Rail - Road

Life Cars & Motorcycles
1

An en-trained anti-aircraft unit went through Tainan station yesterday when I was waiting for my train. Lots of Humvees, generators, radar and radio trucks, and some twin bofors AAA looking things.

See that a lot, and it makes sense when you consider the mpg a Humvee gets. I suppose its a no-cost op, since the railway is nationalised, but when I was in the British army (when the rail system was nationalised) I never saw or heard of any deployments by rail. Probably just a “cost centre” accountancy thing.

OTOH, it could just be to stop them getting lost, I suppose.

2

[quote=“Ducked”]An en-trained anti-aircraft unit went through Tainan station yesterday when I was waiting for my train. Lots of Humvees, generators, radar and radio trucks, and some twin bofors AAA looking things.

See that a lot, and it makes sense when you consider the mpg a Humvee gets. I suppose its a no-cost op, since the railway is nationalised, but when I was in the British army (when the rail system was nationalised) I never saw or heard of any deployments by rail. Probably just a “cost centre” accountancy thing.

OTOH, it could just be to stop them getting lost, I suppose.[/quote]

For some systems the vehicles are too heavy for public roads and require special permits if traveling on public roads. For those, rail is the preferred method.

3

[quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”]An en-trained anti-aircraft unit went through Tainan station yesterday when I was waiting for my train. Lots of Humvees, generators, radar and radio trucks, and some twin bofors AAA looking things.

See that a lot, and it makes sense when you consider the mpg a Humvee gets. I suppose its a no-cost op, since the railway is nationalised, but when I was in the British army (when the rail system was nationalised) I never saw or heard of any deployments by rail. Probably just a “cost centre” accountancy thing.

OTOH, it could just be to stop them getting lost, I suppose.[/quote]

For some systems the vehicles are too heavy for public roads and require special permits if traveling on public roads. For those, rail is the preferred method.[/quote]

Wouldn’t apply to anything I’ve seen entrained. In fact I can’t think of anything it would apply to, except possibly tanks on their own tracks (which I’ve never seen entrained). Certainly wouldn’t apply to Humvee’s

The question isn’t so much “Why do they do it”, since it makes sense, even in a country as tiny as Taiwan. The question is “Why doesn’t anyone else.” (or at least the British don’t, and I’ve never seen it anywhere else).

I’d guess the answer is probably “No one makes them, and they can’t be arsed”. One up to the Taiwanese, I think.

4

Most likely they do, except with considerably better security.

5

[quote=“Ducked”][quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”]An en-trained anti-aircraft unit went through Tainan station yesterday when I was waiting for my train. Lots of Humvees, generators, radar and radio trucks, and some twin bofors AAA looking things.

See that a lot, and it makes sense when you consider the mpg a Humvee gets. I suppose its a no-cost op, since the railway is nationalised, but when I was in the British army (when the rail system was nationalised) I never saw or heard of any deployments by rail. Probably just a “cost centre” accountancy thing.

OTOH, it could just be to stop them getting lost, I suppose.[/quote]

For some systems the vehicles are too heavy for public roads and require special permits if traveling on public roads. For those, rail is the preferred method.[/quote]

Wouldn’t apply to anything I’ve seen entrained. In fact I can’t think of anything it would apply to, except possibly tanks on their own tracks (which I’ve never seen entrained). Certainly wouldn’t apply to Humvee’s

The question isn’t so much “Why do they do it”, since it makes sense, even in a country as tiny as Taiwan. The question is “Why doesn’t anyone else.” (or at least the British don’t, and I’ve never seen it anywhere else).

I’d guess the answer is probably “No one makes them, and they can’t be arsed”. One up to the Taiwanese, I think.[/quote]

Actually you do not know what system you saw and there are a lot of real things out there that exist that you can’t think of because you don’t know.Further I have given you the correct answer to your question and I actually do know.

6

Most likely they do, except with considerably better security.[/quote]

So those British Army road convoys that I’ve seen, and been in, (and on one painful occaision navigated for, and got it lost) were actually trains in disguise?

Fool [strike]Fritz[/strike] Ivan every time.

(Did you once work as a script writer for the BBC Radio Goon show, in the chilly early days of the Cold War?)

EDIT

(I looked it up, mostly because I’m supposed to be doing a Proofread/literature survey for “The Effects of Product Value, Service Quality, Perceived Value on Customer Satisfaction and Customer Loyalty”. Death where is thy F-ING sting?)

"[i][Waves against wood]

Greenslade:
Seagoon and Bluebottle travelled by sea. To avoid detection by enemy U-boats they spoke German throughout the voyage, heavily disguised as Spaniards.

Sellers:
As an added precaution they travelled on separate decks and wore separate shoes on different occasions.

Seagoon:
The ship was disguised as a train, to make the train sea-worthy it was done up to look like a boat and painted to appear like a tram.

Milligan:
All rather confusing really[/i]."

Milligan (1954) The Dreaded Batter-Pudding Hurler of Bexhill-on-Sea

ENDEDIT

7

[quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”][quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”]An en-trained anti-aircraft unit went through Tainan station yesterday when I was waiting for my train. Lots of Humvees, generators, radar and radio trucks, and some twin bofors AAA looking things.

See that a lot, and it makes sense when you consider the mpg a Humvee gets. I suppose its a no-cost op, since the railway is nationalised, but when I was in the British army (when the rail system was nationalised) I never saw or heard of any deployments by rail. Probably just a “cost centre” accountancy thing.

OTOH, it could just be to stop them getting lost, I suppose.[/quote]

For some systems the vehicles are too heavy for public roads and require special permits if traveling on public roads. For those, rail is the preferred method.[/quote]

Wouldn’t apply to anything I’ve seen entrained. In fact I can’t think of anything it would apply to, except possibly tanks on their own tracks (which I’ve never seen entrained). Certainly wouldn’t apply to Humvee’s

The question isn’t so much “Why do they do it”, since it makes sense, even in a country as tiny as Taiwan. The question is “Why doesn’t anyone else.” (or at least the British don’t, and I’ve never seen it anywhere else).

I’d guess the answer is probably “No one makes them, and they can’t be arsed”. One up to the Taiwanese, I think.[/quote]

Actually you do not know what system you saw and there are a lot of real things out there that exist that you can’t think of because you don’t know.Further I have given you the correct answer to your question and I actually do know.[/quote]

Ah! Need-to-know basis eh?

Say no more, old man. You can rely on my discretion.

Be like dad. Keep mum.

Loose lips sink ships.

Careless talk costs er…credibility.

A nod is as good as an oxymoron to military intelligence.

Or alternatively…

Bollocks.

8

[quote=“Ducked”]
Or alternatively…

Bollocks.[/quote]

Or maybe Numbnuts

9

[quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”]
Or alternatively…

Bollocks.[/quote]

Or maybe Numbnuts[/quote]

Or maybe not. If I understand your American English correctly, that’d be in violation of the “Discuss the message, not the messenger.” principle, and might invoke The Wrath of The Mods.
:no-no:

10

I’ve seen similar in South Korea. As you say, rail is an efficient form of transportation, so why not.

11

[quote=“Ducked”][quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”]
Or alternatively…

Bollocks.[/quote]

Or maybe Numbnuts[/quote]

Or maybe not. If I understand your American English correctly, that’d be in violation of the “Discuss the message, not the messenger.” principle, and might invoke The Wrath of The Mods.
:no-no:[/quote]

The message was clear and concise. Then it moved to some babble about morons and bollocks. Bollocks and numbnuts, believe we are referencing the same part of the anatomy. So whats the problem here?

12

Morons?

Anyway, leaving aside the linguistic subtlties stuff, and the International Man of Mystery stuff, it could be that its something to do with towing. Towing isn’t illegal in Taiwan (according to previous threads, anyway) but they do seem to be scared of it.

There was a lot of towed equipment in that AA unit. I’ve seen units on trains that didn’t include any towed equipment, but a military fear of towing might be enough to establish the habit of traveling by train.

But I suspect the real reason may be simpler, sadder, and staring us in the face.

They cant actually drive.

These are Taiwanese conscripts we’re talking about here, after all.

We already know that, given the choice between (a) teaching people to drive, and (b) faking it, which option the Taiwan civil government takes. Why would we expect the military authorities to be any different?

The difference, perhaps, is that the military aren’t prepared to take the inevitable casualties, and have…er…surrendered.

Maybe not one up to Taiwan after all.

13

[quote=“Ducked”]Morons?

Anyway, leaving aside the linguistic subtlties stuff, and the International Man of Mystery stuff, it could be that its something to do with towing. Towing isn’t illegal in Taiwan (according to previous threads, anyway) but they do seem to be scared of it.

[/quote]

Not sure what point is being made, or value added, with the rest of the comments but Taiwan towing restrictions are not the reasons for rail transport. The larger items of mobile ground equipment are designed to be pulled by commercial tractor trucks in standard/legal tractor trailer configurations (including Taiwan). In some systems, there are items that violate the weight or size restrictions for public roads. Weight is the larger problem of the two. If the weight significantly exceeds a threshold for an item (and in some systems they do), then a study must be conducted to determine if there is acceptable risk that damage will not occur to roads or bridges used prior to giving a permit. For these systems, rail is the preferred method and it is the doctrine provided to the users on transport. There also is a preference to keep the system together (not break it up for shipment) in which everything is shipped by rail, when possible.

Not a man of mystery, just a man of knowledge, at least on this subject. I welcome further self argumentation on this.

14

[quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ducked”]Morons?

Anyway, leaving aside the linguistic subtlties stuff, and the International Man of Mystery stuff, it could be that its something to do with towing. Towing isn’t illegal in Taiwan (according to previous threads, anyway) but they do seem to be scared of it.

[/quote]

Not sure what point is being made, or value added, with the rest of the comments but Taiwan towing restrictions are not the reasons for rail transport. The larger items of mobile ground equipment are designed to be pulled by commercial tractor trucks in standard/legal tractor trailer configurations (including Taiwan). In some systems, there are items that violate the weight or size restrictions for public roads. Weight is the larger problem of the two. If the weight significantly exceeds a threshold for an item (and in some systems they do), then a study must be conducted to determine if there is acceptable risk that damage will not occur to roads or bridges used prior to giving a permit. For these systems, rail is the preferred method and it is the doctrine provided to the users on transport. There also is a preference to keep the system together (not break it up for shipment) in which everything is shipped by rail, when possible.

Not a man of mystery, just a man of knowledge, at least on this subject. I welcome further self argumentation on this.[/quote]

Do we have to “add value”? The Pressure!

Re the “added value” on your heavy equipment thing, yeah, you already said that.

Don’t doubt its sometimes true, but, as I already pointed out, its seems unlikely to apply to the stuff I’ve seen, which were standard vehicles comparable to or lighter than many civilian vehicles in general use.

I assume you aren’t saying that a military spec Humvee (the specific example I gave), or GS truck, or ambulance, unladen and not towing, exceeds the weight limits for public roads?

If you are, that’s hard to believe. If you aren’t, then the “heavy equipment” thing isn’t specifically relevant to this context.

Oh, and since I was there, and you weren’t, your assertion that I don’t know what I saw doesn’t seem to add much value.

15

In New Zealand the armed forces don’t use the railways either. Mind you we don’t have any armor or heavier vehicles. But it seems to be more of a Commonwealth thing. As Aussie also does not use there railways for the there heavier Armor and whatnot. The last time NZ armed forces used the railroads I think was 50 years ago when we did have Armor.

I also see weekly trains go past with various military equipment. A lot of the equipment they carry on the trains could easily be used on the road. And is not actually that heavy. The only thing that might be difficult on some roads would be there M60s. Even they should be ok on a lot of the roads on the east coast. A lot of the stuff is no heavier then what your usual Trucky would be towing around…

16

Alternate explanation: permanently mobile. Shell game. Shelter to shelter. Did any eqpt show “use”?

17

Something like that (with a dedicated rail tunnel system) was, IIRC, proposed for US ICBM’s, and features in an Ian Banks Scifi novel that I can’t remember the name of (“The Use of Weapons”?)

Possible, I suppose, since I believe there are still some sections of West coast line encased in concrete bomb shelters, but doing that by ordinary surface train doesn’t seem to make much tactical sense, since it restricts mobility much more than doing it by road.

A railway line (including any shelters on it) is probably rather easily targeted these days, and much more easily cut than a road.