Started by jamespetts, December 29, 2010, 08:02:08 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
QuoteFollowing Mr Palmer's innovations there were improvements to the design of coaches and in the roads which helped rapidly improve the speed of coach trips and while the coaching industry boomed from 1820-30 and created many bankrupts and few millionaires.The coaches of this new age had stages that averaged 8-10 miles in distance or about an hour in travel time - they tended to have longer stages for longer routes so while the London to Edinburgh route the stages averaged 14 miles, London to Brighton the average was about 10 miles.There were numerous costs, for instance, coaching operators rarely owned their own coaches, instead they leased them from Coachbuilders at a charge per "double mile" (that is the distance to and from a place). In 1830 it cost around 130-150 pounds to build a stage coach. Each route demanded at least 4 coaches, an up coach, a down coach and a spare at each end in case of breakdown so the Tally Ho, or The Age were not one vehicle but many. Also the names would be used on many different routes and by different proprietors (such as the Tally Ho).Then there was cost of stabling, taxes on the coach, coachmen and guards to be paid, and road tolls. It was estimated that coach must make some 4 -5 pounds per double mile on average to survive.
Quote from: William Hemmingway[/urlSome tunnels for double line have been constructed in good ground, and under favourable circumstances as to building materials and labour, for as low as £32 per lineal yard; while others, carried out under adverse conditions, have cost as much as £150 per lineal yard. A medium somewhere between the two should represent the cost of tunnel-work through ground which does not present any special difficulty. At the same time it must be borne in mind that simple tunnelling which can be done in one locality for £50 or £60 per lineal yard, would be increased 20, 30, or 40 per cent. in another, where building material for the lining is scarce and expensive.
QuoteLocal tram fares in 1906Horns Cross - Bexleyheath 4dHorns Cross - Crayford Bridge 3dMilestone Road - Bexleyheath 3dHorns Cross - Bull Hotel (Dartford) 2dMilestone Road - Maiden Lane 2dBull Hotel (Dartford) - Crayford Gas Works 2dWest Hill School (Dartford) - Crayford Bridge 1dCrayford Bridge - Bexleyheath 1dDartford Station - Fulwich Street 1dDartford Station - Maiden Lane 1dDartford Station - Wilmington 1dWorkman's fare - half the above rate.
QuoteThe Cheap Trains Act of 1844—to cite it by its common name, though in fact it dealt with many other subjects—required every company to run one train a day for the whole length of its line, calling at all stations, at a speed of not less than 12 miles an hour, and at fares of not more than Id. per mile. The fares in third-class carriages on these trains, known to an earlier generation as ' parliamentary trains were exempt from the tax of 5 per cent, charged on all other fares. But for many years after 1844 by all other trains the third-class fares were at the rate of 1 1\4d. or 1 1\2d. per mile. Gradually, the fares for third-class passengers on all trains by which they were carried were reduced to the parliamentary level; and the penny-a-mile passengers were admitted more and more to the faster trains. Finally, in 1872 the Midland Railway took the plunge and announced that in future third-class passengers would be carried on every train. The companies on either side of the Midland were compelled to follow suit immediately, and within a few years the other companies fell into line. ...Modern railway Acts have fixed statutory maxima of 3d., 2d., and Id. per mile for three classes respectively. But first-class fares of 3d. had long been obsolete for practical purposes; the fares in fact ranged between 2 1\2d. and 1 1\2d. The second class itself is obsolete. The third-class 1d. only registered what the companies had conceded of their own accord.
QuoteThe railway returns for 1923 show that, whereas the nominal ordinary fare is 2 \d. per mile first-class and 1 1/2d. third-class, in fact the average sum received per passenger-mile for all classes at full fares is only about 1.4 d. Moreover, so large a proportion of the first-class travel is not on ordinary tickets, but on season or traders' tickets, that the average receipt per first-class passenger-mile is only Id. Similarly in the third class, workmen's and season tickets bring down the average from 1 1\2d. to 0.93d. Taking the total of all classes and all descriptions of ticket, we find that the average fare paid per mile travelled is at present 0.935d. In other words the actual fare paid per passenger-mile is only 62 per cent, of the ordinary third-class fare. 1 If we assumed that the same ratio existed before the war between the standard third-class penny and the average fare paid per mile for all travel, the latter figure would have been 0.62d. But the average fare paid is undoubtedly nearer the ordinary third-class fare now than it was before the war. For a good many of the cheapest fares have been suppressed, and workmen's and excursion fares have been steeply raised. So it is safe to assume that the average fare received by the railways for carrying a passenger a mile was not in 1914 more than 0.55d.
