| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Clive Page wrote:
But as a libertarian at heart I think this reduces passenger choice in a rather serious way. I nearly always walk up escalators, even long ones, unless I have As a libertarian are you arguing that your choice to walk should trump the choice of others to stand side-by-side? If you are arguing there should be no rule at all then I agree that might work in some places. But my expereince of travelling across London with people who find escalators difficult, and really want a companion alongside them, is that a fair few passengers are prepared to pursue vigorously their "right to walk". -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
In message , at 08:50:44 on Tue, 1 Dec
2015, Clive Page remarked: I'd like to see the figures in a peer-reviewed publication http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/assets/sn...f/2002-11-01Go utamDutta.pdf -- Roland Perry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:50:44 on Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Clive Page remarked: I'd like to see the figures in a peer-reviewed publication http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/assets/sn...f/2002-11-01Go utamDutta.pdf Isn't that the same one I mentioned way up-thread? |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:13:28 +0100
Robin9 wrote: Roland Perry;152175 Wrote: Not many pedestrians on the M25. -- Roland Perry That won't deter the anti-motor car fanatics! Their ultimate goal is quite obviously to get rid of the private car altogether. They seem to think that because they're fit and healthy and live only a few hundred metres from a tube station in their organic fair trade right-on ghetto in London and never go anywhere outside the M25 unless they're in an aircraft, then everyone else must be in a similar situation. I guess if you're old or infirm and live in an area that poor or no PT so rely on your car to go anywhere, you can just go **** off and die. -- Spud |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
In message
-sept ember.org, at 10:36:49 on Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Recliner remarked: I'd like to see the figures in a peer-reviewed publication http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/assets/sn...f/2002-11-01Go utamDutta.pdf Isn't that the same one I mentioned way up-thread? Yes, but Clive must have missed it. -- Roland Perry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
|
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 07:52:39 -0600
wrote: In article , d () wrote: On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:13:28 +0100 Robin9 wrote: Roland Perry;152175 Wrote: Not many pedestrians on the M25. That won't deter the anti-motor car fanatics! Their ultimate goal is quite obviously to get rid of the private car altogether. They seem to think that because they're fit and healthy and live only a few hundred metres from a tube station in their organic fair trade right-on ghetto in London and never go anywhere outside the M25 unless they're in an aircraft, then everyone else must be in a similar situation. I guess if you're old or infirm and live in an area that poor or no PT so rely on your car to go anywhere, you can just go **** off and die. As my mother found when age required her to give up driving at age 89, she could rely on online shopping and hire cars (arthritis made the step up to London-type cabs too difficult). Thats fine so long as you don't have much of a life and are happy to stay at home most of the time. Also minicabs cost a fortune. If she'd used more than a few of those a week that would be her state pension gone. -- Spud |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 01/12/2015 09:38, Robin wrote:
As a libertarian are you arguing that your choice to walk should trump the choice of others to stand side-by-side? Well of course. What's the point of being a libertarian if you can't be selfish. That was, of course, a somewhat light-hearted comment. If you are arguing there should be no rule at all then I agree that might work in some places. But my expereince of travelling across London with people who find escalators difficult, and really want a companion alongside them, is that a fair few passengers are prepared to pursue vigorously their "right to walk". This is a difficult issue, I agree. But at many stations there are now perfectly good lifts which are much more suitable for those with luggage or walking difficulties. Is the reason that people are so unwilling to use lifts that nobody knows they are there? I admit they are often tucked away and badly signposted. Or could it be that they like getting to their destination as quickly as possible and lifts are sometimes slower? If the latter, then they may see the point of allowing those of us still tolerably fit to walk up an escalator on the left-hand side. -- Clive Page |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 07:52:39 -0600 wrote: In article , d () wrote: On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:13:28 +0100 Robin9 wrote: Roland Perry;152175 Wrote: Not many pedestrians on the M25. That won't deter the anti-motor car fanatics! Their ultimate goal is quite obviously to get rid of the private car altogether. They seem to think that because they're fit and healthy and live only a few hundred metres from a tube station in their organic fair trade right-on ghetto in London and never go anywhere outside the M25 unless they're in an aircraft, then everyone else must be in a similar situation. I guess if you're old or infirm and live in an area that poor or no PT so rely on your car to go anywhere, you can just go **** off and die. As my mother found when age required her to give up driving at age 89, she could rely on online shopping and hire cars (arthritis made the step up to London-type cabs too difficult). Thats fine so long as you don't have much of a life and are happy to stay at home most of the time. Also minicabs cost a fortune. If she'd used more than a few of those a week that would be her state pension gone. Probably cheaper than running your own car for the same purposes, however. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 01/12/2015 11:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message -sept ember.org, at 10:36:49 on Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Recliner remarked: I'd like to see the figures in a peer-reviewed publication http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/assets/sn...f/2002-11-01Go utamDutta.pdf Isn't that the same one I mentioned way up-thread? Yes, but Clive must have missed it. I did miss it, so now much obliged to both of you. This is described as a working paper and so probably not peer reviewed, or at least not yet. But it does look like competent research and makes interesting reading, with some touches of light humour. People here will appreciate in section 2 "these escalators ... are designed to last for a long period of time". Some of their conclusions are interesting: * Passengers will not stand on both sides of an escalator simply because they are asked to. I think Londoners should take justifiable pride in not doing what they are told; I suspect those in say Germany or Japan would be much more likely to obey the instructions of officials. * When passengers do stand on both sides capacity is high but this is only because the majority of passengers do not treat the left hand side as a standing side (From the text it is clear that this is because a few people comply with the TfL instructions and refuse to walk, so others bunch up behind them, thus occupying almost every step, whereas normally on a standing side there is at most one person per two steps). Their final conclusion is that: * To impose such a selective policy would be even more difficult than persuading passengers to stand on all escalators and the benefit gained would be minimal. I don't know whether TfL management have read this working paper, but if so their policy at Holborn does seem to be rather contrary to scientific advice. -- Clive Page |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 2015-12-01, Clive Page wrote:
On 01/12/2015 09:38, Robin wrote: As a libertarian are you arguing that your choice to walk should trump the choice of others to stand side-by-side? Well of course. What's the point of being a libertarian if you can't be selfish. That was, of course, a somewhat light-hearted comment. If you are arguing there should be no rule at all then I agree that might work in some places. But my expereince of travelling across London with people who find escalators difficult, and really want a companion alongside them, is that a fair few passengers are prepared to pursue vigorously their "right to walk". This is a difficult issue, I agree. But at many stations there are now perfectly good lifts which are much more suitable for those with luggage or walking difficulties. The lifts are generally much more suitable for those with luggage or in wheelchairs. They are often not suitable for those with walking difficulties because using them requires walking further than not using them, often to the extent that stairs are better than walking to the lifts. Is the reason that people are so unwilling to use lifts that nobody knows they are there? I admit they are often tucked away and badly signposted. Both true. Or could it be that they like getting to their destination as quickly as possible and lifts are sometimes slower? If the latter, then they may see the point of allowing those of us still tolerably fit to walk up an escalator on the left-hand side. A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Eric -- ms fnd in a lbry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 16:34:36 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: wrote: On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 07:52:39 -0600 wrote: As my mother found when age required her to give up driving at age 89, she could rely on online shopping and hire cars (arthritis made the step up to London-type cabs too difficult). Thats fine so long as you don't have much of a life and are happy to stay at home most of the time. Also minicabs cost a fortune. If she'd used more than a few of those a week that would be her state pension gone. Probably cheaper than running your own car for the same purposes, however. A BMW or merc more than likely. But some little runabout in the lowest tax band with good mpg and one-careful-owner insurance probably not. -- Spud |
Quote:
and who use minicabs instead. Spud's supposition is correct except that I doubt if the anti-motor car bigots believe everyone else is the same as they are. I don't think they care either way. The irony is that without motorists paying vast amounts of money into the Exchequer each year, public transport on a large scale would not be possible. If motorists did give up their cars, there would be a huge increase in demand for public transport and the subsidy from the taxpayer at exactly the moment revenue collapsed. When the anti-motor car brigade talk about "a sustainable transport policy" they should ponder for a few moments on what is financially sustainable. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Eric wrote:
On 2015-12-01, Clive Page wrote: Is the reason that people are so unwilling to use lifts that nobody knows they are there? I admit they are often tucked away and badly signposted. IMHO Eric's made some good points. But I will confess the above's a fair cop in as much as it's never occured to me to use the lifts at Holborn when helping a friend up and down the escalators there ;) -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Robin9 wrote:
;152184 Wrote: In article , d () wrote: - On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:13:28 +0100 Robin9 wrote:- Roland Perry;152175 Wrote: - Not many pedestrians on the M25.- That won't deter the anti-motor car fanatics!- Their ultimate goal is quite obviously to get rid of the private car altogether. They seem to think that because they're fit and healthy and live only a few hundred metres from a tube station in their organic fair trade right-on ghetto in London and never go anywhere outside the M25 unless they're in an aircraft, then everyone else must be in a similar situation. I guess if you're old or infirm and live in an area that poor or no PT so rely on your car to go anywhere, you can just go **** off and die.