Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-31-2022, 08:59 AM - 2 Likes   #18976
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,456
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
Yes, the roads are taking a hammering. State Highway 50 up to the Hawkes Bay has a substantial ridge on the centreline due to it being compressed on both sides by the big trucks.
Most large freight trucks are now 50 ton B-train units on 8-9 axles and those do substantial damage. Max weight is 53 tons, with 7.2 ton per steered axle and 8.2 ton for the other axles.

Added to that, the government has no interest in making side underrun protection mandatory, (I can write a whole book on the issue, the lies, the obfuscations and the lobbying) so cyclists and motorcyclists dice with death every time they have a truck to their side.
Tell me about it. Riding horses on the road in the past I have had my stirrup irons touched by wing mirrors from vehicles coming by. Not cool.
I'd actually heard that some of the forestry roads were allowing up to 72 stickered tons, but am having trouble finding that. If true, our roads are simply not designed for that load, however distributed.

QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
Indeed.

The problem of course is that rail can't compete with road unless we're all prepared to pay a lot more for our "stuff" to be transported around the country.
Sidebar: I have a serious issue with the Toll purchase and them speaking out both (rail, road) sides of their mouth. Tax incentives, properly applied would work wonders for businesses to develop. This is the norm in other OECD countries, not the government (and therefore us) paying for it.

QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
One of the key problems is the lack of rail network. Here's a map of the country's rail network. Rail works for stuff that can be transported and is not badly time dependent, because it's slower. So, it works well for stuff like bulk goods - iron ore, coal, even grain, but much less well for fresh produce and livestock. And, we like to have our stuff go, quickly, from sender to receiver, without having to be loaded and offloaded unnecessarily, which adds cost and time.

Another thing is that rail, when using Diesel, is not clean and green. If we had a comprehensive electrified rail network, it would help, but we don't. And, to build one now would not be economical and, even if we build it, trucks are still going to get there quicker. So, rail, in NZ, has historically transported between 10-15% of freight and the percentage is shrinking, not increasing.
Second, as Ross has mentioned, narrow gauge (Cape gauge) does not help.
Caveat, I don't have the professional interest of some others here, diesel is not clean and green but like ships, the per carry use is low (especially diesel/ electric hybrid). I know it is not comparable, by for giggles, check out the total diesel burn for the "Juice Train" in FLA (pardon the corporate branding). Then look at the load. Insert trees/pulp here.


I note with interest some of the current planning around the green hydrogen production and truck purchases from Hino. If we have supply, redevelopment and partnership of this energy source may help supply other carriers. Not holding my breath but worth thinking about, especially given the "carbon sink" forestry strategy this government is pursuing.

Back to photography. I took my drone with me this time, and think got some decent shots. Here's a couple from Waihi Beach and Akaroa, respectively:


Patterns
by Aaron, on Flickr


Akaroa cliffs
by Aaron, on Flickr


Last edited by Clarkey; 07-31-2022 at 09:03 AM. Reason: Fix You tube link
07-31-2022, 08:54 PM - 2 Likes   #18977
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
zkarj's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Wellington
Posts: 1,287
QuoteOriginally posted by Kiwizinho Quote
Has anyone costed things properly both ways? Back in the bad old days, I think there were rules that regulated trucking to give rail an unfair advantage but I understand there may have been a swing the other way via the trucking lobby.
My Dad used to spend a bit of time with Bob Stott, editor and publisher of Rails magazine, back in the 80s or so. Bob's constant refrain was that there was no "level playing field" for rail, which had to pay ALL of its costs, versus the trucking companies who got to use (and in some cases destroy) the roads. Doubtless there were rules, and certainly taxes, but the railways of the day had a big fat zero from government once they sold it off. Has it swung the other way? Most certainly, as evidenced by the current state of affairs. No complaints from the operator who... run as many (more) trucks as trains, and have basically not bothered with even any pretence at maintenance, forcing the government to buy the network back and invest $$$ and years to try to fix (at least the urban sections).

QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
One of the major issues with rail in NZ is it was built on a 'narrower' gauge to save money. This impacts the ability to carry heavy loads, and also the ability to have higher speeds. So, NZ rail is constrained by both load and speed based on some design decisions taken a very long time ago.
Meanwhile, heavier loads are allowed for the trucks despite the fairly dire effect on roads. If we were to consider the complete non-economic impact of trucks on our roads, I think we might find that rail has a substantial benefit. Rail's only contribution to "Road to Zero" will be better warning signs at some crossings to deter the idiots.

QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
One of the key problems is the lack of rail network.
See above about lack of maintenance, lack of government support, lack of basic care by the operator for so many years. The network used to be far more extensive, but as trucks were supported more and more over the years, much of it became uneconomic. Take a look at the washout of the line north of Wairoa a few years back. If that was a road, contractors would have been working on it within hours. As it was, it took months for the government to decide that it was worth fixing despite the economics.

QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
Another thing is that rail, when using Diesel, is not clean and green. If we had a comprehensive electrified rail network, it would help, but we don't.
We have the North Island Main Trunk electrified from Palmy to the Tron but... I'm sensing a theme here... the operator didn't bother maintaining the electric locos so they keep breaking down so they wanted to stop using them (despite at the time they made that statement, the diesels were breaking down with regularity in the Wellington suburban network confines!) until told by the gummint to pull their fingers out and make it work.

We keep building bigger and better roads "for the good of the country" while at the same time allowing councils to tender for the cheapest possible options for public transport. If we took even 10% of what is spent on urban roads alone and put that into public transport, then we'd come out better off all round. The same can be applied to taking money out of regional roads and putting it into more efficient infrastructure. The trucks originally picked up their loads from the trains and I see no reason that can't be the case again. Intermodal transfer has come a long way since the beginning. The rail doesn't need to go everywhere, just along the core routes. The same reasoning the line was only electrified between Palmerston North and Te Rapa.

And this brings me to a final point. If we only care about $cost, then we may as well light the planet on fire because it's cheaper.
07-31-2022, 09:47 PM - 1 Like   #18978
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Blenheim
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by zkarj Quote
We keep building bigger and better roads "for the good of the country"
I've noticed what a short term investment roads are. I've travelled from Blenheim to Canterbury numerous times since the Kaikōura earthquake, and really appreciated the massive rebuild involved, but what struck me was that it wasn't long after the road was completed and stop and gos removed, the surface was already rutted and rough in many places. It really surprised me how little time such a massive and expensive repair effort lasted before it was already needing repairs. Sure, the coastal seawalls remain good, and hopefully will do for years to come, but the lifespan of the road surface seems to be measured in months rather than years.
That's why I raised the initial query about the infrastructure cost of road vs rail, as rail has infrastructure costs too, but I'm not sure of the numbers in terms of how long it lasts between major maintenance, and what tonnage of freight it can carry in that time compared to road.
07-31-2022, 10:30 PM - 1 Like   #18979
Kiwi Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
NZ_Ross's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Timaru
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,222
QuoteOriginally posted by zkarj Quote
Meanwhile, heavier loads are allowed for the trucks despite the fairly dire effect on roads. If we were to consider the complete non-economic impact of trucks on our roads, I think we might find that rail has a substantial benefit.
I would love to see heaver loads possible on trains (think double stacking containers like in the US and Canada) and faster trains to enable more passenger use. Having been on passenger trains in Finland, Sweden and Denmark I would observe that with speeds of about 160km/hr city to city it made much more sense than using a car. I have also been on the Vitesse from Rome to Florence, and it was clicking along at 300+ km/hr and made more sense than flying. To achieve the northern European or Italian/French passenger train speeds requires significant capital and maintenance investment.

The point I was making is that our existing rail network design (and maintenance) is a significant constraint.

