search the site
 daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Liverpool Metro Area

Liverpool Metro Area 'Scouse Scrapers for both sides of the Mersey



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old Yesterday, 10:31 PM   #6261
UnterDenLinden
Registered User
 
UnterDenLinden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 316
Likes (Received): 192

Martin, you need to relax.

Just after you've replied to that post about Neville Shute.
UnterDenLinden no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old Yesterday, 10:46 PM   #6262
ennisc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 11
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
New York has some 80 miles of well-populated Long Island to its 'coastal' side. We have the Wirral peninsular. New York has rail and road routes through its centre linking New England with the central USA. We have routes linking Cheshire to Lancashire. New York is the prime eastern sea port for the largest economy on earth. Liverpool is on the opposite side of the country from our main trading partners (not for long though ). So New York isn't as poor as you think it is. Even so, the city faced almost terminal decline not that long ago - far worse than what Liverpool experienced.

Liverpool to Manchester electrification occurred for the reason that most electrifications occur - because of the density of traffic. I suppose you will argue that electrification to Wigan was for the benefit of Greater Manchester but earlier electrifications such as Birkenhead to Chester oddly left Manchester out.

The government did give Liverpool the Loop (and the Link as well) with 75% government grants and a follow up of electrification and new stations. As for giving these other cities what they've never had - tell me that when Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds opens an underground rail system.
New York faced terminal decline?! When?
ennisc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:51 PM   #6263
ennisc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 11
Likes (Received): 3

An airport railway station and something serving the Norris Green/Clubmoor area would in my view complete Merseyrail.
__________________

mmcd liked this post
ennisc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 11:23 PM   #6264
Eastisleast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Forsaken City
Posts: 2,483
Likes (Received): 464

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElectroSoldier View Post
A train guard is a safety critical roll. His one and only job is to make sure passengers and the train is safe.
The companies keep telling the guards and drivers that there is no problem as the guards will not lose their jobs, they will be found other rolls in the company. But thats not what the problem is, the problem is the roll is a safety critical one.

Drivers and guards are concerned about peoples safety and the company tells them its ok your jobs will be safe. And thats why it keeps going nowhere.
I think the issue is about money and job protection.

Unions are self interested, not altruistic.
Eastisleast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:11 AM   #6265
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,089
Likes (Received): 763

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
Tom,

I said that it might be advisable to have two or even three additional members of staff on trains in certain situations. For example, late night weekend trains. On other day time services, one man in the drivers cab should suffice. However, removing the guard's role and replacing it with on train staff, allows that flexibility.

London underground trains can carry close on 1000 passengers without a second member of staff on the train. Actually, the more crowded a train is, the less effective that second person becomes.

I agree that, in the rare event of a crash or derailment or terrorist incident a second person would be of value but is that a good use of resources? It would be rather like having a hospital that specialised in heart transplants. It might save lives in that way but would be turning away a huge number of people with less serious but debilitating illnesses. It is all down to risk assessment - a technique that you will, no doubt, be familiar with.

When major events do occur, the important factor is getting the emergency services there as soon as possible. That can be done by the driver or if the driver is incapacitated, by passengers using mobile phones. Remember also that the new trains will have remotely monitored CCTV.

The reason commuter railways make losses is due to the fact that their passenger loads vary considerably over the course of a day but the rolling stock and staffing has to accommodate the peak. Merseyrail runs off peak frequencies of 15 minutes on all but the Ellesmere Port branch - which I hardly think is sub-optimum.
I work in an industry were there's a very high premium paid for safety and it's as if there are never too many safety critical staff. I don't believe a guard's/ticket-inspector's wage per train compared to several floating on-train staff per route will be that great a difference.... but possibly will leave passengers at risk for parts of their journeys.

Therefore, I don't agree that this is good use of resources.... I think it's a marginal saving (No saving at all if all staff are to be retained) with a measurable decrease in safety (perceived and real).
Many airports have very expensive dedicated fire stations with fire engines and crews who will probably never attend a real fire in their entire careers... but that's just the way it has to be.... safety cannot be compromised. As far as trains having collisions/fires/derailment...... I think it is essential that trained staff are at hand to manage safe evacuation or incident control if necessary.... not to mention the general normal operation of the train and presence in the carriages.

I don't believe 15 min frequencies is optimal for journey times to town of approx 15-17 mins from hunts cross and Kirkby. Of course that could be much different for loop lines serving a far greater catchment, with all stations acting as through stations And with ensuing bemefits due to resultant increased frequency and direct route options.... but it's not a great frequency as it is.
Tom Hughes está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:38 AM   #6266
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,089
Likes (Received): 763

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastisleast View Post
I think the issue is about money and job protection.

