Jump to content

StuartT

Regulars
  • Posts

    1,246
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by StuartT

  1. But furthermore you have to be able to prove that you haven't just moved to the UK for the purpose of undertaking your education - something which is not as easy as it sounds....
  2. Because you have to go through your local authority - which in an Isle of Man Student's case is the Isle of Man Government Department of Education, not the Department of Health. What it actually means is that you are entitled to those places if you come from the IOM (unlike some UK institutions and on Island Career's advisors state), but you still have to go to your 'local authority'. Because you are resident in the Isle of Man, despite studying in the UK it means your local authority at the time of application is the IOM Govt. The end result is that Manx Nursing Students undertaking courses in the UK get worse support than both their UK compatriates (because the Dept of Education uses every little excuse to wheedle out of paying them a bursary and worse support than those student Nurses undertaking their training via the School of Nursing (which only offers ten places - many students have had several rejections by them, then gone away and been snapped up by prestigious Nurse Training universities in the UK, and gone on to perform well at university - if that option was not open to them then they would have got nowhere on the IOM!). Indeed Manx student nurses don't even get travel allowances to get to their placements! And yes, a good many of those Nurses have then come back. And now on top of the inadequate support the IOM Govt offers them (basically expecting them to do 30 hours a week working for the NHS for nothing) it now wants them to pay £2,500 every year for the pleasure! So your only option if you don't get the limited opportunities on Island is either to join the forces (if that option is open to you), become a UK resident for long enough to qualify, or invest a lot of your own money in the course (the amount which you will have to invest will soon be increasing if Mr Bell has his way)... To top it off plenty of Manx people who have had training on Island with all the support in the world then decide to bugger off elsewhere too - but there wouldn't be any financial redress for that.....
  3. Prune it from the unnessarily large road budget. You don't need new stock to run a service like that, the IMR proved it could be done with what it had. Anyway a start would be cutting the bus routes which run parralel to the railways. Funny isn't it when people talk about spending obscene amounts of money on the roads to little effect hardly anyone bats an eyelid. Mention spending it on public transport and everyone is screaming outrage at it. Regardless of what in the long run offers the best value for money. Look forward to seeing what happens when oil runs out and the Island is ill prepared to meet it.... never mind battery electric bikes, or whatever the roads will be falling apart because you haven't got the tarmaccadam to maintain them with.....
  4. My Grandfather survived the Prison Camps of the Japanese, likewise many other members of my families have been involved in numerous wars and conflict zones both in the past and recent times. One thing I know is that whilst my Grandfather would have been saddened that a teenager didn't appreciate the sacrifice that his friends made, he would have been evern more saddened and disgusted about a culture where free speach does not exist and someone can be arrested for a symbolic gesture of burning a poppy. This wasn't what they were fighting for, it was what they were fighting against - and it's happened anyway....
  5. Well the 5C is timetabled at 90-odd minutes, so a leettle over 'half an hour'. You do realise that buses move quite slowly and tend to stop a lot? Though given that the current management appears to think it a good idea to drive them as fast as possible, maybe you are Mr Longworth and I claim my £3 million and as many slightly used buses as I would like. Of course there may not even be any facilities for a 'comfort break' for drivers (or indeed passengers) when you get to the destination, so maybe you should look at return timings. In reality they probably pop into the nearest public toilets / pub / cafe as and when, but I suspect that the drivers are technically not allowed to leave their buses unattended - certainly not when there are passengers on board. Yet the IMR could run trains from Ramsey to Douglas in the 60's in an hour. Public transport on the Island would have been a lot better had they retained the West Coast Lines, especially in TT week..... Buses are innappropriate on the Island's roads, it's time to contemplate a long term significant change in transport policy.....
  6. So they should take away the bus service that takes people from where they live to where they work; and insist people use a steam-powered train that does neither? What I've suggested is a bus service to feed to and from the railway (rather than mirror it) to take people pretty much from their door to their destination. As for the motive power, what's the issue with using locomotives designed to haul faster passenger trains by people who actually knew how to design something to do a job properly and make it last for years doing the same job? The times for the trains for the Ramsey and Peel Lines could certainly compete with modern buses and that was at a time when the railways were running on a shoestring fighting to survive. In terms of a service record none of the island's buses still in the government fleet have a service record anywhere near approaching that of the second youngest steam locomotive of the IMR. So which is really more cost effective given the initial outlay upon it....my vote's with the steam locomotive. Anyway China was still largely using steam locomotive traction (and still does to an extent) for its Mainline railways. Last thing I heard they're becoming a major threat to the Western Economies and haven't experienced anywhere near the financial issues that Europe has..... Thats odd because the last time I was in China I didn't see any smoke or steam coming out of any of the trains I travelled on. In fact the one from Shanghai airport didn't even have wheels,and it was running at 290mph. I'll show them some photos of the Manx Stem Railway next time I'm there,you never know they might award us a contract to construct some steam engines for the Beijing to Shanghai line. The official end of steam traction in China was in 2002, there was still lines running with steam traction in 2005 (http://www.markusworldwide.ch/Railways/Steam/China/JiTong/JiTongMain.htm) and many industrial systems still employ steam locomotives. You obviously didn't look hard enough. But then that's a problem I've noticed you have when you read peoples posts in general.....
  7. Well, my problem with the horse trams is that they lose money, year on year and are an out-dated, albeit quaint, form of transport, rush-hour or not. Who uses them? Tourists we don't have anymore? Back in the day, they were usually full of happy, smiling holidaymakers. I haven't seen one, in years, full to capacity. So get rid. Cars (a mode of transport belonging to the 1950's and 60's - most modern cities are turning to alternative options such as tramways and railways - the Isle of Man and many of it's inhabitants are just typically behind the times as always not seeing the merits of such systems) are filled to far less capacity than horsetrams and their occupants are rarely smiling.... more like time to get rid of the motorcars particularily as providing the expensive infrastructure for the fuel wasting luxuries cost far more than any other part of the Island's expenditure. Those of you who are too lazy to walk or cycle can use a railway system once the infrastructure has been invested in.... But the reality is that there'll be no investment in a practicable railway infrastructure. Not one that services the needs of the majority. Unlike cars and, dare i say, buses. As for the steam railway, i couldn't give two hoots that it attracts 'enthusiasts' who apparently add to our economy. In real terms, it's still a money-pit. Give it over to the said 'enthusiasts' and then see how long it lasts. Same goes for the MER, the Snaefell run being the exception.... Best suggestion yet, give the whole system to the enthusiasts like StuartT and let them run it, no subsidies they have to make the fares they get cover the actual running costs. See how long they keep everything open then, I would guess that it would become a weekend railway and then, with no staff costs it might generate enough money to cover maintenance of items that cant be fixed like the very rusty cable columns you see. This may be a bit of a shock to some but we need to all get our heads around the fact that the island is skint, using reserves that will run out PDQ and then what? Cut pensions to keep an unused railway going, because its "nice to have" We really are in deep trouble and the sooner people accept that the better. So what you're actually saying is that you're in favour of increasing unemployment by getting rid of a skilled workforce to try and 'save' pensions which will inevitably get cut anyway for some other reason. And increasing unemployment stimulates the economy exactly how?.......
  8. I've been going over more than ten years and have seen it happen on a few occasions. It may be that they've clamped down now on escorts - as they should. Most patients don't need an escort unless they're struggling to mobilise, have cognitive issues or facing a piece of bad news.
  9. Electrical battery vehicles are nowhere near the stage where they can compete with tramways for running duration & speed combined, and its mainly in rail mounted transport where the best innovations in electrical traction have been made. In addition what exactly are you going to be driving these vehicles upon?...I'm curious when oil runs out how you propose to maintain the roads?.....At least rails can be cut down, welded to form reusable lengths and then the rest melted down and rerolled Nothing is affecting my cognitive abilities. At least I can consider the options other than the highly innefficient motorcar. Are you unable to read to understand the issues with battery powered technology as compared to mains fed?....
  10. So they should take away the bus service that takes people from where they live to where they work; and insist people use a steam-powered train that does neither? What I've suggested is a bus service to feed to and from the railway (rather than mirror it) to take people pretty much from their door to their destination. As for the motive power, what's the issue with using locomotives designed to haul faster passenger trains by people who actually knew how to design something to do a job properly and make it last for years doing the same job? The times for the trains for the Ramsey and Peel Lines could certainly compete with modern buses and that was at a time when the railways were running on a shoestring fighting to survive. In terms of a service record none of the island's buses still in the government fleet have a service record anywhere near approaching that of the second youngest steam locomotive of the IMR. So which is really more cost effective given the initial outlay upon it....my vote's with the steam locomotive. Anyway China was still largely using steam locomotive traction (and still does to an extent) for its Mainline railways. Last thing I heard they're becoming a major threat to the Western Economies and haven't experienced anywhere near the financial issues that Europe has.....
  11. I don't see the issue with someone who has to be with a person doing a bit of shopping in a case like you've mentioned above - Mrs Baps was unable to push a chair and therefore you came along (and saved the cost of paying for an Escort). However some people get off the plane with their friend, get the taxi to the city centre, then disappear leaving their perfectly mobile friend on their own at the hospital, then reappear at 17:00 ready for pickup having spent little or no time in the company of their friend. So it begs the question did their friend really need them there at all, or was it just a freebie trip on the NHS for the friend?.... Likewise I don't see the issue with a patient going to the city centre before or after their appointment. But I do see an issue with someone coming along as an 'escort' but spending hardly any time with the patient beyond the time they spent travelling to the city centre.....
  12. Nope quilp you just show that you're totally unaware that in general most modern disorders which are on the increase such as obesity and type two diabetes are linked to the generally sedantery lifestyle and poor diet. Having to walk a bit would do a lot of people a lot of good....
  13. Once you put the systems in place to make it work effectively you can invest more. If needs be pull the necessary revenue from the road budget. At least the money goes back into the government pocket rather than into the pockets of the greedy oil industry. If the petrol and motor companies had to put into place the infrastructure require to run their machines, then it would cost even more for petrol and cars than it currently does. As it is the whole industry freeloads off the back of the taxpayer far more than any railway system does. But car drivers won't see that because the fumes have already affected their cognitive abilities.....
  14. Well, my problem with the horse trams is that they lose money, year on year and are an out-dated, albeit quaint, form of transport, rush-hour or not. Who uses them? Tourists we don't have anymore? Back in the day, they were usually full of happy, smiling holidaymakers. I haven't seen one, in years, full to capacity. So get rid. Cars are filled to far less capacity than horsetrams and their occupants are rarely smiling.... more like time to get rid of the motorcars particularily as providing the expensive infrastructure for the fuel wasting luxuries cost far more than any other part of the Island's expenditure. Those of you who are too lazy to walk or cycle can use a railway system once the infrastructure has been invested in.... I heard they have yellow submarines in La La Land too - is it true? If you think people are going to drive a car from home for 10 mins, wait 10mins for a train, travel 30 mins on a train, hop on a horsetram, hop on a bus for 10 mins, then walk 10 mins in the pissing rain to work, then do it all in reverse with a bag of shopping at night - you need your bumps felt mate. Will never happen. Uneconomic, unrealistic, unnecessary, unnatural, unneeded and the costs are unnumerable - to save and achieve WHAT? . Getting you fat f@ckers out of your car, utilising the infrastructures already in place and saving the NHS a fortune from having to treat you because of your lack of exercise because you're so damn lazy that you can't walk a little bit. As for La La land the amount of time you spend in the car avoiding exercise probably means you're closer to being a telly tubby than I ever will be... Your problem is you're seeing things from the angle of how things are at the minute in this car obsessed society, not how I suggested they should be. More like get out of your house door the minute you see the hail and ride minibus approaching the stop outside your house, the bus takes 10 minutes to get to the station arriving at a set time to meet the train as it arrives at the station, a couple of minutes to get on board, arrive at the terminus where minibuses are waiting to take you pretty much to your office door. It's not that hard to put in place if you cut unecessary mirroring routes.
  15. Once the "alternatives" are in and running, then get rid of some parking places..... However, at the moment, people feel the need to be able to park in town. I don't live on or near a bus route, I don't live near an electric or steam railway track and I don't live near the horse tram! There is no pay or display coming in from the north, and why should I pay to park my car and then pay to get a bus into town, when I can park for 2 hours on the prom for free?? Out of town parking (at the nearest railway/tramway station) could be made inclusive with the tickets to get you into Douglas and to your destination beyond. Try to see the solutions and not the obstacles, it's not that difficult an option to resolve. Let's say hypothetically if they pulled the mirroring bus services and instead used smaller buses to feed to and from the various railway stations you'd be getting a better quality service for the same level of cost.
  16. Interesting routing suggested. How about double track Derby Castle to the Villa then loop of single track along Market Street, through new Lower Douglas development and then single track back along Prom. I heard rumour that current proposal was to finish tram at Regent Street or something though. I made personal submission to Lower Douglas Master Plan planning consultation that at least the following should be included in requirements for Lower Douglas site in plan: 1. Siting and specifications for a high quality public transport interchange and facilities, and routing of trams and buses in connection with this interchange; 2. Route of the long-proposed cycleway (between existing cycleways at Quarterbridge and on the Promenade) through North Quay, Lord Street, Middlemarch and Parade Street sites) and associated specifications; 3. Minimum and maximum number of car parking spaces to be provided in Lord Street, Parade Street and Middlemarch sites, and encouragement for co-ordinated provision. I think I'd go for that as a good routing suggestion, with a spur up to the Railway Station. Depending on the state of the cable car tracks (whether they're intact and structurally sound enough) up to the junction with Ridgeway Street it may even be possible to lift off the tarmac and run a horsetram up that way, though as the junction is missing and there's been extensive remodelling of that area in recent times there's probably a section missing between Victoria Clock and the horsetram tracks, plus some services may have severed some sections.
  17. Well, my problem with the horse trams is that they lose money, year on year and are an out-dated, albeit quaint, form of transport, rush-hour or not. Who uses them? Tourists we don't have anymore? Back in the day, they were usually full of happy, smiling holidaymakers. I haven't seen one, in years, full to capacity. So get rid. Cars (a mode of transport belonging to the 1950's and 60's - most modern cities are turning to alternative options such as tramways and railways - the Isle of Man and many of it's inhabitants are just typically behind the times as always not seeing the merits of such systems) are filled to far less capacity than horsetrams and their occupants are rarely smiling.... more like time to get rid of the motorcars particularily as providing the expensive infrastructure for the fuel wasting luxuries cost far more than any other part of the Island's expenditure. Those of you who are too lazy to walk or cycle can use a railway system once the infrastructure has been invested in....
  18. This is easily the most sensible suggestion. Hardly, it could end up costing more - it has the conversion costs, the issue of increased wear on the tarmac (exactly how long has the road surface lasted compared to the tramrails? Probably no where near as long. In addition the rails offer less rolling restance to the vehicle as a horsetram flange is far far narrower and much smoother than a car tire (plus the wheels are sprung loaded in such a way that the horse tram keeps rolling with little input from the horse once it has created the initial momentum) - therefore coupled with the fact the horse would be walking on conventional tarmac rather than the rubberised surface used between the rails converting the horsetram into a rubber tyred horse bus is going to mean increased wear and tear on the horse meaning they need to see a vet far more, and that they'll have to be retired sooner (so they will require upkeep whilst making zero revenue plus another horse to be purchased to take their place). The cheapest option would be to leave the trams as is. If they need to be separated from the traffic then lay a kerbstone each side of the double track, this allows you to tarmac either side, get rid of the parking bays and turn the useable potion of the summerland site into a park and ride. This gives you a dual carriageway down Douglas prom and gets rid of the parked cars which are the real problem on the promenade...
  19. Wear and tear increases around sections like points - at current most of the crossovers have been elminated (if you look at the sections where they were on the promyou will notice most of them don't actually connect fully to the track - it's only at each end and in the yard at Derby Castle where any substantial pointwork still exists.). I haven't got access to the books or in a position to do the research but I would hazard a guess that it was the 30's as that's when the last major set of works was done on the prom. In addition single track is more dangerous for shared use with pedestrians as it makes it less predictable to work out where the tram is coming from on which line (as you don't know which side of the loop the tram behind you will end up on - whereas with Double track it's left hand running as per the road and so more logical. Maybe at the moment there might be no motive power transmitted through the wheels but let's say if the Electric Tramway plan ever became reality.... As I've said before if you're going to put the trams in a reservation then it should be on the landside rather than the seaward one. If the route was to substantially change I'd suggest a landward reservation from Derby Castle to the Villa, then through Strand and Duke Street to the Harbour as this is where the main body of modern passenger traffic is located. Get rid of the parking bays on the prom too. We shouldn't be encouraging people to use cars, it's time to make it more convenient to use the alternatives instead.
  20. As I have pointed out the running costs increase with a single track line - which is the main part of the cost of a heritage system (suprised that people don't think money to pay peoples wages who choose not to work in an office or a pub is not money well spent - it all helps to keep the island's economy moving), and should the choice be to develop the system as an electric street tramway linking in to the MER to attempt to aleviate road traffic then there's far more costs involved to reinstate the second track than there would be if it was laid at the same time. Given that the materials already exist for a second track (if they're 'transplanatable' to the new location for the tramway) then it seems stupid to turn it into a single track system just because some 'know it all' thinks that half the track actually means half the costs which it doesn't. You also failed to recognise that single track means increased wear and tear which means even more costs to repair and replace the tracks given that they're a street tramway. As I've also pointed out railway tourism has been in more recent years type of tourism which has come closer to rivalling the TT for the number of visitors (who end up spending far more per head than your average TT visitor given that they tend to buy more memorabilia, stay in hotels rather than camp, eat out more often), now given that the Horsetrams are also approaching their centernary and are unique in the British Isles (? possibly even the world) in being an original horse drawn street tramway still running along much the same route as it did when first laid (with a small extension to reach Derby Castle from Burnt Mill Hill), they have the potential to be a big draw if marketted properly. So the chances are that the traffic receipts will increase if the 150th Anniversary is sold properly and there will be substantially more visitors wanting a ride. With regards to the mothballing of the Laxey to Ramsey line that was tried before in the years when the Island had zero economy (as the tourist trade was on its last legs and the finance sector was not established) and it lost more money to the MER than keeping the Ramsey line open. In addition a major amount of trackwork has already been done on the Laxey Ramsey section so given that you often talk about government wastage don't you think it's a bit foolhardy to suggest wasting the money spent on the track improvements on the section North of Ramsey - it would just be sat there deteriorating and the money spent would be wasted whereas at least it could be making money by operating traffic. As I've argued before the way to make the railway pay is to pull the competing bus services (and instead feed the lines with a minibus service taking a passenger vitually door to door rather than just to the nearest bus stop). It seems crazy to have two routes owned by the same department competing with each other. As the railway has the historical value and should be retained naturally the bus route should go. If you have a residents ticket then it's a lot more cost effective to use the railways and tramways as it is to use the buses. I do not underestimate the amount of money that we're short of given that I've fallen foul of government cuts myself, but at the end of the day if you were taking the attitude you are suggesting then ultimately you'd be letting elderly people die rather than eke out their existance, or scrapping any form of education not necessary for anyone working in the finance sector, cutting all major facilities (including the Villa Marina, NSC, most of the healthcare and social services), not spending money on roads as well as the railways or any other aspect of our heritage or transport system. So in short we'd become like the Channel Islands - very little real heritage left,no railways, with only the super rich able to get property (and young people renting for life) and in addition lacking any sense of identity or history. Not the kind of place most of us would want to live....
  21. That's sadly probably very true. Indeed in the 50's and 60's many of Britain's well established street tramways which were already starting to evolve into a modern infrastructure (newer trams, track reservations in the middle of Dual Carriageways, some subway running in place/planned in city centres), and the Railway infrastructure (including some electrified lines) were either closed (or in the case of a few electrified lines de-electrified) at the behest of senior officials in the government and town councils. Many of these same officials held shares in the petrol industry and as they already owned cars were not the ones most effected by the unpopular decisions they made..... Now we've been left with a situation where there is few alternatives left to the internal combustion engine and the massive cost required to reinstate infrastructure which ironically (in the case of Britain's Street Tramways) still remains beneath the streets but will require massive replacement works due to underuse. All to make some long dead idiots very rich....
  22. Yes my whole experience of the civil service left a nasty taste in the mouth - perfectly prepared to bring temps back time and time again to cover short term contracts, but when the same temps applied for permanent jobs they didn't get them......
  23. Why should it be single track? Double would work out far more cost effective in the long run because single track line needs more staff to control the passing places and oversee the staff exchange...plus it reduces the wear and tear on the track (you don't want to be digging it up every so often because the rails have worn down twice as quickly) and why on earth put it on the walkway?... instead move it over to the Land side of the prom in a reserved trackway and push cars out to the seaward side. If you're cramped for space then get rid of the parking bays....
  24. Maybe if they pulled the unecessary competing bus services and instead fed the railway line using the buses it might pay......
  25. We have always had to make choices on this island (even when there were many toursists about) as to what was economically viable in terms of 'tourism' etc. We have lost a grandeous pier in Douglas, a railyway line to Peel and the Douglas head railway etc. etc. and all in the heady days of tourism because they were not viable. Sorry but that's crap AT... the IOMRLy lines carried a massive amount of traffic in the 1950's equal to any UK mainline... Tourism was starting to die in the 60's but they battled on until 1968/9, and the infrastructure was still in place in the mid 70's when the Railway company was liquidated and the government oversaw the ripping up of the tracks to Peel and Ramsey...By then tourism was all but dead...It's unlikely the railways could have battled on for as long as they did with reduced tourist traffic unless they'd made such a significant earning in the haylcon days of the 50's to sustain them through the lean years.... Ironically in more recent times the tourist figures which show the closest rivalry to the TT was those for the events spanning the years 1993 - 1999 when the various railway lines had their centenaries - and enthusiasts kept coming back for each respective event. Then along came the Howard regime, got rid of much of what attracted the enthusiasts (eg some of the staff who organised the events, proper special events, more pruning of Douglas station yard to build a bus depot, the open door policy), and the visitors stopped coming. I'm not pretending that maybe the pudding was slightly over egged in the 6 years of centenaries, but then as we're approaching the 150th Anniversary of the Railway line to Peel (2023) and the year after (2024) there's potential that if sold right the railways could be a major source of income... oh and there was a railway on Ramsey pier too and the 'Planet' locomotive and coach, plus some trucks still exist (not so sure about the Wickham railcar I think that disappeared)....perhaps if some work was done the cost could be recouped from the enthusiasts?....
×
×
  • Create New...