Beeching-Axt und Diskussion:Alexander Osang: Unterschied zwischen den Seiten
(Unterschied zwischen Seiten)
Inhalt gelöscht Inhalt hinzugefügt
K →Further reading: + space |
Keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung |
||
| Zeile 1: | Zeile 1: | ||
== Sag mir, WO du stehst == |
|||
[[image:Brsince78_photo_1292.jpg|thumb|right|Many railway lines were closed as a result of the Beeching Axe]] |
|||
Im Magazin der Berliner Zeitung vom 20./21.1.2007 findet man eine Geschichte von Alexander Osang mit dem obigen Titel (im Internet nicht vorhanden). Ganz am Ende steht, dass Osang am 20. Januar um 21oo Uhr im "Deutschen Theater" gelesen hat. Was, steht da allerdings nicht. Das einzige Buch, das in seinem Artikel mit Titel vorkommt, ist: ''Verliebt, Verlobt, Verheiratet'' von seinem "ehemaligen Kollegen" Torsten Preuß, dieses [http://www.toponlineverlag.com/index1.htm]. Man muß zwei mal klicken, um zu dem Buch zu kommen. |
|||
The '''Beeching Axe''' is an informal name for the [[United Kingdom|British]] Government's attempt in the [[1960s]] to control the spiralling cost of running the [[Rail transport in the United Kingdom|British railway system]]. The name derives from the main author of the report ''The Re-shaping of British Railways'', Dr [[Richard Beeching]]. Although this report also proposed the development of new modes of freight service and the modernisation of trunk passenger routes, it is best remembered for recommending the wholesale closure of what it considered to be little-used and unprofitable [[railway line]]s, and the removal of stopping passenger trains and closure of local stations on other lines. |
|||
:Austerlitz [[Benutzer:88.72.17.92|88.72.17.92]] 18:20, 30. Jan. 2007 (CET) |
|||
Ich würde gerne einige Sätze aus der Geschichte von Osang zitieren, aber auf die Diskussionsseite soll man nur schreiben, wenn man die Hauptseite diskutieren will, habe ich öfters gelesen. |
|||
The report was a reaction to the significant losses which had begun in the [[1950s]] as the expansion in road transport began to abstract significant passenger and goods traffic from the railways; losses which continued to bedevil British Railways despite the introduction of the railway modernisation plan of [[1955]] <ref>http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docSummary.php?docID=23</ref>. Beeching proposed that only drastic action would save the railways from increasing losses in the future. |
|||
However successive governments were more keen on the cost-saving elements of the report rather than those elements requiring investment. Over 4,000 miles of railway and 3,000 stations were closed in the decade following the report, being a reduction of 25% of route miles and 50% in the number of stations. To this day in railway circles and amongst older people, particularly in those parts of the country that suffered most from the cuts, Beeching's name is still synonymous with the mass closure of railways and consequent loss of many local services. |
|||
== |
== Broken Link == |
||
[[Image:British Rail timetable page from 1963 illustrating Beeching Axe in progress.jpg|thumb|right|A [[timetable]] from [[1963]] showing the closure of a [[branch line]] and the suggested replacement bus service. This was the start of the Axe; the peak year followed in [[1964]].]]<!-- FAIR USE of Image:British_Rail_timetable_page_from_1963_illustrating_Beeching_Axe_in_progress.jpg: see image description page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:British_Rail_timetable_page_from_1963_illustrating_Beeching_Axe_in_progress.jpg for rationale --> |
|||
In tune with the mood of the early 1960s, the transport minister in [[Harold Macmillan]]'s [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative]] government was [[Ernest Marples]], the director of a major road-construction company (his two-thirds shareholding were divested to his wife whilst he was a minister) <ref>http://www.bilderberg.org/railways.htm</ref> <ref>http://www.rodneyb.demon.co.uk/marples_trading_companies.htm</ref>. Marples believed that the future of transport lay with roads, and that railways were a dead-end relic of the [[Victorian era|Victorian]] past. |
|||
Hi, der Link |
|||