Unions are self interested, not altruistic.
I think you need to look up the definition of altruism and the role of trade unions.

Generally, unions are powerless in the UK nowadays... this action is a relative rarity.

In the Oil and gas industries for instance, companies have been able to turn back terms and conditions of employment decades, with barely a whimper of dissent in the British sector.... whereas the Scandies with their stronger unions and employment laws have been able to sustain their conditions/salaries. If you think unions are self serving then perhaps you need to sample employers who can dictate without fear of protest in many industries and work places to bring us gems like zero hour contracts etc.
__________________

Toadboy liked this post
Tom Hughes está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:52 AM   #6267
ElectroSoldier
Registered User
 
ElectroSoldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,672
Likes (Received): 249

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
I was referring to hard working people who pay an awful lot of money to use Merseyrail. There aren't any planned job losses when the new trains come in to being in 3 yes 3 years time and of course people can strike if they are treated poorly or their rights are reduced or compromised however the thin excuse of passenger safety is just not factually correct. The DLR has no drivers or guards and transports hundreds of thousands of passengers everyday in CW with no problems so the safety excuse it flawed.

The real issue is (as with other industries) is new technology has since the industrial revolution replaced people's jobs and resulted in less people being needed. These guards will not lose their jobs and are safe and should just accept the new trains and be happy of the investment and improvements for passengers.
No the safety excuse is not flawed at all.
The DLR is a closed network that does not have the same problems and safety issues present on other networks like Merseyrail.

You are no doubt like many others blind to the facts because it has caused you some small inconvenience. Which is not good, however the issue at stake is regarding you as a user and your personal safety while using the trains.
ElectroSoldier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:52 AM   #6268
Toadboy
Registered User
 
Toadboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Liverpool, in the North of England but not of it
Posts: 13,997
Likes (Received): 4038

Quote:
Originally Posted by ennisc View Post
An airport railway station and something serving the Norris Green/Clubmoor area would in my view complete Merseyrail.
Kurt you tit, call it a day.
__________________
Assiduous

Centurio liked this post
Toadboy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 01:29 AM   #6269
ElectroSoldier
Registered User
 
ElectroSoldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,672
Likes (Received): 249

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
Tom,

I said that it might be advisable to have two or even three additional members of staff on trains in certain situations. For example, late night weekend trains. On other day time services, one man in the drivers cab should suffice. However, removing the guard's role and replacing it with on train staff, allows that flexibility.

London underground trains can carry close on 1000 passengers without a second member of staff on the train. Actually, the more crowded a train is, the less effective that second person becomes.

I agree that, in the rare event of a crash or derailment or terrorist incident a second person would be of value but is that a good use of resources? It would be rather like having a hospital that specialised in heart transplants. It might save lives in that way but would be turning away a huge number of people with less serious but debilitating illnesses. It is all down to risk assessment - a technique that you will, no doubt, be familiar with.

When major events do occur, the important factor is getting the emergency services there as soon as possible. That can be done by the driver or if the driver is incapacitated, by passengers using mobile phones. Remember also that the new trains will have remotely monitored CCTV.

The reason commuter railways make losses is due to the fact that their passenger loads vary considerably over the course of a day but the rolling stock and staffing has to accommodate the peak. Merseyrail runs off peak frequencies of 15 minutes on all but the Ellesmere Port branch - which I hardly think is sub-optimum.
An additional members off staff on a train...
But that isnt what is on offer is it Martin?
Its all well and good talking about it here but while we are talking about this as a matter of the facts, and given that this is in your own words a cost cutting excerise then does it seem likely in even the slightest degree that spending more money on more staff will ever actually happen? And there has never been any mention of that happening at all anyway.

London Underground trains and the stations are different, they are run differently (ie train movements) they are staffed differently too AND there is no talk about replacing train guards with a system that is in place on the Tube.

Find out how and why that SYSTEM of people on the Tube works for the Tube Martin!!!
And by SYSTEM I mean there is more than one person involved in seemingly simple tasks like closing doors and starting a train.
ElectroSoldier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:31 AM   #6270
Wavertreelad
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 889
Likes (Received): 321

The dispute sounds very much like the many "who does what disputes" of the 1960's and 1970's which did so much damage to the image of Britain. The union is right to highlight the safety issue, but as sadly the events of week prove, it is impossible to have total safety at all times. The RMT need to realise this fact and move on, and accept that the world has moved on in the last 40 to 50 years. The technology now exists to relieve some of the guards traditional duties, but that does not necessarily mean they are redundant. The British rail network is the safest in the world and that is because of the attention paid to safety, and I see no reason why RMT members should not continue to provide that safety role on the Merseyrail network, but it has to be accepted that the role will change.
Wavertreelad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 10:35 AM   #6271
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,089
Likes (Received): 763

