|
Do help him to understand that the vast majority of law-abiding motorists feel that the new anti-speed culture is oppressive and it serves only to erode the public's support for the police and to increase the distance between police and public, creating a gap that neither body can afford to live with.
|
|
A tenuous link I know, just to say that a woman Vicky ??? who is apparently the Chairman of Transport 2000 was on Radio 5 Live yesterday, happened to say that her family do not own a car!
|
|
HJ if you get a chance ask him about his views on the run down of Roads POlicing.
|
HJ if you get a chance ask him about his views on the run down of Roads POlicing.
And don't fall into the trap of talking about resources being diverted into spdcamras, since they are self-funding. The decline in traffic police is a straightforward diversion of resources into other areas.
|
|
|
|
...a woman Vicky ??? who is apparently the Chairman of Transport 2000 was on Radio 5 Live yesterday, happened to say that her family do not own a car!
Why is that a surprise? Transport 2000 is a lobby group that promotes greater use of public transport. She might be considered a hypocrite if she did own one.
|
Why is that a surprise? Transport 2000 is a lobby group that promotes greater use of public transport. She might be considered a hypocrite if she did own one.
>>
The biggest hypocrisy is in the name Transport 2000. Transport Middle Ages would describe their aims more accurately.
|
|
|
Why is that a surprise? Transport 2000 is a lobby group that promotes greater use of public transport. She might be considered
a hypocrite if she did own one.
>>
Transport 2000 are supposed to present a balanced view, when I heard that the chairman does not have a car I just though that it explains a lot.
|
According to its website
Transport 2000 is the independent national body concerned with sustainable transport. It looks for answers to transport problems and aims to reduce the environmental and social impact of transport by encouraging less use of cars and more use of public transport, walking and cycling.
Transport 2000's vision is of a country where traffic no longer dominates our lives, where many of our journeys can be made on foot, by cycle or using public transport and where you don't need a car to enjoy the countryside or city life.
A pressure group of like minded individuals with a laudable aim albeit one that might be thought unachievable. It's no more required to put a balanced view than is the ABD in promoting the view from the other end of the continuum.
I’m sure NW will pop up with the figure bit there is a surprisingly large segment of the population that neither owns nor has access to a vehicle. In some cases through choice, in others lack of affordability or for medical reasons. I would happily reduce my car fleet from two to one if busses would both get me to the morning train and from the evening one.
|
I would not commute in a car if public transport were viable, affordable and comfortable.
To all intents and purposes it is not possible to stop me using my car by raising the costs.
Improving availability, affordability and comfort of public transport might, in fact well could, succeed.
So when will they realise that penalising one form of transport is ridiculous if one is not also enhancing the other alternatives ?
|
So when will they realise that penalising one form of transport is ridiculous if one is not also enhancing the other alternatives ?
When the desert freezes over and camels take up skating?
Personal transport is a cash cow. If everyone abandonned their cars tomorrow and took to public transport the country would have a serious financial problem. If you make public transport too attractive then the source of revenue from cars drops and that gap has to be plugged somehow. So the way to do it is to make both forms of transport as unattractive as each other.
If everyone starts using broadband and commuting on t'internet instead of commuting in reality then watch that get taxed to the hilt to make up the short fall. The moral arguments aren't there, they're just smoke screens to keep the taxes as high as the electorate will allow.
One could choose to commute on horseback or go by carriage.. not quite sure how you go about measuring horse emissions and who would volunteer....
teabelly
|
|
|
|
|
|
From the 2001 census statistics 27% of households in England & Wales don't have a car or van, which seemed quite high to me. How that 27% breaks down into 'can't afford it' versus ' city dweller with viable public transport' isn't detailed.
|
How many of that number actually have a car/van but it isn't registered in their name so they didn't put it down? Were company cars excluded? 27% of households not owning a vehicle might not be too far off and would be different to households who had the use of a vehicle that may not necessarily be owned by them.
teabelly
|
In my house you would find that 50% of the adults did not own a vehicle obviously indicating that car ownership is not essential and a substantial portion of the country's population manages quite happily without.
Worse, you would also find that 50% of the adults in this sample household owned more than one vehicle which is clearly more than they need and should be penalised heavily for recklessly adding to the polution and congestion in this country.
These two figures clearly showing that at least 50% of car ownership is not essential and, at least half the time, is an inconsiderate, unneccesary luxury.
Clearly banning cars in their entirety would not affect 50% of the household and the other 50% deserve to be penalised. So therefore banning cars, or at least making them prohibitively expensive is entirely justified and would be supported by a substantial proportion of the electorate.
Just the sort of statistics that our government loves.
|
Just the sort of statistics that our government loves.
Mark, I read your post. Now my brain is hurting.
|
|
|
|
The actual phrase used on the site is 'have no car or van' , which is not clear enough IMHO to discriminate between 'ownership' & 'access to'.
FWIW the stats. are here :-
neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/default.asp?nsid=f...e
Glad to see that in my neck of the woods car theft is 25% of national average!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beautifully put Roger - I agree wholeheartedly
|
one 50 mile stretch of road in Lincolnshire where they are sited at the only safe overtakign spots.
Did he say which road it is? I'm curious because I often have cause to drive in Lincolnshire.
|
speed cameras in Lincs - take your pick...
www.abd.org.uk/cameras/lincolnshire.htm
|
The point about the chairperson of transport 2000 not owning a car is that it proves that she lives in an urban enviroment (bets on Islington?) where not owning a car is possible.
Anyone living in a rural enviroment MUST have a car and is likely to be on a far lower income so less able to afford the taxes the treehuggers wish to impose. Just another example of the 'if it ain't about London we ain't interested' viewpoint.
|
Surely there must be a significant of people who, like me, would use public transport if it was clean and convenient, and at least not prohibitivly expensive ?
I certainly would. So if they simply improved the buses in my [rural] area and reactivated the little lines between villages, then chances are my car would get little, if any, use at the weekend.
And given that my major issue with trains is the journey to and from the stations at either ends, if those buses were improved also, then I'd use it a lot less in the week.
Without anybody having to dictate to me, restrict my freedom, or penalise me for using it.
Now I'me sure that the above wouldn't apply to a lot of people. Perhaps even the majority. But surely it would appeal to sufficient numbers to make quite a signficant difference.
Sadly I feel that if they are ever successful in the total restriction of cars, they will then start on long distance trains and buses, and essentially carry on until the country is much less mobile than it is now, perhaps significantly so.
****
|
Right thats it - I violently disagree with you and I am coming over there to punch your lights out. Northampton village somewhere init? near Brackley?
Oh, I have no car. Let me see, thats SWT trains into Waterloo, The tube to Main line station (now which main line station do I need) Need to change somewhere on the main line (wonder where) Is there a bus at the other end? dunno.
Will you still be there at 9pm tonight so I can punch your lights out?
OK Crude I know, but it illustrates one important thing. It does not matter how good, clean, cheap and reliable Public transport is - it can never ever match the "immediate point to point" transport requirement. And yes I am a public transport user, taking the car into the City of London is madness (as it should be really) Train/tube is faster and cheaper (if you include parking costs)
But that is "planned travel"
|
If its anything like the rest of the lead times from your company, I am strangely unworried !
However, on the rest of your points, public transport doesn't work well for "ad-hoc" travel. However, probably 90% of my travel is either commuting or totally predictable regular travel such as to the shops or similar.
Now my office has moved my mileage is much reduced. I do about 750 miles per week. Add probably another 150 to cover what I do in the other car, and we're talking about 900 miles a week or so.
Decent buses to and from Bicester station and either Leamington or Warwick station, plus a decent "inter-village" train/bus service would probably knock 700 miles off that.
That's pretty significant.
What stops me is two naff bus services between stations and my home/office and no form of transport (train or bus) between villages.
It wouldn't even have to be quicker, as long as it was similar. In a car I am forever spilling my coffee on my paper every time the phone rings.
|
>>Oh, I have no car. Let me see, thats SWT trains into Waterloo, The tube to Main line station (now which main line station do I need) Need to change somewhere on the main line (wonder where) Is there a bus at the other end? dunno<<
You could alsways phone Bombay or Delhi for directions!
--
\"Nothing less than 8 cylinders will do\"
|
|
Taps at keyboard "the computer says noooo"
|
>>Then people started finding that cars were more convenient and that time is money
And sometimes it is. But usually, at least for me, the ability to cope with stress and pressue and retain some level of quiet time is at least as important.
