|
|
Post by greenboy on Jan 3, 2022 20:29:36 GMT
Active Travel should work really well in London. With those sorts of population densities it should be possible to most people have the facilities they need within walking distance, with the odd longer journey by public transport or cycle. Maybe car clubs if there really is a need to drive (although there again taxis could be an option). The only areas that are not so good are the leafy outer suburbs, but even these are peppered with local shopping parades that should be able to support a variety of shops and facilities catering to many everyday needs. And I don't buy the argument that cars are convenient in London. They have to be parked up somewhere, serviced and maintained, they cost a lot to own and run, and whenever they are taken out it is necessary to find parking at the destination - in London this can cost a small fortune. Sometimes in London it's just easier to walk, cycle or take the bus and, as with Zurich, it should be made even more so. Many people in London manage perfectly well without a car. I disagree with this, owning a car has been a lot easier than needing to fiddle around with public transport. Even with the congestion charge changes it's clear TfL have realised that making car travel into London difficult just stops people altogether rather than promoting public transport usage. The weekend restrictions are clearly aimed at getting people to drive into London before it kicks in and then leave after it's no longer applicable. I need to go to Westfield in a bit and hopefully get dinner on the way home, my options are walk to the 238 in the cold (or take a 62), the 62 and 238 are both every 15 minutes today. The other option is walk in the cold to the 262 which takes me around 10 minutes and that is also every 15 minutes. I can time myself leaving for the 62 so let's say wait time there is negligible. Worst case I could end up waiting 15 minutes in the cold for the 238, upon arrival at Stratford I'll need to walk over the bridge and into the shopping centre before coming out again and potentially waiting another 15 minutes for the 262 or 238. Worst case scenario again I end up waiting 15 minutes for both to turn up together. If I were to get a 262 I go to East Beckton and stop off at McDonald's to get some food. Bringing the food home is not an option on foot as the 10min walk in the cold will make my food cold, the other option being get off at Beckton Asda for the McDonald's there and get a 173 straight home, of which the 173 itself is also every 15 minutes today which could mean another 15 minute wait, whether this be in McDonald's or out in the cold, I'll be waiting and wasting time regardless. I'm not going to be able to do all of this in an hour, assuming two hours I've spent £3.10, could potentially be £4.65 if one of my bus wait times pushes me above the third hour. The flip side here is I get into my car, pelt it up the A406 and A12, most of which is in 5th gear so fuel burn is minimal. Looking on Google maps there's not any traffic that will slow me down. I go to Car Park B in Westfield which means I don't even have to go outside into the cold at any point, I don't need to spend too long in there so will make the £3 parking charge. On the way home I again use the A12 and A406 back, stopping off at the East Beckton McDonald's drive thru which is about a minute or two drive from my house. I can bring my food home nice and warm and have probably spent a lot less than I would have on the bus. I can't see where during all of that public transport will have been easier for me. The car in this case has saved me money being the cheaper option. The heating in my car keeps me warm and as that predominantly uses engine heat it doesn't cause additional fuel burn. I haven't waited for a bus at any point during this and have made all the calls of where I want to be when I want to be there. I've not been at the mercy of buses or regulation. Until this issue gets sorted out it's no surprise people use cars. I can't disagree with any of this, I'm quite happy to use the train for Central London but for most journeys in these covid times it's the car. If that means I'm not a proper bus enthusiast then so be it but I'm not cutting off my nose to spite my face. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jan 3, 2022 20:31:05 GMT
I can relate to Eastlondoner62 and I live on the other side of London. Whether you want to admit it or not some journeys are just better done by car and in some cases such as with Friern Barnet Retail Park some people just prefer to drive. Some areas have very little transport provision such as Hampstead. I'm afraid living near a dual carriageway means that likely if there's not decent enough transport provision people will drive. I can really see that and there are many journeys better done by car and I'm not disputing that, but all I'm saying is there is always a way around in London. There always is, however can be a total headache. I'm not willing to be waiting 15 minutes in the cold for a bus when I do have access to a car. My argument isn't that there is no way around London without car, I'm just saying why the car is preferable and why public transport is falling behind. I know some people here aren't worried about bugs and are happy to wait, but many people are not. Many people at my workplace drive in despite being in the Congestion Zone. People who have the choice to not spend 15 minutes waiting will not wait and many people are also enticed to buy cars after experiencing similar. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jan 3, 2022 20:40:06 GMT