Some years ago I suggested in a national forum that we split our rail network into an upper north island heavy use/fast passenger - Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga and Whangarei to facilitate much more freight movement on rail, and fast passenger links. Then maintain the current network for the rest of the country. It is on from an infrastructure investment point of view as the distances are not that great, and the extra upgrade expenditure was only a few more billion to achieve. This suggestion was ignored - there is no vision in NZ around such things.

We would much rather maintain the colonial system we inherited with all the attendant compromises.

07-31-2022, 10:42 PM   #18980
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Blenheim
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
I have also been on the Vitesse from Rome to Florence, and it was clicking along at 300+ km/hr and made more sense than flying.
I've been on the Eurostar from London to Paris, and similar experience. Not as fast, but I've also been on numerous trains in Portugal. I missed one from Porto to Lisbon, and although I had to pay again, I only had to wait an hour for the next one.
That's the equivalent distance of Blenheim to Christchurch, but here if you miss the train, especially at this time of the year, you wait several days between Blenheim and Christchurch.
Unfortunately there's no equivalent to economy class either.
Personally, I find train travel far more comfortable than buses. I've been on both buses and trains here and overseas, and I'd rather take a train any day if I have to use public transport.
07-31-2022, 10:58 PM - 1 Like   #18981
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,391
QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
I would love to see heaver loads possible on trains (think double stacking containers like in the US and Canada) and faster trains to enable more passenger use. Having been on passenger trains in Finland, Sweden and Denmark I would observe that with speeds of about 160km/hr city to city it made much more sense than using a car. I have also been on the Vitesse from Rome to Florence, and it was clicking along at 300+ km/hr and made more sense than flying. To achieve the northern European or Italian/French passenger train speeds requires significant capital and maintenance investment.

The point I was making is that our existing rail network design (and maintenance) is a significant constraint.

Some years ago I suggested in a national forum that we split our rail network into an upper north island heavy use/fast passenger - Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga and Whangarei to facilitate much more freight movement on rail, and fast passenger links. Then maintain the current network for the rest of the country. It is on from an infrastructure investment point of view as the distances are not that great, and the extra upgrade expenditure was only a few more billion to achieve. This suggestion was ignored - there is no vision in NZ around such things.

We would much rather maintain the colonial system we inherited with all the attendant compromises.
I suspect that you've summed it up in just a few words: "There is no vision"

Our greatest problem, of course, is small population. New Zealand would work exceedingly well if we had about 3x the population we have now. As it is, there's too few of us to pay for the "nice to have" stuff we all want. But, no-one likes change and the thought to open us up for large scale (skilled) immigration is not popular, politically, so we'll plod on with systems that barely work (or not) being paid for by not enough of us. Oops. That sounds a bit political so I'll shut up.

Last edited by MarkJerling; 07-31-2022 at 11:04 PM.
08-01-2022, 02:21 AM - 3 Likes   #18982
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Blenheim
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
That sounds a bit political so I'll shut up.
Unopinionated Pentaxian? Isn't that an oxymoron?

08-01-2022, 05:54 AM   #18983
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,456
QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
I would love to see heaver loads possible on trains (think double stacking containers like in the US and Canada) and faster trains to enable more passenger use. Having been on passenger trains in Finland, Sweden and Denmark I would observe that with speeds of about 160km/hr city to city it made much more sense than using a car. I have also been on the Vitesse from Rome to Florence, and it was clicking along at 300+ km/hr and made more sense than flying. To achieve the northern European or Italian/French passenger train speeds requires significant capital and maintenance investment.

The point I was making is that our existing rail network design (and maintenance) is a significant constraint.

Some years ago I suggested in a national forum that we split our rail network into an upper north island heavy use/fast passenger - Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga and Whangarei to facilitate much more freight movement on rail, and fast passenger links. Then maintain the current network for the rest of the country. It is on from an infrastructure investment point of view as the distances are not that great, and the extra upgrade expenditure was only a few more billion to achieve. This suggestion was ignored - there is no vision in NZ around such things.

We would much rather maintain the colonial system we inherited with all the attendant compromises.
Yep. Nail on the head. I have family members who are designing other (electrical, IT) infrastructure and it may be a good time for that suggestion to be repeated Especially with the ongoing ports discussion.