A train journey might be a pain for most people, but for me its a welcome moment of relief. The days I go to London are great; the journey is predictable and long enough to relax.
And I can't believe that I am alone.
|
Ok, How about a real life planned situation.
I have a customer meeting in Birmingham, Near the bull ring, next Wednesday 9:00am
Ok thats thats leave home at 5:30 for first train at 5:45am, arrive New Street 08:45 and the cost - wait for it - is £111.00!
or
Leave home at 06:30, arrive Bull ring car park 08:45. Thats 4 gals diesel, £8 parking and an hour in bed thank you.
or
Leave home at 06.45, park at Warwick Parkway Station, £6 return from there to Moor St and three gallons diesel and hour/15 minutes in bed.
Guess which one of the options I will NOT be taking?
|
RF,
You're missing the point.
It will not / can not apply to all people
It will not / can not apply all the time
You will not / should not be restricted from using your car
However, my point is that there are occasions when public transport would be quite possible if it were available. For me, that would be a substantial amount of the time.
For you, perhaps not. But surely it would apply often enough and to enough people to actually make a significant difference without actually winding anybody up with ridiculous laws, restrictions, taxes, fines or anything else.
>>Leave home at 06.45, park at Warwick Parkway Station
Excuse me ? You live around here ? Best you do a bit of customer entertaining then..
|
Mark,
Not alone, since returning from rural Oz (no buses or trains whatsoever) I have been using buses and trains into Oxford for 95% of my commuting and occasional longer trips. The congestion and parking charges simply made it uneconomic to commute by car. Due to very strict timing requirements (2 year old to nursery) my wife and I commute at slightly different times so no car sharing. We do run a car for weekend and shopping use.
This is about to change, after nearly 4 years of buses and trains First GW have taken over the Thames Trains franchise and our local bus operator has lost the bus contract into Oxford after 74 years to Stagecoach. ALL the timetables and frequencies are changing for the worse. The result is that we are having to reconsider driving into work and whilst I love motoring the commute into Oxford is not something I am looking forward to.
I appreciate that this might not suit everyone, but I much prefer the time to relax and read up a scientific paper or journal on a bus/train than stuck in a traffic jam on the A44 or A40.
StarGazer
|
with apologies to hj for continuing this hijack of his camera thread.
public transport vs private cars:
many sesnible points already made, and mark(rlbs) got it right in summing up the reasons why one mode of transport is better than the other depending on the circumstances - including whether the journey is a commute to work or whether it is a family outing with different needs for different age groups.
in the end, most people will balance the advantages/disadvantages of cost, convenience, comfort, time and possibly privacy-needs before choosing one or the other mode of transport.
if fuel and car ownership costs rise/reduce significantly, or if the congestion on the roads everywhere improves/worsens, or public transport improves/worsens significanlty in terms of comfort/costs/convenience then the tipping point of the balance will shift for some people to make a change from their previously preferred mose of transport.
there are plenty of permutations here for some quango or think-tank to keep them busy for decades, writing papers and setting up working committees to investigate the environmental impact based on various scenarios.
|
Ok I shall leave this thread with my parting words of wisdom.
For any user, for 90% of the time, there is NO single mode of trasport that is better than others. For most users for 90% of all circumstances there is one way of supplying transport needs.
Integration.
Integration does not mean pricing/legislating/making impossible one form of transport out of the market for the betterment of another. It means making ALL forms of transport interlink.
The Warwick Parkway example I gave is a classic example of where it works. A new station, built within a stones throw of major road junction, with ample parking and access, and a reliable, comfortable well priced journey into a major city.
Are there any of these outside London? Nope. The greens would have a fit if we wanted one. Green belt torn up for a car park? jeez they would turn apoplectic forgetting that more people would be traveling into london on public transport boosting up the numbers making it cheaper and allowing the spreading of more congestion charges, which on the whole work.
If Groups like transport 2000 were to embrace the car in a constructive manner, they would possibly achieve some of their aims.
And Mark? no I live 100 miles away from you, But next time I am at a certain place in Warwick maybe I can look you up and you can give me that pint you owe me.
|
Are there any of these outside London? Nope. The greens would have a fit if we wanted one. Green belt torn up for a car park? jeez they would turn apoplectic....
