re-painting French-style windows

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

This turns out not to be the case.
Taxes on private motorists cover more than the entire transport network. Not just the roads.
Andy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Modern steam engines do not have to stop for water. They can be oil fuelled http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Steam_Engines
A steam hybrid car: http://www.cleanpowertech.co.uk/content/technology/vehicles.asp
Maglev trains are the answer. The maintenance cost are negligible. Liverpool-Manchester is earmarked as the first inter-city Maglev in the UK. Historical as it was the world's first passenger railway in 1829.
Differing systems are under test - 3 in the USA alone. The technology has not settled. Many have all the equipment in the train, others have some in the track. Many are planned around the world. Once settled, standard track and cars can be built in bulk lowering costs. In the UK the main problem is land costs as they require new track. Some can be cheaply elevated on top of existing tracks.
Maglevs. Here they are. They are used in Germany, China and Japan, and one was used for 12 years in Birmingham:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev_(transport)
There have been rumblings of installing a Maglev train between Manchester and Liverpool John Lennon airports running on the Manchester Ship Canal wall. Airport to airport should take 10 minutes or less. This may merge the two airports, with check-in at any airport and take the Maglev to the airport the plane takes off. Any runway expansion would be at Liverpool over the wide estuary with no noise nuisance - new runways can go into the river, aligned for minimum noise nuisance. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1040991_new_rocket_to_liverpool__in_10_minutes
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How many more looney sites have you found?

That's the kiss of death, then if you think it's any good.
--
*Nostalgia isn't what is used to be.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He must have read a good site for a change.. maglev is the obvious solution if superconductors are available.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pretty well everything he recommends involves lots of 'ifs'.
--
*Oh, what a tangled website we weave when first we practice *

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Please eff off you are a plantpot.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Please eff off you are a plantpot.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:31:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Hmm, I thought some of the larger ones had automatic stokers - I'm sure that could be adapted for smaller engines, too these days.

The curse of a small crowded island, I suppose - over here it seems to be a very efficient way of getting goods from A to B. It's not uncommon to see trains with three engines and over 200 wagons (and there are no overhead bridges on a lot of routes, so shipping containers stacked one atop the other are a frequent sight).
Some of the fuel consumption figures claimed by the freight companies are pretty impressive - presumably because steel-on-steel is low friction, and these are from routes with no stop-starting and flat gradient all the way.
cheers
Jules
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The UK is not crowded. Only 7.5% of the land mass is settled. The UK has land surplus.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:36:23 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote:

Land surplus that's at all useful / practical for rail use?
Yes, 'crowded' is very much a local thing indeed - but given the UK's existing land use, infrastructure and geology there's not a lot of space for a sensible* rail network.
* I very much liked the network, TBH - but it's hardly the best model if you need to get something from A to B in a hurry and at low cost :)
cheers
Jules
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jules wrote:

Well juts compare overall population density of ENGLAND rather than the UK with almost anywhere in the world..its VERY high.
Drivel likes his stats, but a quick look at google earth will tell you that most of scotland is empty, and why.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are confused indeed.

Again.............The UK is not crowded. Only 7.5% of the land mass is settled. The UK has land surplus. Not only that 5% of that is gardens and parks and open spaces inside the urban footprint. So only 2/5% is paved. England is not overcrowded at all. The Home counties are underpopulated. England is not a separate entity as the country is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It says on your passport.
That is pretty clear. That means the UK is not crowded. Of course it is not crowded to Mars.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is empty because most of it is owned by a few people. England is not densely populated at all. The Home Counties are underpopulated. Only 7.5% of the UK is settled with 5% parks and gardens.
Land Value Tax will stop most of it and even up society. http//www.landvaluetax.org Read and understand it. No change to the business system, ownership, nothing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:46:27 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote:

I think it's close on 400 people per sqkm these days, isn't it? That seems pretty high (it's 10 per sqkm here)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jules wrote:

Yup
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2967374/England-is-most-crowded-country-in-Europe.html
3rd most crowded country in teh world, after Bangladesh and S Korea.
Whuch goes nicely with Drivel's 'not crowded at all'
Wales and Scotland, are by contrast, pretty empty. Send all the Scots back, I say. Well Gordon at least. And Campbell.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:18:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

yes, and the less-crowded bits are doubtless the ones where you couldn't easily put any rail network through, anyway.