One other point to make; Here in eastern Canada we have one of the largest networks on the planet. Except (and there is politics and much lobbying here), so the freight operator CN Rail gets priority over the passenger operator Via Rail. Hence flagship passenger trips are still subject to freight scheduling. To be avoided at all costs.
08-02-2022, 01:16 PM - 1 Like   #18984
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
zkarj's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Wellington
Posts: 1,287
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
As it is, there's too few of us to pay for the "nice to have" stuff we all want.
I still think taking a big wedge out of road funding would do A LOT to boost alternative infrastructure. I do think Transmission Gully needed to be built for resilience (every other route out of Wellington is tenuous for a big shake) but there is no way we need to build a second Mt. Vic tunnel or a flyover at the Basin, or improve the motorway that already exists. I don't know the actual percentages, but a hell of a lot of Wellington car commuters live within 1km of a railway station. Those that don't tend to have a bus service. If we took even 50% of these drivers off the roads, then there is no need to do anything to the roads other than basic maintenance. On my walk this morning I went past one of those "time to destination" signs and noted that the time to the airport was double what it normally is. That is 100% caused by people who have easy access to public transport.

As for a high speed rail network, yes, that's probably unlikely given our population density, but that isn't a reason to just abandon rail completely. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good, and all that. The Wellington suburban network originally reached only to Paekakariki and in my lifetime has been extended twice, to Paraparaumu and then Waikanae, and there is talk about now of going to Otaki. The talk is that this will rejuvenate Otaki and make it a more desirable place to live, which solves that other problem of urban density.

The whole "people don't like change" angle is an interesting one given the events of the last couple of years. How many businesses were of a mind that "working from home can't work" who have now realised they were just falling back on the (very overused) "that's the way we've always done it." The way we have long done transport is going to kill the planet.
08-02-2022, 03:28 PM - 1 Like   #18985
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,391
If every mommy stopped driving her special brood to school that would be a big help. Every school holiday it's evident that the roads carry much less traffic. Why kids can't walk or bike to school like we did I don't know. (And don't say traffic volumes. I grew up in large cities that make Auckland and Wellington look like small provincial towns.)
08-02-2022, 05:30 PM - 2 Likes   #18986
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Blenheim
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
If every mommy stopped driving her special brood to school that would be a big help
A good number of them seem to think school runs require serious off road capabilities too.

When I upgraded our car 3 years ago, I got a small stationwagon with 7 seats that was more economical than the last car, with the idea in mind that I could take another family if need be.
I didn't feel the need to get an AWD SUV, as it's not as if the route to school is a muddy track.
Another year and my daughter will probably be able to cycle, and then the car will not get much use.
Unfortunately in practice it hasn't happened often, as I'd figured that if I couldn't afford a hybrid or EV, at least car pooling could be a zero cost way to reduce vehicles on the road, and in fact potentially save money if you take turns, as your vehicle is only in use half the time it would be otherwise.
We've already worked out that we don't need to be a two car household, and I've just got to get around to cleaning our second car and putting it up for sale before we get another round of registration, as we barely use it any more.

Before Dad got dementia, he did some research, and apparently a car with one occupant is one of the most inefficient forms of transport, but a car with a full passenger load is one of the most efficient, except people aren't very much in the habit of sharing rides.
08-02-2022, 06:38 PM   #18987
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,391
Ah yes, the SUV. The "must have" car. When I was big into the 4wd hobby, I needed a "go anywhere" 4wd. Most of the towering behemoths on the road not only never go offroad but would be incapable of going offroad anyway. Yet, cars are bigger than ever before. Even "small" cars are bigger than ever. The original VW Golf was 3.7m long x 1.6m wide. The latest model is 4.3m long x 1.8m wide. The original 3-series BMW was 4.3m long x 1.65m wide. The current model is 4.7m long x 1.83m wide. Don't get me started on the Mini.

