Discussion:
A literal Railbus
(too old to reply)
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-03 10:22:43 UTC
Permalink
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.


Recliner
2025-02-03 10:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-03 11:16:18 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.

Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 11:17:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
I've a vague idea something similar was tried in the 1930s here.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-03 11:31:44 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 11:17:28 +0000
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines
than
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would
be
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
I've a vague idea something similar was tried in the 1930s here.
I imagine its been tried elsewhere but the combination of disused available
railway + high speed bus service being required is so infrequent that bus
manufacturers don't bother to implement the hardware which will be a lot
more complicated than a pair of guidewheels nailed to the steering rack.
Marland
2025-02-03 15:25:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
I've a vague idea something similar was tried in the 1930s here.
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>

Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
A present day version would likely have adjustable suspension to cope.

GH
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-03 15:28:17 UTC
Permalink
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical play
at rail joints.
Marland
2025-02-04 01:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical play
at rail joints.
While roads are bad in places roads tend not to have two pot holes side by
side a bit over
4ft apart every 45 feet for miles on end. While the up and down movement
may have not been much the constant hammer like thud must have taken its
toll as the axle beam broke after not long in service.

GH
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-04 07:24:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical play
at rail joints.
While roads are bad in places roads tend not to have two pot holes side by
side a bit over
4ft apart every 45 feet for miles on end.
But
Loading Image...
Loading Image...

tend to be bad after some decades of heavy use.
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-04 08:35:29 UTC
Permalink
On 4 Feb 2025 01:02:55 GMT
Post by Marland
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical
play
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
at rail joints.
While roads are bad in places roads tend not to have two pot holes side by
side a bit over
4ft apart every 45 feet for miles on end. While the up and down movement
may have not been much the constant hammer like thud must have taken its
toll as the axle beam broke after not long in service.
Sounds like they didn't improve the suspension enough to make up for the
lack of a pneumatic tyre.
Bob
2025-02-05 06:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical play
at rail joints.
I suspect it comes down to the different characteristics of road and
rail "bumpiness". The kind of vibration railway vehicles experience
tends to be a higher frequency lower amplitude vibration, while road
vehicles tend to experience much higher amplitude vibration but at a
lower frequency range (as the pneumatic tyres act as a low pass filter).
Expect the frequency of vibration passed to the structure is quite
significant in things like resonant frequency and fatigue response. If
you hit a resonance at a higher frequency, you consume fatigue "cycles"
at quite a rapid rate.

Robin
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-05 08:35:32 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 07:54:39 +0100
Post by Bob
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical
play
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
at rail joints.
I suspect it comes down to the different characteristics of road and
rail "bumpiness". The kind of vibration railway vehicles experience
tends to be a higher frequency lower amplitude vibration, while road
vehicles tend to experience much higher amplitude vibration but at a
lower frequency range (as the pneumatic tyres act as a low pass filter).
Expect the frequency of vibration passed to the structure is quite
significant in things like resonant frequency and fatigue response. If
you hit a resonance at a higher frequency, you consume fatigue "cycles"
at quite a rapid rate.
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance rather
than support that could solve the problem.
Bob
2025-02-06 07:45:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 07:54:39 +0100
Post by Bob
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 3 Feb 2025 15:25:28 GMT
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
Really? I'd have thought it would be the other way around. Potholes and other
crap on a road will be far harder on suspension than a few mm of vertical
play
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
at rail joints.
I suspect it comes down to the different characteristics of road and
rail "bumpiness". The kind of vibration railway vehicles experience
tends to be a higher frequency lower amplitude vibration, while road
vehicles tend to experience much higher amplitude vibration but at a
lower frequency range (as the pneumatic tyres act as a low pass filter).
Expect the frequency of vibration passed to the structure is quite
significant in things like resonant frequency and fatigue response. If
you hit a resonance at a higher frequency, you consume fatigue "cycles"
at quite a rapid rate.
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance rather
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.

Robin
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-06 08:12:13 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
what I suggested for years:

https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/Anw
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-06 13:52:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/Anw
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
I guess there is a low speed limit.
Recliner
2025-02-06 14:14:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ulf_Kutzner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/Anw
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
I guess there is a low speed limit.
50 km/5, vs 89 km/h on the road.

The vehicle has narrow, single rubber tyres
Bob
2025-02-06 16:26:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/Anw
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
The tyres and suspension of a Unimog are not suitable for a bus/railcar,
and the performance of those vehicles both on road and on rails is
limited due to this fact.

Robin
Sam Wilson
2025-02-06 16:33:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails - while
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/Anw
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
The tyres and suspension of a Unimog are not suitable for a bus/railcar,
and the performance of those vehicles both on road and on rails is
limited due to this fact.
On the other hand a Unimog’s performance on neither road nor rail is
oustanding!

