|
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . derek wrote: Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone (most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above them. I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the material then they are **** all use to anyone. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. The last time I did a structures design was many years ago, and it consisted of a reinforced slab over a large underground chamber. As I said my specialisms are traffic engineering and drainage engineering and if you know more about these topics than mysled I would be very surprised, as yet you havent shown any evidence to show that you are in either way so your opinions are purely that, and not based on any study or fact. You cant even talk the talk, never mind walk the walk |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message .. . everyone knows the theory of public transport, however you are forgetting the disadvantages of bus use, that's what puts most people off. I dont think everyone does know the theory of public transport judging by this NG comments so apologies for teaching you to suck eggs Not forgetting the disadvantages at all, we all know that a bus does not have the same attributes as car travel, but it can also be said to some degree that cars do not have some of the qualities of public trasport. For example in a town centre, parking can be a problem, not if you use the bus. There are many issues revoloving around the reasons for why people choose not to use public transport. The key is to identify these and redress them to attract people back to them. No mean feat |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"derek" wrote in message ... On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:33:26 -0000, "iantheengineer" wrote: "Paul Weaver" wrote in message . .. On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:23:48 +0000, iantheengineer wrote: It doesnt need to for most of the commute Ahh, so the bus splits into 72 parts at each end? No not at all, and I would think that the theory behind it is obvious, the key to bus usage is modal interchange, Is that your name for what we call a bus stop? It can be but in its loosest and at the lowest level. a bus stop is interchange between walking and the bus ride, but many forms of interchange are being developed, such as cycle carrying facilities on buses and cycle lockers at train stations to enable the change from say the bus to the cycle to complete the last part of the journey ie facilities to allow transfer from opne mode of travel to another. you mean you ride the bus to the bus stop, get off and walk the rest of the way home. I think I have answered this point above Fotr the most part of the commute menay people are travelling in the same direction however upon reaching the very last section of the journey and at the very start of the journey we all live and work in slightly different places, but we use the same main corridors. In cities, it is generally the case that most people can walk from their bus stop to their office. Complications arise for people who work to site etc, but for the most part many people are 9-5 approx and stay office bound. IF you carry out any o-d survey you will see that certain routes are trafficked by people from the same areas going to the same areas, and it is for these that public transport works. Buses may be OK if you work in the centre of a city and live in a suburb of that same city near to an arterial road to the city centre and are lucky (the bus stop being near to your house). If you live in one suburb and work in another you can forget about PT. I agree but it is only because all of the other people are using cars as well that makes the provision of PT unviable The main problem with public transport is the effective routing. You're wrong there the main problem with public transport is the dreich people you have to share your space with. The last time I used a bus there was a man in a dirty shabby mac sat next to me, smelling of wee, his face covered in sores, and a "dewdrop" glistening on the end of his nose like a pearl. True this is a problem but not an entirely insurmountable one In order to make it profitable a bus must collect x punters to make the service profitable, cloudy thinking, what has profitability to do with it? It is the function of the bus to pick up and carry passengers. The bus must pick up passengers - period, or it might as well stay in the depot all day. Why operate a service in the deregulated system if it isnt profitable??? No company would, ask any community transport group who have to fill in the gaps that PT is missing in order to do this sometimes it is necessary to protract the route to serve a certain catchment Second thoughts you're right, a public transport system that didn't have to pick up passengers would run much more efficiently. Another example of the travelling public being unreasonable. and by doing this it incurrs delays compared to the direct route of using the car, but , by many people using their cars they create delays through traffic congestion. Bus lanes assist to redress this balance a litlle, but at present do not provide sufficient advantage to make the bus seem attractive. Correct, it would take *some* doing. I agree we have a long way to go with the public transport system, but we have to start somewhere. The fiirst issue is to get them efficient and on-time so that people can rely on them. Secondly to make them more cost effective to give cheaper fares. Thirdly to improve the quality of the ride and interchange