Your perception of rail travel in the UK?

[kabbes]

Is it though? How much is your season ticket?

An annual ticket -- something that you have to commit to for a complete year, don't forget, despite not really knowing that you will definitely be needing it -- costs about £3000 per year. On top of that, I need to pay £600 per year for parking. So about £3,600 per year in total.

My car costs me about 10p per mile in petrol. Yes, I have to pay for lots of other motoring costs. *But I would be paying these anyway*. That's the problem with the train -- you are comparing the marginal cost of the car with the absolute cost of the train. But nonetheless, that's the comparison that is open to you.

I work 4 days a week in London, incidentally, with 20 days holiday per year + 5 or 6 bank holidays (I forget exactly how it works). It means about 183 working days per year. Which means that £3000 train cost works out as about £20 per working day. That's a LOT more expensive than the marginal cost of driving, even including the £1000 per year parking at my work.

I didn't actually mean the cost of commuting, though. I would never drive into the centre of London anyway. I meant incidental train journeys, particularly where there are two of you. I would never dream of taking the train to Guildford, for example. It would involve:

* A 2 mile walk to the nearest train station, which is unmanned and has no ticket machine.
* A wait for the train that comes as little as once every 2 hours.
* A cost of between £5 and £10 each, from memory.
* Having to get from the station to the destination (not too bad, as the station isn't too far out of town).

The whole journey would certainly cost in excess of £10 and would take an uncertain length of time, but certainly at least an hour. Compare that to an 8 mile drive that takes about 20 minutes. The train isn't even an option worthy of consideration.

 

[kabbes]

I just looked up the journey. There is indeed only one train every 2 hours. It takes 15 minutes. Although a single is £3,40, however, the off-peak return only costs £3.50 (and not the £5 to £10 predicted, which is the peak charge). So that's £7 for two people. The petrol costs are about £1.50 plus £1 parking. Cheaper, quicker and easier for one person to drive. A LOT cheaper for two people to drive.

 

[teuchter]

An annual ticket -- something that you have to commit to for a complete year, don't forget, despite not really knowing that you will definitely be needing it -- costs about £3000 per year. On top of that, I need to pay £600 per year for parking. So about £3,600 per year in total.

My car costs me about 10p per mile in petrol. Yes, I have to pay for lots of other motoring costs. *But I would be paying these anyway*. That's the problem with the train -- you are comparing the marginal cost of the car with the absolute cost of the train. But nonetheless, that's the comparison that is open to you.

I work 4 days a week in London, incidentally, with 20 days holiday per year + 5 or 6 bank holidays (I forget exactly how it works). It means about 183 working days per year. Which means that £3000 train cost works out as about £20 per working day. That's a LOT more expensive than the marginal cost of driving, even including the £1000 per year parking at my work.

I didn't actually mean the cost of commuting, though. I would never drive into the centre of London anyway. I meant incidental train journeys, particularly where there are two of you. I would never dream of taking the train to Guildford, for example. It would involve:

* A 2 mile walk to the nearest train station, which is unmanned and has no ticket machine.
* A wait for the train that comes as little as once every 2 hours.
* A cost of between £5 and £10 each, from memory.
* Having to get from the station to the destination (not too bad, as the station isn't too far out of town).

The whole journey would certainly cost in excess of £10 and would take an uncertain length of time, but certainly at least an hour. Compare that to an 8 mile drive that takes about 20 minutes. The train isn't even an option worthy of consideration.

This is all a result of you deciding to live somewhere two miles from the train station, though, isn't it. You are looking at marginal rather than absolute costs for the car because you have decided to adopt a car-dependant lifestyle.

OK so that's a whole different argument (assuming car dependancy is a bad thing which we may not agree about) about whether people should live near good transport, or good transport should be extended to wherever people live regardless of economic feasibility.

I don't have much sympathy for people doing well-paid jobs in London complaining about how expensive it is to commute to and from their big houses with big gardens in the countryside. If you don't like it then live in London, or just don't work in London. I have more sympathy for people living in provincial cities doing low paid jobs having to struggle with crappy public transport in areas where good public transport would be perfectly feasible given a bit of commitment.

But I do agree in principle with everyone who is saying that train fares (in general) should be at most the cost of two people making the equivalent journey by car (with the possible exception of travel at peak times when business users can afford to pay high fares and provide useful revenue).

 

[kabbes]

So ignoring the 2 mile journey to the train station (and since train stations here are only situated about 10 miles apart, you're going to be dismissing an awful lot of people like that), you think that one train every two hours and a cost that is multiple times the cost of driving for one person is acceptable?

 

[Kanda]

2 miles to a train station is nothing really.

Have you ever been out of London Teuchter???

