It's cheaper to run a high speed service than a low speed one. You can transport more people with the same number of staff and trains because it runs faster. The solution isn't to run an artificially cheaper low speed service along side, it's to run the high speed service in a sane way.
mondoman712
The problem isn't how they're constructed, it's how they're run, and this article is basically just complaining about SNCF without realising it. They run bad timetables and aim for high occupancy rather than transporting more people. Jon Worth has better writing on the topic IMO.
Should it not be double foldable? It has two folds
Or the fact that it doesn't need to be real because 1. It's still funny and 2. We all know that the incident has happened somewhere, because shit like this happens so often.
Which part of what I said do you disagree with?
exactly, either way you need to make sure there isn't any oncoming traffic.
If there isn't space to overtake two cyclists side by side, there isn't space to overtake one cyclist. If there's another car coming towards you while you overtake, you'd be endangering the one cyclist.
They are The News Quiz host Andy Zaltzman, I'm a Celebrity and Celebrity Gogglebox star Babatunde Aléshé, Starstruck and Ghosts actress Emma Sidi, stand-up comic Jack Dee (Lead Balloon) and comedian Rosie Jones (Out of Order, Trip Hazard: My Great British Adventure).
For anyone else that doesn't know who they are (source)
I'd guess with inflation you'd be right, but if we're sticking with the current value, what on Phase 2 justifies it costing the same as Phase 1?
Yeah they're really taking their time with it.
A single train with a single crew can transport more people in a day when travelling at higher speed.
This is running costs. The capital costs are irrelevant.