| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Time to reconsider the west london tram scheme | |
| Posted by: | Chris Veasey | |
| Date/Time: | 08/08/10 17:45:00 |
| Which colleagues do you mean? Re Nottingham, the tramway goes right out of the city to the freestanding town of Hucknall. Of course a taxi driver would be entirely disinterested and unprejudiced on this topic, wouldn't they? And as we all know, taxidrivers know everything about everything and never stop telling their passengers so! (BTW you may also wish to know that in Nottingham as in most UK towns and sities there is a perpetual life-and-death battle between the two breeds of taxi - hail-and-ride and private hire, corresponding to London black cabs vs minicabs - I've found myself involved as a transport conmsultant on occasions including in Nottingham). Re 'obstruction on the cables' as I said modern trolleybuses can run miles on auxiliary battery power if necessary. Do you know of any electric tramways where your alleged schoolkid shoe-thowing craze is a problem? - so why should it be differenmt for electric trolleys? You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel to dredge up spurious objections to a trolleybuses aren't you? Trolleywires on Uxbridge Road wouldn't be a 'maze'. But if your visual sensitivities are far greater than your other senses, including noise, then that's your preference and your choice. Others may take a different view. FYI Yorkshire gets far less govt funding per head of population than London or Scotland. Ironically Leeds looks set to be the first UK city to introduce a modern trolleybus system (as the sensible cost-effective alternative to an unaffordable tramway system), provided the Westminster govt doesn't stop the funding to help pay for London Xrail. |