In article , Neil
Williams writes
The difference in bus and train fares seems to be a British thing - in
the German Verkehrsverbuende (like TfL or the PTEs) there is no
differential - your ticket is valid for a through journey, with
connections if desired, on any or all of the available modes of transport.
There isn't a "train fare" or a "bus fare", just a "public transport fare".

A good example being my recent trip to Dusseldorf - the area has exactly
three fares, called A, B, and C. A single B ticket[*] was good for a
journey consisting of:
* tram through suburban streets, which turned into pre-Metro through the
central area to the Hbf;
* rail to Wuppertal;
* monorail along the river a bit;
* (if I'd wanted) bus into the suburbs.

A second B ticket got me on the monorail, two trains, and the strange
Skytrain thing back to the airport.
[*] Bought on the tram, incidentally.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Neil Williams wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:54:56 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

What do you mean by a 'supplementary fare'? You mean that the
duplicating buses are more expensive than standard buses? But are thus
still cheaper than the train, while being as nice and not a lot
slower?

No, they are more comfortable than the train, and more expensive (EUR1
or so on top of the standard fare). The idea is that they save you
having to change, but you are charged for the privilege, mainly because
of the limited capacity. They aren't always that quick.

Crumbs. The idea of a road vehicle being *higher* status than a train is
pretty radical!

It's worth bearing in mind that the number of bus routes entering
central Hamburg can probably be counted on the fingers of both hands.
The public transport system is geared up such that buses mainly provide
links from non-rail-served locations to the nearest rail station, as
well as quieter circumferential routes, with the Schnellbusse (express)
and Nachtbusse (night) being a separate, largely radial network "on top"
of the rail network.

Sounds extremely sensible.

The difference in bus and train fares seems to be a British thing - in
the German Verkehrsverbuende (like TfL or the PTEs) there is no
differential - your ticket is valid for a through journey, with
connections if desired, on any or all of the available modes of
transport. There isn't a "train fare" or a "bus fare", just a "public
transport fare".

Also extremely sensible. Ein Stadt, Ein Verkehrsverbund, Ein Fahrpreis!

tom


--
Dude, read Aquinas if you want intelligent. This is the internet.

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Neil Williams wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:54:56 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

snipitty
The difference in bus and train fares seems to be a British thing - in
the German Verkehrsverbuende (like TfL or the PTEs) there is no
differential - your ticket is valid for a through journey, with
connections if desired, on any or all of the available modes of
transport. There isn't a "train fare" or a "bus fare", just a "public
transport fare".

Also extremely sensible. Ein Stadt, Ein Verkehrsverbund, Ein Fahrpreis!

tom


Funny you should say that, I have in front of me the current Munich public
transport map and printed beneath the MVV logo it has, "1 Netz. 1 Fahrplan.
1 Tarif."

As a comparison with UK pricing, an all zone one day ticket (called a Single
Tageskarte - Gesamtnetz) is ?9.00, whilst the same ticket but valid for up
to 5 people (with children between 6 & 14 counting as half a person and
called a Partner Tageskarte - Gesamtnetz) is ?16.00. Which if my maths is
correct makes the one person ticket about 6 quid and about ten and a half
quid for the five person one, which, for a family is a bit of a bargin.
--
Cheers, Steve.
If The Good Lord had meant for us to be fiscally prudent, He would not have
given us the platinum credit card...
Change colour to PC Plod's lights to reply.

"Steve Dulieu" wrote in message
...

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Neil Williams wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:54:56 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

snipitty
The difference in bus and train fares seems to be a British thing - in
the German Verkehrsverbuende (like TfL or the PTEs) there is no
differential - your ticket is valid for a through journey, with
connections if desired, on any or all of the available modes of
transport. There isn't a "train fare" or a "bus fare", just a "public
transport fare".

Also extremely sensible. Ein Stadt, Ein Verkehrsverbund, Ein Fahrpreis!

tom


Funny you should say that, I have in front of me the current Munich public
transport map and printed beneath the MVV logo it has, "1 Netz. 1
Fahrplan.
1 Tarif."

As a comparison with UK pricing, an all zone one day ticket (called a
Single
Tageskarte - Gesamtnetz) is ?9.00, whilst the same ticket but valid for up
to 5 people (with children between 6 & 14 counting as half a person and
called a Partner Tageskarte - Gesamtnetz) is ?16.00. Which if my maths is
correct makes the one person ticket about 6 quid and about ten and a half
quid for the five person one, which, for a family is a bit of a bargin.

Thats 9 and 16 euros, knew it was a mistake to use the symbols...
--
Cheers, Steve.
If The Good Lord had meant for us to be fiscally prudent, He would not have
given us the platinum credit card...
Change colour to PC Plod's lights to reply.

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:34:24 +0100, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:26:14 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:

c) how to deal with the very strong competition provided by the rail and
tube network.

The answer is that they should not. Why? Well, what's the point in
running parallel with railway lines, except where necessary to get beyond
the railway line? In fact, I'd propose the best solution for the latter
would be to run an express service from the end of the railway line to the
ultimate destination. Express bus services are really best filling in
where the railway does not serve.

But the original poster was proposing an express version of route 48
which runs between Walthamstow Central and Liverpool St virtually
parallel to the "One" overground line. The bus does run on to London
Bridge. It also stops at almost all the same places as the train service
barring St James St and Bethnal Green.

You deleted my text which referred to the waste / duplication of
resources argument which would fall foul of the strategic direction
given to TfL. Also in times of constrained budgets it would not make a
lot of sense.

That said, Hamburg[1] takes a different approach; direct, express buses to
and from the city centre do duplicate some railway lines, but at a
supplementary fare of (I think) EUR 1. They are provided with
high-quality, low-density seating and are treated as "first class".

Which is similar to the long distance bus routes in Hong Kong. These
typically run at a premium fare but in the few cases where there is a
parallel with the rail system they remain cheaper than rail.

Commuter bus routes (from the outer Boroughs into Manhatten) in New York
also charge a premium fare and to use them on a regular basis you need
an upgraded and more expensive Metrocard.

Do the Hamburg express buses run only at peak times or all the time?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

One of the main reasons why such routes don't exist is
that they fail the "value for money" test when you look
at the density and capacity of the rail network in Greater
London. I appreciate that peak capacity is a big problem
on much of the rail network but just running express
buses at that time just pushes up the peak time costs of
the transport network as a whole.

If an existing route which is running ludicrously frequently, for instance
the 38, were replaced by an express route and stopping route each running at
half that frequency, the decreased journey times would allow a reduction in
the number of buses and drivers used. I suspect that fuel usage and vehicle
wear would also decrease with fewer stops. The only question is whether the
stopping route would wither and die.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Neil Williams schrieb:
That said, Hamburg[1] takes a different approach; direct, express buses to
and from the city centre do duplicate some railway lines, but at a
supplementary fare of (I think) EUR 1. They are provided with
high-quality, low-density seating and are treated as "first class".
Excuse me, but i can say something about Hamburg too... I actually live
there!
The express bus system falls into two categories:
"Eilbusse" (buses in a hurry would be a translation) is a system of only
6 lines. They are useable without a supplement. 3 of those lines are
serving the airbus airplane works in Finkenwerder. A few buses from
major stations or some parts of town go there in the morning and come
back in the afternoon.
The other lines serve a big settlement that has no railway connection
and another big company.
"Schnellbusse" (fast buses) (8 lines): These are very long lines, often
going all the way through Hamburg, the idea is to provide fast
connections from suburbs to the city and back. They run all day and they
cost a supplement of 1,05 Euro per trip. A season supplement is available.
In my opinion the supplement makes them completely useless. They are
rarely faster that getting a local bus to the next railway. They get
stuck in traffic. They are not very comfortable.
I don't want to pay a premium for them and most other Hamburgers, too,
it seems, as everytime i see a Schnellbus it has between 1 and 10
passengers only.
In my opinion the hamburg express bus system is rubbish... with one
notable exception: In weekend nights there is an express night bus from
the Reeperbahn amusement district to my front door, using a motorway for
most of the trip. This express bus is unbelievably cool!

Tom Anderson schrieb:
[Hamburg express buses]
What do you mean by a 'supplementary fare'? You mean that the duplicating
buses are more expensive than standard buses? But are thus still cheaper
than the train, while being as nice and not a lot slower?
Standard bus and train cost the same. You don't buy a ticket for a mode
of transport but you buy a ticket from A to B, including trains
(everything that runs on rails excluding intercity services), buses and
ferrys as necessary, all for the same price.
Its only if you want a Schnellbus (possibly duplicating a railway) or
you want to travel first class on the mainline railway that you have to
pay 1,05 Euro for a supplement.
And, in my opinion, the Schellbus is of course less comfortable than any
train.

Neil Williams schrieb:
This supplement is also charged for night buses.
This is no longer true.
Night buses now cost the same as any other vehicle.
Also, if you have a one day travelcard this will get you around for one
day, and it will still be valid on all night buses the following night.

Currently plans are made to run the inner parts of the rail network all
night at weekend nights, bringing Hamburg to the same level as "major"
cities like Berlin, Heidelberg and Hannover.

On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 20:20:49 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .

One of the main reasons why such routes don't exist is
that they fail the "value for money" test when you look
at the density and capacity of the rail network in Greater
London. I appreciate that peak capacity is a big problem
on much of the rail network but just running express
buses at that time just pushes up the peak time costs of
the transport network as a whole.

If an existing route which is running ludicrously frequently, for instance
the 38, were replaced by an express route and stopping route each running at
half that frequency, the decreased journey times would allow a reduction in
the number of buses and drivers used. I suspect that fuel usage and vehicle
wear would also decrease with fewer stops. The only question is whether the
stopping route would wither and die.

I understand the point being made but I think the example of the 38 is a
poor one. An X38 but running from Leyton with limited stops in Zone 2
and Zone 1 might make sense but the traffic on the 38 is pretty high
from Hackney Central inwards with people getting on and off all the
time. It would be near impossible for an Express version to offer
sufficient choice of stops while being faster than the stoping service.
Also given that it would probably be one person operated it would be
slower than a crew bus thus reducing the overall extent of peak vehicle
requirement reduction.

I also think you would have a riot on your hands if you proposed cutting
back route 38 given where the route serves and the high usage (look at
the reaction to the 73 change). When TfL get round to replacing the
routemasters it will be interesting to see what they decide to do -
double decks or artics. Personally I will be surprised if they go artic
for this route.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!