There was a plan for just such a carpark at Boston Manor tube station. A single access road from the M4 east and a single exit to M4 west. It never happened. It seemed a useful idea.
|
|
The point about the chairperson of transport 2000 not owning a car is that it proves that she lives in an urban enviroment (bets on Islington?) where not owning a car is possible.
It's also possible in rural areas, though the constraints are different (particulkarly if you want to commute into a town). But I think you'll find that the likes of Transport 2000 are the strongest advocates of improved rural bus services, which have been severely reduced since privatisation.
|
Who pays for Transport 2000? Where does it get its money
FRom their website, at www.transport2000.org.uk/helpT2000/Helping.asp
"Transport 2000 is an independent campaigning and research body and relies on donations from individuals and corporate bodies such as local authorities, grant-making trusts and environmental or transport organisations"
The reason I ask is I thought it was supported by the privatised bus and rail companies.
That would indeed appear to be one of their sources of funding.
|
"Transport 2000 is an independent campaigning and research body and relies on donations from individuals and corporate bodies such as local authorities, grant-making trusts and environmental or transport organisations" >> the privatised bus and rail companies. That would indeed appear to be one of their sources of funding.
I wonder where the balance lies? How sizeable are the donations from individuals vs the donations from corporate bodies whose interests the promote.
|
I wonder where the balance lies? How sizeable are the donations from individuals vs the donations from corporate bodies whose interests the promote.
I couldn't find their accounts on the website, so I dunno.
But looking at what they are doing, I'm can't see anything that I would expect them to be doing differently if they weren't receiving funds from the railcos -- the interests of their other stakeholders would be pushing them in the same direction.
I think the same goes for both sides of the argument. If, for example, HJ was not receiving advertising income from the motor industry, would he be arguing a different corner? I'm sure he wouldn't.
|
Who pays for Transport 2000? Where does it get its money? The reason I ask is I thought it was supported by the privatised bus and rail companies.
It is, although I didn't realise until I just looked it up:
www.transport2000.org.uk/aboutT2000/Structure.htm
|
More should be done to encourage those who can to switch to public transport, starting by toning down the hysterical media coverage of train accidents.
|
I don't have any confidence that the public transport infrastructure, as it is, could cope if significant numbers of commuters decided to hang up their keys.
number_cruncher
|
I don't have any confidence that the public transport infrastructure, as it is, could cope if significant numbers of commuters decided to hang up their keys.
Extra train capacity has long lead-in times. But new bus services can be added very quickly.
|
Yes, you are right there - I was thinking more about the railway, because that is the service I now use frequently.
Beyond the obvious permanent way issues, I think that the engineering decision to do away with loco hauled interchangeable carriages, and replace them with permanently coupled rakes of bespoke carriages with underslung engines makes the railway even more inflexible.
number_cruncher
|
Some years ago a report was produced exploring improving interchanges between tube line stations and other railway lines. I emailed Ken Livingstones office suggesting it should be reexamined but they had never heard of it.
Can anyone recall this report and can anyone point me to a copy?
|
>Beyond the obvious permanent way issues, I think that the >engineering decision to do away with loco hauled >interchangeable carriages, and replace them with permanently >coupled rakes of bespoke carriages with underslung engines >makes the railway even more inflexible.
Agree, locomotive+carriages is more flexible but comes at a price - extra manpower to shunt the carriages around, plus time at dead-end terminus platforms plus cost of an extra locomotive to drag the carriages clear of the now stranded 'train' loco. By contrast the "bespoke carriages with underslung engines" ('multiple unit' in railway speak) just needs the driver to change ends.
|
Part of the problem is that cars have been getting cheaper to run over the past decades, while employment patterns have been getting less stable. So people find themselves commuting over larger distances and the journey they make can vary from year to year. We don't have to do it that way though and it didn't happen by some weird force of nature; we let it go that way by choice when (among other things) we built housing developments, business parks, and out of town shopping centres away from established public transport routes, instead of using the city centres. It's going to hurt when cars start getting more expensive to run again as I think they must--there isn't enough space to put them all and if you own real estate you want to make money from it--but we'll adapt, just as we have in the past.
