Dave Arquati wrote:

Earl Purple wrote:
Don't know what it's used for, but if it's just for freight they might
be better placed in lorries on a road.

I think I'm having a transport planning embolism.

There isn't a world shortage of food. There is starvation in the world
because of insufficient distribution.

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

Earl Purple wrote:
After that we hit the disused railway
and just take our road along it.

That railway isn't disused.


Don't know what it's used for, but if it's just for freight they might
be better placed in lorries on a road.

I think I'm having a transport planning embolism.

ZEPPELINS.

tom

--
Tech - No Babble

Earl Purple wrote:

Yes, the A12 does provide an alternative route to Docklands just as my
proposed extension of the West Cross Route would provide an alternative
link from the A406 to the A40 (other than the A406 itself). By the way,
much of Cricklewood and Harlesden are relatively undeveloped, and
there's a disused railway line that crosses through Gladstone Park, so
part of the space is already there (albeit not exactly the line I have
drawn).

The line through Gladstone Park is far from disused - it just doesn't
have any passenger services. It was at one point proposed to use it
for Heathrow Connect.

A semi-orbital service from St Pancras or a Goblin extension, via
Cricklewood and out to the west might well be useful, especially at
Olympic time.

Public transport loses out on journey time if the journey involves
more than one change. So the best orbital services go about a third of
the way round, overlapping with other orbital services, and continue
outward or inward at both ends of the orbital section. This maximises
the number of journeys that can be done with one change.

Colin McKenzie

Dave Arquati wrote:

You're missing a rather significant point - which is how the people on
the M25 bus got onto it in the first place. You either need a large
number of bus routes from each centre of population within the
travel-to-work area for Staines, or you need feeder buses from the
origin towns too. If it's the latter, as I suspect you are suggesting,
then any journey to Staines that way will involve *at least* 2 changes.
....
That perfect journey takes 55 minutes. The AA say it takes about 30
minutes by car. Therefore, the near-perfect PT alternative takes nearly
twice as long. You may have provided a vastly superior PT service to the
current offering, but it still can't compete with the car for orbital
journeys.

The additional problem is that this is a gross over-simplification. How
likely is it that the commuter actually lives in Reigate town centre, or
at least within a few hundred metres of the road between the town centre
and the motorway?

For most people, this problem can be much alleviated by cycling the
first and/or last leg. When changing from PT to bike there is no
waiting time, and because bike journey times are so accurately
predictable, only a couple of minutes are lost when changing the other
way.

If people can easily and quickly get 2 or 3 miles to their transport
hub, many fewer points need to be served by PT, and it becomes much
easier for it to compete with the private car.

From where I live, I can walk to two tube stations, on different
lines, in 7 or 12 minutes respectively. But in 12 minutes I can cycle
to at least 4 more stations, giving me access to about 6 extra rail
and tube services. By starting by bike, I can get to much of London
with no changes - and to virtually all of the south-east with one change.

And the journey times will compete well with the car too.

Colin McKenzie

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

Earl Purple wrote:

After that we hit the disused railway
and just take our road along it.


That railway isn't disused.



Don't know what it's used for, but if it's just for freight they might
be better placed in lorries on a road.


I think I'm having a transport planning embolism.


ZEPPELINS.

Gah!

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London