Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:53:28 on Sat, 11 Mar
2006, Dave Arquati remarked:
Maybe you'll have to cycle to the car park and get a free "Pod". (I
assume they are free, it talks about a journey costing 80p, which
hardly seems worth collecting).

If that were true, most of my bus journeys would be free too...

Most of your bus journeys aren't made by people clutching Euro or Dollar
bills, and nothing resembling 80p in sterling.

Firstly, I think the majority of passengers on the system as proposed
will be travelling to and from the northern perimeter car parks, and are
unlikely to be tourists.

Secondly, if you're in Heathrow, you probably need sterling anyway - and
it's not exactly difficult to get change. Plenty of foreigners seem to
manage fine - toilets in railway stations across Europe and in London
charge an entrance fee which is significantly below 20p.

If tourists can buy travelcards and bus tickets, I'm sure they can cope
with this.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

In message , at 00:20:54 on Sun, 12 Mar
2006, Dave Arquati remarked:
Maybe you'll have to cycle to the car park and get a free "Pod".
(I assume they are free, it talks about a journey costing 80p,
which hardly seems worth collecting).

If that were true, most of my bus journeys would be free too...
Most of your bus journeys aren't made by people clutching Euro or
Dollar bills, and nothing resembling 80p in sterling.

Firstly, I think the majority of passengers on the system as proposed
will be travelling to and from the northern perimeter car parks, and
are unlikely to be tourists.

But if the taxi drop-off is incorporated not only will there be tourists
arriving by taxi but presumably lots of *departing* people will need to
get the pods to the taxi rank.

Secondly, if you're in Heathrow, you probably need sterling anyway -
and it's not exactly difficult to get change.

Glad to hear it. The UK is quite unfriendly to tourists when it comes to
foreign language ticket machines and/or proprietary ticketing like
Oyster. Not as bad as some places, but still quite high up the list.
Having change machines [is that what you mean] at LHR is a good idea
(where are they, though)?

Plenty of foreigners seem to manage fine - toilets in railway stations
across Europe and in London charge an entrance fee which is
significantly below 20p.

That's an argument it's worth collecting the money, rather than a
demonstration that tourists have coinage spare. I've been at Amsterdam
Central and wanting to use the toilet but no local coinage Of course,
toilets (and indeed shuttle trains) at airports are usually free.
However, London is one of the few places with free baggage trolleys; I
never seem to be able to get one when I arrive in the USA as I often
don't have the correct coinage.

If tourists can buy travelcards and bus tickets, I'm sure they can cope
with this.

Hopefully, if it is charged for, they'll take credit cards and notes,
too.
--
Roland Perry

In message .com, at
15:05:34 on Sat, 11 Mar 2006, remarked:
Reducing it to 3 or 4 people per vehicle on demand solves operational
problems of schedule planning and running large vehicles around at
times of low demand.

No doubt they have a cunning scheme for when one adult arrives with four
children and lots of luggage.
--
Roland Perry

In message , Tony Polson
writes

You obviously don't know about the expansion of car parking in the
central area that is currently under way. A large part of the road
congestion in the Central Area is caused by a lack of parking
capacity, plus slow means of entrance and exit to the car parks. This
is being addressed in a programme of enhancement that has been in
progress for some years, and is ongoing. Construction of a very large
new multi-storey car park for the Central Area is under way.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I'm not referring to parking in the central area
- that only accounts for 20% of the car traffic through the tunnel. I'm
referring to drop-off and pick-up, which accounts for 80% of the car
traffic, and thus for most of the congestion.

Also, please can you tell me how a transit system that operates wholly
within Heathrow Airport is going to reduce car journeys to and from
that airport?

It won't. The object, as I see it, is to do something about the traffic
in the central area before the tunnel reaches gridlock (predicted for
only two years hence, although by then T5 ought to be relieving the
strain). Drop-off and pick-up from one of the northern car parks would
save four car journeys through the tunnel for each return flight, which
would make a big difference.
--
Paul Terry

In message , Roland Perry
writes

Any such target should include cars journeys to the perimeter (and
T4&5) to make any greater environmental sense - which is what I thought
the targets were for.