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-06 16:38:36 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 17:26:52 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails -
while
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/An
w
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
The tyres and suspension of a Unimog are not suitable for a bus/railcar,
and the performance of those vehicles both on road and on rails is
limited due to this fact.
So? The point still stands - you can use rubber tyres on rails with guidewheels.
I'm sure suspensions could be finessed to work well on both road and rail.
Adaptive suspension systems have been a thing for a long time now.
Bob
2025-02-06 17:18:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 17:26:52 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:45:26 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
That makes sense. Of course if they used both road axles on the rails -
while
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
obviously locking the steering - and just used rail wheels for guidance
rather
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
than support that could solve the problem.
That would require the track to be provided with running surfaces, Paris
Metro style, becase the running surface of normal rails is much narrower
than the running surface of a road tyre, so would lead to a range of
other problems.
I'm afraid you're a bit behind the times. Unimog have been doing exactly
https://special.mercedes-benz-trucks.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Images/Unimog/An
w
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
endungen/2-Wege/Zagro_Ungarn/CT_U_Zagro-Ungarn_2.jpg
The tyres and suspension of a Unimog are not suitable for a bus/railcar,
and the performance of those vehicles both on road and on rails is
limited due to this fact.
So? The point still stands - you can use rubber tyres on rails with guidewheels.
I'm sure suspensions could be finessed to work well on both road and rail.
Adaptive suspension systems have been a thing for a long time now.
This is why a road-rail vehicle is not just "put a bus on the rails",
but it is a specialist vehicle with all kinds of modifications to allow
it to work, with custom suspension, custom drive trains, potentialy
custom tyres and all that. As a custom solution rather than a series
production vehicle, you also get the problem that each vehicle will
essentially be hand built, with all the problems associated with one-off
machines. This is exactly the kind of situation that makes "let's just
use an off the shelf vehicle" turn into "the modifications cost twice as
much as the off the shelf vehicle, and it has abysmal reliability problems".

Robin
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-07 09:30:42 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 18:18:07 +0100
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
So? The point still stands - you can use rubber tyres on rails with
guidewheels.
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
I'm sure suspensions could be finessed to work well on both road and rail.
Adaptive suspension systems have been a thing for a long time now.
This is why a road-rail vehicle is not just "put a bus on the rails",
but it is a specialist vehicle with all kinds of modifications to allow
it to work, with custom suspension, custom drive trains, potentialy
custom tyres and all that. As a custom solution rather than a series
production vehicle, you also get the problem that each vehicle will
essentially be hand built, with all the problems associated with one-off
machines. This is exactly the kind of situation that makes "let's just
use an off the shelf vehicle" turn into "the modifications cost twice as
much as the off the shelf vehicle, and it has abysmal reliability problems".
I don't see your point - all road-rail vehicles will be specialist and not
"off the shelf" because of the small demand.
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 15:54:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
I've a vague idea something similar was tried in the 1930s here.
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
A present day version would likely have adjustable suspension to cope.
GH
That mentions the possibility of a freight version as well which
eventually appeared as a prototype in the late 50s, early 60s. My Airfix
models never really worked well, not enough ballast I suspect.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Marland
2025-02-03 20:08:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
A present day version would likely have adjustable suspension to cope.
GH
That mentions the possibility of a freight version as well which
eventually appeared as a prototype in the late 50s, early 60s. My Airfix
models never really worked well, not enough ballast I suspect.
Has something slipped out of order here?
I can’t see any reference to a freight version though some suggest the LMS
vehicle ended up as a PW maintenance vehicle in Scotland presumably re
bodied.

I wasn’t aware Airfix had done a model of it , K’s made a white metal one .

Or were you talking about the BR era Railbus mentioned elsewhere, that is
still manufactured by the Welsh firm Dapol.

GH
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 21:33:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
A present day version would likely have adjustable suspension to cope.
GH
That mentions the possibility of a freight version as well which
eventually appeared as a prototype in the late 50s, early 60s. My Airfix
models never really worked well, not enough ballast I suspect.
Has something slipped out of order here?
I can’t see any reference to a freight version though some suggest the LMS
vehicle ended up as a PW maintenance vehicle in Scotland presumably re
bodied.
I wasn’t aware Airfix had done a model of it , K’s made a white metal one .
Or were you talking about the BR era Railbus mentioned elsewhere, that is
still manufactured by the Welsh firm Dapol.
There's a mention of a freight version with greater load capacity. Never
built but, as I say, in the early 60s there was a project involving
artic trailers with road-rail capability that could be made up ito
trains with a special adaptor wagon to enable loco haulage.

<https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/airfixtributeforum/road-railer-t9857.html>

Not sure if the full size version ever got off the drawing board.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 21:41:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
On the LMS
Details on this link
<https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lms_ro-railer.htm>
Wasn’t a success as the suspension could not cope with the harshness of
riding on rail track especially joints.
A present day version would likely have adjustable suspension to cope.
GH
That mentions the possibility of a freight version as well which
eventually appeared as a prototype in the late 50s, early 60s. My Airfix
models never really worked well, not enough ballast I suspect.
Has something slipped out of order here?
I can’t see any reference to a freight version though some suggest the LMS
vehicle ended up as a PW maintenance   vehicle in Scotland presumably re
bodied.
I wasn’t aware Airfix had done a model of it , K’s made a white metal one .
Or were you talking about the BR era Railbus mentioned elsewhere, that is
still manufactured by the Welsh firm Dapol.
There's a mention of a freight version with greater load capacity. Never
built but, as I say, in the early 60s there was a project involving
artic trailers with road-rail capability that could be made up ito
trains with a special adaptor wagon to enable loco haulage.
<https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/airfixtributeforum/road-railer-t9857.html>
Not sure if the full size version ever got off the drawing board.
There's some pictures here, scroll down a bit. Apparently Peco, not
Airfix. The real thing did exist but had lots of problems, including
changing mode on the move. Eventually sold to Australia.

