Safe Speed Forums

I have just heard on the news about the proposed new high speed rail route from London to Birmingham. It is claimed that this will reduce the journey time by 14 minutes over current trains and is hailed as a great leap forward in efficiency.

Now, whenever a higher speed limit is proposed on the road to reduce journey times and increase efficiency the usual response is "it will only save a few minutes".

Why the double standards? Why spend all the money on the train to save just a few minutes?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Yes, I heard that too on the radio today and was rather disappointed. OK, we still get the extra train capacity - which I'm sure will come in handy once they've taxed / legislated all the cars off the roads, but 14 minutes doesn't sound too impressive for a 250MPH train! Just gos to show that the Scammers were right all along - you really DON'T get there appreciably faster! Also struck me as a bit daft going to Birmingham too - I mean, does anybody FLY from Birmingham to London? Now if they extended the line to Newcastle / Carlisle, that might be a bit more useful!

HMM - and then they spent obscene amounts to get the West Coast main Line up to 125. In France ( so I am told ) ,if the SMCF wants to build a line - they just take the land ,and pay compulsary purchase price . So they get a straight line . I've seen the problems Nutty Rail have had trying to get the WCML uprated to four lines from Euston to Glasgow - and it's not pretty . ( And that's at 125). At 250 - the line would have to be straight -how many years would that take in enquiries etc ?.The theres upgrading Birmingham to Glasgow to take 250 trains .Unless they buils another route .Might be cheaper to take passengers to Heathrow via a hugh sppeed link ,fly them to Glasgow /Edinburgh and then take them back to the city on another hi speed link .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Funny enough, I was talking to a Frenchman bout that once and he said just the same thing - they draw a line on the map and then just buy the land - no argument, no comebacks. Then he hesitated and said, "...well, perhaps, if is a VERY good vineyard, they may make a small detour..."! How very French! The attitude over there seems totally different though. They actually get towns COMPETING with each other to have the railway going through their town! I don't think there's a French word for "NIMBY"!

Of course part of it is that (like Spain and many other countries) they've got a hell of a lot more space than we have. In the UK we live like battery hens by comparison!

The French seem to have had a tradition of making "Infrastructure projects" worth the local peoples while!

Back when they were building their nuclear power stations there was very little objection because everybody living within "X"Km of one got free electricity!

I dare say the people living near the high speed railways get a similar concession.

I wonder how many objections there would be about (say) mobile phone masts in the UK if people living within a certain distance got free SIM cards (or at least a certain monthly alowance)

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

In the UK, the effects of large infrastructure projects are pretty much totally negative on people living nearby. For example, this rail link goes from London to Birmingham and the people of Great Missenden basically can't use it.

It's no use saying that they should acquiesce for "the greater good". People don't think like this. If they build new secondary branch lines alongside the high speed lines and stations for the local peole to access the system then perhaps there will be more local benefit.

In reality, building a new limited access high speed road would probably allow more travel between cities than trains.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

What bugs me are the statements like “it’s only 45 minutes to London” or “it’s only a four hour flight”. No it isn’t!

It‘s all about the time it takes to get from A to B. 'A' being my front door, 'B' being my actual destination!

Even if there were a train that could go from Birmingham, where I live, to London at 300 mph I could still do it quicker and nicer by car...

My house to the nearest train station by taxi ~ 30 to 45 minutes, (and at least £10). By bus ~60 to 90 minutes

Time after getting ticket and waiting for train to arrive and finally depart ~30 minutes to 2 hours, unless the Germans or Japanese come over and run it.

Time getting from London Train station to final destination ~God knows!

Does that not put it in its true perspective? By the time the train to London has even moved from Birmingham I would be half way there without the inconvenience, expense and waste of time if I just set out from my house in the car or on the Motorbike instead.

What planet do these people live on This is England; you can have fast, reliable or cheap? Pick any one. (Still wouldn't get it mind)

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Tone.

If you had to be in London at 10am travelling by car what time would you leave Brum? Just how much contingency time would you build into your schedule for holdups?

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

OTOH:

- what kind of contingency time would one build in for late, non-stopping (over-crowded) or cancelled trains?
- how easy it is to change train routes assuming those holdups? (that's fairly easy for drivers who are using updates and GPS)

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

If you HAD to be in Beaconsfield at 10:00 am travelling by train what time would you leave your house in Bromsgrove to allow for holdups and contingency?

The "benefits" of train travel only hold if you live near a mainline station and you want to go to the centre of a big town. Otherwise, the car wins. And you can take your friends for the same cost.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Fair question. Okay...

Well, I do a lot of travelling far and wide in my job and rely heavily on my Sat Nav which, on average, is pretty good. Usually plus or minus 10 mins, unless there has been an accident or something.

So if I take as an example the last journey I did to London from my home in Birmingham to The Ace Café (NW10 7UD) it comes up at ~1:54 Hrs. I think that’s quite fair as a generalisation by car/motorbike and I hope you agree with me dcb?

You won’t know if I am telling fibs now but I promise depending on whether I choose my feet, taxi or bus, (Midland Red or usual), to the train - I would still then have to get the ticket, wait for the train to arrive, then wait for it to depart, until I eventually get to London.

This is where I’m lost, because I don’t know London well and need help. So if someone who knows London better than me can tell me how long and by what means I would then get to The Ace Café from the City Centre I could make a better guesstimate.

I’m certain it’s not going to be quicker though based on what I already know about the part of the journey I know about. It would also be prohibitively expensive don’t forget, so if I had to go there by train I would simply never go again.

So the speed of the supa-fast train would actually not enhance the quality, cost or time of my trip so where's the incentive for me?

Oh, nearly forgot to answer your question. About two hours, so I'd leave at 7:30 a.m to be sure of getting there on or before time. If you stayed at mine and we set off together I could be phoning you saying "I'm enjoying a beer at the Cafe, where are you?" To which you would say, "Some yoof on the train just spat at me".

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Actually that is a trick question? If I had to be anywhere more than a hundred miles away by 10am I would travel the previous day.

I don't think that most people on this board use the train enough to form a real perception of their reliability and use one bad experience to denigrate the whole system. Just as my perception of road travel is biased by the times I have sat in traffic jams on the M6.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Oh no you don’t!!!

Pah, the nerve thinking he can get away with that

Firstly, if you travel the day before you would have to B&B in London at £200 for the night and secondly, there’s nothing quite like your own bed.

I mean your own bed, I don’t mean I sleep in your bed of course.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

It has been repeatedly said that not everyone has the option of those alternatives due to time/money/tools/commitments/location.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Funnily enough I had just that situation recently.

A freind going off on the "Holliday of a lifetime" (Yes really! she had won a substantial competician prize for a holiday that she would never have ever otherwise been able to afford!) needed to catch a plane from gatwick that left at 09:15 sunday morning.

She wanted a lift to the airport and was wondering what time she would have to leave.

Although we are only an hours drive away I said Satuday lunchime!, there are plenty of cheap hotels (£50) within spitting distance of the airport and it is one less thing to worry about!

She took my advice!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

When you used to go down to the RAS in London for 0930 meetings we found that it was cheaper to travel down the previous evening and do B&B than pay the grossly inflated price for the 0700 train. Plus the bonus of a night on the town

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

I am not arguing about that (though one can make life style decisions which make it easier to use public transport). I am just challenging the conception that trains are much less reliable than private cars when it comes to planning journey times.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Sometimes those life style changes just aren't possible. The burden or limitation of just one of: time/money/tools/commitments/location/relationships, will usually overwhelmingly override that decision, regardless of any incremental changes one can make.

The reliability aspect indeed cuts both ways, but there is substantially more to consider when making those decisions.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

In my experience journey times on public transport do not vary much from the published schedule. The problems begin when you need to switch once or more for a journey.

I live inside the M25. There is a bus stop 200 yrds from my house. A home to work (10 minutes by foot from a major South London PT hub) trip, 6 miles, by PT is 40 minutes, involves a switch from bus to tram and a 10 minutes walk, by car from 15 to 20 minutes on average. Disruption on the tram has occurred more times than to my car journey. I used to do this journey by push bike in 20 minutes, but a change of job required me to use of a vehicle.

A 66 mile trip I make on a regular basis from home by car takes on average 1hr 10min. I have only 2 or 3 times been stuck in traffic to take that time to 1hr 30min. The same trip by PT is over 2hrs just to get to the nearest train station to my destination I then have to take a 5 mile taxi ride.

The best one though is the home to the motorbike dealer. 8 miles by car or motorbike 20 minutes (it does not vary much plus minus 1 minute), by PT 1hr 10min, bus and bus.

My work does not allow me to use PT, I cover to many sites, but even if I only had to go to the one nearest home I would have to work hard to justify the use of PT. I would probably go back to the push bike.

The only time I will willingly use PT is for a night out to the centre of London. Then it is only because I would not be in a fit state to operate a car or bike to get home.

IME PT works well on short, single route journeys. Where the start and destination are only a few minutes walk from the bus stop/train station. Or the long multi switch journey of over 300 miles, where a fast/express train or plane makes up 95% or more of the distance.

For me the deciding factor is not necessarily cost, it is time. For the vast majority of my travel the quickest journey, on average by a good margin, will be by car.

Not much has been commented on about personal safety.
I personally feel far safer in a car than on any PT as well you are safer.
I thoroughly enjoy the driving against sitting and being driven by train / bus etc. Although I love flying and that is fun.

I find the cost / convenience / safety / requirements (personal luggage/tools/ etc) far better in the car and even when I consider taking PT I always conclude that the car is better. There (for me) is a huge convenience to go by car. Recently when I travelled south I left 3 DAYS early sue to the sever snow conditions and just as well as if I had left on the Wed even the trains were cut of from England. I would have been stuck and that would have had massive cost and time repercussions if not several legal problems too.

As I have said before the train / plane can be good but the common journeys have a narrow band. IF the PT was vastly cheaper then some inconvenience and some safety losses can be considered 'worth it', but not all.

I rarely go by PT, because of the huge costs and as has been clearly shown below/above, (in the previous posts) staying overnight rapidly adds to he PT costs.
I very much like the idea of campervans /motorhomes as they clearly have that advantage of about car / van size but can be slept in - can pause your journey easily - can travel to new necessary destinations without penalties inc time and cost one's - sleep is easy and comfy and allows for a good cup of tea at any time and if all is stopped on the Motorway - you could feasibly even make lunch with the cup of tea even !
But they are slow and feel cumbersome compared to car transport. Some have bigger fuel costs but many of the smaller one's are very good.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.