The golden age of motoring that all this seems to hark back to was actually a period when cars were a real luxury item; we enjoyed them more because we didn't depend on them. I work from home and when I do have to commute I use the train for all the reasons Mark has given, so I think I appreciate what that was like.
|
HJ,
What was your impression mof Mr B. Did you get a chance to challange him directly on any issues (including the Roads Policing one)
|
I was in Leuven, Belgium at the weekend and commented to Mrs S how many people appeared to be using public transport - it MUST be working out there. I was drinking Duvel (Mmmm...) at a bar which gave a view of a very efficient, clean, well organised and heavily used bus station.
I think the problem is that our services have been permitted to decline beyond repair. Like many things, they bear the scars of continual cost cutting (and the local yobbery, which also seemed less prevalent over there)
|
If people were disposed to change from private to public transport - even if it was only a small proportion of overall users - public transport would probably grind to a halt or have insufficient buses, trains, ferries in etc in service to cope.
A simple way to reduce traffic congestion would be to ensure that the maximum number of lorries, trucks and similar vehicles made journeys/deliveries as much as possible overnight.
However, businesses would have to be persuaded to accept what would almost certainly amount to higher costs (employing staff to work overnight etc to acccept deliveries, although most supermarkets have staff who stock up after closing time or are open 24 hours).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
no mention of Mr Brunstroms' reaction, but this is the IAM press release from yesterday
www.iam.org.uk/Pressroom/News_Releases/2004/nr0420...f
(It was OK to make this particular link clickable. HJ)
|
Just to clarify the clickable link situation (again):-
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=26...7
|
if they had decent security at train station car parks people would probably use the train a lot more, as it is driving to many train stations and leaving the car there while you get the train, you may as well take the car down the pub and give it away
i often wonder whether unmanned stations are a false economy, all those cameras and stuff and they still get vandalism, a nice hardworking station master on a very modest salary would probably be cost effective
|
I commuted from Reading to London for a year (which was made more hellish as the Paddington crash happened during that period) and do you want to know what one single thing would have made the journey go from horrendous to tolerable?
More carriages.
Make the bloomin' trains longer. Three carriages are not enough for a busy commuter train. I've paid thousands of pounds for a season ticket on this line, and not only can I not get a seat, I'm either squeezed onto the train with my head in someone else's armpit in a Tube stylee, or I can't get on at all.
In europe, trains are really really long. A lot of people use them but everyone gets a seat, even in rush hour. In Switzerland they split the platforms into zones because the trains are so long, frequently twelve or sixteen carriages. Just that one thing makes train journeys much much better over there than in London. If a train's 10 minutes late or so, I don't care. A train typically costs less than my petrol and parking for the day. But if a train's three carriages long and rammed full of commuters I'm not a happy bunny. And when I'm not a happy bunny I stick to my car.
|
a nicehardworking station master on a very modest salary would probably be cost effective
>>
Would you be able to find one these days?
My father took early retirement when they made his station unmanned, the two younger lads who worked with him also took redundancy and both now work in a local call centre.
The question came up a little while back when we met one of them as to whether he regretted leaving the railway. His answer was that he now gets to work regular hours in a warm, dry, air-conditioned office and gets paid slightly more than he did on the railway for working shifts between 06:00 - 00:00 on a cold, windy station. He said that he still occasionally gets shouted at by a customer but they are pretty tame compared to some of the local commuters and at least his current customers can't spit in his face like his old ones did if their train was delayed.
All in all he seemed to think it was a bit of a no-brainer and couldn't understand how my dad had lasted 29 years.
Coincidentally, SWMBO also worked on the railway, is now the manager of these two guys in the call centre and of three other ex-railwaymen/women, I think that might say something.
Cockle
|
|
which just goes to show getting people to use public transport more is more than just taxing and persecuting car drivers ever more, simple stuff like sorting out station car parks could help a lot, and i agree railway staff should be paid, trained, and provided with the condiitons possible
|
"In Switzerland they split the platforms into zones because the trains are so long"
And also double decker. Sadly our loading guage can't do double decker.
BTW did anyone see the thing in the Economist on rural rail. Apprarently it costs c. £250k to build a rudimentary rural station in Germany compared to something like £1.5 million here. Consequently, we don't build them....
|
Apprarently it costs c. £250k to build a rudimentary rural station in Germany compared to something like £1.5 million here. Consequently, we don't build them....
We don't even reopen existing ones. There's an 8-mile rail line between two major towns here, now with heavily populated suburbs most of the way. Several closed stations at excellent locations, no sign of any of them reopening :(
|
Sadly our loading guage can't do double decker.>>
Wouldn't go under railway bridges in most cases....:-))
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
My favourite inventor O.V.S. Bulleid had a good try though; 1.5 decker:-
www.semg.org.uk/gallery/4dd.html
I think the main challenge with adding capacity to rail routes into the main conurbations is that the trains are already running as close to each other as possible without significant re-signalling; and making platforms longer, particularly at urban stations, is expensive & time consuming.
|
DD - I havent seen that, but then again I dont live in the west Midlands and I'm not looking for a car 'veleter' in that area -
perhaps it should be in Forum Information and General Policies ?
|
DD - I havent seen that, but then again I dont live in the west Midlands and I'm not looking for a car 'veleter' in that area -
bora, apolgies - so easy to take for granted that others don't read all the threads that get posted.
perhaps it should be in Forum Information and General Policies ?
I've added a comment to "Posting Website Adresses." in Announcements.
DD.
|
so easy to take for granted that others don't read all the threads that get posted.
>>
dd
that explains why you have not replied to:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=26920&...e
|
dd that explains why you have not replied to:
I am awaiting a response from the man himself.
|
I am awaiting a response from the man himself.
>>
dd - thanks . i shall await the reply from the man.
|
In Turkey they have these little mini buses called a "dolmus"
why oh why we can't have them here I don't know, each one (and there are hundreds) has a huge sign on the front indicating where its going, you hop on and wait till it fills up before it leaves, they never appeared to have a time table and you could flag them down to get on, they were really really cheap and efficient. The big stinking buses we have are awful, they take forever to get anywhere and stop all the time AND are expensive.
I live about 4.5 miles away from where I work, I could cycle but the road is busy and dangerous, they could put a cycle track in and im sure loads of people would use it, that would cost money though can't be having that! We recently moved house and just before we did I bought the mini, seems really unnecessary to use it every day for such a short distance but there doesn't seem to be an alternative, ive not seen a bus and if i did it would drop me off at the passenger terminal not the cargo area. Theres no trains from the village to stansted and taxis here are a joke, how else can i get there??? I HAVE to drive, at the last house I car shared each day with a girl who lived nearby and that was great but ive not found anyone to car share with yet at the new house. I would love to use some other method to get to work, im not one of these tree hugger types but i do try to do my bit, recycling and all that stuff. I just don't think the councils/governments try very hard with the stuff we have. In scotland they have post buses! if you don't know what that is, its a regular car used for the normal postman drop off that you can get a ride in for a small fee, why don't we do that?? our buses should be smaller, faster and more off them and cheaper and more people would use them.
|
I know its crazy, I guess the government don't want to let things get any better/cheaper/more comfortable for us lowly taxpayers!
There are SO many ways they could save money and make things better for normal hardworking people. If the people running this country thought more about the people who pay their ridiculous wages rather than themselves we would be a whole lot better off.
If the transport system in this country was anywhere near that of countries like turkey/switzerland/germany/france etc etc I would use it. I do not want to spend my extremly valuable time wasting it in line for a stinking unrealiable yob filled bus or train. I do want to help the environment and pollution and congestion and all that stuff but my car is fabulous, i get up an hour before i start work and get there in 10 mins, there is no traffic to worry about no lines to wait in and the only thing that blocks my way is the barrier on my works car park. I have my stereo on and my heater and my heated seats i do not have to worry about what ive sat in on a filthy bus before i sit down for dinner at night nor do i have to stand in the rain/wind/or baking sun before i get to go home. Im sorry but until its better the mini is for me!!!!
|
|
Bugged - You wouldn't use public transport if it were like the Continent because the arguments you give for not using it now would not go away if the UK systems were cheaper or even free. You would still have to wait for the bus or train and it wouldn't come with a personal entertainment system or heated seats. The fact is the car will nearly always be quicker than public transprt.
|
|
Daveyjp's point illustrates exactly why moving folks over to PT requires a stick as well as a carrot.
|
anyone been on the "new" virgin trains (both types)
well
overhead racks have space for nothing thicker than an inch, therefore lots of the luggage that used to be carried will never fit
numbers of seat backs against each other (with space between them for luggage) has been massively reduced
silly "luggage holder" things have been added to carriages, which only hold a few bags
in summary as soon as a few passengers get on with bags it becomes a big problem, and inevitably luggage ends up in the aisles etc, the trip hazard to end all trip hazards
virgin do seem to have realised they have screwed up big time by removed some seat from some carriages as extra luggage space, but this is just in the odd carriage
few times recently they have changes there fancy little displays showing the seat reservations AFTER the train has been moving for some time, turning lots of seats that people had taken as non reserved into reserved seats, causing mad panic, and often people who had got there very early to ensure a seat end up standing, various excuses "download didn't work properly", or "sorry we loaded the seat reservations in the wrong carriage order" etc
In short in my view these trains are in my view dangerous with anything near a full passenger load, as lots of minor trips etc are happening, from perfectly well expected baggage load, to say nothing of the problems this would cause if you had to get off in an emergency
To say nothing of the very high chance you have of getting your luggage damaged, I certainly wouldn't take a laptop on these trains
With idiots like this running public transport, even the newest and what should be the best service turns to c**p and inevitably people will take their car instead
|
Been on them a few times for cross country trips to Scotland. Luggage racks are useless for suitcase, I did find them useable with soft, squashy holdalls.
I thought they were good for laptops with a power supply beside the seat, useful to use it as a DVD player on a long journey.
Dont tend to take the car on journeys to Scotland fron the south of England when there's only me travelling. I don't find 7-8 hours at a stretch in a car on my own the most pleasant and relaxing way to spend the time even with breaks.
|
the diesel ones have slightly more overhead space than the electric ones, not much though
is i were travelling south of england to scotland and didnt want to drive i would either get a scotrail sleeper or fly, or GNER (at least there is some space), or a coach
Very last choice would be Virgin, unless its a time when I can be pretty sure the trains will be empty
|
Daveyjp good point, however if public transport was free/cheaper id have enough money left over for a winter coat and an mp3!!! hee hee! The point I was trying to make is that public transport needs to get nearer to the convience of a car, everyone knows its never going to be the same as using a car because its NOT a car! But the benefits of public transport Vs car need to be greater.
FOR EXAMPLE.............. we often go to scotland walking and climbing, we fly from stansted to glasgow or prestwick,
we live 4 miles from Stansted, its takes 55 mins to get to glasgow instead of the 6 hours it might take by car, we both arrived chilled out and ready to start our break away instead of knackered after what has sometimes been a 10 hour drive, the flight costs between £1 and £30 when they have a deal on, the fuel in the car alone would be double that as well as wear and tear and the time it takes.
I wouldnt mind waiting for public transport if it was worth waiting for, in Turkey the tranport is cheaper and cleaner and more efficient than ours and it is worth waiting for, not that they have to wait for long!
|
Hi all, I was reading down the postings( the subject has changed a bit!) and I came across a post from "renault" in which he said ".....and allowing the spreading of more congestion charges, which on the whole work." Well, I have had to pay congestion charges in London every Christmas since it came out. For TWO hours of road use every time. If I could use public transport I would, but 1/4 ton of disco gear won't go on a bus!! I'm not alone If you need to take any gear into London, you pay. Builders, electricians you name it.
Yes, it has reduced the traffic in THAT area, but increased it in the surounding areas. I usually pay at one of the shops or outlets when I get down there and they all say the same "trade is down, people are going elswhere". If I go into that area I increase my charges to cover it. The overall result is that fewer people are shopping, attending entertainment and I suspect working inside the congestion zone. House prices have dropped. Shop prices have gone up. Delivery prices have gone up. So, given the choice I would only buy from outside the area because I know I am going to be "surcharged". Think about what will be happening 10 years from now. Will anybody be going into the congestion zone(s)? Incidentaly, I heard the it is going UP to £8!!!!
DJCJ
A happy new year to all!!! I've got to work tonight! :¬(
|
|
|
|
|
|
