On 2013\07\30 20:54, Recliner wrote:
Sampo Smolander wrote:
d wrote:
Why is it that you can have everyone on an escalator standing on the right
[...]

Not a Brit, so I have been wondering: How come you drive cars on the
left side, but then on the sidewalk you (usually) take the right side,
and also the right side on escalators?

Why not consistently left side everywhere?

Boats pass on the right in Britain, as elsewhere. On pavements (sidewalks)
there seems to be no consistent pattern in Britain. Perhaps escalators,
which came here from the US, follow American precedent?

Much of the London Underground was controlled by American(s) in its
early days, and LU still follows certain practices which were copied
from America in that era, such as calling carriages "cars".

Sampo Smolander wrote:

Not a Brit, so I have been wondering: How come you drive cars on the
left side, but then on the sidewalk you (usually) take the right side,
and also the right side on escalators?

Why not consistently left side everywhere?

You stand on the right (walk on the left) on the escalator. No rule for
pavements (sidewalks) nor any convention as such. The only opposite one is
that you would walk on the right on a country lane without a pavement, but
that's so you can see the oncoming traffic that's about to kill you rather
than it sneaking up on you from behind.

I have also noticed an annoying tendency for people to cycle on the right
on the MK Redways. I have no idea why. Only theory I have had is that
some could be from other countries where driving is on the right, and
because there is no flow of traffic to remind you which side to be on you
revert to what you're used to. No idea if that's actually true but it
seems viable.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

If only a couple of people are walking up the left-hand side then the escalator can only be working at 50% capacity. At busy times escalators would be more efficient if standing on both sides were compulsory. The tourists are right.

In message , at
06:59:25 on Sun, 15 Sep 2013, Offramp remarked:
If only a couple of people are walking up the left-hand side then the escalator can only be working at 50% capacity.

Only if there's a queue to board.

At busy times escalators would be more efficient if standing on both sides were compulsory.

No, walking up both sides would be the most efficient. But the
compromise is that people stand on one side, and walk up the other side.

The tourists are right.

No, they are always wrong.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
No, walking up both sides would be the most efficient.

Efficent? What are you optimising for? Throughput, or minimum journey
time?

ISTR that standing gives better throughput because people tend to
be happy leaving a small gap to the person in front when they stand,
but I can't find the any trace of the research I half-remember on the
web.

No, they are always wrong.

Not always.


--
Mike Bristow

In message , at 17:21:33 on Sun,
15 Sep 2013, Mike Bristow remarked:
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
No, walking up both sides would be the most efficient.

Efficent? What are you optimising for? Throughput, or minimum journey
time?

Throughput.

ISTR that standing gives better throughput because people tend to
be happy leaving a small gap to the person in front when they stand,

But if they are walking up at the same speed as the escalator (ie
doubling their rate of progress) then they'll break even leaving twice
the gap. I don't think Londoners walking up escalators leave as much as
twice the gap.

but I can't find the any trace of the research I half-remember on the
web.

No, they are always wrong.

Not always.

Regarding where to stand on escalators, they almost always are.
--
Roland Perry

On 2013-09-15, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
06:59:25 on Sun, 15 Sep 2013, Offramp remarked:
If only a couple of people are walking up the left-hand side then the
If escalator can only be working at 50% capacity.

Only if there's a queue to board.

Capacity has nothing to do with any queue there may or may not be.

At busy times escalators would be more efficient if standing on both sides
At were compulsory.

No, walking up both sides would be the most efficient. But the compromise
is that people stand on one side, and walk up the other side.

Only if everyone was the same distance apart as if they were just standing
(unlikely) and everyone was moving at the same speed relative to the steps
(also unlikely). The "compromise" is a system that reduces throughput in
order to give the energetic able-bodied the ability to get through a bit
faster.

The tourists are right.

No, they are always wrong.

You are being arrogant and xenophobic.

Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 17:22:40 +0100, Eric wrote:
On 2013-09-15, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
06:59:25 on Sun, 15 Sep 2013, Offramp remarked:
At busy times escalators would be more efficient if standing on both
sides were compulsory.

No, walking up both sides would be the most efficient. But the
compromise
is that people stand on one side, and walk up the other side.

Only if everyone was the same distance apart as if they were just
standing (unlikely)

They could be somewhat further apart, and further still on longer
escalators, and still get more people through per unit time than if they
all stand still.

and everyone was moving at the same speed relative to the steps (also
unlikely)

Actually, this is guaranteed at busy times, since there's no overtaking.

I would be surprised if LT hadn't done research on this, as they did to
determine the optimum moving speed.

The "compromise" is a system that reduces throughput in
order to give the energetic able-bodied the ability to
get through a bit faster.

Allowing standing one side allows slower walkers to choose to stand,
therefore increasing the average walking speed compared to expecting
people to walk on both sides.

Colin McKenzie

--
Cycling in the UK is about as safe as walking, and helmets don't make it
safer. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

In message , at 17:22:40 on Sun, 15
Sep 2013, Eric remarked:
If only a couple of people are walking up the left-hand side then the
If escalator can only be working at 50% capacity.

Only if there's a queue to board.

Capacity has nothing to do with any queue there may or may not be.

OK, it only matters if there's a queue.

At busy times escalators would be more efficient if standing on both sides
At were compulsory.

No, walking up both sides would be the most efficient. But the compromise
is that people stand on one side, and walk up the other side.

Only if everyone was the same distance apart as if they were just standing
(unlikely) and everyone was moving at the same speed relative to the steps
(also unlikely). The "compromise" is a system that reduces throughput in
order to give the energetic able-bodied the ability to get through a bit
faster.

No, the throughput increases as long as the walkers don't more than
double their spacing.

The tourists are right.

No, they are always wrong.

You are being arrogant and xenophobic.

You are just as wrong to think that all tourists are foreigners.
--
Roland Perry

Offramp writes:

If only a couple of people are walking up the left-hand side then the
escalator can only be working at 50% capacity. At busy times
escalators would be more efficient if standing on both sides were
compulsory. The tourists are right.

They would be even more efficient if everybody walked up them.