An advisory group known as the Stedeford Committee (after its chair, Sir [[Ivan Stedeford]]) was set up to report on the state of British transport and provide recommendations. Also on the Committee was Richard Beeching, who at the time was the Technical Director of ICI. He was later, in 1961, appointed Chairman of the newly formed [[British Railways]] Board. Both Stedeford and Beeching clashed on a number of issues related to the latter's proposals to drastically prune the rail infrastructure. In spite of questions being asked in Parliament, Sir Ivan's report was never published and the proposals for the future of the railways that came to be known as the "Beeching Plan" were adopted by the Government, resulting in the closure of a third of the rail network and the scrapping of a third of a million freight wagons. |
|||
http://www.blitz-stadtmagazin.com/web/2002/012002/osang.htm |
|||
fuehrt ins Nichts. Ich konnte auf www.blitz-stadtmagazin.com keine neue Adresse finden, also entferne ich den Link aus dem Artikel. |
|||
Beeching believed the railway system should be run like a business and not a public service, and that if parts of the railway system did not pay their way—like some rural branch lines—they should be closed. His reasoning was that once these were closed, the remaining core of the system would be restored to profitability. |
|||
Beste Gruesse, Joerg [[Spezial:Beiträge/141.14.232.135|141.14.232.135]] |
|||
When Beeching was Chairman of [[British Railways]] he initiated a study of traffic flows on all the railway lines in the country. This study took place during the week ending [[23 April]] [[1962]] , two weeks after Easter. The results of which were used to include in the report which concluded that 80% of the traffic was carried on just 20% of the network, with much of the rest of the system operating at a loss. The "The Reshaping of British Railways" report <ref>http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docSummary.php?docID=13</ref> (or Beeching I report) of [[27 March]], [[1963]] proposed that out of Britain's then 18,000 miles (28 800 km) of railway, some 6,000 miles (9 600 km) of mostly rural branch and cross-country lines should be closed. Furthermore, many other rail lines should lose their passenger services and be kept open for freight only, and many of the lesser-used stations should close on lines that were to be kept open. The report was accepted by the Government. |
|||
At the time, the highly controversial report was called the "Beeching Bombshell" or the "Beeching Axe" by the press. It sparked an outcry from many communities that would lose their rail services, many of which (especially in the case of rural communities) had no other means of public transport. |
|||
The government argued that many rail services could be provided more cheaply by [[bus]]es, and in a policy known as "[[bustitution]]" (a portmanteau of "bus" and "substitution"), promised that abandoned rail services would have their places taken by replacement bus services. |
|||
A significant part of the report also proposed that British Rail electrify some major main lines and adopt containerized freight traffic instead of outdated and uneconomic wagon-load traffic. In general, [[politician]]s jumped at the money-saving parts of the plan but were less enthusiastic about those parts that required expenditures. Some of those plans were eventually adopted, however, such as the creation of the [[Freightliner]] concept and further electrification of the [[West Coast Main Line]] from Crewe to Glasgow in [[1974]]. Additionally the staff terms and conditions were improved over a period of time. |
|||
==Rail closures by year== |
|||
[[Image:Rugby Central station remains2.jpg|thumb|right|300px|The remains of [[Rugby railway station#Rugby Central Station|Rugby Central Station]] on the former [[Great Central Railway]], one of many stations and lines that were closed under the Beeching Axe]] |
|||
At its peak in [[1950]], the mileage of the British Railway's system was around 21,000 miles (33 800 km) and 6000 stations. By [[1975]], the system had shrunk to 12,000 miles (19 000 km) of track and 2000 stations, roughly the same size it was in [[2003]]. |
|||
Contrary to popular belief, Beeching did not start the rail closures, as a number of rail closures had occurred during the [[1950s]] and certainly earlier <ref>''Passengers No More'': by G.Daniels & L.A.Dench Ian Allan(1975) ISBN 0-7110-0438-2</ref>. In reality he continued a trend as the Branchline Committee of [[BR]] had also closed a number of unremunatitive lines between 1950 and [[1963]], as approximately 3000 miles (4800 km) of line had already been closed. After the publication of the first report, the closure process was accelerated. |
