| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? 13:11 - Jul 19 with 1766 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
We have known for decades that climate change is happening. We used to have rails that were about 15m long, with gaps between them to allow for expansion in the heat. Then perhaps 30-ish years ago, around the time when we became more aware of global warming, Railtrack started laying huge long rails with no expansion slots. Other countries are far hotter than us, and they don't seem to suffer as badly with railway tracks buckling. Anyone work for a rail company who knows why? |  |
| |  |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:15 - Jul 19 with 1728 views | JakeITFC |
I imagine it's our swing from extreme high to extreme low that makes it tricky, but I guess places like Canada can make that work (with even more extremes in either direction). |  | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:15 - Jul 19 with 1716 views | unbelievablue |
We've known for decades, but most models didn't predict these types of temperatures today - it was further down the line. And when things are a way off, policy makers and budget holders tend to kick the can.
And, to be frank, a cost/benefit analysis probably calls for way more days like this a year for it to be worth it. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:19 - Jul 19 with 1677 views | STYG |
Like everything it'll be money.
Nobody in any position of authority, who is paid mega bucks, is likely to care about how much profit there will be in 25 years time when they are long gone and drawing their pension.
Same reason politicians now say whatever they need to say to survive the next election. None of those elected ever come out and say it'll be years of paying more tax to make a better future for us all. It's say whatever keeps you in a job short term.
Can't be any different with rail. They'd have to invest huge sums of money in technology that they may not even need now (or potentially ever) and get that signed off just to do the right thing.
No doubt other countries can argue the economics or more expensive materials that will stay intact and not need to be replaced as often. Here, if this weather hasn't occurred yet, then it'll just be seen as an unnecessary expense.
Look at Grenfell. Sadly there were costlier options that would have been infinitely safer but presumably they went with something cheaper on the basis of a thing that would never actually happen. I can't see any major organisation having any other outlook sadly.
I guess you can look at it like Yeovil spending £3m they don't have (and hindering their chances of promotion) to make Huish Park all seater, when they don't need to yet, just because it'll be cheaper now than if they ever do get back into the league. It would never happen. [Post edited 19 Jul 2022 13:27]
|  | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:29 - Jul 19 with 1649 views | itfcjoe |
We also have to deal with cold and wet climates, so like the tarmac the deisgns are done to cover 99% of the time and not 1% of the time |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:31 - Jul 19 with 1621 views | chicoazul |
The track is fine like 98% of the time. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:31 - Jul 19 with 1628 views | STYG |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:29 - Jul 19 by itfcjoe |
We also have to deal with cold and wet climates, so like the tarmac the deisgns are done to cover 99% of the time and not 1% of the time |
It'll be interesting to see how we adapt.
Like with schools and businesses having a legal cold temperature where you don't have to attend but none for heat, as you say it's the 99% of the time.
Now we move towards the inevitable I am sure it'll still be geared towards 95% cold instead and not much will change. But at some point in the future they'll be enough heat delays for someone to be hit in the pocket. Only when it becomes financially viable to make change for these people will we see it. | | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:37 - Jul 19 with 1587 views | ghostofescobar |
Money. Cheaper to produce the rails in longer lengths. Other countries are also more used to extremes in temps, so cope better. It's a bit like us grinding to a halt with a couple of cm of snow in winter, whereas the Scandi countries, as an example, have feet of the stuff and just carry on. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:42 - Jul 19 with 1570 views | clive_baker |
Probably the same reason we don't have countless snow ploughs, because the cost of purchasing, maintaining, housing and operating far outweighs the very occasional times we need them. It all comes down to cost and a cost vs benefit equation.
I think moving forward the benefit side of that equation in terms of excessive heat is (sadly) going to start increasing as days like this become more commonplace. The records temperatures today beat records from yesterday, and they only beat records from 2018. I think 8 of the 10 hottest days on record are within the past 20 years, it's a changing climate and those that deny that fact are numpties.
I do think there are smaller and easier measures that can be brought in though, without investing billions in infrastructure. Take schools, there's a minimum class room temperature (16 degrees I think) at which point kids would be sent home eg. if heating wasn't effective or it broke. To my knowledge there's no such maximum, but with what we're seeing now these temperatures tip from those balmy summer days to dangerous.
Of course prevention is better than cure, the real focus should be on how we control rising temperatures and ensure a habitable planet beyond the end of our noses. That's not to say there's no role for cure as well though in the meantime. [Post edited 19 Jul 2022 13:48]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:42 - Jul 19 with 1572 views | GeoffSentence |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:37 - Jul 19 by ghostofescobar |
Money. Cheaper to produce the rails in longer lengths. Other countries are also more used to extremes in temps, so cope better. It's a bit like us grinding to a halt with a couple of cm of snow in winter, whereas the Scandi countries, as an example, have feet of the stuff and just carry on. |
Everyone quotes the Scandis and the Canadians for dealing with extreme weather conditions, but I'd like to see how they'd fare in our generally mild climate. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:44 - Jul 19 with 1557 views | STYG |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:42 - Jul 19 by GeoffSentence |
Everyone quotes the Scandis and the Canadians for dealing with extreme weather conditions, but I'd like to see how they'd fare in our generally mild climate. |
This is the thing.
We'd never invest heavily in snowploughs and make sure every council had loads of the things. It would be a massive waste of money for once every 10 years.
They however have massive snowfalls 10-20 times a year and need them. They have the skills and the machinery because it's frequent.
However, I am sure they also have governments that get warned of changes and actually bother to act a bit quicker than ours. | | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 14:03 - Jul 19 with 1448 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Part of the problem is our narrow gauge and frequent corners. And cost cutting | |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 16:08 - Jul 19 with 1290 views | nodge_blue |
This was answered in the news today. Apparently when you engineer a railway you have a 45 degree tolerance. So we choose to go from -10 to 35 degrees. Hotter countries don't cope for minus 10. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 16:27 - Jul 19 with 1247 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 14:03 - Jul 19 by ElephantintheRoom |
Part of the problem is our narrow gauge and frequent corners. And cost cutting |
What? So we should have stuck with Brunel's broad gauge to combat climate change? |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 16:33 - Jul 19 with 1223 views | Pinewoodblue |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:42 - Jul 19 by GeoffSentence |
Everyone quotes the Scandis and the Canadians for dealing with extreme weather conditions, but I'd like to see how they'd fare in our generally mild climate. |
Extreme weather conditions are difficult to plan for. Canada and Scandinavia plan for their normal conditions, as we do. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 16:37 - Jul 19 with 1215 views | Swansea_Blue |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:37 - Jul 19 by ghostofescobar |
Money. Cheaper to produce the rails in longer lengths. Other countries are also more used to extremes in temps, so cope better. It's a bit like us grinding to a halt with a couple of cm of snow in winter, whereas the Scandi countries, as an example, have feet of the stuff and just carry on. |
Very different types of snow also makes a difference. Theirs is often very cold and powdery and packs nicely, which is remarkably grippy - you can hack along at close to normal speeds with winter tyres just fine. Our is a wet, slippy mush. |  |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 16:53 - Jul 19 with 1189 views | solomon |
Guy from network rail was asked this on bbc breakfast this very morning. People keep comparing our system to India, fact is our rails are designed to operate in a broader temp zone than hot countries who do not have to experience low temperatures and ice and snow, it’s extremely difficult to build a system that needs to operate at the opposite extremes.
It’s an entirely reasonable explanation. |  | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 18:02 - Jul 19 with 1124 views | Freddies_Ears |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 16:08 - Jul 19 by nodge_blue |
This was answered in the news today. Apparently when you engineer a railway you have a 45 degree tolerance. So we choose to go from -10 to 35 degrees. Hotter countries don't cope for minus 10. |
But quite a bit of Europe has a far greater range of temperatures every year. For example, alpine countries will have temperatures from around -20c to +35c in many regions, also bits of Bulgaria, Romania, Germany, Poland... | | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 19:44 - Jul 19 with 1041 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 18:02 - Jul 19 by Freddies_Ears |
But quite a bit of Europe has a far greater range of temperatures every year. For example, alpine countries will have temperatures from around -20c to +35c in many regions, also bits of Bulgaria, Romania, Germany, Poland... |
Indeed. Switzerland being a very obvious country with a wider temp range than the UK. And their railways run like clockwork. My brother has lived there for 40 years. So why can we not build railways like the Swiss? | |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 20:05 - Jul 19 with 1011 views | Swansea_Blue |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 19:44 - Jul 19 by LegendofthePhoenix |
Indeed. Switzerland being a very obvious country with a wider temp range than the UK. And their railways run like clockwork. My brother has lived there for 40 years. So why can we not build railways like the Swiss? |
Only guessing, but presumably it comes down to cost and not being willing to pay for quality (over-engineering is a word that gets bandied around a lot, and maybe too much if we do actually need more tolerances built in).
We made some cracking civil engineering structures once. World leading, to borrow a phrase that’s been abused a lot lately. | |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 00:00 - Jul 20 with 911 views | Terra_Farma |
Ok, so here goes:
Our Rail infrastructure has been in place since the Victorian era.
We have CIRCA 10,000 miles (thanks Google) in England alone.
The jointed track you fondly speak of is held in place by plates and bolts is unsafe for trains that travel the speeds they do today.
This is part of the reason why CWR (continuous welded rail) is now used (CWR is 216m in length). These long threads of rail when installed are welded together (rather than bolted together) and depending on the temperature when the track is installed, its then stressed (pulled from either end). In addition to this, there are expansion joints (we call them breathers) that allows the rail to expand in the summer and contract in the winter.
CWR enables trains to run at higher speeds, decreases maintenance costs and renewal costs. More importantly, it's safer than jointed track.
So if you wanted train services for 363 days of the year that run at vastly reduced speeds then jointed track it is - also, not forgetting the higher maintenance and renewal cost which means higher taxes.
Ultimately, it's us tax payers who finance the rail network. | | | |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 00:48 - Jul 20 with 863 views | NeedhamChris |
| |
| |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 02:44 - Jul 20 with 816 views | Kropotkin123 |
| why is our rail network not designed for these temperatures? on 13:19 - Jul 19 by STYG |
Like everything it'll be money.
Nobody in any position of authority, who is paid mega bucks, is likely to care about how much profit there will be in 25 years time when they are long gone and drawing their pension.
Same reason politicians now say whatever they need to say to survive the next election. None of those elected ever come out and say it'll be years of paying more tax to make a better future for us all. It's say whatever keeps you in a job short term.
Can't be any different with rail. They'd have to invest huge sums of money in technology that they may not even need now (or potentially ever) and get that signed off just to do the right thing.
No doubt other countries can argue the economics or more expensive materials that will stay intact and not need to be replaced as often. Here, if this weather hasn't occurred yet, then it'll just be seen as an unnecessary expense.
Look at Grenfell. Sadly there were costlier options that would have been infinitely safer but presumably they went with something cheaper on the basis of a thing that would never actually happen. I can't see any major organisation having any other outlook sadly.
I guess you can look at it like Yeovil spending £3m they don't have (and hindering their chances of promotion) to make Huish Park all seater, when they don't need to yet, just because it'll be cheaper now than if they ever do get back into the league. It would never happen. [Post edited 19 Jul 2022 13:27]
|
Same reason politicians now say whatever they need to say to survive the next election. None of those elected ever come out and say it'll be years of paying more tax to make a better future for us all. It's say whatever keeps you in a job short term.
I have wondered if this is a fundamental failing of democracies and a systematic reason they may not last in the future. It is something that needs addressing, but no ideas how. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