... and they get a shitty rail service, too :-)
(not that I can talk - I think my nearest passenger service is three hours' drive away)
cheers
Jules
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2967374/England-is-most-crowded-country-in-Europe.html
England is NOT a country. It is not an independent sovereign state. We live the in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Relevant Facts.............................
The UK has a land surplus.
We are living in crowded and dense cities, not a crowded and urbanised country
Contrary to popular belief, the UK has approximately only 7.5% of its land settled upon. The Urban plot of 4 million acres is only 6.6%. The UK actually has a surplus of land. Despite claims of concreting over the South East of England, only 7.1% is settled with the Home Counties being underpopulated. The North West of England is densest with 9.9% settled.
The value of the land accounts for 2/3 of the average house price.
Over 90% of the population now live in urbanised areas, the second highest percentage in Europe, leaving the countryside virtually empty, because of the draconian Town & Country Planning act. This crams near 55 million people into around 7% of the land, which is only 4.2 million acres out of a UK total of 60 million acres. 60 million people own just 6% of the land.
The UK has 60 million acres of land in total
70% of the land is owned by 1% of the population.
Just 6,000 or so landowners - mostly aristocrats, but also large institutions and the Crown - own about 40 million acres, two thirds of the UK.
Britain's top 20 landowning families have bought or inherited an area big enough to swallow up the entire counties of Kent, Essex and Bedfordshire, with more to spare.
Big landowners measure their holdings by the square mile; the average Briton living in a privately owned property has to exist on 340 square yards.
Each home pays 550/ann. on average in council tax while each landowning home receives 12,169/ann. in subsidies. The poor subsidising the super rich. In Ireland where land redistribution occurred, there is no council tax.
A building plot, the land, now constitutes between half to two- thirds of the cost of a new house.
60 million people live in 24 million "dwellings".
These 24 million dwellings sit on approx 4.4 million acres (7.7% of the land).
Of the 24 million dwellings, 11% owned by private landlords and 65% privately owned.
19 million privately owned homes, inc gardens, sit on 5.8% of the land.
Average dwelling has 2.4 people in it.
77% of the population of 60 million (projected to be more in new census) live on only 5.8% of the land, about 3.5 million acres (total 60 million).
Agriculture only accounts for 3% of the economy.
Average density of people on one residential acre is 12 to 13.
10.9 million homes carries a mortgage of some kind.
Average value of an acre of development land is 404,000. High in south east of 704,154, low in north east of 226,624. London is in a category of its own.
Of the world's 15 most expensive prime commercial property locations, five are in England.
London's West End occupation costs of 98 per square foot are the most expensive in the world. They are around 40 per cent more than any other city in the world, and double that of Paris, the next most expensive European city.
Prime site occupation costs in Manchester and Leeds are around 40 percent more than mid-town Manhattan.
Reservations of land have been placed by builders to a value of 37 billion to build the 3-4 million homes required. The land reserved is almost wholly owned by aristocrats; with none of it on the land registry. This land is coming out of subsidised rural estates, land held by off-shore trusts and companies and effectively untaxed.
Tony Blair ejected from the House of Lords 66 hereditary peers, who between them owned the equivalent of 4.5 average sized English counties.
The averaged sized new home in the UK is a paltry 76 square metres, while in Germany with a similar population density new homes are 109 square metres, nearly half as much again in size. In Australia the average sized new home is 205.7 square metres, in the Netherlands 115 square metres and in Denmark 137 square metres. Danish rooms are twice as big as the hutches now on offer in the United Kingdom. In Japan, a country once notorious for small homes, the average sized new home is now 140 square metres.
The averaged size living room in the UK is a miniscule 13 foot by 15 foot; a room which has to function as TV room, children's play room, entertainment room and relaxation room. If the averaged sized man stands in the middle of a typical British living room and stretched out an arm he will hit either a wall or ceiling. British TV has many programmes dedicated to giving a larger feel to a room by careful choice of furnishing and colour co-ordination. People attempt to create an impression of space in undersized homes.
The housing charity, Shelter, estimate 500,000 households are officially overcrowded.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:54:02 +0100, Doctor Drivel wrote:

Really? I'm not sure there's that much of it that isn't at least woodland or farmed. Not having buildings on it doesn't mean that it isn't being used for something - which in turn makes it difficult to just throw a sensible rail network through it all.
That was some interesting reading in your post, however. Those land price figures are just plain scary :-( (I think it works out at about £4000 per acre where I live for building land, although it'll obviously be more nearer to town)
cheers
J.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes the figures were given. Only 7.5% of the UK is settled. What didn't you understand about them?

4,000 an acre for building land. In your dreams!!!! That is what agricultural land goes for. An acre will go for at least 500,000.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.