|||
*'''Branchline Committee closures''' |
|||
**'''1950'''....150 miles (240 km) closed |
|||
**'''1951'''....275 miles (440 km) closed |
|||
**'''1952'''....300 miles (480 km) closed |
|||
**'''1953'''....275 miles (440 km) closed |
|||
**'''1954''' to '''1957'''....500 miles (800 km) closed |
|||
**'''1958'''....150 miles (240 km) closed |
|||
**'''1959'''....350 miles (560 km) closed |
|||
**'''1960'''....175 miles (280 km) closed |
|||
**'''1961'''....150 miles (240 km) closed |
|||
**'''1962'''....780 miles (1 250 km) closed |
|||
*'''Beeching closures''' |
|||
**'''1963'''....324 miles (521 km) closed |
|||
**'''1964'''....1058 miles (1703 km) closed |
|||
**'''1965'''....600 miles (965 km) closed |
|||
**'''1966'''....750 miles (1 205 km) closed |
|||
**'''1967'''....300 miles (480 km) closed |
|||
**'''1968'''....400 miles (640 km) closed |
|||
**'''1969'''....250 miles (400 km) closed |
|||
**'''1970'''....275 miles (440 km) closed |
|||
**'''1971'''....23 miles (37 km) closed |
|||
**'''1972'''....50 miles (80 km) closed |
|||
**'''1973'''....35 miles (56 km) closed |
|||
**'''1974'''....0 miles (0 km) closed |
|||
It must be realised that not all of the railway lines listed for closure were closed; a number were kept open for a variety of reasons, including political manoeuvring. For example, the railway lines through the [[Scottish Highlands]], although these were seen as not very cost-efficient by Beeching's definition, but they were kept open, in part because of pressure from the powerful Highland lobby. It has also been suggested that other lines may have been kept open because they passed through marginal constituencies. In addition, some lines that were listed for closure were kept open because the local roads were quite incapable of absorbing the extra traffic that would be generated following the railway lines' closure. As a result, there exists today, a number of rural railway lines on the British railway system, although in reality, far fewer than there were before Beeching. |
|||
On the other hand, some routes that Beeching proposed should be kept open as major trunk routes, for example the [[Woodhead]] route, were eventually closed in favour of keeping alternative politically-sensitive routes open. |
|||
Overall, 2128 stations were closed on lines that were kept open. As well as minor railway lines, a few major inter-city railway lines were closed, where it was deemed that these lines were duplicates of other main-lines. The most notable of these was the former [[Great Central Railway]], which linked [[London]] to the [[Midlands]] and north of [[England]]. |
|||
Since 1974, there have been few passenger railway closures in the UK. Indeed there have been some re-openings, usually on lines that had lost their passenger service due to Beeching, but had been left open for freight services, therefore reinstatement of passenger services came at a relatively low cost. However in the 1970s and 1980s there was a large scale closure of such latterly freight-only lines, the demolition of structures and disposal of permanent way, which has made many such re-openings less likely in future, thus effectively making the Beeching legacy permanent. |
|||
==Beeching II== |
|||
In [[1964]], Dr. Beeching issued a second, less well-known, report "The Development of the Major Railway Trunk Routes" <ref>http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docSummary.php?docID=14</ref>, widely known as "Beeching II", which went even further than the first report. The report singled out lines that were believed to be worthy of continued large-scale investment. |
|||
Essentially, it proposed that all railway lines other than major inter-city routes and important commuter lines around big cities had little future and should eventually close. If the report had been implemented, the railway system would have been cut to just 7000 miles (11 250 km), leaving Britain with little more than a skeletal railway system, with large parts of the country entirely devoid of railways. |
|||
The report was rejected by the then [[British Labour Party|Labour]] government and Dr. Beeching resigned in [[1965]]. Although politicians were ultimately responsible for the rail closures, Dr. Beeching's name has become synonymous with them ever since. |
|||
==Changing attitudes and policies== |
|||
