Public Transport

A vast and contentious subject.

What, where, when, and why? Are questions which need to be asked in relation to peoples usage of public transportation. Obviously different means of public transport will be appropriate to different journeys.

The distance you are going to travel, the reason for your journey, convenience, and what you wish to transport with you, are all things which need to be taken into consideration.

Public transport includes... aeroplanes... which will only be suitable for longer journeys. You will have to take into consideration the time taken at the airport, having to be there an annoyingly long time before boarding the plane, plus the time waiting for baggage at the other end. Checking in and out adds hours to what would, otherwise, be quite a fast method of getting from one place to another. And another thing to consider is that you are bound to have to get to and from the airport by another method of transport.

I suppose we should include boats in this list of transportation methods. Though there will be few cases where this method of public transport will be appropriate [except for holidays]. I know that boats are used as a normal mode of public transport on the Thames in London... but then I think people in our capital city have more choices than most of the country.

Trains can be divided into long distance travel; and short distance underground journeys [where again London is well served]. One word sums up my thoughts on the long distance train service... expensive... I'm afraid my thoughts are 'am I buying a ticket here, or will this amount of money buy a share in the business?' Quite frequently too, one needs to use another form of transport to complete the journey.

Trams... where they run... they can be a useful addition to existing public transport.

Buses and coaches... again where they run they are a useful method of transport, depending on where they go and what you need to carry on them. They normally have the added benefit of being competitively priced. The downside is that they can get stuck in traffic, and if you are using them to connect with other forms of public transport... you might possibly miss it if there has been an accident slowing the traffic down, or just through volume of traffic.

I have omitted the taxi from this list, just because it is another form of car.

For those of us living outside the major cities... consider this... without a car it is a major hassle to travel from one place to another when they happen to be about 30 miles apart.

Consider this... the railway station or bus station being about 15 minutes walk away. What if you are elderly or unable to walk? What if it is tipping down with rain? A taxi? Expensive. Not a good start. Then an expensive train ride, or is there a bus? And what about at the other end... neither train nor bus station is conveniently placed for where you have to go, so we have the same problem all over again. What if our appointment in that town is early in the day?

You have two clear options... use public transport and start out a day in advance OR go by car.

This is just one simple scenario which I am basing on a journey to a hospital about 30 miles distant.

Then the government has the brass nerve to state that we have more choice and should drive less, or even get rid of our cars.

Please read my first post, and let me know what YOU think of the government's 'integrated' transport policy. Does goverment policy add up?

I won't even start to mention my opinions on the state of 'local hospital trusts' or we could be here for w e e k s.

 

Walking

Walking and 'Road-Use'.

Walking should be enjoyable, health promoting, and safe. It should, therefore, be undertaken at an appropriate time, and in an appropriate and SAFE environment or place.

'The powers that be' should NOT, under any circumstances try to dictate when or where people should walk... the usual method used by local councils is to try to make it totally impossible to use a car, or not to provide reasonable parking areas, or to make parking too expensive.

This is in every aspect counter-productive.

There is a time and place for walking, and different modes of transport [other than the car] ... and a large percentage of the general public know what is right for them... and resent the big brother attitude of 'we know what is best for you'.

Walking should be for relaxation and enjoyment, whether it is to walk a dog [whether your own or for an elderly friend or neighbour], view the scenery, or just for the pure health benefits.

It is very rarely a suitable way to travel to work [due to weather constraints], or to do the weekly food shop [due to the weight of the shopping, and the difficulty of carrying numerous bags]. I always think those who advocate this should be made to act as a 'carrying machine' for a family of at least three for a month!

Enjoy your walking... but only do it in safe areas, in well lit streets, and preferably not alone... safety first.

 

Motorbikes and Bicycles

Very different propositions here... basically because of speed. With a bicycle it takes much longer to commute any distance. The motorbike has the advantage of speed on its side.

Many anti car lobbyists cite the idea of travelling to work on a bicycle. Do they do it? Or how about shopping?

There are many rational reasons why this will not be appropriate [without even mentioning safety, though I mention that later]... British weather can nearly be described in one word 'changeable'. That is not an ideal cycling to work or school scenario... stay in damp clothes with damp hair and feet all day... look and feel bedraggled. Is this a GOOD idea? You need to appear smart for both work and school.

What about carrying items of shopping, again not ideal? The weekly shop on a bike, yes, good idea!

Now let's examine the safety implications... I don't think bicycles and other traffic mix well together. If there are totally separate bicycle tracks, then it can be OK... as long as they don't peter out half way through your journey. The winter is especially dangerous... never mind the weather in this instance - just concentrate on the lack of LIGHT. Seeing cyclists is extremely difficult for other traffic in the dark when they have to have lights on - and especially when they are in the 'blind spot' which is inevitably created by traffic approaching from the opposite direction.

As far as motorbikes are concerned... as long as you have somewhere safe to store your over clothes... and the bike - then all would appear to be OK for travel to work, shopping, on the other hand is still NOT ON!

Each type of vehicle has its place.

Those who live 'out of town' and have reasonable distances to travel to work cannot be expected to get on their bikes, and 'the powers that be' within local councils should show less prejudice against cars. They want to get taxation from local shopkeepers... if shopkeepers are to get customers, customers have to get to their shops in a convenient way... otherwise their shops will close down, and there will be no tax from them for the local councils!

 

Prejudice?

Does anyone out there [in the UK] have opinions on 4 x 4's?

Government policy seems to be totally ANTI.

Those of us with more than one child, or who generously elect to do the school run with a few extra children need them. Those of us who have more than one dog need them. And also those of us who admit to being nosy in regard to other peoples gardens or other aspects of the scenery when travelling as a passenger... well, we need them too!

Quite a number of 4 x 4's use less fuel than some of the upmarket large and fast cars. Another plus, if the law makers really believe in decreasing the speed at which most of our traffic proceeds, is that very frequently 4 x 4 drivers don't , or are less likely to, speed.

Add to these plus marks the fact that being higher up makes for better vision, and, it could therefore be argued, safer driving. You could be said to be in a better position to see cyclists and motorbikes... the famous think bike adverts could perhaps be sited here. [That said the speed at which some motorbikes overtake, or just travel, on the open roads has to be seen to be believed!]

Politicians and those responsible for transport within the local authorities, as opposed to experts in the field like the AA and RAC, should remember that there is life OUTSIDE London, and the other urban conglomerations, and 4 x 4's are a reliable and useful tool to many, many, people.

 

Road Use... does government policy add up?

Do you think government policy on road usage adds up? [For clarification... I am referring to the position in the UK.]

I tend to think not! If we forget for today the way they advocate using public transport, bicycles, and walking [let's think about those uses another day]... let us just think about our usage of cars.

How many GOOD ideas have they [the powers that be, and the experts] come up with? I would say very few. Can you think of any? Perhaps we could say that car sharing, and special lanes for those who do, might possibly work... where there is room for such a facility. Thoughts please!

On the other hand, the closing of local facilities in many spheres is totally detrimental to their crusade.

Regionalisation, and worse, of government departments... think of your 'local' tax office... you know where that is situated now, yes... or probably NOT. Where-ever it might be, you could lay odds on it not being local and convenient to you. The same goes for other 'government' offices.

Then we come to the 'local' hospital, how long can we expect to have a LOCAL hospital if we don't live in a large metropolis? Not only do we face longer journeys as patients, but also visiting our loved ones is scheduled to be a nightmare. Public transport is impossible in this instance and totally out of the question... for an early appointment you would need to set out the previous day!

The fact that regional trusts have been set up has divided all the protesters into 'small' numbers... what a wonderful way to use "divided we fall" to get done, what THEY want done.

So necessary journeys are increased whether we like it or not... and in most cases, it is NOT.

Those in power may also grumble about the school run, but as 'choice?' is increased and children have to travel long distances to school it may not be practicable to walk them there [and in inclement weather it definitely isn't]... with the increasing number of paedophiles let out into the community, or at least the increased perception of that danger... can anyone blame parents for wanting to see their child safely into the school gates?