"Big Shift" to rail urged for uk.

anthony wrote:
> with regards to this topic i believe maybe that the rail and bus
> networks be re-nationalished and perhps hopefully prices coming down
> or contracting the bus/rail services out with a new body controling
> all forms of public transport and having the ability to force
> operators to get their act togethr or revoke their franchises.

That is more or less what we have for rail.

> if this proposals does come into affect, i bet we will see first group
> having problems.
>
> the operators need to learn that if they work with the authorities
> they they may get more passenger etc.

The operators do what they are told to do.

> this idea of making people pay for the amount of miles they drive in
> their cars is a great idea but thos working in the emergency services
> etc should be excempt
>
> also my final point is to perhaps have the rail network running on
> christmas day, boxing day & new years day. i bet a lot people will use
> the services if they are available, we can see this when some bus
> operators are operating services on christmas day they get a lot of
> people using them
>
> thanx
>
> anthony

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <637dc1F26643lU1@mid.>, at 11:09:52 on Wed, 5
> Mar 2008, Phil Richards <philrichards1@> remarked:
>> For instance it would be unreasonable to penalise those flying from
>> Edinburgh to Belfast by additional taxes as in all honestly there is
>> no other option unless one wants to take your car.
>
> Similarly routes like Edinburgh-Oslo.

ECML to Newcastle then ship to Norway (in theory, at least)?

To squash short haul flights, how about a Papa Westray - Westray LGV :-)
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In message <13stu3in0pshhd4@corp..com>, at 19:45:53 on Wed, 5
Mar 2008, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.com.invalid> remarked:
>>> For instance it would be unreasonable to penalise those flying from
>>>Edinburgh to Belfast by additional taxes as in all honestly there is
>>>no other option unless one wants to take your car.
>> Similarly routes like Edinburgh-Oslo.
>
>ECML to Newcastle then ship to Norway (in theory, at least)?

What's the ferry time, might be the same as going by rail the "long way
round".

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <13stu3in0pshhd4@corp..com>, at 19:45:53 on Wed, 5
> Mar 2008, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.com.invalid> remarked:
>>>> For instance it would be unreasonable to penalise those flying from
>>>> Edinburgh to Belfast by additional taxes as in all honestly there is
>>>> no other option unless one wants to take your car.
>>> Similarly routes like Edinburgh-Oslo.
>>
>> ECML to Newcastle then ship to Norway (in theory, at least)?
>
> What's the ferry time, might be the same as going by rail the "long way
> round".
>

from seat61:

Newcastle d18.30 day 0
Stavanger a15:00 day+1
Stavanger d22:19
Oslo Sentral a07:26 day+2

Hafas can't do it all the way, but finds:

London St. Pancras Inte | | 14:34 |
Bruxelles-Midi Eurostar | 17:33 | |
Bruxelles-Midi | | 19:25 |
Köln Hbf | 21:45 | 22:28 |
Koebenhavn H | 09:59 | 10:23 |
Göteborg Central | 14:20 | 15:07 |
Kil Station | 17:45 | 18:18 |
Oslo S | 21:03 | |

Duration: 29:29
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Phil Richards wrote:
> Graham Harrison wrote:
>> "Phil Richards" <philrichards1@> wrote in message
>> news:6374viF25vdv3U1@mid....
>>> Paul Harley wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:40:01, "DB." <anon@anon.tesco.net> wrote:
>>>>> The UK needs a "modal shift" from road to rail if greenhouse gas
>>>>> emissions from transport are to be curbed, a report concludes.
>>>> It also needs a modal shift from (most) internal air routes to rail
>>>> (plus some European air routes as well)!
>>> Rail can only win a bigger place in the market if journey times
>>> become more competitive. The only evidence I've seen of that is with
>>> the likes of Eurostar plus other routes within mainland Europe.
>>> Nothing here in the UK as we still see relatively short haul air
>>> routes like London to Manchester etc. survive in this day and age.
>>
>> I think the word "survive" is instructive. Compared with previous
>> times the amount of air service on London Manchester these days is
>> reduced. Why? Because, for all their problems, Virgin are picking up
>> market share.
>
> Picking up the market share, may be, but there still is competition from
> air. However there shouldn't be, journey times are better than they used
> to be yet there is obviously a reason why there is still a market for
> flying.
>
> Look to the other side of the English Channel and you'll see longer
> distance key routes such as Paris to Lyon or Brussels have had their air
> competition killed off completely thanks to rail.
>

I think one thing is that a portion of Short Haul flights form the
spokes to feed the long haul hubs. Rail might be eating into the share
of the London to Manchester. But can it poach the Manchester -> Heathrow
part of a Manchester -> Heathrow -> Sydney journey? Does the TGV serve CDG?

Mark B wrote:


> Does the TGV serve CDG?

Yes.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:56:08 +0000, Arthur Figgis
<afiggis@example.com.invalid> wrote:

>Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <13stu3in0pshhd4@corp..com>, at 19:45:53 on Wed, 5
>> Mar 2008, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.com.invalid> remarked:
>>>>> For instance it would be unreasonable to penalise those flying from
>>>>> Edinburgh to Belfast by additional taxes as in all honestly there is
>>>>> no other option unless one wants to take your car.
>>>> Similarly routes like Edinburgh-Oslo.
>>>
>>> ECML to Newcastle then ship to Norway (in theory, at least)?
>>
>> What's the ferry time, might be the same as going by rail the "long way
>> round".
>>
>
>from seat61:
>
>Newcastle d18.30 day 0
>Stavanger a15:00 day+1
>Stavanger d22:19
>Oslo Sentral a07:26 day+2
>
>
>Hafas can't do it all the way, but finds:
>
>London St. Pancras Inte | | 14:34 |
>Bruxelles-Midi Eurostar | 17:33 | |
>Bruxelles-Midi | | 19:25 |
>Köln Hbf | 21:45 | 22:28 |
>Koebenhavn H | 09:59 | 10:23 |
>Göteborg Central | 14:20 | 15:07 |
>Kil Station | 17:45 | 18:18 |
>Oslo S | 21:03 | |
>
>Duration: 29:29
>
There are also a variety of sea services from Aberdeen (and Rosyth?)
to the west coast of Norway, from where at least one port presumably
has reasonable access to Oslo.

Phil Richards schrieb:


> For Switzerland you have to look at rail (& bus) versus the private car.
> Of course the former wins by a long way thanks to a proper integrated
> transport system.
>
> Switzerland isn't is that well served by airports, however having just
> looked at the Swiss Air site I was surprised to see a 45 minute duration
> flight between Zürich and Geneva competing with SBB's 3 hour journey by
> rail.

I tried pointing to conditions, and the tools for them. SNCF is the
fastest railroad in Europe, and has had tremendous success on the LGV,
but has lost major amounts of traffic on the old network. The net result
is still positive, but the achieved end result isn't much better than in
Germany, where operation of ICE is much slower. In Germany, S-Bahn, RB
and RE, with their top speed of 160 km/h or less, have won more
passengers and passenger kilometers than the ICE. It is /not/ clear,
that a high-speed line always wins more passengers, than improving some
dozen RE lines from 70 towards 90 km/h average, especially, if these get
good connections.

It's an error to look only at the speed of the train, the main issue is
the speed of the passenger.

Hans-Joachim

--

Gratulation nach Karlsruhe. Daß ausgerechnet Juristen
eine Technologiefolgenabschätzung vernünftig hinkriegen...

Sam Wilson <Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk> wrote

>> Plus there needs to be MAJOR investment in the railway system so that
>> it can carry all these millions of people that are coming off the
>> roads...
>
>Or we could change the way we work so that we don't have to travel so
>much.

Heavens, we can't do that! Britain wouldn't be Britain if we didn't use
every available opportunity to drive somewhere! :-)

--
Hil

On 7 Mar, 16:46, Tony Polson <docnews2...@> wrote:
> rob_m8...@m wrote:
> >In the context of this thread - discussing a "big shift" *to* rail,
> >then I'm not quite sure what point you're tryint to make.  You're
> >discussing a set of travellers that is *already* using rail & sea.
>
> The point is already made, that there is an alternative to air travel
> for flights between these islands.  If carbon pricing was applied to
> transport, it would make rail/sea/rail an even more attractive
> alternative, because of the much lower CO2 emissions of the rail and
> sea modes compared to flying.
>
> If you are unable to see that, I cannot help you any further.

I'm perfectly able to see that carbon pricing makes flights less
attractive against more energy efficient modes, hence my comment,
"Belfast-Edinburgh is the type of flight that might be taxed (even)
more to make more carbon-friendly modes more attractive"...

However, high taxation of air travel (obviously there is a lot of
scope for debate over what consitutes "high taxation") makes the cost
of doing business in regions such as NI higher, hence business
struggles, and people get made redundant in a part of the UK that has
some of the most significant economic problems. i.e. There is a
causal link between access to air travel (and other transport modes
that facilitate business) and economic growth. Now you and I might
not feel that this is right, or desirable, but that's the way it is,
and what we feel doesn't count for a hill of beans. Suddenly levying
a £X environmental tax on flights from Belfast might not simply result
in the transfer to other modes that you advocate, but a reduction in
demand due to a reduction in economic activity (which is generally
agreed to be not such a great idea).

If you are unable to grasp that air (and for that matter rail & sea)
travel operate in a wider business and societal context, then I think
we should probably agree to differ and leave it here.

Regards