facilities, this includes having to sit next to Mr Dew drop who hasnt washed this week. If these issues were resolved and I had a bus available for my journey to work I would use it. DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"NM" wrote in message m... iantheengineer wrote: "NM" wrote in message m... iantheengineer wrote: How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, and there would be no need for bus lanes! Without busses and bus lanes there would be even less congestion. How many cars does it take to move 72 people, at say 5 seats per car 15, okay and what area does a car take up 5.75m by 2.5m roughly so 14.4m2 times 15 = 216m2, and what area does a double decker take 12.9m long by 2.5m = 32.25m2, hmm I need say no more. Take off your rose tinted's and actually look at your average bus, usually about 5 or less passengers, I went from Cheltenham to London by coach the other day, there were as many passengers as I could get in my car with seats left over. Okay many routes have this, but it is purely because the services are not reviewed. If the PT companies are operating like most businesses, they will supply to satisfy a demand, and in the case you are talking of demand was low. Perhaps thsi was a small blip and it normally has more passengers, but the bus will not continue if they have no passengers unless under some sort of subsidised agreement. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... Under the assumption that there are no cars, vans, bikes would there still be congestion? Assume the usage is the same as the total passenger km as on an urban bus route at the moment, and whatever bus frequency is optimal (which I expect to be at least 30 buses in the peak hour). Its an unanswerable question as it depends upon link and junction capacities so each location is different., You can not say whether there would be congestion when the only traffic on the road is buses? Or you can not say whether the PT travel speed in ideal conditions is any better than it is at the moment? but it is fair to say that the throughput of people would be greater so congestion would a lot less than it is at present Well, I hadn't mentioned throughput, but what would you expect the maximum PT throughput per lane to be? Per lane the maximum throughput of a lane for buses is 900 vehicles per hour. This is purely a lane capacity in pcu (passenger car units) that relates a bus to equal 2 passnger car units. An average lane has a capacity of 1800 pcu, although this depends upon width gradient and alignment. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"derek" wrote in message ... On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 14:02:15 -0000, "iantheengineer" wrote: "Clive" wrote in message ... In message , Grant Crozier writes With a bit of luck in eighteen months time the UK will be governed by a decent party with a man at the helm who knows what he is doing . First of all, they've got to find one. -- Clive Not the conservatives then Not unless the NHS, Education, Railway chickens come home to roost for Labour or there's another monumental cockup like Foot & mouth. Are you a betting man? DG I cant see the cons getting in this time, people still remeber the Thatcher days and it is this that is keeping labour in power. Although Labour seemed to have lost support over the Iraq invasion so who knows God help us |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 22:43:22 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER? God save us all. Okay Paul what are your views and ideas Seriously? Let the market decide. It will anyway. All this modern interference wastes resources. Transport engineering is about facilitating choice, not restricting it. -- Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed cameras cost lives |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
In article , derek wrote:
Buses may be OK if you work in the centre of a city and live in a suburb of that same city near to an arterial road to the city centre and are lucky (the bus stop being near to your house). If you live in one suburb and work in another you can forget about PT. Really? I live in one suburb and work in another. (I will admit both are in Greater London, but I don't think this changes the base assumptions of these arguments.) PT works just fine for my commute. It's a little slower than driving would be, but not bad at all. I can either use two bus routes or a train and a bus route. Niklas -- For my birthday I got a humidifier and a de-humidifier...I put them in the same room and let them fight it out. -- Steven Wright |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote the following
in: I cant see the cons getting in this time, people still remeber the Thatcher days and it is this that is keeping labour in power. Me neither. Michael Howard? Ha! They'd have better luck if they brought Maggie herself back. -- message by Robin May, but you can call me Mr Smith. Hello. I'm one of those "roaring fascists of the left wing". Then and than are different words! |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. . I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the material then they are **** all use to anyone. If they were looking for flow in soda-lime glass at ambient temperatures they were in for a long wait. It will bend, and it does suffer from stress corrosion if stretched under load below the breaking stress, which ultimately can lead to failure, but flow it will not unless you heat it to a temperature at which it has an appropriate viscosity. Note that many plastics have glass transition points below ambient temperature, and behave like glasses below that temperature. -- Terry Harper http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 22:50:13 +0000, iantheengineer wrote:
I dont think everyone does know the theory of public transport judging by this NG comments so apologies for teaching you to suck eggs Most people know the theory, however argue its not practical in many cases Not forgetting the disadvantages at all, we all know that a bus does not have the same attributes as car travel, but it can also be said to some degree that cars do not have some of the qualities of public trasport. For example in a town centre, parking can be a problem, not if you use the bus. Indeed, and IMO only dumbasses and people working weird shifts would consider using private transport in London, especially in zone 1. My car is currently on a long term holiday in Greece, and will stay there for as long as I'm working in the hellhole that is London. However in many cases people dont live in dense enough Areas to allow public transport. I'm more of a fan of parkway stations on motorway networks, offering direct speedy (70mph+) access to the center of towns, with easy interchange to a local light-rail system taking you Direct to your destination. There are many issues revoloving around the reasons for why people choose not to use public transport. The key is to identify these and redress them to attract people back to them. No mean feat convenience, comfort, privacy Getting a seat in the morning, a table and power point for laptop on long distance trains, intergration so I'm not waiting for connections, cleanliness of trains, comfort of the ride, reliability I wont use buses because they are stop-start all the time for busstops, the drivers can't drive to save their life, and of course the smelly scum that sit on you. Oh, and the peak theoretical speed is 30mph, average is about 5-10mph. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... Well, I hadn't mentioned throughput, but what would you expect the maximum PT throughput per lane to be? Per lane the maximum throughput of a lane for buses is 900 vehicles per hour. This is purely a lane capacity in pcu (passenger car units) that relates a bus to equal 2 passnger car units. An average lane has a capacity of 1800 pcu, although this depends upon width gradient and alignment. But if they have to stop to pick up customers, what is the achieved passenger throughput? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
|
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
... snip We could go on forever but suffice to say not all things work under the same rules, yes perhaps rock was a poor example due to the issue of it being lava when in a super heated stat, but to go by your theories we would only need one mathematical formula to solve all of the worlds issues and this isnt the case, ask any mathematician. Nicolis & Prigogine? Waldrop? Stewart? ok, not quite the /one formula/; yet... |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message . .. iantheengineer wrote: I actually work for a consultancy and not a local authority, Name them so I can cross them off the list of places we do business with. Sounds like a good move; my understanding is that anyone still using pcu is a tad out-dated. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On 08 Nov 2003 23:17:06 GMT, Niklas Karlsson wrote:
In article , derek wrote: Buses may be OK if you work in the centre of a city and live in a suburb of that same city near to an arterial road to the city centre and are lucky (the bus stop being near to your house). If you live in one suburb and work in another you can forget about PT. Really? I live in one suburb and work in another. (I will admit both are in Greater London, but I don't think this changes the base assumptions of these arguments.) Oh, but it does. Very few cities in the world have a PT network on the scale of London, combined with a horrific traffic problem for cars. If If I live in one suburb and work in the next one along I have to wait for a bus into town, walk to the next bus stop and wait for a bus out of town to get to work. Three times the distance and twice the waiting. Maybe 1 hour 20 minutes. In a car it's just 10-15 mins. PT works just fine for my commute. It's a little slower than driving would be, but not bad at all. I can either use two bus routes or a train and a bus route. You're lucky! Niklas DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message . .. iantheengineer wrote: What are you then Steve, Well known. or shall we go all defensive again SInce I haven't been "defensive" how can I be "defensive again"? BTW, only loonies post four followups to the same post, and only ****wits quote the entire post that they are replying to, including the sig, to add a one line comment. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. Not defensive!! You have a very strange view of the world, please note I have not had to resort to expletives to make a point unlike you, not defensive, with replsies like whats the F** has it to do with you? you could have merely not answered. And anyway your the one with all of the extraneous crap on the end of every message. God you really do need a good kicking |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... Well, I hadn't mentioned throughput, but what would you expect the maximum PT throughput per lane to be? Per lane the maximum throughput of a lane for buses is 900 vehicles per hour. This is purely a lane capacity in pcu (passenger car units) that relates a bus to equal 2 passnger car units. An average lane has a capacity of 1800 pcu, although this depends upon width gradient and alignment. But if they have to stop to pick up customers, what is the achieved passenger throughput? You cant really say this globally as it depends upon the density of stops, the number of people alighting etc. Its got to be higher than the car figure at any rate as the car lane capacity is 1800 pcu so thats 1800 cars per hour at say 2 people per car (that is very generous!) giving 3600 persons per hour. Say a bus achieved 1/3 capacity of 72 sealts ie 24, and they have a lane capacity of 900 buses per hour you are talking 21600 passenger throughput, taking out say 15 minutes of the hour to be ultra generous to the car argument you are looking at 16200 which is far in excess of the 3600 car argument, and I have been generous to the car argument and have taken a pessimistic view of the buses. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Robin May" wrote in message . 1.4... "iantheengineer" wrote the following in: I cant see the cons getting in this time, people still remeber the Thatcher days and it is this that is keeping labour in power. Me neither. Michael Howard? Ha! They'd have better luck if they brought Maggie herself back. -- message by Robin May, but you can call me Mr Smith. Hello. I'm one of those "roaring fascists of the left wing". Then and than are different words! Perhaps so she seems to have plenty of supporters in this NG! and I am certainly not one of them!! |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
|
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 11:18:08 +0000, derek wrote:
Oh, but it does. Very few cities in the world have a PT network on the scale of London, combined with a horrific traffic problem for cars. If And here lies the problem. Most PT supporters live in London, and don't realise how lucky they Are to Have such a reliable and extensive PT network. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
In article , Paul Weaver wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 11:18:08 +0000, derek wrote: Oh, but it does. Very few cities in the world have a PT network on the scale of London, combined with a horrific traffic problem for cars. If And here lies the problem. Most PT supporters live in London, and don't realise how lucky they Are to Have such a reliable and extensive PT network. I've only lived in London for seven months. Prior to that I lived in a town of 50K; admittedly not in the UK. Bus coverage was similar there. Niklas -- Who is this Time Being and why are people always doing things for him/her? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On 09 Nov 2003 12:15:52 GMT, Niklas Karlsson wrote:
I've only lived in London for seven months. Prior to that I lived in a town of 50K; admittedly not in the UK. Bus coverage was similar there. Outside the UK (certainly in Western Europe), bus services tend to be run sensibly. In the UK, London is the only place with a proper planned, useful, well-run and good-value bus network. This is because it was the only place in which deregulation was not carried out, probably because the politicians all live/work there. Try a similarly-sized town in the UK, and you'll see the picture is not nearly as rosy. In Milton Keynes, while there have been a few welcome improvements to evening/Sunday services recently, it is a sick joke. I understand it is far worse elsewhere. Neil -- Neil Williams is a valid email address, but is sent to /dev/null. Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... Well, I hadn't mentioned throughput, but what would you expect the maximum PT throughput per lane to be? But if they have to stop to pick up customers, what is the achieved passenger throughput? You cant really say this globally as it depends upon the density of stops, the number of people alighting etc. You are free to choose the optimal density of stops, but please explain what that is. For simplicity, I would go with your assumption that everyone alights at the city-centre bus-station near their office. . Say a bus achieved 1/3 capacity of 72 sealts ie 24, and they have a lane capacity of 900 buses per hour you are talking 21600 passenger throughput, taking out say 15 minutes of the hour Even at a bus every 5 seconds I don't see how you can pick up any passengers; if any bus actually stops, all the following buses would have to. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 12:15:52 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote:
In article , Paul Weaver wrote: On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 11:18:08 +0000, derek wrote: Oh, but it does. Very few cities in the world have a PT network on the scale of London, combined with a horrific traffic problem for cars. If And here lies the problem. Most PT supporters live in London, and don't realise how lucky they Are to Have such a reliable and extensive PT network. I've only lived in London for seven months. Prior to that I lived in a town of 50K; admittedly not in the UK. Bus coverage was similar there. I've lived in this pile of **** for a couple of months, before that I lived in a city of 100k, with a crumbling bus infrastructure, and before That a town of 120k where it took 45 minutes to get to the centre, and another 20 minutes to get to the cinema. 6 miles an hour? Until you live With 2 buses an hour (maximum) from 7-5, and thats it, you can't say jack. And that's actually good compared with most areas of the UK. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
In article , Paul Weaver wrote:
I've lived in this pile of **** for a couple of months, before that I lived in a city of 100k, with a crumbling bus infrastructure, and before That a town of 120k where it took 45 minutes to get to the centre, and another 20 minutes to get to the cinema. 6 miles an hour? Nice. Until you live With 2 buses an hour (maximum) from 7-5, and thats it, you can't say jack. How does that follow? And that's actually good compared with most areas of the UK. So I'm told, and I have no problems believing it after a stay in the West Country not too long ago, before moving here. Niklas -- "Kids have it easy today. All they have to listen to is stories about how back in the '70s we had to listen to stories about how bad it was back in the '30s." -- Keith Lynch |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... To continue to build roads will continue the problem. The answer is puvblic transport, but public transport cannot cater for all journeys and therefore over time journeys will need to become more corridored. For example go into any city during the am peak and the tidality of the flow is there to be seen. IF we were to get all of the people from their cars onto public transport, or even better living nearer to the workplace, the congestion would be far less. cars. Without cars on the urban road network public transport would be faster and more reliable. How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, And what will the travel speed be, and who long will each stop take, and how frequently will the stops occur? Or, alternatively, how fast would a typical journey be? Well this depends upon the usage the frequency of buses, the congestion levels. The reason for the introduction of bus lanes at intersections was to advance the bus to the front of the queues thus gaining back on the journey speed to make up for stops. And the bus lanes are useless, because they are full of prats in cars queuing to turn left or go straight on at the lights.... |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
In article , Paul Weaver wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 12:46:16 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote: How does that follow? Assuming most people in this country live with a London, or foreign, Style bus service is stupid, yet PT fans constantly believe that population density is high enough Eh? I have made no such assumption. Niklas -- "From what I've seen the majority of computer users are more interested in the tool they have sitting in their laps than anything else." -- Bill Pechter |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 14:04:55 +0000, Ian Henden wrote:
And the bus lanes are useless, because they are full of prats in cars queuing to turn left or go straight on at the lights.... TBH I hardly see cars in bus lanes, they are usually just empty lanes. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 12:46:16 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote:
In article , Paul Weaver wrote: I've lived in this pile of **** for a couple of months, before that I lived in a city of 100k, with a crumbling bus infrastructure, and before That a town of 120k where it took 45 minutes to get to the centre, and another 20 minutes to get to the cinema. 6 miles an hour? Nice. Until you live With 2 buses an hour (maximum) from 7-5, and thats it, you can't say jack. How does that follow?# Assuming most people in this country live with a London, or foreign, Style bus service is stupid, yet PT fans constantly believe that population density is high enough |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 12:02:49 +0000, Huge wrote:
Paul Weaver writes: On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 11:18:08 +0000, derek wrote: Oh, but it does. Very few cities in the world have a PT network on the scale of London, combined with a horrific traffic problem for cars. If And here lies the problem. Most PT supporters live in London, and don't realise how lucky they Are to Have such a reliable and extensive PT network. Reliable? In comparison to other towns and cities |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... Well, I hadn't mentioned throughput, but what would you expect the maximum PT throughput per lane to be? But if they have to stop to pick up customers, what is the achieved passenger throughput? You cant really say this globally as it depends upon the density of stops, the number of people alighting etc. You are free to choose the optimal density of stops, but please explain what that is. For simplicity, I would go with your assumption that everyone alights at the city-centre bus-station near their office. . Say a bus achieved 1/3 capacity of 72 sealts ie 24, and they have a lane capacity of 900 buses per hour you are talking 21600 passenger throughput, taking out say 15 minutes of the hour Even at a bus every 5 seconds I don't see how you can pick up any passengers; if any bus actually stops, all the following buses would have to. The same argument can be used for any mode though if a single lane with no overtaking is installed as all traffic will be delayed due to stops by any vehicle. This is why we have bus laybys in many places to prevent this.You could argue that the car is less effective at this as it stops and can only let a maximum of 4 people off before resuming the journey. A bus stops in only a slightly longer timestep and can let a maximum of 72 people depart, before it can set off So effectively you have the stop the depart and the set off elements to measure. The stopping and departing are going to be similar with a couple of extra seconds for the bus, but the efficiency of the stop is far greater allowing a greater passenger per second exit ratio. It is known that the bus service always seems to operate on no buses for ages then a fleet come along at once and this is due to the fact that people alighting on the first bus delay it so that the headway between it and the following bus reduces, and so on until the first bus is full and perhaps skips a few stops, and then the second bus will take over until the first bus is able to stop again. But if the system were saturated the first bus would load up and set off then the second would load up and set off and so on, and the headways would remain overall similar with smaller variation. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Ian Henden" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... To continue to build roads will continue the problem. The answer is puvblic transport, but public transport cannot cater for all journeys and therefore over time journeys will need to become more corridored. For example go into any city during the am peak and the tidality of the flow is there to be seen. IF we were to get all of the people from their cars onto public transport, or even better living nearer to the workplace, the congestion would be far less. cars. Without cars on the urban road network public transport would be faster and more reliable. How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, And what will the travel speed be, and who long will each stop take, and how frequently will the stops occur? Or, alternatively, how fast would a typical journey be? Well this depends upon the usage the frequency of buses, the congestion levels. The reason for the introduction of bus lanes at intersections was to advance the bus to the front of the queues thus gaining back on the journey speed to make up for stops. And the bus lanes are useless, because they are full of prats in cars queuing to turn left or go straight on at the lights.... They are only useless if abused, many local authorities are now introducing cameras on buses to poilce the abuse. If bus lanes are clear as they are supposed to be then they do work. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 14:04:55 +0000, Ian Henden wrote: And the bus lanes are useless, because they are full of prats in cars queuing to turn left or go straight on at the lights.... TBH I hardly see cars in bus lanes, they are usually just empty lanes. Yep and so they should be and eventually when we all get fed up with sitting at the lights in a a mile long queue as the bus sails by on the inside lane we may start to think, how about taking the bus. If all the people that could use buses used buses everyone else who couldnt would have an easier time of it, but we have this mentality were we all *need* our car and cant possibly use PT or a sustainable transport mode. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
To commute is to waste, in both time and resources, the more we
reduce commuting the easier it will be for the people who have to travel to get around. True. Nobody likes commuting to work, I'd rather not have to do it. But with the way the job market is these days, I can't just keep moving house every time I change jobs, or I'd never get the chance to settle down anywhere. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
We cant travel if the rate of increase in traffic continues
Traffic has only increased at the same rate as the number of driving license holders has increased - due largely to women getting their own cars more these days. Once the number of license holders flattens out (which it will in due course), traffic should stop increasing so fast. If we built a decent road network now, it might be able to serve us forever. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
Speed humps slow drivers down thus making accidents less likely and
less severe. Not necessarily - they slow down for each hump and speed up in between - so they may well be going faster in between the humps than they would be if the humps weren't there. As for speed limit in force at all times well if it wasnmt drivers would get confused, and is travelling at 20 over that distance such a problem??. But as it's the school run parents who are usually the ones responsible for speeding outside schools, surely having a 24/7 20-limit is wasteful and unnecessary? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 15:50:32 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: It is known that the bus service always seems to operate on no buses for ages then a fleet come along at once and this is due to the fact that people alighting on the first bus delay it so that the headway between it and the following bus reduces, and so on until the first bus is full and perhaps skips a few stops, and then the second bus will take over until the first bus is able to stop again. But if the system were saturated the first bus would load up and set off then the second would load up and set off and so on, and the headways would remain overall similar with smaller variation. It's much more boarding (and ticket sales) rather than alighting that causes this problem; if off-bus ticketing were the norm (outside London), and all buses larger than van-derived minibuses were fitted with two sets of doors, this would be significantly reduced. Neil -- Neil Williams is a valid email address, but is sent to /dev/null. Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
When North sea gas runs out, what are we going to do then to replace
it, the best source of heat for the community. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3161414.stm |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:41 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk