line from Oxford.

 

[stuu]

The Railway Conversion League, as well as some later nutters experts, some details in this article:

Almost Terminal: Marylebone's Brush With Destruction - London Reconnections

The leading source for independent news and analysis about transport in London and beyond. Award-winning coverage of transport infrastructure and politics alongside stories about the history of the Capital's transport networks.

www.londonreconnections.com

 

[AlastairFraser]

You really wouldn't. A single decker bus has about the same number of seats as each car of the 484s, so you only need to run 4 buses an hour to have broadly similar capacity.

I said an improvement..... And bus drivers on the island are hard enough for Southern Vectis to recruit.

 

[The Ham]

I said an improvement..... And bus drivers on the island are hard enough for Southern Vectis to recruit.

Also whilst train drivers are often cited as having high pay, would the cost of a guard and a driver be cheaper than the cost of (say) 5 bus drivers (even if you could recruit them)?

Even at £20,000, that would require a driver and guard's combined pay to be around £100,000, however bus drivers according to the link below are paid £22,500 to £25,200.

https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Salary/Southern-Vectis-Bus-Driver-Salaries-E25381_D_KO16,26.htm

How much does a Bus Driver at Southern Vectis make?​

The typical Southern Vectis Bus Driver salary is £24,314 per year. Bus Driver salaries at Southern Vectis can range from £22,510 - £25,200 per year. This estimate is based upon 4 Southern Vectis Bus Driver salary report(s) provided by employees or estimated based upon statistical methods. When factoring in bonuses and additional compensation, a Bus Driver at Southern Vectis can expect to make an average total pay of £24,314 per year.

 

[stuu]

I said an improvement..... And bus drivers on the island are hard enough for Southern Vectis to recruit.

One single decker bus every 10 minutes would be a 50% capacity increase. No need for double deckers

 

[devon_belle]

Yeovil Junction to Pen Mill (and/or Yeovil Town area on the old alignment) would probably benefit from a busway.

 

[randyrippley]

Yeovil Junction to Pen Mill (and/or Yeovil Town area on the old alignment) would probably benefit from a busway

I don't think there would be room for a busway and the current link line, which is needed as a diversionary route. You might get away with a single track busway with passing spaces, but then you'd need some kind of signalling or other flow control - unless it was strictly "one bus in service"

 

[devon_belle]

I don't think there would be room for a busway and the current link line, which is needed as a diversionary route. You might get away with a single track busway with passing spaces, but then you'd need some kind of signalling or other flow control - unless it was strictly "one bus in service"

Agreed, I was thinking a single lane for the part which shared an embankment with the railway. Maybe not one bus in operation, but with flow control and some double lane sections (the abandoned curve to Yeovil Town) I guess it could work.

You could argue that the bus should go straight into Yeovil rather than going to Pen Mill, as I don't suspect there are many connecting passengers between the two stations.

 

[randyrippley]

Agreed, I was thinking a single lane for the part which shared an embankment with the railway. Maybe not one bus in operation, but with flow control and some double lane sections (the abandoned curve to Yeovil Town) I guess it could work.

You could argue that the bus should go straight into Yeovil rather than going to Pen Mill, as I don't suspect there are many connecting passengers between the two stations.

Town would be better - I don't think you could get it under Pen Mill bridge and then up onto the road

 

[Krokodil]

For example Maidenhead to Marlow

Too many people of influence.

Settle-Carlisle
Settle-Carnforth

How will you accommodate the freight?

Maesteg Branch

Well if the bus is a single door entry one, the locals might get the shock of actually having to pay for their journey

Conway Valley Line

If there's ever a way of decimating passenger numbers on a busy service, it's converting it to a bus of any sort. Great way to pile more cars into the National Park. Starting to see full & standing reports frequently these days.

It's intriguing that even though this dreadful idea was discredited in Sir Peter Parker's day, elements of the railway fraternity still seem to feel the need to return to it as a dog returns to its vomit.

I've no objection to a hypothetical discussion, but clearly some nutters actually think that it's a good idea.

Yeovil Junction to Pen Mill (and/or Yeovil Town area on the old alignment) would probably benefit from a busway.

How will trains divert when Taunton is closed for engineering work?

 

[randyrippley]

How will trains divert when Taunton is closed for engineering work?

As said upforum, there's enough room for a single bus lane alongside the existing track

 

[AlastairFraser]

One single decker bus every 10 minutes would be a 50% capacity increase. No need for double deckers

12 plus extra drivers on the Island, seriously?
And where do these buses go after the busway with a competitive journey time?

 

[ANDREW_D_WEBB]

Tattenham Corner/Caterham Branches
Greenford Branch
Bromley North Branch
Island Line
Barton on Humber Branch
Gunnislake Branch
Maesteg Branch
Conway Valley Line
Morecambe/Heysham Branch

Whilst the Greenford branch may have a sparse (by London standards) and underused passenger service it has daily freight services using it.

 

[stuu]

12 plus extra drivers on the Island, seriously?
And where do these buses go after the busway with a competitive journey time?

Your original point was that the line could not be converted to a busway as it would need double deckers in order to meet demand, which it clearly wouldn't. No mention of drivers or other practicalities, so why change the goalposts?

 

[gingerheid]

The bus should be passing the cyclist with a space the same as required on a road on Mainland Uk: the gap is now specified by Highway code as 1.5m (wheel to wheel). Do you think it is acceptable for drivers to almost remove cyclists elbows when driver is on ordinary roads? The fact the cyclist is in a separate lane/ track does not remove the passing at speed driver's responsibility to leave a safe gap when passing. Close passing is the bane of narrow cycle lanes and is wrong.

But isn't that how almost every pavement in the country doesn't work? If you fall off a pavement you are always at risk of coming to harm.

I've cycled the busway many many many times and always felt safer than on normal roads, and just as safe as on pavements with parallel roads.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The bus should be passing the cyclist with a space the same as required on a road on Mainland Uk: the gap is now specified by Highway code as 1.5m (wheel to wheel). Do you think it is acceptable for drivers to almost remove cyclists elbows when driver is on ordinary roads? The fact the cyclist is in a separate lane/ track does not remove the passing at speed driver's responsibility to leave a safe gap when passing. Close passing is the bane of narrow cycle lanes and is wrong.

The entire issue with close passing is that the vehicle might move. A vehicle passing at speed that can't deviate isn't as scary. I'm sure everyone here has stood within 1m of a train passing a platform at 100+ mph (yellow lines tend to be about 1m out).

That said, even if you don't like this the affected section of busway is very short - the path is a long way from it on most of the route.

The reason they can't do a fence is I suspect the need for people to be able to exit a bus in case of fire using the normal nearside door (using the offside door poses its own risks).

 

[Mark J]

Rail lines that could be converted in to busways?​

NONE!

I don't support converting any higher capacity, faster (than buses) rail lines into bus ways.

It is a regressive move.

IMO definitely not Marlow. The current rail service is actually quite well used, which is a fair achievement considering the setup is rather awkward. The best thing to happen here would be to restore the railway to High Wycombe, however due to the amount of building on the former trackbed I don't expect to see this happen. Changing the current layout to support a proper 2tph Maidenhead to Marlow service would be useful, but again not easy to achieve in practice.

I support something being done to re-establish some kind of rail service reinstated between Bourne End and High Wycombe.

It is only six miles of track that needs to be reinstated - somehow.

If this to be some kind of tram with limited on street running, so be it.