Cycle path sign - compulsory?

[Dave Larrington]

In article <[email protected]>, Paul (pauld771
@yahoo.co.uk) wrote:

> I really love the idea of trams, but for the life of me, I cannot see any reason
> why they are (when on the road) superior to buses.

Trams can't force cyclists into the kerb?

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
You can't have ham!

 

[Paul]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 10:50:24 +0000, Colin McKenzie <[email protected]>
wrote:

>It is hypothesised that if there is 3' between the tram rail and the
>kerb, this is enough space to cycle in (if there isn't a tram around).
>But you wouldn't be able to manoeuvre to cross the rail at a steep
>angle if you need to get out of this slot.
>
>Between the rails, there's 4'6". I think I'd be safer there.

You see, this is where I just don't understand the tram thing.

There you are, wet road, cycling along a tram route at 5 mph, and the tram comes
up behind you. What can it do except wait?.

All it can do is slow down to 5 mph and wait until you either turn left, risk
death by trying to turn right moving across slippery tram rails or get off and
lift your bike onto the pavement to let it pass.

I really must go and have a look at the Croyden tram and see how it all works.

 

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 10:17:23 GMT someone who may be Mark Thompson
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com>
wrote this:-

>A lot of the quickness of the tram seems due to special largely traffic
>free routes and treatment at lights - something that we could do for buses.

A tram is one vehicle every five minutes. It is much easier to give
this one vehicle priority than a stream of buses.

>In addition, the initial costs are _huge_

They need not be. The fact that they have been is due to various
reasons that can be called inertia if being polite. However, some of
us are trying to do something about this. The equipment outlined at
http://www.trampower.co.uk allows the life cycle cost of a tramway
to be reduced to that of buses. Sooner or later the inertia will be
overcome and everyone will want this sort of thing.

>and the routes are inflexible.

Tramways are flexible and inflexible. They are flexible in that they
can cope with sudden surges in demand. If 100 people turn up then
they should be able to get on the next tram.

The inflexibility of the routes is often a godsend. Provided they
are put in the right place nobody is going to argue that the tram
could just be diverted through this estate, it would only take two
minutes extra. Do that five times and the end to end journey is ten
minutes longer, and so less attractive.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 09:55:22 +0000 someone who may be Richard
<[email protected]> wrote
this:-

>Do you have a reference for the former? Whilst I accept that
>individual trams can carry more people than individual buses, the
>greater enforced separations between (modern) trams would tend to lower
>the effective overall capacity.

A tram can carry as many people as three typical buses, in peak
periods. Need to carry any more people? Couple two trams together
and they are now carrying the same number of people as six buses,
but there is only one driver on the tram.

One tram can be given high priority at junctions, compared to a
stream of buses. Even two trams coupled together cause little extra
delays for others.

As well as the individual vehicles consider that the tram will
complete its journey more quickly, especially if the buses are pay
on entry types.

>(Of course, in the Olden Days, they'd
>just queue up in a row and discharge/charge passengers simultaneously).

The way to carry lots of people is to keep the trams moving. Stop
for a few seconds and then away. Queues of trams lowers carrying
capacity.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 10:17:23 GMT someone who may be Mark Thompson
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com>
wrote this:-

>A lot of the quickness of the tram seems due to special largely traffic
>free routes and treatment at lights - something that we could do for buses.

There is another point with buses. To provide the same carrying
capacity as trams one needs very intensive bus services. These
destroy ordinary roads (as any cyclist who observes the Greenways in
Edinburgh will observe). So one needs to dig up the road and install
a road that is up to the job, which is at least as expensive as
laying tram tracks.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[Jim Ley]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:18:04 +0000, David Hansen
<[email protected]> wrote:

>As well as the individual vehicles consider that the tram will
>complete its journey more quickly, especially if the buses are pay
>on entry types.

Surely the payment style is the same between different formats - in
fact given there are 3 entrances to 3 buses it would suggest faster
loading of the multiple buses.

The thing you're missing though is that load factors are pretty
irrelevant outside of peak time, with both buses and trams being
mostly empty - frequency of service is actually more important than
load. One of the biggest problems with public transport is that you
cannot use it _now_ but have to either know the timetable off by heart
(and it be reliable) or chance an indeterminate wait once you've
walked to the stop.

Jim.

 

[Jim Ley]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:08:11 GMT, [email protected] (Paul) wrote:

>I really must go and have a look at the Croyden tram and see how it all works.

Lots of the croydon tram is on completely seperate system, re-using
old railway lines, very little of it is shared used with anyone.

Jim.

 

[Jim Ley]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:21:10 +0000, David Hansen
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 10:17:23 GMT someone who may be Mark Thompson
><pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com>
>wrote this:-
>
>>A lot of the quickness of the tram seems due to special largely traffic
>>free routes and treatment at lights - something that we could do for buses.
>
>There is another point with buses. To provide the same carrying
>capacity as trams one needs very intensive bus services.

Very intensive bus services however mean that people are more likely
to use them as there is less time waiting in the rain for
indeterminate periods of time - you can also run them down more roads
so people have a shorter average walk to get to the vehicle.

Jim.

 

[David Martin]

Daniel Barlow wrote:
> "ian henden" <[email protected]> writes:
> > It is a fact of life that cycles are NOT like other traffic. The greatest
>
> It is a fact of life that small cars are NOT like other traffic. The
> grestest part of a small car is made of easily-crumpled materials that
> would stand little or no chance in a collision with one of the 38
> tonne trucks they currently share the roads with.

One fo my former colleagues' ford fiesta became the filling in a
juggernaught sandwich on the M1 many years ago. Sadly, he was in it at
the time and neither he nor the passenger survived.

...d

 

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:27:11 GMT someone who may be
[email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote this:-

>Surely the payment style is the same between different formats

That might seem sensible to you and I, but not all bus companies see
things that way. Outwith London I suspect that no bus companies see
things that way.

> - in
>fact given there are 3 entrances to 3 buses it would suggest faster
>loading of the multiple buses.

Not in the least. A tram has four wide doors on each side and level
boarding from the platform.

>The thing you're missing though is that load factors are pretty
>irrelevant outside of peak time, with both buses and trams being
>mostly empty

Although some off-peak trams have been lightly loaded this is not
the case in Manchester or Croydon, both of which tend to be heavily
loaded all day.

> - frequency of service is actually more important than load.

Up to a point.

>One of the biggest problems with public transport is that you
>cannot use it _now_ but have to either know the timetable off by heart
>(and it be reliable) or chance an indeterminate wait once you've
>walked to the stop.

People can already call up train running information on their
computers, for example Edinburgh Waverley is on
http://www.livedepartureboards.co.uk/ldb/sumdep.aspx?T=EDB&R=1&A=0
If it is not already done somewhere for buses and trams it soon will
be, as it is just a matter of making what is available at stops
available on WWW.

With trams journeys are more reliable, a tram every five minutes
means just that usually while a bus every five minutes often means
two or three buses arriving together.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[Richard]

David Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 09:55:22 +0000 someone who may be Richard
> <[email protected]> wrote
> this:-
>
>
>>Do you have a reference for the former? Whilst I accept that
>>individual trams can carry more people than individual buses, the
>>greater enforced separations between (modern) trams would tend to lower
>>the effective overall capacity.
>
>
> A tram can carry as many people as three typical buses, in peak
> periods. Need to carry any more people? Couple two trams together
> and they are now carrying the same number of people as six buses,
> but there is only one driver on the tram.

I should have said "lower the effective overall throughput". Modern
trams seem to be forbidden from discharging their passengers just
anywhere, so they have to queue up behind each other to access the
platforms on a one in, one out basis. Buses have more flexibility;
they can chuck out passengers just before a stop if the stop is
occupied, so two or three buses can charge/discharge in the same time as
one tram.

> As well as the individual vehicles consider that the tram will
> complete its journey more quickly, especially if the buses are pay
> on entry types.

Apples and oranges; buses are just as capable of carrying conductors as
trams are.

> The way to carry lots of people is to keep the trams moving. Stop
> for a few seconds and then away. Queues of trams lowers carrying
> capacity.

Which is wot I said.

R.

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Paul wrote:
>You see, this is where I just don't understand the tram thing.
>
>There you are, wet road, cycling along a tram route at 5 mph, and the tram comes
>up behind you. What can it do except wait?.
>
>All it can do is slow down to 5 mph and wait until you either turn left, risk
>death by trying to turn right moving across slippery tram rails or get off and
>lift your bike onto the pavement to let it pass.

Squash you into a pulp, say "sorry mate, didn't see you", and have the judge
say "well, it was his own fault for being on the tram track, it's not as
if there weren't rails there as a clue"? I have no idea whether this actually
ever happens.

 

[Jim Ley]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:15:06 +0000, David Hansen
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> - in
>>fact given there are 3 entrances to 3 buses it would suggest faster
>>loading of the multiple buses.
>
>Not in the least. A tram has four wide doors on each side and level
>boarding from the platform.

So how is the payment done? as you're suggesting non-payment to the
driver, in which case you need more staff to deal with the
fare-avoidance, so there's another higher cost...

>If it is not already done somewhere for buses and trams it soon will
>be, as it is just a matter of making what is available at stops
>available on WWW.

Which is completely irrelevant, having to power up the computer and
look something up is not exactly something which is useful to the vast
majority of users.

>With trams journeys are more reliable, a tram every five minutes
>means just that usually while a bus every five minutes often means
>two or three buses arriving together.

There are tram-services running at 5minute frequencies with full loads
in the UK? The croydon line hardly runs at half that frequency and in
all my journeys on it have been near empty. Of course I don't travel
at peak time.

Jim.

 

[Peter Clinch]

Alan Braggins wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Paul wrote:
>> You see, this is where I just don't understand the tram thing.
>>
>> There you are, wet road, cycling along a tram route at 5 mph, and the tram comes
>> up behind you. What can it do except wait?.
>>
>> All it can do is slow down to 5 mph and wait until you either turn left, risk
>> death by trying to turn right moving across slippery tram rails or get off and
>> lift your bike onto the pavement to let it pass.
>
> Squash you into a pulp, say "sorry mate, didn't see you", and have the judge
> say "well, it was his own fault for being on the tram track, it's not as
> if there weren't rails there as a clue"? I have no idea whether this actually
> ever happens.

From looking at the trams in Den Haag on trips to the NL, it strikes me
that trams are generally not in the same place as fietspads and "regular
roads" except for crossings. The fact that the trams are considerably
narrower than buses means that segregating them effectively is far
easier than one might suppose, as does their not needing a fully
tarmacked road. And keeping them apart means they're not subject to the
traffic jams that afflict buses and cars, so not cycling in the tramways
ought not to be too hard.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Peter Clinch]

Jim Ley wrote:

> So how is the payment done? as you're suggesting non-payment to the
> driver, in which case you need more staff to deal with the
> fare-avoidance, so there's another higher cost...

In NL you buy a book of tickets and you stamp them off yourself using
machines in the cabins near the doors. Travel Dundee buses appear to
use something similar for regular travellers.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Paul]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:24:37 GMT, [email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:15:06 +0000, David Hansen
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> - in
>>>fact given there are 3 entrances to 3 buses it would suggest faster
>>>loading of the multiple buses.
>>
>>Not in the least. A tram has four wide doors on each side and level
>>boarding from the platform.
>
>So how is the payment done? as you're suggesting non-payment to the
>driver, in which case you need more staff to deal with the
>fare-avoidance, so there's another higher cost...

Probably works just like a bendy bus where those of us that pay can use
whichever set of doors we like, but chavs and scallies use the rear doors and
hop off if they see a revenue protection officer is waiting to get on.

 

[Paul]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:25:15 +0000, Peter Clinch <[email protected]>
wrote:

> From looking at the trams in Den Haag on trips to the NL, it strikes me
>that trams are generally not in the same place as fietspads and "regular
>roads" except for crossings. The fact that the trams are considerably
>narrower than buses means that segregating them effectively is far
>easier than one might suppose, as does their not needing a fully
>tarmacked road. And keeping them apart means they're not subject to the
>traffic jams that afflict buses and cars, so not cycling in the tramways
>ought not to be too hard.

This won't apply to the Uxbridge Road tram scheme, though (if it ever gets
built).

I don't know whether to be for it for the usefulness (and fun) of the trams or
against it because it will probably kill me at some stage.

 

[Jim Ley]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:35:51 +0000, Peter Clinch
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Jim Ley wrote:
>
>> So how is the payment done? as you're suggesting non-payment to the
>> driver, in which case you need more staff to deal with the
>> fare-avoidance, so there's another higher cost...
>
>In NL you buy a book of tickets and you stamp them off yourself using
>machines in the cabins near the doors. Travel Dundee buses appear to
>use something similar for regular travellers.

Exactly, so you have to have more people policing the system, so the
cost savings of fewer drivers over buses is not actually as large as
suggested.

Jim.

 

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:24:37 GMT someone who may be
[email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote this:-

>So how is the payment done? as you're suggesting non-payment to the
>driver, in which case you need more staff to deal with the
>fare-avoidance, so there's another higher cost...

Not many more staff than one needs to do the same sort of thing on
buses where passengers pay the driver.

>Which is completely irrelevant, having to power up the computer and
>look something up is not exactly something which is useful to the vast
>majority of users.

Those who follow the link I gave may notice that the same
information can be sent to mobile telephones.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[David Hansen]

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:39:12 GMT someone who may be
[email protected] (Paul) wrote this:-

>This won't apply to the Uxbridge Road tram scheme, though (if it ever gets
>built).
>
>I don't know whether to be for it for the usefulness (and fun) of the trams or
>against it because it will probably kill me at some stage.

You are much more likely to be killed by a motorist.

A holocaust of pedestrians and cyclists doesn't happen in the
Netherlands or Germany (Kaiserstrasse, the main shopping street in
Karlsruhe has a tram every minute in peak periods for example) or
the UK.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54