Ford no longer sells cars in New Zealand, other than the Ford Focus. It's all SUVs, in one shape or another, other than the Mustang of course. And the Ranger is the ultimate fashion accessory. The number of utes that never see a paddock is staggering.

I'd love an EV but secondhand ones are not affordable (yet) and new ones are certainly out of my price range. I've just bought another Mondeo (I seem to have a bit of a Mondeo fetish) but prior to doing that I looked at pretty much all cars and my criteria was simple: I need to have it big enough to fit 2 bicycles inside the car (so a hatchback of some sort was a must), I need 4 seats minimum and I need a towbar. And I need something that can accelerate quickly enough to overtake safely and something that can go around corners without falling over.

Having something with good safety features is probably also a good thing. The Mondeo has driver & front passenger, driver knee, front and rear side curtain airbags and even airbags in the sides of the front seats and, bizarrely, in the rear seatbelts. So, hopefully I can make this one last until EVs become more affordable.
08-02-2022, 07:35 PM - 1 Like   #18988
Pentaxian
Transit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Whanganui NZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,624
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
Very true, sadly. Why NZ has such an incredibly poor road culture I don't know. Then, of course, we have NZTA (Whaka whatever) and the Police with nothing better to do than to carry on with the overly simplistic "speed kills" mantra. What annoys me about that is that the "advice" by the powers that be is, in effect: As long as you stick to the speed limit, you can be a complete dickwad. And that's why we see such poor driving when it comes to merging lanes, right of way at roundabouts, large road users bullying others etc.

Sorry. Rant over.
Rant on !
Wish I was a mufti cop, I'd love to ticket every moron who wanders out of their lane

---------- Post added 3rd Aug 2022 at 02:40 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kiwizinho Quote
I've noticed what a short term investment roads are.etc.
In Whangas, we have seal, dig up for services, reseal, repeat

---------- Post added 3rd Aug 2022 at 02:42 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
...

I am happy enough with the FA 31mm f1.8 Limited and it has lived up to it's reviews and top billing. I will have to try it on the LX too, and see the results on film.
...
and get the full 31

---------- Post added 3rd Aug 2022 at 02:43 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kiwizinho Quote
Mine sometimes likes to use a Pentax too, although I was a little perplexed about where the headscarf came from, mind you a couple of years later she wanted me to take photos of her in essentially not much more than a grass skirt, and then on another occasion in full Viking armour complete with a battle axe, and I've had her as a forest elf. At one birthday she was running around dressed up as a shark, another, a tiger, so there's no knowing what ethnicity or even species she's going to want to dress up as next.
lovely shot and tale
08-03-2022, 12:22 AM   #18989
Kiwi Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
NZ_Ross's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Timaru
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,222
QuoteOriginally posted by Transit Quote
and get the full 31
Hi Pete, accurate observation but in fairness I have been pretty happy with the initial results off the K-3 III. It is a very nice lens.
08-03-2022, 01:06 AM   #18990
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Waikikamukau
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,247
QuoteQuote:
To achieve the northern European or Italian/French passenger train speeds requires significant capital and maintenance investment.
and a more geophysical stable environment ?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aperture, bit, bobd, camera, display, ear, flickr, jun, k1, k5, kiwi, lens, lenses, new zealand, nz, pentax, pentaxians, photos, pig, pm, post, results, ross, saturation, sharpness, theatre, time, weeks, whanganui, yesterday
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kiwi Newbie :) Heidi Welcomes and Introductions 15 01-13-2011 09:04 PM
Another Kiwi has landed zk-cessnaguy Welcomes and Introductions 5 11-22-2010 05:00 AM
Another G'Day from an Oz Kiwi Tonto Welcomes and Introductions 4 04-26-2010 12:44 AM
Hi From yet another Kiwi Scott NZ Welcomes and Introductions 4 06-14-2009 07:24 PM
Kiwi sharp shooter (aspirations...) K-xx-500-user Welcomes and Introductions 11 10-07-2008 09:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:48 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top