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavertreelad View Post
The dispute sounds very much like the many "who does what disputes" of the 1960's and 1970's which did so much damage to the image of Britain. The union is right to highlight the safety issue, but as sadly the events of week prove, it is impossible to have total safety at all times. The RMT need to realise this fact and move on, and accept that the world has moved on in the last 40 to 50 years. The technology now exists to relieve some of the guards traditional duties, but that does not necessarily mean they are redundant. The British rail network is the safest in the world and that is because of the attention paid to safety, and I see no reason why RMT members should not continue to provide that safety role on the Merseyrail network, but it has to be accepted that the role will change.
I'm not sure about "image".... we're talking about a country that then had the technological and manufacturing prowess to create Concorde..... we now barely have or own any of our traditional major industries....... no doubt boiyed by an establishment that preferred to grasp post industrialism to rid us all of those pesky unions.

I think there is a world of difference between the general oft-quoted demarcation disputes of the 60's and best practice regarding safety ...... and it's important to remember that many of those disputes helped nurture and create a far greater regard and legislation for general health and safety in some industries where safety records were quite frankly abysmal..Make no mistake, in many instances these changes had to be forced on cost cutting employers.

A driver cannot possibly monitor carriages while he's driving.... and if he's incapacitated in a collision or other incident then several hundred passengers are left without any direct trained personnel in a potentially very dangerous environment that may not be easily accessible to emergency services. It's fundamental that one trained person will never be able to cover these risks as well as two.... and in terms of general roles it is also accepted that there is an operational role and a preference for staff to be present, and accessible within the carriages on a mass transit system like Merseyrail.
Tom Hughes está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:11 AM   #6272
Fat Ed
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 40
Likes (Received): 15

There aren't enough journeys on the Merseyrail network, especially in peak times. Every 15 minutes? It's embarrassingly slow for a modern city and if it increased, many more people would be keen to use the train. Even every ten minutes would be a big improvement. This would need more drivers of course and therefore less jobs would be lost, some of those guards could be retrained.

I know increased capacity with the new trains would alleviate the congestion, but it's besides the point really. I think people wouldn't be as upset with standing up if they knew that they were more likely to be able to get to work on time if they were running late. For example, a journey from Aintree to town takes 20 minutes, but if you just miss a train in the morning, it then takes you 35 minutes. Vital margins on the morning commute. These are some of the reasons that encourage people to buy cars so often and this, as we have said before increases pollution and causes congestion on the roads.
__________________

mmcd liked this post
Fat Ed no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:35 AM   #6273
notlob.divad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 435
Likes (Received): 174

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Ed View Post
There aren't enough journeys on the Merseyrail network, especially in peak times. Every 15 minutes? It's embarrassingly slow for a modern city and if it increased, many more people would be keen to use the train. For example, a journey from Aintree to town takes 20 minutes, but if you just miss a train in the morning, it then takes you 35 minutes. Vital margins on the morning commute. These are some of the reasons that encourage people to buy cars so often and this, as we have said before increases pollution and causes congestion on the roads.
It is still significantly better than the city lines. 20 minute journey is Prescot. If you miss the train by seconds you are waiting for the next approximately 30 minutes later. People will obviously say, don't miss the train, fine, but given people are likely to have a car anyway these days, that attitude does nothing to help get people onto sustainable public transport.

I am with you on the whole, increased frequency of rail services directly drives an increase in usage more than any other factor. I just feel Merseytravel should focus on the un served and under served areas of the city region before they tweek with the adequately served areas of the city.
notlob.divad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:09 PM   #6274
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,089
Likes (Received): 763

Quote:
Originally Posted by notlob.divad View Post
It is still significantly better than the city lines. 20 minute journey is Prescot. If you miss the train by seconds you are waiting for the next approximately 30 minutes later. People will obviously say, don't miss the train, fine, but given people are likely to have a car anyway these days, that attitude does nothing to help get people onto sustainable public transport.

I am with you on the whole, increased frequency of rail services directly drives an increase in usage more than any other factor. I just feel Merseytravel should focus on the un served and under served areas of the city region before they tweek with the adequately served areas of the city.
This is why I described the system as dysfunctional and token in previous posts. The coverage for Liverpool is poor. It hugs the river to give an unpopulated watery catchment for much of its length and 15 mins frequency is a far from ideal combination. If there was the northern and southern loops then frequencies would be doubled for the same number of trains, and direct route options increased dramatically to provide far greater coverage and enticement to leave your car at home.... and less or no need to subsidise.
Tom Hughes está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

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

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu