Wednesday, 25 August 2010

When was the last time Denton Station saw this much action?

This video clip featuring an enthusiasts special steam train was filmed last Friday at Denton Station. The footage is poor because it was filmed in near total darkness with a basic camcorder. However, the event has now been published and in the future curious people may view it as an historical record of what Denton Station was once like.

Denton Station is quite a famous station in railway enthusiast circles because of the bizarre service on offer for the discerning traveller; one train per week in one direction only (Stockport to Stalybridge). Andrew Gwynne MP has done good work in discussing the plight of Denton Station in Parliament. For a look into the history of this little used community asset click here.


Automobile said...

Waste of money. Like many other parts of the rail network it needs shutting down. Can't see how it's an asset in ANY way

let the train take the strain said...

So speaks a selfish motorist! Thankfully for you many of us cannot afford or choose not to own a private motor vehicle - if we could the roads would be even more congested than they are now. Public transport is an essential part of the lives fore millions and the best form of public transport is the railways. Railways are environmentally friendly and unlike busses they do not get stuck in gridlock on the roads caused by thousands of selfish motorists who clog up the roads as they are sat in their tin bin boxes lined up one after another.

Automobile said...

Trains are PROVEN to be the most environmentally unfriendly form of ground based transport per passenger mile. An experiment done a few years ago on a packed commuter train into London worked out that if each passenger had driven a petrol 4.4 litre Range Rover -about 13 mpg - instead, the total pollution output and environmental damage would have been significantly less. And as we all know the vast majority of trains are far from packed.
Rail takes 40% of all the transport budget and moves only 6% of the moving public. Only three to six percent of road tax is actually spent on the roads, guess where a sizeable chunk of the rest goes. Hardly 'selfish', from the motorists anyway. The rail lobby has a massively disproportionate amount of pull in government circles because rail IS essential as part of the London commute. the rest of the country would be a lot better off if this filthy, inflexible, outdated form of transport was scrapped and the rails tarmacced over for dual carriageways etc, where they would move tens of thousands of times more people.

Stop road tax extortion said...

If you can afford the bloody ludicrous train fares you can certainly afford coach or bus fares as they're a lot cheaper. And National Express etc don't take billions off the taxpayer. Also 95% of people in work COULD afford a car even if they had to make financial sacrifices elsewhere.

Tameside Citizen said...

The convenience of a car takes some beating but who would win in a race from the centre of Manchester to the centre of London? The train of course as the journey only takes two hours. If you attempted such a journey in a car, depending on the time of day, it would take at least three hours but more likely than not double that. On the train you can sit relaxed looking out the window as the world passes by. You can read or even do work on your laptop. And unlike at the end of a gruelling car journey, you feel nice and relaxed on reaching you destination.

As for the environmental impact. How can three hundred people sat together in the same vehicle going in the same direction be compared to the same people all making individual journeys in a gas guzzling V8 Range Rover’s? That comparison makes no sense. Many modern trains are electric rather than diesel and even the diesels only have one large engine which would certainly pollute less than three hundred smaller and less efficient 4x4 engines?

Automobile said...

The train's pollution output included all empty running time to first passenger pick up and afterwards. Trains are often not in service, using vast amounts of diesel for zero passenger movement. Cars never are.
The immense infrastructure costs of running a railway (for which the taxpayer foots the bill), relative to their positive impact on the economy negate any argument for their retention outside of a few urban centres and specialist lines, high speed links etc, all of which should be privatised.

Anonymous said...

It's obvious railways are better for the environment.

Automobile said...

It's so obvious you can't even tell us why.

Motorist said...

Rail freight:
Goods brought to rail yard by LORRY/VAN.
Reach destination on train.
Taken by LORRY/VAN to final destination.
Spot the flaw.
As for passengers, a 50% expansion in rail use (an utter impossibility as it would cost hundreds of millions to expand by 5% and there isn't room or money for that) would only make a 4% dent in car use.
Rail's got its' (very minor ) place and it should stay in it.