So I was wandering over the railway bridge on Brunstane road on saturday, and I noticed that there was a huge train filled with sand parked underneath it, and there were workmen busy covering one of the tracks with sand.
Does anyone know why they are doing this?
I have my suspicions that it's a plan to ensure that the railway never gets opened up again. Don't want a decent transport link ruining the traffic problems in Portobello.
Filling in the railway?
Re: Filling in the railway?
You should have shouted down and asked them, they might have knownGrunk wrote:So I was wandering over the railway bridge on Brunstane road on saturday, and I noticed that there was a huge train filled with sand parked underneath it, and there were workmen busy covering one of the tracks with sand.
Does anyone know why they are doing this?
I have my suspicions that it's a plan to ensure that the railway never gets opened up again. Don't want a decent transport link ruining the traffic problems in Portobello.
Re: Filling in the railway?
Or, you could try phoning the network rail community liasion line, they might be able to tell ya, or if they dont know they may get back to ya. The number will be on their website.Grunk wrote:So I was wandering over the railway bridge on Brunstane road on saturday, and I noticed that there was a huge train filled with sand parked underneath it, and there were workmen busy covering one of the tracks with sand.
Does anyone know why they are doing this?
I have my suspicions that it's a plan to ensure that the railway never gets opened up again. Don't want a decent transport link ruining the traffic problems in Portobello.
I rather think that "filling in" the railway line in question would have further implication than just for Portobello... The line that runs under the bridge on Brunstane Rd is the East Coast Mainline.
Or are you talking about the bridge just before Brunstane Station, on Milton Rd? Two lines past under this - one links to the South Sub and is rarely used, the other goes to the platform at Brunstane and onto Newcraighall. Putting in a point after the bridge would allow the same traffic, but just a single line under the bridge. This in turn would allow the bridge to be fixed or alternative temporary arrangements made to remove current road restrictions (i.e. three lanes, reduced width, reduced weight).
Or are you talking about the bridge just before Brunstane Station, on Milton Rd? Two lines past under this - one links to the South Sub and is rarely used, the other goes to the platform at Brunstane and onto Newcraighall. Putting in a point after the bridge would allow the same traffic, but just a single line under the bridge. This in turn would allow the bridge to be fixed or alternative temporary arrangements made to remove current road restrictions (i.e. three lanes, reduced width, reduced weight).
Yeah, you said it, half*** ideas.Grunk wrote: I just always assume it some half *** idea to increase transport inefficiency and wast money.
Here is another example of one such idea:
Grunk wrote: I have my suspicions that it's a plan to ensure that the railway never gets opened up again. Don't want a decent transport link ruining the traffic problems in Portobello.
Michael, is there any truth in the rumour that you were a consultant on Simon Pegg'slatest film 
Nope.Marya wrote:Michael, is there any truth in the rumour that you were a consultant on Simon Pegg'slatest film
Last edited by BeachBum on 29 Sep 2008, 16:54, edited 2 times in total.
