Long drives was The world's least favourite airport

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>I take train journeys all the time, and am rarely delayed. Around 90% of
>UK train journeys are on time (which is actually pretty average for much
>of Europe, excluding Switzerland!) and very few are cancelled.

try london commuting.
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:12:06 +0100, d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>The Reid <mikereidclothing@freedomnames.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>>
>> >> day off work? It must have happened 20 years ago? There are two or three
>> >> trains an hour from York to London nowadays. Journey time around two
>> >> hours. It was already around 2 hours, 30 years ago,
>> >
>> >Or it could have been a major problem, stopping everything... Rare, but
>> >it does happen.
>>
>> happened a lot when I commuted,
>
>That you had to take the next day off work?

In the 1970s anything was possible.
--

Martin

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> I meant its not going to Ambleside
>
>So?

its not a lot of use for hillwalking. Dispersed people doing things at
different times isnt fertile ground for public transport.

>> OK, walk down the M6 if you want to.
>
>I thought you said you didn't notice any fast driving on country roads?

The M6 isnt a country road.
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:23:03 +0100, d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>The Reid <mikereidclothing@freedomnames.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:
>>
>> >> >The Lake District is blighted by too much car traffic- something the
>> >> >tourist authorities are well aware off. While you're at Waswater or
>> >> >something, most of the visitors to the area are actually trundling very
>> >> >congested roads in parts of the Lake District which are well served by
>> >> >PT. They're looking at ways of aleviating this. Maybe a congestion
>> >> >charge! :)
>>
>> >Or a free public transport zone.
>>
>> wouldnt make any difference in Wasdale.
>
>Or would it? Wasdale is only a few miles from a train station. If more
>people used public transport, there would be more of it, and more
>demand. It would stop people driving too quickly along country roads for
>a start, which is one blight IME on visits to the countryside.

The advantage of airline hubs is that they create scheduled flights on routes
that aren't viable otherwise.

Gone are the days when one had the pleasure of flying from Toulouse to Amsterdam
via Bordeaux and Frankfurt with real French yummy food even in economy, that was
not made in an airline food factory. Monsieur wotshis name used to deliver the
food to the plane in his battered van.
--

Martin

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> >> OK, walk down the M6 if you want to.
>> >
>> >I thought you said you didn't notice any fast driving on country roads?
>>
>> The M6 isnt a country road.
>
>So, what's the point of mentioning it then?

noe at all.
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> clearly those very short car journeys are a bad thing. I wonder what %
>> they are in terms of pollution? They may be more significant for
>> congestion.
>
>Congestion increases the pollution though for the same distance.

of course, but if its a % of a small %.....

>> Assuming technology keeps doing what it does, it will get faster and
>> cheaper to go further,
>
>But the opposite is happening, albeit slightly. Due to congestion, it is
>taking people longer to go the same distance.

not for flying. You dont seem keen to address that. We can both get to
Shetland now, you on a plane, me in a car, 75 years ago if would have
been difficult and "we", on average, wouldn't have been going *at
all*.

>Exactly. US-style out of town shopping centres are a terrible idea.

hey, something we agree on!

>People will happily wait in traffic for 30 minutes on busy days to cover
>a couple of miles on the road to the Trafford Centre. Taking the tram
>and bus isn't much better, as the shuttle bus (which isn't cheap) will
>be in the same traffic. I can well understand why people drive, seeing
>as there's no advantage to PT over the car.

especially if they are coming from the suburbs or further

>Meanwhile, most people leave
>the shopping centre with at most a couple of light bags...

at most? That would be at least, wouldn't it?
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> of course, but if its a % of a small %.....
>
>No, it's a large one. Most car journeys are not long distance- they're
>the commute to work, and they're taking longer to do.

thats not the very short journeys we were discussing.

>> >> Assuming technology keeps doing what it does, it will get faster and
>> >> cheaper to go further,
>> >
>> >But the opposite is happening, albeit slightly. Due to congestion, it is
>> >taking people longer to go the same distance.
>>
>> not for flying. You dont seem keen to address that.
>
>I wasn't talking about flying, and I'm not going to address it here.

I was, in the initial post.

>I often find people don't have a clue about their public transport
>alternatives though.

"I wasn't talking about public transport, and I'm not going to address
it here."
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> its still true that a % of a small % isn't much.
>
>The school run isn't much? Wow.

I questioned what % of pollution the very short car journeys *you*
raised were. Do you know the answer?

>> *And* it isn't what
>> we were talking about.
>
>What _were_ we talking about then?!

The subjects were long drives and short visit flying
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> I questioned what % of pollution the very short car journeys *you*
>> raised were. Do you know the answer?
>
>No. I doubt it's insignificant, and like I said, it impacts on
>congestion.

congestion certainly, biggest cause here.

Pollution? journey length will be everything, you may of course find
it easier to eliminate the short ones, even if its a small effect.

>> >> *And* it isn't what
>> >> we were talking about.
>> >
>> >What _were_ we talking about then?!
>>
>> The subjects were long drives and short visit flying
>
>Which is why you brought up trips to the supermarket?

in the context of making trips count
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)

Following up to d4g4h4.uk (David Horne) wrote:

>> Pollution? journey length will be everything,
>
>Oh dear-

"oh dear" indeed.

>I'm sure you didn't mean that. You surely know that stop and go
>traffic per mile compared to driving at a constant optimal speed on the
>motorway is less efficient, and per mile, more polluting?

of course I know that "*per mile*". But a lot of relatively efficient
miles have more effect than a very few less efficient ones.
--
Mike
(remove clothing to email)