Public Transport - Epic fail

[Sonic]

For reasons I shan't bore you with I needed to utilise public transport today, so I set off at 9am for my half mile walk to the nearest bus stop to catch a ride down to the nearest train station.

Now its been a while since I had the need to use the bus but I see them going up and down the main road advertising a regular 15 minute service but was pleased to see that when I arrived at the stop at 9.20 that I could text my location to the bus company and they'd text me where the next bus was and when it would arrive - which I did - to be told the next bus to anywhere was due at 10.40; over an hour wait! FFS!

A four mile walk later I make it to the train station soaked to the bone.

Why would anyone choose to get out of their cars for a "service" like this?? There's a kerosene cat in hell wearing gasoline drawers chance you'll even get me to leave my car behind again.

[gadjo_dilo]

Why would anyone choose to get out of their cars for a "service" like this??

Because moving your body is good for your health. :laugh:

[Rudy Tamasz]

What you described looks like a thinly populated rural or suburban area. In big cities the situation is different. With heavy traffic it makes perfect sense to use public transportation in the shape of trams or metro that easily beat cars in terms of getting you from point A to point B.

[MrJan]

What you described looks like a thinly populated rural or suburban area. In big cities the situation is different. With heavy traffic it makes perfect sense to use public transportation in the shape of trams or metro that easily beat cars in terms of getting you from point A to point B.

That's the thing, unless you live in one of the larger Cities (London, M'cr, Birmingham etc.) it's rubbish. I live in a city with a population of about 125,000 people and the transport is fine if you just want to go from suburbs to City centre. if you want to try going anywhere else then it's just hassle. Also it's extremely slow because the buses take stupid routes to try and pick up more people.

There was one time that I used the bus and it took 50 minutes to do a journey that would take no more than 10 minutes in a car. Said journey cost £1.50 which would be about the price I would spend on parking if I'd driven.

England is made up of smaller cities like this but unfortunately the politicians only go to work in London and subsequently think that public transport is a viable option. Personally I have the problem of working out of town, about 17 miles and 30minutes away in the car. If I were to use public transport I have a choice of leaving the station at 6:45 and getting to work 30 minutes early or leaving at 7:35 and being 25 minutes late (not including the extra 10-15 minutes to walk from the bus stop to where I actually work).

To make it even more fun I wouldn't be able to catch a bus to the station to take the first option anyway as the bus from my house (which leaves at 6:25) doesn't get to the station until after 6:45.

In summary, public transport is rubbish :)

[Sonic]

What you described looks like a thinly populated rural or suburban area. In big cities the situation is different. With heavy traffic it makes perfect sense to use public transportation in the shape of trams or metro that easily beat cars in terms of getting you from point A to point B.

Nope. 250,000 people live in the main town, and whilst I had to walk along a rural lane for 15 mins I was in a heavily populated area where I tried and failed to get a bus.

Having had the chance to to investigate (read yell at their customer services) I am informed that 9am is not seen as "peak" times and therefore the timetable is only hourly pickups.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Nope. 250,000 people live in the main town, and whilst I had to walk along a rural lane for 15 mins I was in a heavily populated area where I tried and failed to get a bus.

Having had the chance to to investigate (read yell at their customer services) I am informed that 9am is not seen as "peak" times and therefore the timetable is only hourly pickups.

Hey, by 9 a.m. all honest folks are supposed to be at their workplaces instead of enjoying country landscapes in a totally decadent way.

[anthonyvop]

A government run transportation system has poor service?
That cannot be!
I refuse to believe that.
Everybody know that the government can do a better job with anything better than the private sector.
It is impossible for an agency that has to answer to nobody and is made up of employees with total job security to not have service as their # priority.

[Rudy Tamasz]

A government run transportation system has poor service?
That cannot be!
I refuse to believe that.
Everybody know that the government can do a better job with anything better than the private sector.
It is impossible for an agency that has to answer to nobody and is made up of employees with total job security to not have service as their # priority.

Do we need to turn a simple conversation about transportation into an ideology dispute?

[anthonyvop]

Do we need to turn a simple conversation about transportation into an ideology dispute?

The discussion is about Government run transportation. How can it not be?

[Brown, Jon Brow]

The discussion is about Government run transportation. How can it not be?

Railways transportation was much better in the UK before it was privitised to improve service through 'competition'.

If I was getting the train to London from my nearest station the only choice I have is a Virgin train. Virgin have a monopoly and can charge whatever they want. How is this 'competition' improving the service?

[Sonic]

Hey, by 9 a.m. all honest folks are supposed to be at their workplaces instead of enjoying country landscapes in a totally decadent way.

LOL! Although I didn't feel very decadent as I strolled into the the train station looking like a tramp in my drenched clothes . :D

[GridGirl]

The discussion is about Government run transportation. How can it not be?

Who said anything about government run transport. Our train operators are not government run and my bus services are all operated by private companies. The only thing public about it is the 'public' bit in the words public transport.

[anthonyvop]

Who said anything about government run transport. Our train operators are not government run and my bus services are all operated by private companies. The only thing public about it is the 'public' bit in the words public transport.

Is it an open market or a government mandated monopoly?

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Is it an open market or a government mandated monopoly?

The buses in my local town are run by a few different operators.

[Captain VXR]

Virtually every bus in Bath is ran by First, with ever increasing fares and decreasing frequencies

[J4MIE]

I work in Edinburgh, 39 miles away from my house.

I have to catch a bus at 6.49am (it hasn't been early for a few weeks now) which gets me into the city centre at 8.05 ish, then I have a 5 minute walk to get a local bus out to my workplace at 8.35. I stroll out of the office at 5pm, get a bus back into town, then if I am very lucky and it is up to time I will get my main bus home and be in the house by 7.25pm.

This costs me £35 a week all in, which isn't bad, but remember that if I drive in then I can get up an hour later, lazily have some cornflakes whilst catching up on breakfast news, then set off at 7.30 and still be there around 8.35. In addition to this time saving, I can be home and in my house by 6pm. So this would save me over two hours a day! In addition, if it is hot I can switch on the fan or open a window, if it is cold I can put the heater on at a temperature that is just right and I can play whatever music I like as loud as I want. On top of that is the fact that I don't have to sit next to some fat old person or have to sit near the annoying woman on my bus that has a very distinctive cough - every day.

I really must get around to buying a car soon....... :s

[gadjo_dilo]

A government run transportation system has poor service?
That cannot be!
I refuse to believe that.
Everybody know that the government can do a better job with anything better than the private sector.
It is impossible for an agency that has to answer to nobody and is made up of employees with total job security to not have service as their # priority.
Tell this to my governants. There are about 5 years since they try to " modernize " the railway Bucharest - Constanta, which means the connection betweeen the capital and the main harbour of the country ( not to mention the summer resorts at the Black Sea - our main holiday destination ). The distance of 225 km between the cities is done in over 5 hours in trains without air conditioned. And this can't stop them to charge the price of an express train.
And as if it wasn't enough they began the same operation on the railway to the mountains.

[Dave B]

Railways transportation was much better in the UK before it was privitised to improve service through 'competition'.

If I was getting the train to London from my nearest station the only choice I have is a Virgin train. Virgin have a monopoly and can charge whatever they want. How is this 'competition' improving the service?
This is preciscely the problem. We were told that privatisation would lead to competition, but the reverse has happenned. Train Operating Companies were so scared of losing their not inconsiderable investments that they were promised exclusive routes and long franchises.

The net effect of this is that if I get the train into London I'm stuck with Southeastern Trains, like it or lump it. I'd like to see several companies competing for my business, bidding for slots at stations and operating services accordingly.

It works for airlines: if I want to fly to any major European city I have a choice of several airlines and I can make a decision based on cost, comfort, convenience of takeoff times, reputation, service, and in the case of BA the likelyhood of being on strike on any given day!



The buses in my local town are run by a few different operators.
Lucky you. That's theoretically the case here but well over 90% are run by Arriva who, to be fair to them, actually run a halfway decent service. The only real drawback round here is than many routes use Chatham as a hub, so you have to go into and back out of one of the most unpleasant areas of the country on the way to somewhere nice!

[Mark in Oshawa]

Is it an open market or a government mandated monopoly?

Apparently in Britain the public sector doesn't always run transit Tony. You can use your ideological argument on a lot of subjects, but not in this case.

I think the problem with public transit is unless you live in a city with subways like a London or New York City, most transit systems either need subsidies or are inefficient. The bus service in most cities isn't as quick as a car. It is THAT simple, and you must adapt your life to meet ITS schedule, and not the other way around. Since we are a one car family of late, I have been using transit here in my town of 150000. I can say I can make it work if I worked near the bus line I can pick up easy...then it is ok. The problem is, the real need of people doesn't work that way.

Cars work best. PERIOD. They are not cheap, but people will pay for the reality of not being a slave to someone elses schedule. Those idiots who refuse to grasp this usually are the same people who live in a large city near a subway line and live and work near that line.....and they cannot see or refuse to see the reality of anyone else..

[MrJan]

I think that subways are a great way to get around the main centre of large cities. When I've been to London or when I went to Toronto I found it very easy to hop on and make a journey. It's not ideal but it's a reasonably cost effective way of getting about in areas where parking is at a premium and traffic is slow.

Also in the UK we have areas with a 'Congestion Charge' which means that you pay to drive within a certain zone at a certain time. The idea is that people don't want to do that so use public transport. Not sure how well it works but it's certainly a cash cow.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I think that subways are a great way to get around the main centre of large cities. When I've been to London or when I went to Toronto I found it very easy to hop on and make a journey. It's not ideal but it's a reasonably cost effective way of getting about in areas where parking is at a premium and traffic is slow.

Also in the UK we have areas with a 'Congestion Charge' which means that you pay to drive within a certain zone at a certain time. The idea is that people don't want to do that so use public transport. Not sure how well it works but it's certainly a cash cow.

Jan, it is a cash cow, but it wouldn't be accepted by Londoners for 2 minutes if they didn't have the "underground" to get them around.

The problem with public transit is for it to work properly and not be a chore to use, it has to be a high density of users needing the service. Most cities are not that densely populated. AS I said, it is only really large cities that can make public transit part of the average guy's life as an option to taking the car. As Sonic just proved, it just isn't very good at accomodating anyone who isn't working on a set schedule that the people running transit think appropriate.

I would LOVE to not have to drive really. AS much as I love driving, and I love a good road trip ( and I used to drive for a living ), if I could work and live in the city and not have to drive, I would. The simple reality of it is, I need a car because transit doesn't work really. It just doesn't. Don't matter who runs it (government or tendered out to private concerns) either....

The reality of it is, it requires high densities in population that pretty much go against the desire of most people. Most people do NOT want to live in high density development in large cities if they can afford to live and work in the suburbs or the country. You don't want to raise children in an apartment block either...hence the drive to the burbs and the phenomena of the car as the primary source for getting around...

[Camelopard]

A government run transportation system has poor service? ..........usual crap............


Actually vopie if you bothered to read the subject of the thread and Sonic's post, then you would see that the word Government doesn't get a mention.......... :rolleyes:

[Camelopard]

I live in a city of 300,000 people and if I worked at one of the major centres doing a monday to friday, regular hours job, I would probably catch a bus, it would be cheaper than paying the parking fees in one of the privately run car parks.

But, I work shift work, (although I can retire now, yaay...) and work from 7am till 7pm on days and 7pm till 7am when on nights. This covers 7 days a week.

For me to catch a bus to work and be on time on day shift, I would have to leave home at 6am as the bus does a circuitous route through the suburbs, whereas by driving the couple of kilometres (1 mile = 1.6 kms approx) and parking for free on the street, rather than in an overpriced privately run car park, I can stay in bed until 6:25 and still get to work by 7am and of course I would have had a shower....

It's a no brainer really..... I used to ride my push bike, but I've gotten lazy and cycling home at 7am after a 12 night shift wasn't much fun particularly as it is up hill!

[Rollo]

This is the city... 4 million people... I live here.
Ladies and gentlemen: the story you are about to hear is true. Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent.

Thanks to the Australian Federal government mandating this E10 rubbish as at 1st July, it's now cheaper for me to take public transport than to drive my 1.3L Ka back and forth to work.

The break even point for me is if the price of petrol is 119.7c/L. At that point it costs me either $48/week in petrol or $48/week to take public transport.

The net difference in time is that if I use public transport, the journey is on average about 25 minutes quicker than to drive.

(E10 is a crapper blend and that discussion is found here:
http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130453)

[anthonyvop]

Actually vopie if you bothered to read the subject of the thread and Sonic's post, then you would see that the word Government doesn't get a mention.......... :rolleyes:

The title of the thread is "PUBLIC TRANSPORT"

How am I wrong? Enlighten me own self-anointed defender of the looters!

[dunes]

I have 20 something son; Who allthough graduated with honors fails to see how public trans could help him own a car.Its been 4 years and I haven't bought him one yet but still he thinks I'm going to just to get him out of my basement.
So today I gav e him a bus schedule and he remarked it was too far to walk to catch the bus,So without missing a beat I took him to the shed and introduceds him to his v ery own bicycle. Nothing fancy so he could either lock it up at a friends or but it on the bus's buggy I'm still feeling good and laughing out loud.
Yes I like public Transportation.

[Rollo]

The title of the thread is "PUBLIC TRANSPORT"

How am I wrong? Enlighten me own self-anointed defender of the looters!

Public Transport is available to the general public, such as a train, bus or a ferry.
Private Transport is not available to the general public, such as a bicycle, a car or even a horse.

Public Transport can either be owned by government or by corporations like Veolia Transport etc.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Today we had a huge torrential rain and all electricty driven public ground transportation stopped. I had to catch a cab to show up at work. I have to acknowledge that sometimes cars come handy even in big cities.

[Camelopard]

The title of the thread is "PUBLIC TRANSPORT"

How am I wrong? Enlighten me own self-anointed defender of the looters!

As usual you are wrong, 'public' doesn't necessarily mean 'Government', use your brain for once in your life.................

[Mark in Oshawa]

Cameleopard. Irony of ironies must be pointed out to a hard right free enterprise guy like Tony though. In Australia, and in the UK, I know that the bus and rapid transit systems are often actually contracted out to private industry, something Tony would approve of, but in his land, (and for all but a few places here), public transit is PUBLICALLY owned..and errr....sorta operated.

Transit in most of North America, is often a money loser, even if it is a good way to get around. I once read that the New York City Subway and bus system might be the only one on the continent that actually pays its own way.....

Transit in North America often doesn't work very well, and is subsidized heavily, while being run by people who are being run basically at the whim of the public sector unions who of course, do nothing to improve the service.

[Rollo]

Transit in most of North America, is often a money loser, even if it is a good way to get around. I once read that the New York City Subway and bus system might be the only one on the continent that actually pays its own way...

Blame General Motors for that - they (along with others) right royally screwed up public transportation in the US. One only needs to look at the "United States v National City Lines" case to work that out.
By the time it finally saw a circuit appeal in the Supreme Court in 1953, none other than Charles Erwin Wilson (former CEO of General Motors) was also Secretary of Defense. Perhaps strangely, National City Lines and their respective owners, were acquitted.

The law is impartial. Railway Trains are also impartial, but once you set the guidelines, that's where they run. The United States should have had the best public transportation systems in the world... but it doesn't. "Ha Ha Suffer" to the American public eh?

[555-04Q2]

A government run transportation system has poor service?
That cannot be!
I refuse to believe that.
Everybody know that the government can do a better job with anything better than the private sector.
It is impossible for an agency that has to answer to nobody and is made up of employees with total job security to not have service as their # priority.

Tell that to the Germans and Japanese to name just 2. Their systems are more reliable than a Swiss watch.

[Mark]

I've just come back from Zurich and the tram system there is excellent. As is Swiss rail too.

[Mark]

Ps. Most, if not all public transport in the UK is run by private companies. In certain places, mostly London it is regulated by the local authority. In others it's pretty much a free for all, but with the buses companies try to drive out competition, they prefer a monopoly situation for obvious reasons.

For the railways, it's just as regulated and subsidised as when it was government owned, but we now have private companies creaming off money.

[Camelopard]

Ps. Most, if not all public transport in the UK is run by private companies. In certain places, mostly London it is regulated by the local authority. In others it's pretty much a free for all, but with the buses companies try to drive out competition, they prefer a monopoly situation for obvious reasons.

For the railways, it's just as regulated and subsidised as when it was government owned, but we now have private companies creaming off money.


Don't say that, vopie will never believe you, "private companies creaming off money", that would never happen...... :rolleyes:

[Mark]

In terms of the railways, it's not so much the train operating companies - we've had a spate of failures after all. But it's the train leasing companies (mostly banks) who are raking in huge profits for no effort!

[Mark in Oshawa]

Blame General Motors for that - they (along with others) right royally screwed up public transportation in the US. One only needs to look at the "United States v National City Lines" case to work that out.
By the time it finally saw a circuit appeal in the Supreme Court in 1953, none other than Charles Erwin Wilson (former CEO of General Motors) was also Secretary of Defense. Perhaps strangely, National City Lines and their respective owners, were acquitted.

The law is impartial. Railway Trains are also impartial, but once you set the guidelines, that's where they run. The United States should have had the best public transportation systems in the world... but it doesn't. "Ha Ha Suffer" to the American public eh?

There is a great amount of truth to it Rollo, except in Canada and other nations the experience isn't much different. Large cities can afford to subsidize or use a transit system that actually can meet the needs of enough people to be replace the automobile, but in smaller centers, the car will always be king. Cars give people individual choices, and freedom, and when push comes to shove, that is a pretty tough luxury to give.

[AAReagles]

Because moving your body is good for your health. :laugh:


You mean like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzoXmapRxqE&feature=related

Who says you don't have room to exercise on a bus? :D

[AAReagles]

A government run transportation system has poor service?
That cannot be!
I refuse to believe that.
Everybody know that the government can do a better job with anything better than the private sector.
It is impossible for an agency that has to answer to nobody and is made up of employees with total job security to not have service as their # priority.

:up: I agree. The bus system here is run by the city so far, and what few times I had to use it, it's not one of the most reliable sources for transportation; timewise... and people with attitudes.

I'm not keen on privatizing the bus system for the reasons you stated above.

[donKey jote]

I've just come back from Zurich and the tram system there is excellent. As is Swiss rail too.
I prefer Swiss roll :roll:

[Mark]

I prefer Swiss roll :roll:

As long as it's the chocolate one, with cream!

If you look at public transport systems around the world. The ones which stand out, such as the Swiss railways for example, are invariably government owned and run. It just takes investment and commitment, any government will end up with a bad system if they don't put the money in, and cruically provide proper management.

For private companies, it's difficult, as your running a public service, and yet you've got to make your profit at the same time.

[Mark in Oshawa]

As long as it's the chocolate one, with cream!

If you look at public transport systems around the world. The ones which stand out, such as the Swiss railways for example, are invariably government owned and run. It just takes investment and commitment, any government will end up with a bad system if they don't put the money in, and cruically provide proper management.

For private companies, it's difficult, as your running a public service, and yet you've got to make your profit at the same time.

The key is though that good public transit usually is also money losing transit. Now for the good of society, it may not be a bad thing that the government subsidizes and makes it work well for those who use it. The point has to be reiterated over and over again, when it comes to money, the private automobile makes more sense for the consumer if they can afford it because it will take them places faster and more varied than public transit.

That doesn't mean there isn't a role for transit, on the contrary, I do wish most cities took it more seriously but you need a good population density to make it happen...