Viaduct Type Foundation Year cost at time length (m) height (m) cost per km cost per km 1900 aprxSankey Stone dry 1828 £45,000.00 183 21 £245,901.64 £199,000.00Dutton stone dry 1836 £54,000.00 457 18 £118,161.93 £109,000.00Penkridge Stone dry 1837 £6,000.00 82 £73,170.73 £66,000.00Victoria Stone dry 1838 £40,338.00 247 37 £163,311.74 £147,000.00Willington Dene Timber on Stone dry 1839 £25,000.00 319 23 £78,369.91 £66,000.00Stockport Viaduct brick dry 1840 £72,000.00 547 34 £131,627.06 £109,000.00Ouse Valley brick dry 1842 £38,500.00 450 £85,555.56 £78,000.00Usk timber wet 1848 £20,000.00 366 £54,644.81 £53,000.00Chappel brick dry 1849 £32,000.00 320 £100,000.00 £103,000.00Yarm Stone dry 1849 £44,500.00 690 20 £64,492.75 £66,000.00Knaresborough Stone dry 1851 £9,803.00 80 24 £122,537.50 £138,000.00Hengoed Stone dry 1854 £20,000.00 260 37 £76,923.08 £68,000.00Crumlin Wrought Iron trestle dry 1857 £62,000.00 500 61 £124,000.00 £114,000.00Belah Lattice truss dry 1857 £31,630.00 317 60 £99,779.18 £92,000.00Grosvenor Bridge metal arch wet 1859 £84,000.00 283.5 £296,296.30 £302,000.00Kingsland brick dry 1861 £1,000,000.00 3.00E+03 £333,333.33 £322,000.00Ribblehead Stone and Brick dry 1869 £343,318.00 400 32 £858,295.00 £830,000.00Scotswood Railway Bridge Wrought Iron Beam wet 1871 £20,000.00 212 £94,339.62 £90,000.00Welland brick dry 1878 £12,000.00 1166 £10,291.60 £10,000.00Fledborough brick dry 1897 £65,000.00 814 £79,852.58 £85,000.00Glenfinnan cement arch dry 1898 £18,904.00 380 30 £49,747.37 £53,000.00King Edward VII Bridge Lattice on stone pier wet 1906 £500,000.00 350 34 £1,428,571.43 £1,414,000.00Queen Alexandra Bridge Truss on Stone wet 1909 £450,000.00 274 26 £1,642,335.77 £1,590,000.00Carnon stone wet 1933 £40,000.00 230 29 £173,913.04 £101,000.00Queen Elizabeth II Bridge Truss on concrete wet 1978 £4,900,000.00 352.7 25 £13,892,826.76 £648,000.00
Quote from: wlindley on January 15, 2022, 11:32:41 AMNote that a double-track bridge steel truss bridge will use not much more steel than a single-track bridge (having identical vertical elements), but that the site preparation, materials transportation, and labor cost to build either one will often be only moderately higher. These things are not linear -- the Firth of Forth bridge would not have cost much less to build as a one-track structure, but building it three tracks wide might have inflated the cost tremendously.
URL Tunnel Type cost length year Cost 1900 Cost Per Meter 1900 underwater methodhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudley_Tunnel Dudley Tunnel narrow boat 9700 2900 1779 13,729.23 4.73 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primrose_Hill_Tunnel Primrose Hill Tunnel 2 tracks 120000 9700 1837 109,306.93 11.27 no boredhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standedge_Tunnels Standedge Canal Tunnel canal narrowboat 160000 4979 1810 102,222.22 20.53 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodhead_Tunnel Woodhead 1 track 200000 4840 1839 168,807.34 34.88 no gunpowderhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standedge_Tunnels Standedge Rail Tunnel single track 201000 4880 1846 190,639.18 39.07 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blea_Moor_Tunnel Blea Moor Tunnel 2 tracks 109000 2404 1875 102,326.53 42.57 no dynamitehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thackley_Tunnel Thackley Tunnel 2 tracks 68000 1200 1845 67,268.82 56.06 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colwall_Tunnels Colwall New Tunnel single track 196080 1432 1926 97,510.05 68.09 no pnumatic toolshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summit_Tunnel Summit Tunnel 2 tracks 251000 2638 1841 211,853.21 80.31 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milford_Tunnel Milford Tunnel 2 tracks 93122 783 1840 77,182.20 98.57 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherton_Tunnel_Branch_Canal Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal barge canal 302000 2768 1858 343,012.35 123.92 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilsby_Tunnel Kilsby_tunnel 2 tracks 320000 2216 1838 288,627.45 130.25 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodhead_Tunnel Woodhead 3 2 tracks 4300000 4888 1953 976,790.12 199.83 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_line Victoria Line 2 single track tube 56000000 21000 1962 9,720,754.72 462.89 yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islington_Tunnel Islington tunnel canal tunnel 700000 878 1818 487,878.79 555.67 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherhithe_Tunnel Rotherhithe tunnel 2 lane road 1000000 1482 1908 978,723.40 660.41 yes tunneling shieldhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Cross_Tunnel Clay Cross Tunnel Rail 140000 1631 1839 1,181,651.38 724.50 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwall_Tunnel Blackwall Tunnel (Old) 2 lane road 1400000 1350 1897 1,480,459.77 1,096.64 yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Tunnel Thames Tunnel pedestrian->single track 454000 396 1843 469,303.37 1,185.11 yes tunneling shieldhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensway_tunnel Queensway Tunnel 4 lanes 8000000 3240 1930 4,254,335.26 1,313.07 yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brynglas_Tunnels Brynglas tunnels 2x 2 lane road 3000000 360 1962 520,754.72 1,446.54 no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindhead_Tunnel Hindhead Tunnel 2 x 2 lane 155000 1 2011 1,536.97 1,536.97 no mechanical diggershttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dartford_Crossing Dartford Western Crossing 2 Lane Road 13000000 1430 1963 2,214,814.81 1,548.82 yes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clyde_Tunnel Clyde Tunnel 2x 2 lane road 10000000 762 1963 1,703,703.70 2,235.83 yes tunneling shieldhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limehouse_Link_tunnel Limehouse Link Tunnel 2x 2 lane road 293000000 1800 1993 4,856,061.97 2,697.81 yes cut and coverhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel Channel Tunnel 2 single track tunnels 9000000000 50000 1988 196,348,114.77 3,926.96 yes TBM
Quote from: OctaviusTo give you some numbers, construction cost of Maasvlakte 2 in the Netherlands was 3 billion euros or about 2.5 billion pounds in the period 2008-2013 for 15 square kilometres of land plus 5 square kilometres of water that had to be dredged to 25 metres. This included seawalls, beaches and basic rail, road and water infrastructure, but not the actual port facilities constructed there. So that's about 170 million pounds per square kilometre. The used construction method was supplying a big pile (275 million cubic metres) of sand using ships.Another data point is the Noordoostpolder, constructed between 1936-1942 for about 125 million guilders or 12 million pounds. That included dikes, pumping stations, canals and basic road infrastructure. Surface area is about 500 square kilometres, so that's about 24 thousand pounds per square kilometre. The construction method was a polder: build a dike around it, then pump the water out. Unfortunately for Simutrans purposes, with that construction method, cost doesn't really scale with surface area.
Quote from: PJMack on January 16, 2022, 03:36:43 AMIt was also often common to build a double track bridge on a single track line to cut the costs of future expansion according to Railway Construction by William Hemmingway Mills. ...
Quote from: wlindley on January 15, 2022, 11:32:41 AMNote that a double-track bridge steel truss bridge will use not much more steel than a single-track bridge (having identical vertical elements), ...
Quote from: prissi on October 27, 2022, 07:09:56 AMThe wikipedia chapter on electricication of the USSR (do not ask) contain quite substantial information about the econic cost and maintenance effort of electric traction versus diesel:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_electrification_in_the_Soviet_Union
QuoteThe vehicle has been built for the Tees-side Railless Traction Board, operating from Middlesbroughon-Tees, and connecting up with motorbus services at Saltburn: and other places. The advantage possessed by this company is that it has a contract for electric current, generated from the waste heat of the blast furnaces, at three-farthings per unit. This is, of course, an exceptionally favourable figure, a more general figure being 1 1/2d. per unit. The consumption of current is 1 1/4 units per car-mile, bringing the power cost to .937d. per car mile, whilst the standing charge per car mile to cover the sinking fund in respect of the overhead wire system and the maintenance of that system can be put at about .860d. per car mile on a service with a headway of 7 1/2 minutes. At the more usual rate for current these two figures together may be taken at 2.875d. per car mile on this headway, or if there is a headway of half an hour it would be 5.315d. per car mile.