However that has meant I have had to make sacrifices due to an inept public transport network when my car gives me far more freedoms. Why should I work my life around public transport when really to get people onto public transport it should be the other way around. I do not plan to curb my life to work around using a bus and other modes of public transport and I doubt anyone else that already owns are car would voluntarily do so either. I'm paying for it so why can't I use it, even if it ends up working out cheaper. Don't forget, instantaneously, it may be cheaper to drive instead of getting the bus, but it does cost a lot to run a car including MOT's, road tax, insurance, fuel and repairs. It's £2128 for an annual travel card Z1-4. The average UK price for insurance is around £700, road tax £250. Assuming you keep your car fit through regular services it works out to an additional £300, maybe add in an extra £100 for a good service. This should mean on average you won't need to be spending on excessive repairs every single year. That gives you excess of £778, some of this can be used for the large repairs that cop up every few years should you save portions. Fuel usage will depend but I certainly don't spend hundreds of pounds on petrol. The hurdle is the initial investment of a car, and that's the price people will be willing to pay for the benefit of owning one. ULEZ compliant cars are very easy and cheap to come by these days too. You can even hunt around for a CC exempt car if you really want to. It honestly does not cost as much as travel on public transport does for a year. There are many other variables of course, the train is certainly very convenient and many car drivers may opt for a travelcard alongside a car. However this further shows they're happy to pay a lot more just to have a car for the occasions they need to have one as they don't see public transport fit for whatever reason. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jan 3, 2022 20:52:18 GMT
Don't forget, instantaneously, it may be cheaper to drive instead of getting the bus, but it does cost a lot to run a car including MOT's, road tax, insurance, fuel and repairs. It's £2128 for an annual travel card Z1-4. The average UK price for insurance is around £700, road tax £250. Assuming you keep your car fit through regular services it works out to an additional £300, maybe add in an extra £100 for a good service. This should mean on average you won't need to be spending on excessive repairs every single year. That gives you excess of £778, some of this can be used for the large repairs that cop up every few years should you save portions. Fuel usage will depend but I certainly don't spend hundreds of pounds on petrol. The hurdle is the initial investment of a car, and that's the price people will be willing to pay for the benefit of owning one. ULEZ compliant cars are very easy and cheap to come by these days too. You can even hunt around for a CC exempt car if you really want to. It honestly does not cost as much as travel on public transport does for a year. There are many other variables of course, the train is certainly very convenient and many car drivers may opt for a travelcard alongside a car. However this further shows they're happy to pay a lot more just to have a car for the occasions they need to have one as they don't see public transport fit for whatever reason. I think you seriously underestimate some of the costs. £50 of fuel per week does not get you very far when you spend most of your time idling. My last car, it cost over £700 to replace a set of tyres. The you have AA/RAC cover. Parking. And you have missed the biggest charge any motorist takes every year, maybe conveniently, depreciation of the vehicle, which in many cases exceeds the cost of the Travelcard. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:24:25 GMT
Sorry but this forum really annoys me on occasions anything east London is always okay but anything anywhere else people are allowed to have a say or complain. Members should appreciate the type of people that live in Newham and how they uses buses as they often have no alternative. Too many experts looking at pretty charts. You are going by buses per hour that’s fine but you clearly don’t live local and haven’t observed the single decker 366 loading on a regular bases. If you have such strong views on this matter, I'm assuming you responded to the consultation or petitioned your local Assembly member/MP? Those "pretty charts" with the actual usage provide the only true representation of the services - not anecdotal observations. I love how this forum loves to obsess about cuts and yet when rational cuts are proposed it's a horror because it doesn't quite fit their crayon based ideas. Not to mention that usage to Gallons Reach has been in long term decline over the last 10 years or so because of changing shopping habits. Redevelopment of the site is proposed in the medium term in a more transit friendly manner I would big to differ, the car park at Gallions Reach is busier than ever, it is not down to shopping habits. Its main direct competition over the years has been Westfield. Especially in terms of people going there by public transport. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:27:33 GMT
Bus ridership should increase in theory on all routes regardless, and due to changing patterns it will be very hard to determine what an average is. The 63 for example will not increase nearly as quick as some routes because it's a route which goes through the City which is an area full of office workers. I think the real question to ask is who this whole scheme on the 63 is aimed at. If it's getting people out of cars then good luck to them, my 10+ year old car that's ULEZ compliant is still miles ahead in terms of comfort and internal amenities than these brand new buses. I'd not ditch my car if we're just talking about comfort. However if I was in my car and I see a bus pelting it down on a bus lane, and reaches where I need to go far in advance of when I get there now we're talking. No matter what the state of the bus there, even if it's just the standard offering I'd take it. My time is valuable and I'm willing to sacrifice my amenities for that. If the bus is fast and has some nice amenities then it's a bonus, but if the bus is faster I'd just take it anyway. If you're aiming at pedestrians that don't currently use public transport then the amenities might persuade them a bit more than a car driver would, but then once again unless there's adequate bus priority then the pedestrians aren't going to care. Would anyone really want to get a bus just because it has a colourful screen at the front of it and then just get caught in a load of traffic? If someone is waiting to go from Elephant to Peckham, do you think someone would miss every single bus that comes their way and wait for a 63 specifically just because it's got a seat which is a bit taller than the ones on the 136 or 363? There's this false belief that increasing the spec of a bus will increase ridership, but Londoners are different. The city has many many alternative transport methods, it's very easy to get around on the car, and I don't take the bus long distance when the tube exists. Not to mention the tube is pretty much the same cost as the bus outside of Zone 1 in the peak now anyway. Time is what matters to people, people will trade comfort for time pretty much all the time. From an enthusiasts point of view it's easy to say a nice bus will attract people back because enthusiasts enjoy being on buses and don't see it as a waste of time, but the general public do and this is what needs to be seen. The aim for people is to spend as little time on a bus as possible. I'm possibly being cynical but I think the future bus project is to more than anything improve the satisfaction of existing bus users. And there's nothing wrong with that. The fancy interiors on a bus are a pretty low cost project when compared to other initiatives. Attracting pedestrians onto buses is, in my mind - a bad approach. Walking or cycling, where appropriate, is fundamentally better than using public transport. It's better for your individual wellbeing, wider wellbeing and of course financially. We should actually be encouraging people to walk or cycle in London instead of using public transport - appreciate that might be controversial. And of course recognise it isn't possible for every user or journey Well that is where the bus would mainly get its custom. If they are no longer trying to attract cyclists/pedestrians because they are on a green agenda, they may as well give up. There is not much benefits to attract car users back to the bus, no matter how much you try to sugar coat it. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:32:56 GMT
I'm possibly being cynical but I think the future bus project is to more than anything improve the satisfaction of existing bus users. And there's nothing wrong with that. The fancy interiors on a bus are a pretty low cost project when compared to other initiatives. Attracting pedestrians onto buses is, in my mind - a bad approach. Walking or cycling, where appropriate, is fundamentally better than using public transport. It's better for your individual wellbeing, wider wellbeing and of course financially. We should actually be encouraging people to walk or cycle in London instead of using public transport - appreciate that might be controversial. And of course recognise it isn't possible for every user or journey I certainly agree we should be doing more to encourage "active travel" by having safer and more attractive streets - although I accept that such measures can slow bus journeys and make them less attractive. What really needs to happen is a modal shift from car use to both active travel and public transport. It worked in Zurich where serious curbs on car use won popular support - because the alternatives were so attractive (trams that have priority and don't stop at traffic lights, who wouldn't love those?). I don't see any harm in enhancing the specification of new (and possibly refurbished) buses, as you say the improvements aren't costly and as well as improving the satisfaction of existing users they improve the image of bus travel generally. These improvements are already common practice outside London and operators would not do it if they didn't feel there was some sort of commercial gain to be had. Although improved specification won't cause a huge amount of modal shift in itself, they could generate extra journeys from people who are already favourably disposed to bus travel (we do exist!). It's also worth noting that some of the improvements also have a safety aspect, such as higher seat backs. TfL has an ambitious target to eliminate deaths on board buses, or caused by buses, by 2030. Zurich and London are completely different. This has been the problem of London for many years, they have been trying to rip off so many schemes from other countries around the world and the majority of them is a failure. If a car user goes gym regular and works out in their house. They would not see why they should benefit to use public transport to sit next to someone using loud music, annoying conversations, smelly food, messy interior, anti social behaviour and to top it of take forever to get to. Surely many would not see that as a privilege. The new bus spec is nice, but it still has a long way to go. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:41:04 GMT
I think east London needs a break frankly and gets the wrong end of the stick in most cases. The 19 gets saved for example whereas a bunch of east London routes (25!) have been getting decimated over the years despite ridership being high and the overall area having a demographic which relies heavily on buses. A place like Putney for example has 4 routes going into central London (14, 22, 74, 414) while from the east you barely get anything (25 goes to the middle of nowhere, 8 lands far from its objective, 115 just about gets to zone 1!) so I would quite vehemently oppose non-sensical suggestions on further cuts in east London while ostensibly not cutting much in other areas What makes this funny is transport usage is probably at its highest in East London, the pax/mile list of routes that can be generated pretty much is always dominated by routes in East London, without fail you know the 238, 104, 330 etc will always be there. It's also telling despite the 25 has been almost halved in what it was once, it's still making the top 10 busiest routes in London while other routes that have fallen off completely haven't been touched at all. Changes such as just extending the 115 that bit further into Central, sending the 25 to at least High Holborn, restoring the 8 to Oxford Circus would be a lot more appreciated by the locals than their cost. I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the 14 and the 414 are both needed, while apparently over in East London nobody needs to go further East than City Thameslink. The 8 makes it to TCR, but it then doesn't go further East than Bow. Then don't start me on the 15 which culls short at Blackwall but can't make it further west than Trafalgar Square for some reason. Yet we have half the routes that come up the Whitehall going towards Oxford Circus. Why does the 25 need to be cut when the 24 is carrying fresh air, and why is the 38 still chilling about with 36 buses when it's not even in the top 30 most used routes in London anymore. People in East London have also even been given the short stick of transport within the East, it's been mentioned there's going to be 5 routes from East Ham to Canning Town, and new route 304 is adding some bling to distract people in the middle at Custom House, but this completely ignores the fact Canning Town still has no route literally going around the corner to Canary Wharf nor out of every route that heads down Barking Road from Canning Town, only one extremely overcrowded route actually makes it to Barking on the other end. The only route from Canning Town to Ilford is the indirect 147, while the only route from Stratford to Barking is another overcrowded mess. Getting from Hackney Central to the Newham area is just supported but he 276, while getting to Redbridge involves walking away to the 425 and getting to Barking and Dagenham is pretty much impossible by just using one bus. Then why is Stratford impossible to reach by bus from Dagenham without needing to get to the 86 at Chadwell Heath? These are all links people actually want and need, you can tell just because of how bad the 5, 86 and 25 all are. I cannot see many of these links in Newham created for the reason that it would take passengers away from the District, Tfl Rail, Jubilee and London Overground. East London has been hit badly over decades of changes all geared up to making you use 1 bus then the train to complete your journey. A lot of one bus journeys have been eliminated. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:46:27 GMT
Would the 425 be better off rerouted via Hackney Central then? I do think that is a good idea, it does skirt around Hackney which I'd have thought would be a major objective.
As for the issues with links in East London, would the 238 have been better to have extended to Becontree Heath instead of the EL2, or would have the destination "Stratford" on the front make that overcrowded? I'm no local but I'd have imagined that would be more popular than Barking Riverside? It probably would support the 5, which as you say gets seriously overcrowded. I know you once mentioned no Gants Hill to Barking link, so perhaps if the EL1/EL2 worked in tandem between Barking & Ilford with the 169 at appropriate frequencies, would the EL2 perhaps be a good one to extend further to Gants Hill? The 425 going via Hackney Central would probably be a good shout. I know when Snoggle was with us he did mention that he thought the 238 being extended to Becontree Heath would have been very counterproductive for the reason you suggest. It'd have fired up a ridiculously high amount of untapped demand and rather than helping the 5, you'd have ended up with two routes that needed help themselves. Even the EL2 these days is very well used, whenever I'm waiting for a bus in the morning and I see an EL2 approaching I don't even bother to flag it down half the time as it's packed to the rafters so it's hard to imagine what the 238 would have looked like. But the fact that may have been an issue suggests how poor the bus links really are when you're starting to worry about routes becoming far too busy. Barking to Gants Hill is a missing link indeed, the EL1 or EL2 running there in the way you suggest would have been nice. Even now it's an option, but I'd probably not want the EL1 extended there because the crowd that builds up for the EL1 at Ilford is ridiculous and I don't think the EL1 would manage having more of a crowd to deal with. It's funny to think Barking to Ilford only has two direct routes liking the two towns, with the 366 providing a more indirect link. For two major town centres only 7 stops apart you'd think there'd be a lot more provision for travel between them. There was a Barking to Gants Hill, but the 179 was pathetically cut back to Ilford. There was huge opposition against it, they did not care. These are the journeys that people would make in a car on a long stretch of trunk road, something that TfL has punished many bus users over the years with by cuts. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:52:06 GMT
In regards to active travel, I do think it wouldn't work as well in London as it did in Zurich. The population densities are completely different (926 people per square kilometre in Zurich versus 5701 people per square kilometre in London) meaning that there will be more cars and as a result more people need to get to places. In regards as to why people use a car, it's very simply because of convenience and I do think lifestyles perhaps clash between London and Zurich. Active Travel should work really well in London. With those sorts of population densities it should be possible to most people have the facilities they need within walking distance, with the odd longer journey by public transport or cycle. Maybe car clubs if there really is a need to drive (although there again taxis could be an option). The only areas that are not so good are the leafy outer suburbs, but even these are peppered with local shopping parades that should be able to support a variety of shops and facilities catering to many everyday needs. And I don't buy the argument that cars are convenient in London, after all many residents already manage perfectly well without one. They have to be parked up somewhere, serviced and maintained, they cost a lot to own and run, and whenever they are taken out it is necessary to find parking at the destination - in London this can cost a small fortune. Sometimes in London it's just easier to walk, cycle or take the bus and, as with Zurich, it should be made even more so. Speak for yourself about they cost to be service maintained etc. Some have thier own dedicated parking, some it may not cost much to maintain. Some may do the maintenance themselves. Not because you do nto see the benefits of cars does not mean other do not. Even finding the parking at a so called destination could be quicker than being stuck regulated on a bus. I can only see some of your point within zone 1 area, the rest of London, it really is hard to see the fact. I am saying this as someone who has a car and also uses the bus & train. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 3, 2022 23:56:48 GMT
Active Travel should work really well in London. With those sorts of population densities it should be possible to most people have the facilities they need within walking distance, with the odd longer journey by public transport or cycle. Maybe car clubs if there really is a need to drive (although there again taxis could be an option). The only areas that are not so good are the leafy outer suburbs, but even these are peppered with local shopping parades that should be able to support a variety of shops and facilities catering to many everyday needs. And I don't buy the argument that cars are convenient in London. They have to be parked up somewhere, serviced and maintained, they cost a lot to own and run, and whenever they are taken out it is necessary to find parking at the destination - in London this can cost a small fortune. Sometimes in London it's just easier to walk, cycle or take the bus and, as with Zurich, it should be made even more so. Many people in London manage perfectly well without a car. I disagree with this, owning a car has been a lot easier than needing to fiddle around with public transport. Even with the congestion charge changes it's clear TfL have realised that making car travel into London difficult just stops people altogether rather than promoting public transport usage. The weekend restrictions are clearly aimed at getting people to drive into London before it kicks in and then leave after it's no longer applicable. I need to go to Westfield in a bit and hopefully get dinner on the way home, my options are walk to the 238 in the cold (or take a 62), the 62 and 238 are both every 15 minutes today. The other option is walk in the cold to the 262 which takes me around 10 minutes and that is also every 15 minutes. I can time myself leaving for the 62 so let's say wait time there is negligible. Worst case I could end up waiting 15 minutes in the cold for the 238, upon arrival at Stratford I'll need to walk over the bridge and into the shopping centre before coming out again and potentially waiting another 15 minutes for the 262 or 238. Worst case scenario again I end up waiting 15 minutes for both to turn up together. If I were to get a 262 I go to East Beckton and stop off at McDonald's to get some food. Bringing the food home is not an option on foot as the 10min walk in the cold will make my food cold, the other option being get off at Beckton Asda for the McDonald's there and get a 173 straight home, of which the 173 itself is also every 15 minutes today which could mean another 15 minute wait, whether this be in McDonald's or out in the cold, I'll be waiting and wasting time regardless. I'm not going to be able to do all of this in an hour, assuming two hours I've spent £3.10, could potentially be £4.65 if one of my bus wait times pushes me above the third hour. The flip side here is I get into my car, pelt it up the A406 and A12, most of which is in 5th gear so fuel burn is minimal. Looking on Google maps there's not any traffic that will slow me down. I go to Car Park B in Westfield which means I don't even have to go outside into the cold at any point, I don't need to spend too long in there so will make the £3 parking charge. On the way home I again use the A12 and A406 back, stopping off at the East Beckton McDonald's drive thru which is about a minute or two drive from my house. I can bring my food home nice and warm and have probably spent a lot less than I would have on the bus. I can't see where during all of that public transport will have been easier for me. The car in this case has saved me money being the cheaper option. The heating in my car keeps me warm and as that predominantly uses engine heat it doesn't cause additional fuel burn. I haven't waited for a bus at any point during this and have made all the calls of where I want to be when I want to be there. I've not been at the mercy of buses or regulation. Until this issue gets sorted out it's no surprise people use cars. Even the so called congestion charge has become a joke in the term. Especially having it run at 2am in the morning. These matters are no wonder why the US and other embassies refused to pay it and made London a laughing stock. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 3, 2022 23:59:38 GMT
I disagree with this, owning a car has been a lot easier than needing to fiddle around with public transport. Even with the congestion charge changes it's clear TfL have realised that making car travel into London difficult just stops people altogether rather than promoting public transport usage. The weekend restrictions are clearly aimed at getting people to drive into London before it kicks in and then leave after it's no longer applicable. I need to go to Westfield in a bit and hopefully get dinner on the way home, my options are walk to the 238 in the cold (or take a 62), the 62 and 238 are both every 15 minutes today. The other option is walk in the cold to the 262 which takes me around 10 minutes and that is also every 15 minutes. I can time myself leaving for the 62 so let's say wait time there is negligible. Worst case I could end up waiting 15 minutes in the cold for the 238, upon arrival at Stratford I'll need to walk over the bridge and into the shopping centre before coming out again and potentially waiting another 15 minutes for the 262 or 238. Worst case scenario again I end up waiting 15 minutes for both to turn up together. If I were to get a 262 I go to East Beckton and stop off at McDonald's to get some food. Bringing the food home is not an option on foot as the 10min walk in the cold will make my food cold, the other option being get off at Beckton Asda for the McDonald's there and get a 173 straight home, of which the 173 itself is also every 15 minutes today which could mean another 15 minute wait, whether this be in McDonald's or out in the cold, I'll be waiting and wasting time regardless. I'm not going to be able to do all of this in an hour, assuming two hours I've spent £3.10, could potentially be £4.65 if one of my bus wait times pushes me above the third hour. The flip side here is I get into my car, pelt it up the A406 and A12, most of which is in 5th gear so fuel burn is minimal. Looking on Google maps there's not any traffic that will slow me down. I go to Car Park B in Westfield which means I don't even have to go outside into the cold at any point, I don't need to spend too long in there so will make the £3 parking charge. On the way home I again use the A12 and A406 back, stopping off at the East Beckton McDonald's drive thru which is about a minute or two drive from my house. I can bring my food home nice and warm and have probably spent a lot less than I would have on the bus. I can't see where during all of that public transport will have been easier for me. The car in this case has saved me money being the cheaper option. The heating in my car keeps me warm and as that predominantly uses engine heat it doesn't cause additional fuel burn. I haven't waited for a bus at any point during this and have made all the calls of where I want to be when I want to be there. I've not been at the mercy of buses or regulation. Until this issue gets sorted out it's no surprise people use cars. Even the so called congestion charge has become a joke in the term. Especially having it run at 2am in the morning. These matters are no wonder why the US and other embassies refused to pay it and made London a laughing stock. Ultimately it's a cash cow for TFL because of their failures during the pandemic but also long before. I guess that's what happens when you have incompetent people within TFL like Heidi Alexander. Though I do understand it was of governments order, they should've IMO culled some services in the pandemic. Some of them just weren't being used. I'd have seen no issue with certain services such as the 349, 521 etc during the first lockdown. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 4, 2022 0:11:51 GMT
Don't forget, instantaneously, it may be cheaper to drive instead of getting the bus, but it does cost a lot to run a car including MOT's, road tax, insurance, fuel and repairs. It's £2128 for an annual travel card Z1-4. The average UK price for insurance is around £700, road tax £250. Assuming you keep your car fit through regular services it works out to an additional £300, maybe add in an extra £100 for a good service. This should mean on average you won't need to be spending on excessive repairs every single year. That gives you excess of £778, some of this can be used for the large repairs that cop up every few years should you save portions. Fuel usage will depend but I certainly don't spend hundreds of pounds on petrol. The hurdle is the initial investment of a car, and that's the price people will be willing to pay for the benefit of owning one. ULEZ compliant cars are very easy and cheap to come by these days too. You can even hunt around for a CC exempt car if you really want to. It honestly does not cost as much as travel on public transport does for a year. There are many other variables of course, the train is certainly very convenient and many car drivers may opt for a travelcard alongside a car. However this further shows they're happy to pay a lot more just to have a car for the occasions they need to have one as they don't see public transport fit for whatever reason. £700 for insurance!!!! there was me thinking £300 was expensive I am actually shocked how much a Zone 1-4 travel card costs. I guess as I do not pay for travel then I do not realise who steeply the Gold card has risen over the years. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 4, 2022 0:16:47 GMT
It's £2128 for an annual travel card Z1-4. The average UK price for insurance is around £700, road tax £250. Assuming you keep your car fit through regular services it works out to an additional £300, maybe add in an extra £100 for a good service. This should mean on average you won't need to be spending on excessive repairs every single year. That gives you excess of £778, some of this can be used for the large repairs that cop up every few years should you save portions. Fuel usage will depend but I certainly don't spend hundreds of pounds on petrol. The hurdle is the initial investment of a car, and that's the price people will be willing to pay for the benefit of owning one. ULEZ compliant cars are very easy and cheap to come by these days too. You can even hunt around for a CC exempt car if you really want to. It honestly does not cost as much as travel on public transport does for a year. There are many other variables of course, the train is certainly very convenient and many car drivers may opt for a travelcard alongside a car. However this further shows they're happy to pay a lot more just to have a car for the occasions they need to have one as they don't see public transport fit for whatever reason. I think you seriously underestimate some of the costs. £50 of fuel per week does not get you very far when you spend most of your time idling. My last car, it cost over £700 to replace a set of tyres. The you have AA/RAC cover. Parking. And you have missed the biggest charge any motorist takes every year, maybe conveniently, depreciation of the vehicle, which in many cases exceeds the cost of the Travelcard. £50 of fuel per week is expensive, I would question what you were doing, that is unless you do a lot of mileage. £700 for a set of 4 tyres is very expensive, practically £125 per corner. Depends on how you drive, can get around 8 years from a set of tyres. Be smart of look for deals that would net you free AA/RAC for a year, even with some servicing or banking arrangements. Some cars actually appreciate in value, so some can be smart in other ways  |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 4, 2022 0:38:35 GMT
I most certainly wouldn't say my life is ''curbed'' without a car as well. I, myself, have the really nifty North London line for all my shopping needs. Fares are good and it takes me to whatever shop is the flavour of the day. It's interesting you bring up the North London Line because interchange between lines like the Northern Line is not great along the North London Section. It unfortunately misses out interchange on numerous occasions (Camden Road, K Town West, Walthamstow Queens Road, S Tottenham) whereas ideally it would be good to provide interchange between Camden Town, Kentish Town, W Central, Seven Sisters.
In the case of KTW & Camden Road especially there is not adequate enough parking either so for those heading west it's a bit inconvenient.
Also there could be an interchange with the Central line at Leytonstone. The Gospel Oak to Barking line crosses so many train lines but stations were not interchangeable with many others. Recent years Blackhorse Rd has become closer and Walthamstow Queens Rd by a link. Also nearby Forest Gate is shown on the maps as being a short walk from Wanstead Park. I would say many of the stations on that line were in the wrong place. i.e. Midland Rd would have been better places at Bakers Arms or a station at Bakers Arms. Queens Rd would have been better placed on Selborne Rd or even better on the market High St. |
|