- As my mother found when age required her to give up driving at age 89, she could rely on online shopping and hire cars (arthritis made the step up to London-type cabs too difficult). She could have used the tube longer if her nearest tube station, East Putney, wasn't one of the least accessible on the system (no other means of accessing platforms but long steep staircases). -- Colin Rosenstiel I know some elderly people who cannot step up onto a bus and who use minicabs instead. Spud's supposition is correct except that I doubt if the anti-motor car bigots believe everyone else is the same as they are. I don't think they care either way. The irony is that without motorists paying vast amounts of money into the Exchequer each year, public transport on a large scale would not be possible. If motorists did give up their cars, there would be a huge increase in demand for public transport and the subsidy from the taxpayer at exactly the moment revenue collapsed. When the anti-motor car brigade talk about "a sustainable transport policy" they should ponder for a few moments on what is financially sustainable. Yes, good points. Perhaps rather like the NHS depends on smokers' taxes and shorter lives. If they all stopped smoking, and had a longer old age, it would really squeeze the NHS finances. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 01/12/2015 16:47, Eric wrote:
A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Yes that was the point. But although it might seem to be the right thing to do in theory it seems that it doesn't actually work in practice. There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ -- Clive Page |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 2015-12-02, Clive Page wrote:
On 01/12/2015 16:47, Eric wrote: A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Yes that was the point. But although it might seem to be the right thing to do in theory it seems that it doesn't actually work in practice. There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ No more really, since it is mostly the 2002 paper that has already been mentioned more than once in this thread (which doesn't actually prove anything in my opinion). Eric -- ms fnd in a lbry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Eric wrote:
On 2015-12-02, Clive Page wrote: On 01/12/2015 16:47, Eric wrote: A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Yes that was the point. But although it might seem to be the right thing to do in theory it seems that it doesn't actually work in practice. There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ No more really, since it is mostly the 2002 paper that has already been mentioned more than once in this thread (which doesn't actually prove anything in my opinion). I think what it proves is that it would be really hard to implement such a policy in the few cases where it would be worthwhile: long up escalators in the peaks. In all other cases, it's better to have a walking side and a standing side. Given that many London Tube users aren't fluent in English, most regular Tube users are well-trained to walk on the left and stand on the right, and many aren't listening to routine announcements, it would be nigh on impossible to switch behaviours on a few escalators for a couple of hours each day. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 2015\12\02 17:02, Recliner wrote:
Eric wrote: On 2015-12-02, Clive Page wrote: On 01/12/2015 16:47, Eric wrote: A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Yes that was the point. But although it might seem to be the right thing to do in theory it seems that it doesn't actually work in practice. There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ No more really, since it is mostly the 2002 paper that has already been mentioned more than once in this thread (which doesn't actually prove anything in my opinion). I think what it proves is that it would be really hard to implement such a policy in the few cases where it would be worthwhile: long up escalators in the peaks. In all other cases, it's better to have a walking side and a standing side. Given that many London Tube users aren't fluent in English, most regular Tube users are well-trained to walk on the left and stand on the right, and many aren't listening to routine announcements, it would be nigh on impossible to switch behaviours on a few escalators for a couple of hours each day. Make the steps a metre high and two metres long. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 2015\12\02 17:31, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\12\02 17:02, Recliner wrote: Eric wrote: On 2015-12-02, Clive Page wrote: On 01/12/2015 16:47, Eric wrote: A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Yes that was the point. But although it might seem to be the right thing to do in theory it seems that it doesn't actually work in practice. There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ No more really, since it is mostly the 2002 paper that has already been mentioned more than once in this thread (which doesn't actually prove anything in my opinion). I think what it proves is that it would be really hard to implement such a policy in the few cases where it would be worthwhile: long up escalators in the peaks. In all other cases, it's better to have a walking side and a standing side. Given that many London Tube users aren't fluent in English, most regular Tube users are well-trained to walk on the left and stand on the right, and many aren't listening to routine announcements, it would be nigh on impossible to switch behaviours on a few escalators for a couple of hours each day. Make the steps a metre high and two metres long. .... that will make them wheelchair accessible too. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 2015-12-02, Recliner wrote:
Eric wrote: On 2015-12-02, Clive Page wrote: On 01/12/2015 16:47, Eric wrote: A dubious argument anyway, since the entire point of changing the escalator rules is to get an entire crowd to or from the platforms as quickly as possible. This is a safety issue and the slowing down of a minority is not relevant. Yes that was the point. But although it might seem to be the right thing to do in theory it seems that it doesn't actually work in practice. There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ No more really, since it is mostly the 2002 paper that has already been mentioned more than once in this thread (which doesn't actually prove anything in my opinion). I think what it proves is that it would be really hard to implement such a policy in the few cases where it would be worthwhile: long up escalators in the peaks. In all other cases, it's better to have a walking side and a standing side. Given that many London Tube users aren't fluent in English, most regular Tube users are well-trained to walk on the left and stand on the right, and many aren't listening to routine announcements, it would be nigh on impossible to switch behaviours on a few escalators for a couple of hours each day. Well that would be believable - if I hadn't seem it done (at a very crowded Victoria some years ago with a couple of staff yelling - sorry, giving instructions - at the bottom of the escalator). Eric -- ms fnd in a lbry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
In message
-sept ember.org, at 17:02:52 on Wed, 2 Dec 2015, Recliner remarked: There is a little more on this in Ian Visits blog: http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2015...the-escalator/ No more really, since it is mostly the 2002 paper that has already been mentioned more than once in this thread (which doesn't actually prove anything in my opinion). I think what it proves is that it would be really hard to implement such a policy in the few cases where it would be worthwhile: long up escalators in the peaks. In all other cases, it's better to have a walking side and a standing side. Given that many London Tube users aren't fluent in English, most regular Tube users are well-trained to walk on the left and stand on the right, and many aren't listening to routine announcements, it would be nigh on impossible to switch behaviours on a few escalators for a couple of hours each day. The thing about asking people not to walk on the left if that you only need a few people to obey. I had a look at an escalator on Monday towards the end of the rush hour and most of the people on the "standing" side walked up the 'last' three or four steps. So it's not a completely binary situation. As it was a short one, people were roughly equally using both sides. Today I looked at a few longer ones, albeit not in the rush hour, and almost everyone was standing [on the right], and very few walking [on the left]. -- Roland Perry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 08:50:44AM +0000, Clive Page wrote:
On 30/11/2015 15:32, Recliner wrote: There's also the length (ie, rise) of the escalator to consider. If it's very high, fewer people will choose to walk up, so the walking lane will be under-used, with long gaps. In such cases, having two standing lanes will maximise throughput. But with short escalators, lots of people will prefer to walk, so it's better to have a walking lane. I think this was the reason given for trying it first at Holborn as it has rather long escalators, but surely not the longest (Angel?). I've only used Angel station a couple of times but I don't remember it being particularly busy, so maybe they didn't try it there because there's no problem to solve there. -- David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig You may now start misinterpreting what I just wrote, and attacking that misinterpretation. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
In message , at 11:49:00
on Thu, 3 Dec 2015, David Cantrell remarked: There's also the length (ie, rise) of the escalator to consider. If it's very high, fewer people will choose to walk up, so the walking lane will be under-used, with long gaps. In such cases, having two standing lanes will maximise throughput. But with short escalators, lots of people will prefer to walk, so it's better to have a walking lane. I think this was the reason given for trying it first at Holborn as it has rather long escalators, but surely not the longest (Angel?). I've only used Angel station a couple of times but I don't remember it being particularly busy, so maybe they didn't try it there because there's no problem to solve there. Angel station is very busy in the rush hours, but it isn't an all-day tourist/shopping destination. Holborn is busy for much longer, and has a congestion problem that needs solving. -- Roland Perry |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On 03/12/2015 13:50, Roland Perry wrote:
Holborn is busy for much longer, and has a congestion problem that needs solving. The easy solution, in my opinion, is simply to run the escalators a bit faster, say a 25% increase in speed at rush-hours. Most users then are commuters so will easily cope. Those in Russia and nearby countries seem to cope with much higher speeds. -- Clive Page |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On Thursday, 3 December 2015 15:45:31 UTC, Clive Page wrote:
On 03/12/2015 13:50, Roland Perry wrote: Holborn is busy for much longer, and has a congestion problem that needs solving. The easy solution, in my opinion, is simply to run the escalators a bit faster, say a 25% increase in speed at rush-hours. Most users then are commuters so will easily cope. Those in Russia and nearby countries seem to cope with much higher speeds. A vision of the Merry-Go-Round at the end of Strangers On A Train just sprang into my head. |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
On Thursday, 3 December 2015 15:45:31 UTC, Clive Page wrote:
On 03/12/2015 13:50, Roland Perry wrote: Holborn is busy for much longer, and has a congestion problem that needs solving. The easy solution, in my opinion, is simply to run the escalators a bit faster, say a 25% increase in speed at rush-hours. Most users then are commuters so will easily cope. Those in Russia and nearby countries seem to cope with much higher speeds. The upper machine chamber at Angel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-XlbUDPt7A |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Offramp wrote:
A vision of the Merry-Go-Round at the end of Strangers On A Train just sprang into my head. Easily addressed by a mattress barrier at the top? |
No more walking up escalators at Holborn
Clive Page wrote:
The easy solution, in my opinion, is simply to run the escalators a bit faster, say a 25% increase in speed at rush-hours. Most users then are commuters so will easily cope. Those in Russia and nearby countries seem to cope with much higher speeds. I just returned from my most recent trip to Beijing which included several subway journeys. If you want to experience crowding, that's definitely the place to see it. It's not just the cars that are full, but the platforms and halls as well. What seems to happen on the escalators when things are crowded is that no walking up occurs - standing both sides. They don't run them above average speed though. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:33 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk