On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:43:05 +0100, "Clive D. W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Chris
Johns writes
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.

There's a limit to how many buses per hour you can run on a route. The
same number of trams per hour carry far more people.

But can you run the same number of trams per hour as you can buses per
hour? I suspect not. Remember that buses can overtake each other.
Trams cannot.
--
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

Terry Harper wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:43:05 +0100, "Clive D. W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Chris
Johns writes
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.
There's a limit to how many buses per hour you can run on a route. The
same number of trams per hour carry far more people.

But can you run the same number of trams per hour as you can buses per
hour? I suspect not. Remember that buses can overtake each other.
Trams cannot.

True, but you can couple trams together and carry several hundred
passengers using a single driver (where you might need four drivers to
carry those people with buses).

In any case, the ability of buses to overtake is only useful when they
can avoid stopping at every stop, or when the infrastructure is
specifically designed to allow easy overtaking and multiple buses per
stop - something which would involve as much disruption to traffic as
the tram, if not more. For a super-high-capacity bus rapid transit
system, you'd essentially need to close most of the Uxbridge Road to
private traffic.

The reason trams were chosen for the Cross River scheme was that "only"
40 services were needed to meet peak hour demand, whereas 80 buses per
hour would have been needed. Even 40vph is pushing the limits at the key
junctions on the CRT route (Euston Road and High Holborn). Raising bus
frequencies to very high levels on the Uxbridge Road would also have
throughput implications at major junctions (e.g. North Circular).

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

In message
Terry Harper wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 07:43:05 +0100, "Clive D. W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , Chris
Johns writes
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.

There's a limit to how many buses per hour you can run on a route. The
same number of trams per hour carry far more people.

But can you run the same number of trams per hour as you can buses per
hour? I suspect not. Remember that buses can overtake each other.
Trams cannot.

They can only overtake each other if there is space, which there often
isn't, especially in London, and even if there is space they sometimes
don't, sometimes out of mental laziness, and sometimes, I am sure, out
of wish to avoid work. Let the other man carry the load!. Though I
have sometimes seen examples of very good working, a pair of busses
overtaking each other to take alternate stops.

Michael Bell


--

Michael Bell wrote:

They can only overtake each other if there is space, which there often
isn't, especially in London, and even if there is space they sometimes
don't, sometimes out of mental laziness, and sometimes, I am sure, out
of wish to avoid work. Let the other man carry the load!. Though I
have sometimes seen examples of very good working, a pair of busses
overtaking each other to take alternate stops.


Pity the poor passengers who wanted to get off at the stops "their"
bus didn't stop at.

;-)

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 11:57:10 +0100, Michael Bell
wrote:

In message
Terry Harper wrote:

But can you run the same number of trams per hour as you can buses per
hour? I suspect not. Remember that buses can overtake each other.
Trams cannot.

They can only overtake each other if there is space, which there often
isn't, especially in London, and even if there is space they sometimes
don't, sometimes out of mental laziness, and sometimes, I am sure, out
of wish to avoid work. Let the other man carry the load!. Though I
have sometimes seen examples of very good working, a pair of busses
overtaking each other to take alternate stops.

Oxford Street is full of buses overtaking each other at stops. Not all
on the same route, of course.

If you couple trams together, you have to ensure that, when one stops,
it does not block a crossing. From what I've seen on the U6 in
Dusseldorf, the distance between traffic lights, near Kennedydam, for
example, only allows one set to be at a stop without blocking a
cross-road.
--
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 Tony Polson wrote:

Michael Bell wrote:

They can only overtake each other if there is space, which there often
isn't, especially in London, and even if there is space they sometimes
don't, sometimes out of mental laziness, and sometimes, I am sure, out
of wish to avoid work. Let the other man carry the load!. Though I
have sometimes seen examples of very good working, a pair of busses
overtaking each other to take alternate stops.


Pity the poor passengers who wanted to get off at the stops "their"
bus didn't stop at.

Pity the poor passenger who has to walk twice as far because his bus
stop has been abolished by the coming of the tram.
--
Thoss

In message
thoss wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 Tony Polson wrote:

Michael Bell wrote:

They can only overtake each other if there is space, which there often
isn't, especially in London, and even if there is space they sometimes
don't, sometimes out of mental laziness, and sometimes, I am sure, out
of wish to avoid work. Let the other man carry the load!. Though I
have sometimes seen examples of very good working, a pair of busses
overtaking each other to take alternate stops.


Pity the poor passengers who wanted to get off at the stops "their"
bus didn't stop at.

Pity the poor passenger who has to walk twice as far because his bus
stop has been abolished by the coming of the tram.

Why would that happen?

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

Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
thoss wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 Tony Polson wrote:

Michael Bell wrote:

They can only overtake each other if there is space, which there
often isn't, especially in London, and even if there is space
they sometimes don't, sometimes out of mental laziness, and
sometimes, I am sure, out of wish to avoid work. Let the other
man carry the load!. Though I have sometimes seen examples of
very good working, a pair of busses overtaking each other to
take alternate stops.


Pity the poor passengers who wanted to get off at the stops
"their" bus didn't stop at.

Pity the poor passenger who has to walk twice as far because his
bus stop has been abolished by the coming of the tram.

Why would that happen?

Because it's in the WLT plan. Tram stops will be further apart than the
current bus stops on the route (207) that the tram will replace.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 Graeme Wall wrote:

Pity the poor passenger who has to walk twice as far because his bus
stop has been abolished by the coming of the tram.

Why would that happen?

I wish I knew. But that's in the tram plans.
--
Thoss

In message
thoss wrote:

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 Graeme Wall wrote:

Pity the poor passenger who has to walk twice as far because his bus
stop has been abolished by the coming of the tram.

Why would that happen?

I wish I knew. But that's in the tram plans.

One assumes they've done some research, oh hang on a mo' this is Britain, no
they probably haven't.

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