It was in 1964, that a Labour government was elected under [[British prime minister|prime minister]] [[Harold Wilson]]. During the election campaign, Labour promised to halt the rail closures if elected. Once elected, however, they quickly backtracked on this promise, and the closures continued, at a faster rate than under the previous administration and until the end of the decade. |
|||
In 1965, [[Barbara Castle]] was appointed transport minister, and she began to look at the country's transport problems as a whole. Mrs. Castle decided that at least 11,000 route miles (17 700 km) of "basic railway" would be needed for the foreseeable future and that the railway system should be stabilised at around this size. |
|||
However, towards the end of the 1960s it became increasingly clear that rail closures were not producing the promised savings or bringing the rail system out of deficit, and were unlikely ever to do so. Mrs. Castle also stipulated that some rail services that could not pay their way but had a valuable social role and so should be subsidised. However, by the time the legislation allowing this was introduced into the [[1968 Transport Act]]. Section 39 of this act made provision for a subsidy to be paid by the Treasury for a three year period. There were a number of services and railway lines that would have qualified and benefited from these subsidies; but a number had already been closed or removed, thus lessening the impact of the legislation. But nevertheless, a number of branch lines were saved by this legislation. |
|||
==Overview== |
|||
The closures failed in their main purpose of trying to restore the railways to profitability, with the promised savings failing to materialise. By closing almost a third of the rail network, Beeching managed to achieve a saving of just £7 million, whilst overall losses were running in excess of £100 million. These losses were mainly because the branch lines acted as feeders to the main lines, this feeder traffic was lost when the branches closed—in turn meaning less traffic for, and a worsening of the finances of the main lines, and the increasing vulnerability of the main line. The assumption at the time was that [[automobile|car]] owners would drive to the nearest railhead (which was usually the junction where the closed branch line would otherwise have taken them) and continue their journey onwards by train, but in practice having once left home in their cars, they used them for the whole journey. |
|||
The use of light rail concepts was also ignored by Beeching. Such ideas were already in use on some branch lines, but were conveniently sidelined and ignored, due in part to their high costs. Other concepts such as the Battery Rail car that was used on the Ballater Branch, were also in use. But due in part to the high costs associated with the manning levels along the line, and the fact that little or no effort was made to reduce such costs, innovations like this were also ignored and the line closed. Interestingly the costs associated with the latter are detailed in the Beeching I report. |
|||
The "[[bustitution]]" policy which replaced rail services with buses also failed. As most of the replacement bus services were using existing roads that were already congested with traffic, this made the bus service far slower and less convenient than the train services they were meant to replace, resulting in them being extremely unpopular with the public. As a consequence of this, most of the replacement bus services only lasted a few years before they were removed due to a lack of patronage, thus effectively leaving large parts of the country without any means of public transport. In practice, this policy proved unsuccessful, as the travelling public never saw a bus service as a suitable replacement for a rail service. |
|||
The closures were brought to a halt in the early [[1970s]] when it became apparent that they were not useful, that the benefit of the small amount of money saved by closing railways was outweighed by the [[traffic congestion|congestion]] and [[pollution]] caused by increasing reliance on cars which followed, and also by the general public's hatred of the cuts. |
|||
The last major railway closure resulting from the Beeching Axe was of the 80-mile-long (130 km) [[The Waverley Route|Waverley Route]] main line between [[Carlisle, England|Carlisle]] and [[Edinburgh]], in [[1969]]; plans have since been made in 2006 with the approval of the [[Scottish Parliament]] to re-open a significant section of this line. With a few exceptions, after the early 1970s proposals to close other lines were met with vociferous public opposition and were quietly shelved: this opposition stemmed from the public's experience of the many line closures during the main years of the cuts in the mid and late 1960s. Today, Britain's railways, like nearly every other railway system in the world, require a subsidy and they still run at a deficit. |
|||
Hindsight has shown that, in some areas, the Beeching Axe went too far. Prior to Beeching, a number of lines had been reviewed by the Branchline Committee, and there were a number of closures. So Beeching was in reality continuing a trend. Indeed, it could be argued that some of the Beeching Axe closures were a necessary emergency response to save the railway network from financial disaster, and that if they had not occurred, a far larger programme of cuts may have been necessary later. |
|||
One of the major criticisms made of the Beeching report was that it failed to both address and also to take into account the future trends such as [[population growth]] and the greater demand for travel. The population of many of the towns which had their railways closed in the 1960s has now grown significantly since, leaving these towns more in need of rail transport. However, as was custom and practise at the time, a number of trackbeds of many closed railways had been sold off and have been built over, indeed, they would be prohibitively expensive to re-open. This is as much a criticism of the policy since the Beeching closures of the wholesale disposal of former railway land rather than the protection of trackbeds using a system similar to the US [[Rail Bank]] scheme for possible future use. |
|||
It was in the early [[1980s]], under the government of [[Margaret Thatcher]], the possibility of more Beeching-style cuts was raised again briefly. In [[1983]] Sir David Serpell, a civil servant who had worked with Dr Beeching, compiled what became known as "The Serpell Report" <ref>http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docSummary.php?docID=29</ref> which called for more rail closures. The report was met with fierce resistance from many quarters, and it was quickly abandoned. |
|||
==Reopenings== |
|||
Since the Beeching era, a modest number of the closures have been reversed. Notable amongst these is the [[Robin Hood Line]] in [[Nottinghamshire]], between [[Nottingham]] and [[Worksop]] via [[Mansfield]], which reopened in the early [[1990s]]. Previously Mansfield had been the largest town in Britain to have no rail link. |
|||
In the [[West Midlands (county)|West Midlands]] a new [[Birmingham Snow Hill station]] was opened in [[1987]] to replace the earlier Snow Hill station, which had been closed and demolished in the early 1970s. The tunnel underneath [[Birmingham]] city centre that served the station was also reopened, along with the line towards [[Kidderminster]] and [[Worcester, England|Worcester]]. The former line from Snow Hill to [[Wolverhampton]] has been reopened as the [[Midland Metro]] [[tram]] system. The line from [[Coventry to Nuneaton Line|Coventry to Nuneaton]] was reopened to passengers in [[1988]]. |
|||
In [[Newcastle upon Tyne]], most of the railways north of the river Tyne have been reopened and some new sections added: Shiremoor to Chillingham Road via North Shields, South Gosforth to [[Newcastle Central station]] and Kingston Park to Bank Foot. South of the River Tyne, the [[Newcastle Central station]] to South Shields section via Gateshead and [[Tyne Dock]] has in some parts followed the route of the old line, and in some been completely new. These lines opened as part of the [[Tyne and Wear Metro]]; the routes were originally run by the [[North Eastern Railway (UK)|North Eastern Railway]]. |
|||
Beeching saw [[South Wales]] as a declining industrial region. As a result, it lost the majority of its network. Since 1983 it has experienced a major rail revival, with 32 new stations, and three lines reopened within 20 miles (32 km) of each other: [[Abercynon]]–[[Aberdare]], [[Barry, Wales|Barry]]–[[Bridgend]], and Bridgend–[[Maesteg]]. |
|||
In [[Scotland]], a 35-mile (56 km) stretch of the former [[Waverley Route]] between [[Edinburgh]] and [[Galashiels]] is expected to be reopened in [[2011]] now that funding has been approved. The closure of the line in [[1969]] left the [[Scottish Borders]] area without any rail links. The Edinburgh-[[Bathgate]] line, reopening in [[1985]], was the first success of a new policy introduced by the Thatcher government of experimental reopenings that would become permanent only if well-used. It was and did. [[Airdrie-Bathgate Rail Link|Plans]] are now in hand to reopen the section between Bathgate and Drumgelloch. More recently, a four-mile (6.4 km) section of the [[Argyle Line]] was reopened in December [[2005]], serving [[Chatelherault Country Park|Chatelherault]], Merryton and [[Larkhall]] for the first time since 1968. |
|||
Also, after several years of 'false' promises dating to the 1980s, the railway from Stirling to Alloa and Kincardine is currently being rejuvenated, and will open in 2007, providing a passenger (and freight) route once again. |
|||
In addition a small but significant number of closed stations have reopened, and passenger services been restored on lines where they had been removed. Many of these were in the urban [[metropolitan county|metropolitan counties]] where [[Passenger Transport Executive]]s have a role in promoting local passenger rail use. Several lines have also reopened as [[heritage railway]]s; see [[List of British heritage and private railways]]. |
|||
Notwithstanding the positive environmental implications of a reopening, many of the areas along these routes have expanded and grown over the last 40 years. Where some lines were not profitable in 1963 (on a backdrop of falling passenger numbers and a rise in car use on uncongested roads) they could well be profitable now, or at least could have a desirable and impact on reducing road congestion, pollution and congestion on the railway lines that have remained open, and thus be worth operating with a government subsidy. However in many instances it would be prohibitively expensive for lines closed by the Beeching Axe to be reopened; although it was not stipulated in the report, since Beeching there has been a policy of disposing of surplus-to-requirements railway land. Therefore many bridges, cuttings and embankments have been removed and the land sold off for development; closed station buildings on remaining lines have often been either demolished or sold. |
|||
==References== |
|||
<references /> |
|||
== See also == |
|||
{{List of closed railway stations in Britain by letter}} |
|||
* [[List of closed railway stations in Britain]] |
|||
* [[List of British towns with no railway station]] |
|||
==Further reading== |
|||
* ''Forgotten Railways'': by H.P. White (1986) ISBN 0-946537-13-5. |
|||
* ''The Great Railway Conspiracy'': by David Henshaw (1994) ISBN 0-948135-48-4. |
|||
* ''British Railways after Beeching'': by G. Freeman Allen, Ian Allan.(1966) (No ISBN) |
|||
* ''BR 1948 - 1973'': by T.R.Gourvish Cambridge.(1974) |
|||
==External links== |
|||
*[http://www.timmonet.co.uk/html/body_beeching.htm Website about Beeching cuts in more detail] |
|||
*[http://www.joyce.whitchurch.btinternet.co.uk/maps.htm Railway maps before and after cuts] |
|||
*[http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/stations/ Extensive before and after photo collection of closed stations, with commentaries] |
|||
*[http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docSummary.php?docID=13 download the Beeching Report Part 1] |
|||
*[http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docSummary.php?docID=35 download the Beeching Report Part 2 (maps)] |
|||
[[Category:British Rail]] |
|||
[[Category:Government reports]] |
|||
[[Category:1963 in the United Kingdom]] |
|||
Version vom 14. August 2008, 12:41 Uhr
Sag mir, WO du stehst
Im Magazin der Berliner Zeitung vom 20./21.1.2007 findet man eine Geschichte von Alexander Osang mit dem obigen Titel (im Internet nicht vorhanden). Ganz am Ende steht, dass Osang am 20. Januar um 21oo Uhr im "Deutschen Theater" gelesen hat. Was, steht da allerdings nicht. Das einzige Buch, das in seinem Artikel mit Titel vorkommt, ist: Verliebt, Verlobt, Verheiratet von seinem "ehemaligen Kollegen" Torsten Preuß, dieses [1]. Man muß zwei mal klicken, um zu dem Buch zu kommen.
- Austerlitz 88.72.17.92 18:20, 30. Jan. 2007 (CET)
Ich würde gerne einige Sätze aus der Geschichte von Osang zitieren, aber auf die Diskussionsseite soll man nur schreiben, wenn man die Hauptseite diskutieren will, habe ich öfters gelesen.
Broken Link
Hi, der Link http://www.blitz-stadtmagazin.com/web/2002/012002/osang.htm fuehrt ins Nichts. Ich konnte auf www.blitz-stadtmagazin.com keine neue Adresse finden, also entferne ich den Link aus dem Artikel. Beste Gruesse, Joerg 141.14.232.135