Earlier this year I saw a seminar given by an Italian mathematician who was doing some modelling for swimsuit designers. The reduction in drag that was predicted by the model corresponded very well with the swimmer's (Italian woman, can't remember name) improved performance. The mathematician was quite surprised/proud of this. I can't remember what the time improvement was but it was significant (~1 sec I think). The advantage from these suits is very real.

Sorry Josh. I agree whole-heartedly with public transport getting a fair deal and I too am very concerned that after this motorway is built it will then be very difficult to justify the expense of building a railway along an undesignated corridor. However, my point was IF the government was committed to building both rail and road, then they could build the road first, watch neighbouring property prices plummet, then buy cheap houses for the rail corridor. This wouldn't work if you did rail before road... but I don't believe for a second that the government is interested in building a railway so I'm just being silly.

Won't the houses next to the motorway be cheaper after the motorway is built... so Ontrack won't have to pay so much if they want to build the railway after all. If they did it the other way round (rail before road) then the houses wouldn't have lost their value. Win, win!!