 

[kabbes]

. If you don't like it then live in London.

If everybody who worked in London did this, incidentally, there would simply be no room in London for them all. For good or for bad -- and I'm firmly in the "bad" camp -- our governments have fostered an economic reality in which millions must commute into London every day. Given this situation, I would expect a bare minimum level of transport service that caters for them in a humane way and at a reasonable cost.

 

[Kanda]

If you don't like it then live in London

...and use a Tube network that has worse conditions for travellers than animals get when transported

 

[kabbes]

Oh don't get me started on the fucking Tube. My god.

 

[Roadkill]

The Uckfield line is still diesel isn't it?

It is, but IIRC it's the only Southern route that still is, and new trains were introduced a few years ago so it's not even true there to say that Southern trains belch out black smoke.

A misinformed rant from DRINK? Who'd'a thunk it?

 

[kabbes]

Whilst we're talking about diesel and electric trains -- I was always used to overhead electric cables when I lived in Hertfordshire. But south of the river, there seem to be no such things. Where does the electrickery happen in these trains?

 

[Kanda]

Never noticed the extra track?

It's live, powers the train.

 

[kabbes]

I have to admit that the only time I wonder about it is when I'm not at the station. Tonight I am DEFINITELY going to look for the extra track.

 

[ethel]

Oh don't get me started on the fucking Tube. My god.

am i the only londoner who thinks that the tube isn't that bad.

btw my commute one 20 min train journey and i can normally get a seat or at least leaning space.

kabbes why do you ahve to live so far away from public transport options? my parents live in a tiny village but that's out of neccessity (they farm) they don't complain that there's no public transport options!

 

[Kanda]

2 miles isn't that far from a Station for most towns outside of London!!!!

 

[teuchter]

So ignoring the 2 mile journey to the train station (and since train stations here are only situated about 10 miles apart, you're going to be dismissing an awful lot of people like that), you think that one train every two hours and a cost that is multiple times the cost of driving for one person is acceptable?

Well - I don't know because I don't know the nature of the village/town served by the station - how big it is for example and how many people would actually use a more frequent service if it were provided. If it's the kind of place where most people have cars and aren't within walking distance of the station, then a more frequent service might not actually get used much even if it was available. And the cost of providing that service (either financially or in terms of its effects on other services on that line) might be out of proportion to the benefits.

Like I say we get into a discussion about whether people should live close to public transport, or public transport should come to the people.

 

[kabbes]

am i the only londoner who thinks that the tube isn't that bad.

When do you use it?

I had to wait 25 minutes this morning on the Jubilee line until I could finally get on a train.

kabbes why do you ahve to live so far away from public transport options? my parents live in a tiny village but that's out of neccessity (they farm) they don't complain that there's no public transport options!

I don't think that I have complained about living a long way from a station, have I? I merely mentioned a two mile walk to my nearest station as being a factor to take into consideration, but I don't actually think that's very much as distances go.

My nearest station for commuting into London is actually 6 miles away, which is why I drive there. Believe me -- that's REALLY not uncommon out in the commuter belt. Hundreds of people a day commute in from my station. And it's not a station in a town, it's out in the middle of nowhere. They all drive or cycle to it.

I live where I live for the same reason anybody lives where they live -- personal reasons. I like it here. I knew when I moved here that the trip into London wouldn't be easy. I decided that I'd accept that.

But that's not the point, is it? The point isn't what we've all learned to live with. The point is that in such a rich country in which so many people are forced by economic necessity to commute into London, we should have higher expectations than we do. Saying, "oh well, that's just the way it is" is no kind of answer.

 

[teuchter]

2 miles to a train station is nothing really.

It isn't but not many people these days would consider it acceptable to walk or cycle that distance regularly. Leading to the vicious circle of people getting cars, then local services disappearing, making cars even more necessary.

Have you ever been out of London Teuchter???

I grew up in a place with no shops and about 3 buses a day (weekdays only) to the nearest town which was 20 miles away.

I'm well acquainted with the practicalities of a car-dependant lifestyle.

 

[kabbes]

If I had a train station 2 miles away that was any good, I'd walk to it no bother. I generally walk about 5 miles a day in the summer anyway (and probably more like 3 miles a day in the winter, if I'm being honest). But a train that only goes East-West and that only once every two hours ain't much use to me.

 

[Kanda]

It isn't but not many people these days would consider it acceptable to walk or cycle that distance regularly. Leading to the vicious circle of people getting cars, then local services disappearing, making cars even more necessary.

Already happened in many towns. Towns like MK, Bedford, Stevenage and the like... where there's one station serving a whole town.

 

[teuchter]

But that's not the point, is it? The point isn't what we've all learned to live with. The point is that in such a rich country in which so many people are forced by economic necessity to commute into London, we should have higher expectations than we do. Saying, "oh well, that's just the way it is" is no kind of answer.

Well I would certainly agree that there has been a failure in this country to adopt planning policies which make it feasible for the majority of the population not to depend on private transport. This coupled with the failure to invest properly in public transport including the railways leaves us where we are today. Nonetheless, I do think that a lot of people have more choice about whether or not their life needs to be a car dependant one than they like to admit.

 

[Kanda]

Nonetheless, I do think that a lot of people have more choice about whether or not their life needs to be a car dependant one than they like to admit.

When I used to commute from MK. There was actually no bus service at all to get me to the station, 2.5 miles away... and I lived pretty much near the center of town. I could walk into the City Center and get a bus 20min by foot then 15 min by bus, if it turned up. Or get in the car.. less than 5 mins at 6am.

Getting home was the same. When already doing 2hrs each way (I had to get to Chiswick) no-one is going to add another hour when they could use a car for 10 mins a day.

That's pretty much the journey nearly every commuter in that town has to do due to practically non existent public transport. Which is ridiculous when you think about the towns design.

 

[ethel]

i use the tube at varying times of the day and used to use it every morning. i never had to wait 25 mins to get onto a tube, not even on the northern line from london bridge.

 

[Kanda]

i use the tube at varying times of the day and used to use it every morning. i never had to wait 25 mins to get onto a tube, not even on the northern line from london bridge.

Try getting the Northern Line at Clapham North/South/Common. It's horrendous.

 

[Roadkill]

When I used to commute from MK. ...

That's pretty much the journey nearly every commuter in that town has to do due to practically non existent public transport. Which is ridiculous when you think about the towns design.

It is ridiculous, but not surprising when you consider the context: MK was expanded into a new town at a time when the railways were thought to be in decline in favour of road transport, and lines were being closed all over the country, including at least one that ran very near to MK.

 

[Kanda]

It is ridiculous, but not surprising when you consider the context: MK was expanded into a new town at a time when the railways were thought to be in decline in favour of road transport, and lines were being closed all over the country, including at least one that ran very near to MK.

..and has one of the most efficient road systems in the country to stick bus services on but sends poxy minibuses through estates instead of the main roads..

 

[teuchter]

That's pretty much the journey nearly every commuter in that town has to do due to practically non existent public transport. Which is ridiculous when you think about the towns design.

I'd agree.

Even though it was designed as a car city, like you say, that shouldn't stop decent bus routes being provided. The problem is though, that once the culture has set in, it's not easy to change it and there are few local authorities brave enough to implement decent public transport in places that have grown used to its absence. Such schemes probably have to run at a heavy loss initially, as people gradually switch over to them, and most people just aren't very supportive, however much they might moan about the lack of transport.

The thing proposed, and rejected by the populace, in Manchester recently for example. Whether you blame the public for being short-sighted, or the scheme's promoters for failing to present it in attractive enough terms, it illustrates how difficult it is to initiate changes in people's attitudes to how they travel.

There are a lot of people who simply consider themselves above travelling by bus for example. Not that most of them will admit it in those terms.

 

[Fuchs66]

General impressions are:

Too expensive
Often dirty and over-crowded
Too slow
Too much reliance on out of date, often diesel powered trains
Not enough coverage

This is compared to my experiences in Germany and Holland

 

[Bakunin]

i use the tube at varying times of the day and used to use it every morning. i never had to wait 25 mins to get onto a tube, not even on the northern line from london bridge.

Ah, the Tube, without question my least favourite form of rail transport.

Dirty, smelly, cramped, overcrowded, large parts of it always being closed for maintainance and in the summer months it has the heat-retaining qualities of a blast furnace, so that wherever I'm going from Paddington I invariably end up arriving resembling something that was recently removed from a pressure cooker.

 

[Pie 1]

I don't have much sympathy for people doing well-paid jobs in London complaining about how expensive it is to commute to and from their big houses with big gardens in the countryside.

And or every well paid exec who can afford it without thinking, there are probably 5 or 6 secretaries/office temps/young trainies for whom that £3-4 k is probably a 1/4 of their fucking salary - which in turn is why they can't afford to live in London either.

Do you think it's fair that someone should have to pay 25% of their salary just to get to work?

 

[teuchter]

And or every well paid exec who can afford it without thinking, there are probably 5 or 6 secretaries/office temps/young trainies for whom that £3-4 k is probably a 1/4 of their fucking salary - which in turn is why they can't afford to live in London either.

Do you think it's fair that someone should have to pay 25% of their salary just to get to work?

If the aim is to support people on low wages in London, then subsidise low-rent housing in London rather than transport to and from the home counties.