Jump to content

Promenade - Megathread


slinkydevil

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, AlanShimmin said:

Good to see they've stuck with the original Victorian 19th Century electronic points. 

I don't swear much (compared to the average ManxForumer) but for fucks sake, "H&K controllers linked to a purpose built signal controller," to run a horse tram! These people are unbelievably, totally,  moronically, stupid.

And as I am in such a bad mood... after the press revelation last year about the bus bike racks, I sent an email to Baker pointing out that whoever thought that was a good idea didn't know too much about transport regulations. I was not expecting a response from him, but anyway, just for the entertainment value, I CC'd  both Black and Longworth. Within 30 minutes Black sent me a response. I would class his response as semi-coherent, and absolutely not the standard I would expect from someone running an organisation with a £120 million budget.

I'm just lost for words...

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AlanShimmin said:

They could have saved millions by putting the trams on rubber tyres. There was no need to spend £7m+ on the expensive and unnecessary tram tracks. Rubber wheels could have been done at a fraction  of the cost and they wouldn't be in the same mess that they are now. 

Rubber wheels?

Rubber tyres?

Do you mean tyres?:rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, slinkydevil said:

Missing a trick here. There's a potential solution to the rising unemployment figures - 2 jobs filled, bosh! 

panto_horse_pose.jpg

Is that Black and Longworth carrying out an inspection of progress?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Two-lane said:

A FoI response has resulted in the minutes of a meeting concerning the horse trams to be revealed. It contains wondrous statements such as:

"provide a holistic tram crossing control using transponders for detection."

and

"Points to be operated using H&K controllers linked to a purpose built signal controller, which is triggered by line side tag readers."

So it was not just traffic lights, it was electronically controlled points. The skirting boards pale into insignificance.

Thanks for that , that would explain the £900.000 plus  bill it was to cost then lol mind blowing really . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Nellie said:

The plan is to resurface the walkway, once the Promenade is finished. 

Thats the plan now but originally I'm pretty sure they weren't touching it but because of loads of cock ups they have dug up lots of it to facilitate pipes and services .   

Edited by Numbnuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Numbnuts said:

Thats the plan now but originally I'm pretty sure they weren't touching it but because of loads of cock ups they have dug up lots of it to facilitate pipes and services .   

I'm sure you are right, and not to mention the unplanned damage done by thousands of vehicles, of unrestricted weight, using it as a road for months. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Grumble said:

One thing is for sure, the vast overspend and under delivery won't ever be the fault of the politicians or the civil service, it'll be the contractors (see Richmond Hill for modus operandi).

The civil servants have the accountability for the project. The contractor was responsible for doing the job properly so it's not the civil servants fault they did a rubbish job. However the civil servants have a responsibility to make sure it is put right.....but NOT at the cost of the tax payer.

If the cost falls to the tax payer it becomes the responsibility of the civil servants and they should be held to account for their failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Happier diner said:

The civil servants have the accountability for the project. The contractor was responsible for doing the job properly so it's not the civil servants fault they did a rubbish job. However the civil servants have a responsibility to make sure it is put right.....but NOT at the cost of the tax payer.

If the cost falls to the tax payer it becomes the responsibility of the civil servants and they should be held to account for their failure.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=60375&headline=Dispute over defective roadworks&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2021&cat=Transport

 

Reading the words of the article, it would seem that the latter applies:wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...