wrote:

There is also the the important point that the WLT is a genuine
transport scheme, the purpose of which is to address the need for
improved public transport in a busy established corridor.

And also one where the existing transport was failing. Oldham
Metrolink, for example, would have replaced an entirely adequate (if
not particularly fancy) train service with a tram that would be more
expensive at the point of use (though admittedly require a lower
operating subsidy - but I wonder how long it'd take to even out given
the capital cost of construction?), potentially slower and potentially
of lower capacity.

I think not everyone is unhappy that it didn't go ahead.

Neil

On 3 Jun 2006 03:14:46 -0700, "Neil Williams"
wrote:

victormeldrewsyoungerbrother wrote:

Press release 15 May 2006

We are very sorry for any inconvenience experienced by our customers as
a result of teething difficulties on ftr.

Any word on what these teething difficulties are, and why it's so
difficult to operate what is basically a fancy bendy bus with fancy
ticket machines and a few extra decorative bits of plastic on the
outside?

The ticket machines don't work.
The bar code readers for the period tickets and mobile phone bought
tickets don't work.
They didn't get the bar code stickers for OAP permits delivered on time.
They reduced the frequency on ftr compared to the old service thus
increasing boarding times.
They didn't advertise how the new system worked properly.
The real time displays are not real time - they only work based on the
time now against the theoretical schedule.

There will also be the usual issues of passengers and drivers being
unfamiliar with the vehicles and the schedule. This will take a bit of
time to bed down so they can be forgiven this part of their problems.

The above is based on what I have read - I have not been to York to try
the service out.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Bob wrote:
If the majority of the residents of West London want to sit in traffic
jams - they have the democratic right to do so. It has always struck me
as odd that the West London scheme should be second on the list after
Croydon. Wouldn't the Cross River Link have a bigger economic impact?

I think the Mayor is keen to avoid accusations of being a Mayor for
central London only - hence the progression of the East London and
Greenwich Waterfront Transit schemes, and WLT.

Additionally, the CRT scheme is partly dependent on the ins and outs of
the regeneration schemes at King's Cross and Elephant & Castle. The
latter in particular will create a route for CRT through the road
junctions which doesn't currently exist; to construct CRT before the E&C
regeneration scheme would either mean a delay to the start of Peckham
branch services (thus also limiting frequency through the core section)
or would mean ripping up the tram tracks just a year or two after
putting them down (and indeed rebuilding the road junction twice).

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

The sooner the whole West London Tram scheme is abandoned the better,
it has a huge level of public hostility along with the Councils being
opposed the scheme. Far better to progress Croydon Tramlink extension
schemes in South London(where public hostility is very little) and
Cross River Tram. The scheme will die or death sooner or later, why
don't TfL just pull the plug on the whole thing now and spend the money
on more worthwhile schemes?

Martin
Dave Arquati wrote:
Bob wrote:
If the majority of the residents of West London want to sit in traffic
jams - they have the democratic right to do so. It has always struck me
as odd that the West London scheme should be second on the list after
Croydon. Wouldn't the Cross River Link have a bigger economic impact?

I think the Mayor is keen to avoid accusations of being a Mayor for
central London only - hence the progression of the East London and
Greenwich Waterfront Transit schemes, and WLT.

Additionally, the CRT scheme is partly dependent on the ins and outs of
the regeneration schemes at King's Cross and Elephant & Castle. The
latter in particular will create a route for CRT through the road
junctions which doesn't currently exist; to construct CRT before the E&C
regeneration scheme would either mean a delay to the start of Peckham
branch services (thus also limiting frequency through the core section)
or would mean ripping up the tram tracks just a year or two after
putting them down (and indeed rebuilding the road junction twice).

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

"MartyJ" wrote in message
ups.com...
The sooner the whole West London Tram scheme is abandoned the better,
it has a huge level of public hostility along with the Councils being
opposed the scheme. Far better to progress Croydon Tramlink extension
schemes in South London(where public hostility is very little) and
Cross River Tram. The scheme will die or death sooner or later, why
don't TfL just pull the plug on the whole thing now and spend the money
on more worthwhile schemes?

Martin
Dave Arquati wrote:
Bob wrote:
If the majority of the residents of West London want to sit in traffic
jams - they have the democratic right to do so. It has always struck
me
as odd that the West London scheme should be second on the list after
Croydon. Wouldn't the Cross River Link have a bigger economic impact?

I think the Mayor is keen to avoid accusations of being a Mayor for
central London only - hence the progression of the East London and
Greenwich Waterfront Transit schemes, and WLT.

Additionally, the CRT scheme is partly dependent on the ins and outs of
the regeneration schemes at King's Cross and Elephant & Castle. The
latter in particular will create a route for CRT through the road
junctions which doesn't currently exist; to construct CRT before the E&C
regeneration scheme would either mean a delay to the start of Peckham
branch services (thus also limiting frequency through the core section)
or would mean ripping up the tram tracks just a year or two after
putting them down (and indeed rebuilding the road junction twice).

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


I live and work not too far away from the West London Tram area.
What is proposed has already been done. The bus route 207 is the tram route.
And the 207 is currently a fleet of bendies which do as bendies do and block
up
junctions and cause congestion when driven badly or without consideration.
The 207 has it's own bus lane for most of the section where the WLT will go.
And there are lots of 207's.

So I really see not a lot of difference to what we already have.
I can see why Tfl may want to do this solely as a replacement for the
existing 207.

The area is as people have already said a very busy area which econmically
is doing very well.
The 207 are jammed full most of the day.

On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, londoncityslicker wrote:

So I really see not a lot of difference to what we already have.
I can see why Tfl may want to do this solely as a replacement for the
existing 207.

The area is as people have already said a very busy area which
econmically is doing very well. The 207 are jammed full most of the day.

Why replace it then? If they are jammed most of the day, then some more
busses might be in order.

If busses are good enough for the provinces, why aren't the good enough
for London? Ironically, London is about the only place where busses aren't
viewed upon as the "poor persons transport" like they are everywhere else,
so in reality you could get away with a bus service in London (and have
people use it) whereas outside of London they'd drive/walk/magic carpet
rather than get a bus.

Cheers

Chris
--
Chris Johns

On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Neil Williams wrote:

Any word on what these teething difficulties are, and why it's so
difficult to operate what is basically a fancy bendy bus with fancy
ticket machines and a few extra decorative bits of plastic on the
outside?

The ticket machine was prone to breaking down at first - much to our (the
passenger's) delight - quick boarding and a free ride. The ticket machine
when working is so slow that it must throw the schedules out (which were
reduced from ever 8 mins to every 10 mins when the ftr started).

A few of the busses broke down on the first day, which led to some slating
in the local press. At least one of the 'ftr's must be out of service, as
there's a normal "park and ride" bendybus on the 'ftr' route that
occasionally turns up.

The doors can sometimes misbehave, and theres a big "open" button but
thats only for use in emergencies apparently - which confuses people.
have been incidents (in the local rag) about the doors closing on people.

The bendyness of the busses probably causes more problems in York's
streets - they will fit along "the route" but any obstruction probably
causes them more problems than a tradional bus.

The view of most people i've spoken to seems to be that it was all a lot
of fuss for no gain. I think we're going to be stuck with it as a) they
have the vehicles now and b) it's such a high profile thing for first
(with their new busses) and york council (who did a load of road works to
enable them to run) that they won't admit it's no good.

Cheers

Chris
--
Chris Johns

In message , Chris
Johns writes

Ironically, London is about the only place where busses aren't
viewed upon as the "poor persons transport" like they are everywhere else,

I agree, but it largely an acceptance of reality by many of us who live
in London. I certainly wouldn't regard myself as poor - we have two cars
(posh and not-so-posh), but I wouldn't dream of driving the 7 miles into
London, except perhaps early on a Sunday.

The Congestion Charge plus the near impossibility of parking in the
central area (or the exorbitant charges if you do find a space) are only
half the story - the fact is that public transport in London is usually
both quicker and cheaper than driving in.

As a result, there is a broad social mix to be found on buses, as on all
forms of public transport in the capital.

so in reality you could get away with a bus service in London (and have
people use it) whereas outside of London they'd drive/walk/magic carpet
rather than get a bus.

I'd like to think that matters in the provinces might change if and when
using a car becomes as difficult as it now is in London ... but a lot
more, including a political will for intervention and probably an
acceptance of the need for regulation, is going to be needed first.
--
Paul Terry

Bob wrote

If the majority of the residents of West London want to sit in
traffic
jams - they have the democratic right to do so. It has always struck
me
as odd that the West London scheme should be second on the list after
Croydon. Wouldn't the Cross River Link have a bigger economic impact?

But if what the "majority of the current residents don't want" is key,
what has the economic impact to do with it ?

Those who merely work there or pass through are to be ignored ?

Taking into account those who would find it convenient to shop there
but find the congestion too bad is not democratic ?

On your version of the constitution our multi level government might be
debarred on democratic grounds from building any new or improved Thames
crossing road, bridge or tunnel in the area betweenbetween Staines and
Kingston ?
(The Walton-on-Thames residents association had been opposing any but a
narrow, low weight limit Thames crossing for twenty years)

--
Mike D

Neil Williams wrote:
Any word on what these teething difficulties are, and why it's so
difficult to operate what is basically a fancy bendy bus with fancy
ticket machines and a few extra decorative bits of plastic on the
outside?


The ticket machine's crashed on both of my ftr rides so far -
unfortunately after I'd got on and successfully bought a ticket...

Overall... not much difference between ftr and a normal bendybus,
although I can't see how the driver being isolated behind smoked glass
will make passengers feel any safer... (wasn't one of the objectives of
ftr to make bus travel less unappealing to women?)

pete
--
"That is enigmatic. That is textbook enigmatic..." - Dr Who
"There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas." - N Blackwell