<https://www.rmweb.co.uk/forums/topic/54465-scalecraft-roadrailer/>
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 21:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
There's some pictures here, scroll down a bit. Apparently Peco, not
Airfix. The real thing did exist but had lots of problems, including
changing mode on the move. Eventually sold to Australia.
<https://www.rmweb.co.uk/forums/topic/54465-scalecraft-roadrailer/>
And a photo of the real thing:
<https://www.eastanglianrailwayarchive.co.uk/Railways/Abandoned-Lines-and-Stations/i-SbRfHfZ>
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Marland
2025-02-04 00:15:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
There's some pictures here, scroll down a bit. Apparently Peco, not
Airfix. The real thing did exist but had lots of problems, including
changing mode on the move. Eventually sold to Australia.
<https://www.rmweb.co.uk/forums/topic/54465-scalecraft-roadrailer/>
<https://www.eastanglianrailwayarchive.co.uk/Railways/Abandoned-Lines-and-Stations/i-SbRfHfZ>
Right, I know what you are referring to now , but I would not consider it a
development of the LMS vehicle. They were a UK version of the Chesapeake
and Ohio Road railer or Railvan The two prototype vehicles were sent to
the UK where Pressed Steel examined them and built the smaller vehicles
for use in the UK. Meanwhile the C&O production versions entered service
but not as originally intended as whole trains but a couple at a time
attached to passenger trains carrying mail and express parcels. As
passenger trains declined in the USA they fell out of use.*


In model form Tri-ang made the British version as part of their Minic
Motoways system which would also run on their Tri-ang Railways track. There
was a section of roadway available with track inset for the change over
though the ones seen in this vid don’t appear to use one.


* Other types using the road railer name have been used but they rest on
rail bogies which did not stay with them on the road segment.

GH
Recliner
2025-02-03 11:35:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
That’s probably exactly what it does. The rear wheels don’t lift nearly as
far, as they’re still firmly in contact with the rails.
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
I wonder if the slow switchover might be a problem in Cambridge? These
small converted mini buses are probably also very expensive.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-03 12:00:09 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 11:35:53 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
I wonder if the slow switchover might be a problem in Cambridge? These
small converted mini buses are probably also very expensive.
Yes, the vehicles would no doubt be more expensive than a bus with just
guideway wheels, but would pale into insignificance compared with the 200m
cost of the guideway.
Theo
2025-02-03 12:19:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
I wonder if the slow switchover might be a problem in Cambridge? These
small converted mini buses are probably also very expensive.
I don't think so - it's roughly like waiting at a set of traffic lights.
You might want to fit cameras so the driver can skip the walk-around and
confirm safe transition while sitting in the cab.

I think the main problem with the Cambridge busway was that the tracks might
have been too far gone - decades of sand trains followed by 20 years of
foliage. Once you're having to renew the formation anyway that gets
expensive whatever you're going to do with them (see the Ashington, Blythe
and Tyne project).

Also it appears to be a high-floor vehicle (3 steps up, at 6:55 in the
video) which is troublesome from an accessibility perspective. But you
could probably make it like a low floor tram with low-height boarding in the
middle and bogies at each end.

On costs, it does mean you need a fleet of special vehicles, whereas the
busway guidewheels can be bolted to more or less any bus for cheap(ish). So it
moves costs from infrastructure onto the vehicles. If you have a small
fleet that's fine, if every bus is going to become guided that gets
expensive (and adds compromises - would they make these in double decker
versions?)

Would be interesting if there was a cheap modification kit for conventional
buses, but the addition of the 'snout' suggests substantial modification of
the base Toyota Coaster.

Ah, wikipedia says the rear tyres are used for drive:

"Based on a Toyota Motor Corporation microbus Coaster (fourth-generation
XZB70 model, minor change model released in June 2018), Hino Engineering
Annex reinforced the chassis and frame, modified the suspension, Tokyo
Tokushu Shabo converted it into a one-man bus and made the interior
fireproof, while NICHIJO was responsible for installing the rail-road
equipment . [ 1 ] [ 2 ]

The vehicle is based on the coaster car body, and the interior is equipped
with seats with seat belts and a grab bar, as well as a button to stop the
vehicle like a regular route bus . The passenger seat next to the driver's
seat is used for operation assistance and wheel mode change, so passengers
cannot use it . [ 4 ] The vehicle is equipped with a ticket issuing machine
and a fare box to prove the boarding station, but a change machine is not
installed due to space restrictions . [ 4 ] In addition, the floor is lower
than a normal diesel car and the width of the car is smaller, so the steps
are deployed when boarding and disembarking to reduce the gap with the
platform. The front wheels used in train mode are stored in the bonnet,
making it 1.07 meters longer than the original coaster . [ 8 ] The rubber
tires of the bus are used for driving in bus mode, both front and rear, like
a normal bus, and in train mode, the front tires are raised because the iron
wheels move along the rails, so no steering is required. The rear tires are
used as drive wheels in train mode as well , transmitting propulsion force
on the rails. There is also a railway wheel behind the rear tire, but this
is a guide to prevent the vehicle from falling off the rails and has no
propulsive power."

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%98%BF%E4%BD%90%E6%B5%B7%E5%B2%B8%E9%89%84%E9%81%93DMV93%E5%BD%A2%E6%B0%97%E5%8B%95%E8%BB%8A
via Google Translate.

Theo
Clive Page
2025-02-03 11:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
Also for the Luton - Dunstable guided busway, where something like 80
million was spent on taking up the rail track and replacing it with the
guided bus infrastructure.
--
Clive Page
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-03 12:02:55 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 11:50:12 +0000
Post by Clive Page
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines
than
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would
be
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
Also for the Luton - Dunstable guided busway, where something like 80
million was spent on taking up the rail track and replacing it with the
guided bus infrastructure.
More than that - I remember a final figure of 200m being quoted including
costs of disputes with a contractor. An absolutely absurd figure to replace
a railway with a 2nd rate substitute.
Roland Perry
2025-02-03 17:41:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
--
Roland Perry
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-03 18:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power continued
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would be
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
You couldn't think about rail infrastructure refurbishment
and renovation.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-04 08:34:28 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 17:41:54 +0000
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power
continued
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would
be
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Roland Perry
2025-02-04 08:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 17:41:54 +0000
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 10:54:19 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
I guess the Cape gauge tracks help. I wasn’t sure whether power
continued
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
to be transmitted via the rear rubber tyres, with the rail wheels just
providing guidance, or if they transmitted the power as well? The former,
I think. That would be why the front lifts more than the back when running
on the track.
AFAIK most road-rail vehicles apart from diggers tend to use the non steering
wheels as drive wheels. The front does seem to lift up rather high, not sure
what the purpose of that is. A few inches beyond max suspension travel would
be
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
enough.
Either way, would have been a much better solution for cambridge than ripping
up the railway and putting down the guided busway with its horrendous
enviromental impact both CO2 and visual.
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
--
Roland Perry
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-04 10:09:47 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Roland Perry
2025-02-04 17:30:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2025-02-04 17:41:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Yes, that’s usually the reason for needing them.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-05 08:36:14 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
Recliner
2025-02-05 10:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which is what
happened to many other former railway formations.
Graeme Wall
2025-02-05 10:39:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which is what
happened to many other former railway formations.
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2025-02-05 11:17:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which is what
happened to many other former railway formations.
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
Two track railways need a narrower width than two-lane roads, particularly
if there are pavements, cycle lanes, etc. So there would have to be single
lane sections under or over bridges.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-05 11:45:24 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 05 Feb 2025 11:17:41 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
Two track railways need a narrower width than two-lane roads, particularly
if there are pavements, cycle lanes, etc. So there would have to be single
lane sections under or over bridges.
Looks like the busway is a never ending source of problems:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68429760
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-67641322
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2017/06/crashes-due-to-excessive-speed-on-cambr
idge-guided-busway/

Only local councilers would have been dumb enough to give the go-ahead to this
ridiculous system.
Bob
2025-02-06 07:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 05 Feb 2025 11:17:41 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
Two track railways need a narrower width than two-lane roads, particularly
if there are pavements, cycle lanes, etc. So there would have to be single
lane sections under or over bridges.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68429760
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-67641322
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2017/06/crashes-due-to-excessive-speed-on-cambr
idge-guided-busway/
Only local councilers would have been dumb enough to give the go-ahead to this
ridiculous system.
It was forced by central government. The government of the day thought
that guided buses would be a cheaper alternative to trams and wanted a
pilot project for the technology. They made funding available on the
explicit condition that it be used for a busway, so the county council
had the choice of guided bus or nothign. See the retro website
https://www.noguidedbus.com for full details.

Robin
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-06 08:13:28 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:53:22 +0100
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 05 Feb 2025 11:17:41 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge
perhaps.
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Recliner
Two track railways need a narrower width than two-lane roads, particularly
if there are pavements, cycle lanes, etc. So there would have to be single
lane sections under or over bridges.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68429760
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-67641322
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2017/06/crashes-due-to-excessive-speed-on-camb
r
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
idge-guided-busway/
Only local councilers would have been dumb enough to give the go-ahead to
this
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
ridiculous system.
It was forced by central government. The government of the day thought
that guided buses would be a cheaper alternative to trams and wanted a
pilot project for the technology. They made funding available on the
explicit condition that it be used for a busway, so the county council
had the choice of guided bus or nothign. See the retro website
https://www.noguidedbus.com for full details.
Ok, didn't know that. At least the Tories wised up in the end and east-west rail
didn't end up as a busway.
Certes
2025-02-06 13:37:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:53:22 +0100
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Wed, 05 Feb 2025 11:17:41 GMT
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge
perhaps.
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Recliner
Two track railways need a narrower width than two-lane roads, particularly
if there are pavements, cycle lanes, etc. So there would have to be single
lane sections under or over bridges.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-68429760
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-67641322
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2017/06/crashes-due-to-excessive-speed-on-camb
r
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
idge-guided-busway/
Only local councilers would have been dumb enough to give the go-ahead to
this
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
ridiculous system.
It was forced by central government. The government of the day thought
that guided buses would be a cheaper alternative to trams and wanted a
pilot project for the technology. They made funding available on the
explicit condition that it be used for a busway, so the county council
had the choice of guided bus or nothign. See the retro website
https://www.noguidedbus.com for full details.
Ok, didn't know that. At least the Tories wised up in the end and east-west rail
didn't end up as a busway.
The X5 has been running between Oxford and Cambridge for decades without
the aid of a busway. However, I am disappointed to see that, like the
railway, it no longer runs east of Bedford. I wonder how the new rail
service will compare on speed, frequency, reliability and price.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-06 15:05:16 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:37:31 +0000
Post by Certes
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Ok, didn't know that. At least the Tories wised up in the end and east-west
rail
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
didn't end up as a busway.
The X5 has been running between Oxford and Cambridge for decades without
the aid of a busway. However, I am disappointed to see that, like the
railway, it no longer runs east of Bedford. I wonder how the new rail
service will compare on speed, frequency, reliability and price.
I suspect the actual number of people who want to travel from cambridge or
bedford to oxford isn't large. The money on EW rail would have been better
spent up north, just like HS2 & Elizabeth line.
John Levine
2025-02-06 17:50:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Certes
The X5 has been running between Oxford and Cambridge for decades without
the aid of a busway. However, I am disappointed to see that, like the
railway, it no longer runs east of Bedford. I wonder how the new rail
service will compare on speed, frequency, reliability and price.
I suspect the actual number of people who want to travel from cambridge or
bedford to oxford isn't large. The money on EW rail would have been better
spent up north, just like HS2 & Elizabeth line.
I dunno. If it took less than four hours on the bus, or 2 1/2 hrs on the
expensive train, there might well be a lot more traffic.
--
Regards,
John Levine, ***@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Tweed
2025-02-06 18:44:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Levine
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Certes
The X5 has been running between Oxford and Cambridge for decades without
the aid of a busway. However, I am disappointed to see that, like the
railway, it no longer runs east of Bedford. I wonder how the new rail
service will compare on speed, frequency, reliability and price.
I suspect the actual number of people who want to travel from cambridge or
bedford to oxford isn't large. The money on EW rail would have been better
spent up north, just like HS2 & Elizabeth line.
I dunno. If it took less than four hours on the bus, or 2 1/2 hrs on the
expensive train, there might well be a lot more traffic.
It’s only 2.5 hrs currently via London by train.
John Levine
2025-02-06 19:02:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by John Levine
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Certes
The X5 has been running between Oxford and Cambridge for decades without
the aid of a busway. However, I am disappointed to see that, like the
railway, it no longer runs east of Bedford. I wonder how the new rail
service will compare on speed, frequency, reliability and price.
I suspect the actual number of people who want to travel from cambridge or
bedford to oxford isn't large. The money on EW rail would have been better
spent up north, just like HS2 & Elizabeth line.
I dunno. If it took less than four hours on the bus, or 2 1/2 hrs on the
expensive train, there might well be a lot more traffic.
It’s only 2.5 hrs currently via London by train.
We appear to be in vigorous agreement about the train times.

Cambridge to Oxford is about 90 miles by road, so I'd think a direct
train shouldn't take more than an hour and a half, with no changes.
That's fast enough to make a day trip plausible, if the fare is less
than the £85 that advance tickets cost via London.

The bus is £19 for a dayrider ticket, a cheap round trip if you don't
mind spending 8 hours on the bus in one day.
--
Regards,
John Levine, ***@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Roland Perry
2025-02-10 10:42:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Levine
Post by Tweed
Post by John Levine
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Certes
The X5 has been running between Oxford and Cambridge for decades without
the aid of a busway. However, I am disappointed to see that, like the
railway, it no longer runs east of Bedford. I wonder how the new rail
service will compare on speed, frequency, reliability and price.
I suspect the actual number of people who want to travel from cambridge or
bedford to oxford isn't large. The money on EW rail would have been better
spent up north, just like HS2 & Elizabeth line.
I dunno. If it took less than four hours on the bus, or 2 1/2 hrs on the
expensive train, there might well be a lot more traffic.
It’s only 2.5 hrs currently via London by train.
We appear to be in vigorous agreement about the train times.
Cambridge to Oxford is about 90 miles by road, so I'd think a direct
train shouldn't take more than an hour and a half, with no changes.
That's the assumption the publicity embraced about ten years ago. Since
then, they've consistently increased the end-to-end time every time new
plans are revealed.
Post by John Levine
That's fast enough to make a day trip plausible, if the fare is less
than the £85 that advance tickets cost via London.
My own potential trips would involve attending some evening event in
Oxford, so timetabling of trains leaving at about 10pm would be crucial.
Post by John Levine
The bus is £19 for a dayrider ticket, a cheap round trip if you don't
mind spending 8 hours on the bus in one day.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2025-02-06 16:18:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which is what
happened to many other former railway formations.
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
The plan for the Fareham-Gosport branch was for it to become part of a
light rail system
that linked the towns to Portsmouth via tunnelling under the harbour but
though funding was granted it was withdrawn fairly quickly possibly under
influence from the Navy who had to deepen the channel to accommodate its
new aircraft carriers.
The much watered down plan that was eventually constructed was just a road
conversion with the route available to just buses and cyclists.
So far it has operated fine despite the odd pinch point.

<https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2911462>

GH
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-06 16:37:16 UTC
Permalink
On 6 Feb 2025 16:18:23 GMT
Post by Marland
Post by Graeme Wall
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
The plan for the Fareham-Gosport branch was for it to become part of a
light rail system
that linked the towns to Portsmouth via tunnelling under the harbour but
though funding was granted it was withdrawn fairly quickly possibly under
influence from the Navy who had to deepen the channel to accommodate its
new aircraft carriers.
The much watered down plan that was eventually constructed was just a road
conversion with the route available to just buses and cyclists.
So far it has operated fine despite the odd pinch point.
<https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2911462>
Cheapskate public transport at its finest. Makes you dispair of this country.
Certes
2025-02-06 16:53:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On 6 Feb 2025 16:18:23 GMT
Post by Marland
Post by Graeme Wall
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
The plan for the Fareham-Gosport branch was for it to become part of a
light rail system
that linked the towns to Portsmouth via tunnelling under the harbour but
though funding was granted it was withdrawn fairly quickly possibly under
influence from the Navy who had to deepen the channel to accommodate its
new aircraft carriers.
The much watered down plan that was eventually constructed was just a road
conversion with the route available to just buses and cyclists.
So far it has operated fine despite the odd pinch point.
<https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2911462>
Cheapskate public transport at its finest. Makes you dispair of this country.
There seem to be three buses each way per hour under that bridge, and
six at the busiest point, so short single track sections are unlikely
to cause major congestion. A guided busway might be considered overkill.
Graeme Wall
2025-02-06 16:59:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which is what
happened to many other former railway formations.
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
The plan for the Fareham-Gosport branch was for it to become part of a
light rail system
that linked the towns to Portsmouth via tunnelling under the harbour but
though funding was granted it was withdrawn fairly quickly possibly under
influence from the Navy who had to deepen the channel to accommodate its
new aircraft carriers.
They weren't even on the drawing board then, AIUI it was the cost that
killed it.

A later version abandoned the tunnel and intended to use articulated
vehicles steered by a centrally-mounted guide wheel running in a single
tram rail. They could be driven off the guided section and act as normal
buses round Fareham and Gosport. I got a photo of the prototype in
Guildhall Square, Portsmouth.
Post by Marland
The much watered down plan that was eventually constructed was just a road
conversion with the route available to just buses and cyclists.
So far it has operated fine despite the odd pinch point.
<https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2911462>
GH
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Marland
2025-02-06 19:23:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
The plan for the Fareham-Gosport branch was for it to become part of a
light rail system
that linked the towns to Portsmouth via tunnelling under the harbour but
though funding was granted it was withdrawn fairly quickly possibly under
influence from the Navy who had to deepen the channel to accommodate its
new aircraft carriers.
They weren't even on the drawing board then,
The design that could be considered the “prototype” certainly was.
Post by Graeme Wall
AIUI it was the cost that
killed it.
Yes costs that were increasing and one of the reasons was the need to
accommodate larger warships.

Last few lines on this archived BBC report about the cancellation.

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/4481182.stm>

That was November 2005 and by then the RN had already decided its new
carriers were going to be larger and had reached the stage where several
designs had been considered but the RN finally got approval for the larger
design it wanted called the D class in during 2005 .
The CGI photos of the D class from that lead period show that what became
the QE Carriers were already on some drawing boards.
<Loading Image...>

December 2005 approval to proceed was granted to develop that design into
the QE class which took place over 2006 with the order for being placed in
summer 2007.

Not hard to surmise that someone from the MOD had a quiet word to A
Darling and told him about the need to have the channel dredged and the
light rail scheme would get very expensive.

GH
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-07 09:28:59 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:59:11 +0000
Post by Graeme Wall
A later version abandoned the tunnel and intended to use articulated
vehicles steered by a centrally-mounted guide wheel running in a single
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clermont-Ferrand_tramway

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translohr

Its shit. The Clermont system has suffered endless derailments including
quite a bad one where the vehicle hit the scenery.
Sam Wilson
2025-02-07 22:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:59:11 +0000
Post by Graeme Wall
A later version abandoned the tunnel and intended to use articulated
vehicles steered by a centrally-mounted guide wheel running in a single
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clermont-Ferrand_tramway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translohr
Its shit. The Clermont system has suffered endless derailments including
quite a bad one where the vehicle hit the scenery.
I’ve been on the Venice-Mestre one and it worked. I can’t say anything
much else about it.

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-08 07:19:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:59:11 +0000
Post by Graeme Wall
A later version abandoned the tunnel and intended to use articulated
vehicles steered by a centrally-mounted guide wheel running in a single
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clermont-Ferrand_tramway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translohr
Its shit. The Clermont system has suffered endless derailments including
quite a bad one where the vehicle hit the scenery.
I’ve been on the Venice-Mestre one and it worked. I can’t say anything
much else about it.
The Chinese ones have been closed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translohr#Systems

Regards, ULF
Roland Perry
2025-02-06 18:25:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Recliner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which
is what happened to many other former railway formations.
Tere are many pinch points on conventional roads where unguided buses
mange to pass each other safely. Ignoring the occasional low bridge perhaps.
Not as narrow, nor allowing passing at full speed.
--
Roland Perry
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-05 11:36:01 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 05 Feb 2025 10:16:40 GMT
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 17:30:32 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 08:43:11 +0000
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
The existing railway was in such a bad state it needed ripping up
anyway. And an important river bridge was replaced.
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete
guideway
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30
years
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that
use
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Roland Perry
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
Railway lines require constant maintenance too.
So does anything. But replacing rails is a lot simpler than replacing a
guideway. The only advantage the guideway has is that the buses could use
the normal roads while its being done but then you could argue why didn't
they just use them anyway and save on the 200m cost of the guideway.
Because there were many pinch-points on the route where unguided buses
couldn't pass in opposite directions safely.
Riiight. I think Perrybot needs a reboot.
No, it’s true. Otherwise you’d just turn it into a road, which is what
happened to many other former railway formations.
Wotchewtalkingboutwillis?

I was talking about the normal roads nearby, not converting the railway into
a normal road!
JMB99
2025-02-04 10:42:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
Tweed
2025-02-04 10:53:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
The remaining German Atlantic Wall installations around the Calais coast
are still in very good condition.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-04 11:26:44 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 10:53:11 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
The remaining German Atlantic Wall installations around the Calais coast
are still in very good condition.
I'd lay money on the guideway being built with the cheapest concrete they
could get away with just like most roads are built for the lowest cost rather
than longevity.
Tweed
2025-02-04 11:33:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 10:53:11 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
The remaining German Atlantic Wall installations around the Calais coast
are still in very good condition.
I'd lay money on the guideway being built with the cheapest concrete they
could get away with just like most roads are built for the lowest cost rather
than longevity.
So true. Hardly a pothole to be seen during my trip to the Calais area this
last weekend.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-04 12:02:46 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 11:33:22 -0000 (UTC)
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 10:53:11 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete
guideway
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30
years
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
The remaining German Atlantic Wall installations around the Calais coast
are still in very good condition.
I'd lay money on the guideway being built with the cheapest concrete they
could get away with just like most roads are built for the lowest cost rather
than longevity.
So true. Hardly a pothole to be seen during my trip to the Calais area this
last weekend.
Yes, French roads IME are pretty damn good. You do get the odd exceptions
where the local Marie decided roads weren't a priority - Rouen springs to
mind - but in general they are far better than the UK. But then this applies
to a lot of europe anyway.
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-04 12:14:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 11:33:22 -0000 (UTC)
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 10:53:11 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete
guideway
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30
years
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
The remaining German Atlantic Wall installations around the Calais coast
are still in very good condition.
I'd lay money on the guideway being built with the cheapest concrete they
could get away with just like most roads are built for the lowest cost rather
than longevity.
So true. Hardly a pothole to be seen during my trip to the Calais area this
last weekend.
Yes, French roads IME are pretty damn good. You do get the odd
exceptions
where the local Marie decided roads weren't a priority - Rouen springs to
mind - but in general they are far better than the UK.
We will see what happens to A motorways and N routes
after downgrading.
M***@DastardlyHQ.org
2025-02-04 14:23:51 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 12:14:09 +0000
Post by Ulf_Kutzner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Yes, French roads IME are pretty damn good. You do get the odd exceptions
where the local Marie decided roads weren't a priority - Rouen springs to
mind - but in general they are far better than the UK.
We will see what happens to A motorways and N routes
after downgrading.
What downgrading?
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-04 14:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 12:14:09 +0000
Post by Ulf_Kutzner
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Yes, French roads IME are pretty damn good. You do get the odd exceptions
where the local Marie decided roads weren't a priority - Rouen springs to
mind - but in general they are far better than the UK.
We will see what happens to A motorways and N routes
after downgrading.
What downgrading?
Not all A motorways and N routes nationales have
been downgraded but there is only 1/3 or 1/5 of
N routes nationales left after 1972 and 2006
legislative acts.

A smaller part of A motorways is concerned.
Some of you may know the Lyons city section
in cluding Fourvière tunnel.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoroute_A6_(France)#Historique
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9seau_autoroutier_fran%C3%A7ais#Liens_externes
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-04 11:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 10:53:11 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Tweed
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
The remaining German Atlantic Wall installations around the Calais coast
are still in very good condition.
I'd lay money on the guideway being built with the cheapest concrete they
could get away with just like most roads are built for the lowest cost rather
than longevity.
We have different rules here.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belastungsklasse#Klasseneinteilung

Hard shoulders are normally not made for
heavy traffic use but in many cases opened
for it nevertheless when traffic directorate
feel like not having enough lanes.
Sam Wilson
2025-02-04 22:28:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
There are still examples of Roman concrete out there!

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Recliner
2025-02-04 22:35:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
There are still examples of Roman concrete out there!
Yes, we’ve now rediscovered their superior, self-healing formula. What we
previously thought to be impurities now turn out to be the magic
ingredient:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ancient-roman-concrete-has-self-healing-capabilities/

Plus, of course, it contains none of the curse of modern concrete: rusty
rebars.
Ulf_Kutzner
2025-02-05 08:28:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by JMB99
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
Would still have cost a lot less to renew than building a concrete guideway
that will probably start to crumble like most concrete roads after 30 years
anyway particularly with heavy buses constantly driving over the same bit
all the time and the freeze-thaw of a british winter which metros that use
guideways don't have to put up with as they're usually all underground.
I think it depends on the concrete. I have been around a lot of coastal
gun sites and the experts point out how the WWII concrete is crumbling
but the WW1 concrete is often still in good condition.
There are still examples of Roman concrete out there!
Yes, we’ve now rediscovered their superior, self-healing formula. What we
previously thought to be impurities now turn out to be the magic
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ancient-roman-concrete-has-self-healing-capabilities/
Didn't read it (yet) but eggs and/or quark have/has been
known for this. Proteines.
JMB99
2025-02-03 12:53:24 UTC
Permalink
There was this 'railbus'.

https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 13:22:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Sam Wilson
2025-02-03 13:31:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
vehicles around the world:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 13:49:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>
As a child I always hankered after the Marklin model of the German
railbus. Quite pleased to find one preserved at the museum in Berlin.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Theo
2025-02-03 14:32:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>
As a child I always hankered after the Marklin model of the German
railbus. Quite pleased to find one preserved at the museum in Berlin.
There was also the Lucas Aerospace Workers' Road-Rail Bus:
https://www.bloodandcustard.com/BR-RoadRailers&RailRoaders.html

which solved the problem by having a front bogie with both rail wheels for
guidance and rubber tyres for traction.

Theo
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 15:38:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Theo
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>
As a child I always hankered after the Marklin model of the German
railbus. Quite pleased to find one preserved at the museum in Berlin.
https://www.bloodandcustard.com/BR-RoadRailers&RailRoaders.html
which solved the problem by having a front bogie with both rail wheels for
guidance and rubber tyres for traction.
Very neat idea, pity it wasn't developed further.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Marland
2025-02-03 16:59:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Theo
https://www.bloodandcustard.com/BR-RoadRailers&RailRoaders.html
which solved the problem by having a front bogie with both rail wheels for
guidance and rubber tyres for traction.
Very neat idea, pity it wasn't developed further.
Reasoning ?
I cannot see many situations where such a vehicle offers much of an
advantage especially by the date that one was done when most branch lines
were already closed.
If a bus offers enough seats to cover the traffic then run it on the road
for the whole journey
and lose the burden of having to maintain an expensive infrastructure that
once the freight that such lines once carried had ceased fell entirely on
passenger revenue. Ok railways offer a segregated so ostensibly a safer
environment but that is a luxury that may be a cost too far.
Developing a bus that can kneel to to aid passenger loading by the infirm
or child buggies etc might not be easy with rail wheels underneath ,
probably could be done but be quite complicated and expensive to maintain.
Tyres are a cost too, the section that rests on the rail will wear more
than the rest so you end up replacing tyres that have good tread either
side of the worn band which doesn’t help the economics.

GH
Davy41
2025-02-03 14:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>
As a child I always hankered after the Marklin model of the German
railbus. Quite pleased to find one preserved at the museum in Berlin.
This is what I think of as a railbus.

<https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=657169604387446&id=139645862806492&set=a.283653235072420>
--
Dave
Frodsham
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
Graeme Wall
2025-02-03 15:44:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Davy41
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>
As a child I always hankered after the Marklin model of the German
railbus. Quite pleased to find one preserved at the museum in Berlin.
This is what I think of as a railbus.
<https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=657169604387446&id=139645862806492&set=a.283653235072420>
Thanks, that's the beast I was trying to think of earlier. A little more
info at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Karrier_Ro-Railer>
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Rolf Mantel
2025-02-03 14:51:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
Despite the name it was a pure rail vehicle.
Same with the LEVs and their Pacer successors, which were also colloquially
railbuses, along with other predecssors and a whole host of similar
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railbus>
As a child I always hankered after the Marklin model of the German
railbus. Quite pleased to find one preserved at the museum in Berlin.
As a child, I regularly played with that Marklin model (one of the two
models my day had from his childhood, the other was a small steam engine).

As an adult, I was happy to be able to take a few trips with my kids on
a preserved one running regular weekend service
<http://www.krebsbachtal-bahn.de>
(plus several specials for the 25th anniversary of Verkehrsverbund
Rhein-Neckar in 2014 when the kids were 8 and 5).

Around that time, there were also regular weekend services using the
slightly larger
<https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esslinger_Triebwagen>
(engine stopped working in 2017).
Recliner
2025-02-03 16:16:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
There was this 'railbus'.
https://www.ambaile.org.uk/search/?searchQuery=railbus
The trouble is that’s no longer a bus. This one is a genuine bi-mode.
Certes
2025-02-03 12:08:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@DastardlyHQ.org
A bus with rail wheels too. Seems like a better idea to reuse old lines than
the cretinous guided bus systems with their thousands of tons of concrete,
which means it has no chance of catching on here.
http://youtu.be/B3jQykR-igg
Looks like a much better system than the guided bus, though the vehicles
need far more modification. Changeover is necessarily slow. I wonder
if they could combine it with a station stop, though obviously not while
it's playing Buckaroo.
Loading...