Yes, I agree. But most of the Central Area traffic is drop-off/pick-up,
involving four journeys through the tunnel for each return flight. Given
that the tunnel is a major source of jams, pollution and sometimes
missed flights (and that demand is expected to exceed capacity by 2008),
keeping cars to the perimeter (and removing the internal bus services)
would offer considerable local environmental improvement.

And they are halfway through refurbishing one of the T1 carparks,
unlikely they want to kill that cash-cow any time soon!

Indeed, but I was referring primarily to the drop-off/pick-up traffic,
which apparently accounts for 80% of the car journeys through the
tunnel.
--
Paul Terry

In message
Paul Terry wrote:

In message , Roland Perry
writes

Any such target should include cars journeys to the perimeter (and
T4&5) to make any greater environmental sense - which is what I thought
the targets were for.

Yes, I agree. But most of the Central Area traffic is drop-off/pick-up,
involving four journeys through the tunnel for each return flight. Given
that the tunnel is a major source of jams, pollution and sometimes
missed flights (and that demand is expected to exceed capacity by 2008),
keeping cars to the perimeter (and removing the internal bus services)
would offer considerable local environmental improvement.

And they are halfway through refurbishing one of the T1 carparks,
unlikely they want to kill that cash-cow any time soon!

Indeed, but I was referring primarily to the drop-off/pick-up traffic,
which apparently accounts for 80% of the car journeys through the
tunnel.

But a lot of that will be using the central car-parks, they are for short
term use.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Paul Terry wrote:

Also, please can you tell me how a transit system that operates wholly
within Heathrow Airport is going to reduce car journeys to and from
that airport?

It won't. The object, as I see it, is to do something about the traffic
in the central area before the tunnel reaches gridlock (predicted for
only two years hence, although by then T5 ought to be relieving the
strain). Drop-off and pick-up from one of the northern car parks would
save four car journeys through the tunnel for each return flight, which
would make a big difference.


So what did you mean when you typed:

"BAA are committed to reducing car journeys to Heathrow from 65% to
50%, and part of that will probably involve pick-up and collection
from a People Mover terminal."

So I am asking again why you claimed the people mover could contribute
to a reduction in the car journeys to/from Heathrow.

This time, please don't avoid the question.

;-)

Roland Perry wrote:
In message .com, at
15:05:34 on Sat, 11 Mar 2006, remarked:
Reducing it to 3 or 4 people per vehicle on demand solves operational
problems of schedule planning and running large vehicles around at
times of low demand.

No doubt they have a cunning scheme for when one adult arrives with four
children and lots of luggage.
--
Roland Perry

Summon 2 cars to run in convoy? A meet and supervise service at the
terminal for the first party of unnacompanied children dispatched by
the parent in advance of the accompanied party? A 'stretch' model
individual car available as an option. A coupled train of vehicles for
large groups.

--
Mark

In message , Tony Polson
writes

So what did you mean when you typed:

"BAA are committed to reducing car journeys to Heathrow from 65% to
50%, and part of that will probably involve pick-up and collection
from a People Mover terminal."

Simply that the People Mover could be used to service "Kiss and Fly"
drop down points away from the CTA, as happens at Chicago O'Hare and
many other airports. But that is pure speculation - and, while it would
reduce traffic in the most congested area, I have already said that it
won't reduce car journeys to the general area of Heathrow.

So I am asking again why you claimed the people mover could contribute
to a reduction in the car journeys to/from Heathrow.

And the answer is the same:

It won't.

--
Paul Terry

In message , Graeme Wall
writes

In message
Paul Terry wrote:

Indeed, but I was referring primarily to the drop-off/pick-up traffic,
which apparently accounts for 80% of the car journeys through the
tunnel.

But a lot of that will be using the central car-parks, they are for short
term use.

I'm not sure that's so. The 80% figure in the W S Atkins report was
quoted as that for "kiss and fly" car journeys at peak time. I've always
understood "kiss and fly" to mean the practice of stopping for no more
than a minute or two to drop down or pick up.

--
Paul Terry