The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

Another difference between London and other places is that the buses seem to carry more people. The definition of full is quite a bit different.

I have some various childhood traumas associated with busses and bus drivers; so much so I won't travel on a bus outside of London, and if my wife etc are, I'll go on foot or by bike and meet her there.

London I don't mind as you don't ever have to communicate with the driver.

First.Aspect

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

Another difference between London and other places is that the buses seem to carry more people. The definition of full is quite a bit different.

I have some various childhood traumas associated with busses and bus drivers; so much so I won't travel on a bus outside of London, and if my wife etc are, I'll go on foot or by bike and meet her there.

London I don't mind as you don't ever have to communicate with the driver.

That sounds like a significant obstacle to selling your car.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

Another difference between London and other places is that the buses seem to carry more people. The definition of full is quite a bit different.

I have some various childhood traumas associated with busses and bus drivers; so much so I won't travel on a bus outside of London, and if my wife etc are, I'll go on foot or by bike and meet her there.

London I don't mind as you don't ever have to communicate with the driver.

That sounds like a significant obstacle to selling your car.

Why? No bus route is un-cyclable.

super_davo

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

Another difference between London and other places is that the buses seem to carry more people. The definition of full is quite a bit different.

I have some various childhood traumas associated with busses and bus drivers; so much so I won't travel on a bus outside of London, and if my wife etc are, I'll go on foot or by bike and meet her there.

London I don't mind as you don't ever have to communicate with the driver.

That sounds like a significant obstacle to selling your car.

Why? No bus route is un-cyclable.

Except if you need to take your kid. Or you want to take a train first and you can't take a bike on the train. I ride a bike, but take a lot of buses.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

Another difference between London and other places is that the buses seem to carry more people. The definition of full is quite a bit different.

I have some various childhood traumas associated with busses and bus drivers; so much so I won't travel on a bus outside of London, and if my wife etc are, I'll go on foot or by bike and meet her there.

London I don't mind as you don't ever have to communicate with the driver.

That sounds like a significant obstacle to selling your car.

Why? No bus route is un-cyclable.

Except if you need to take your kid. Or you want to take a train first and you can't take a bike on the train. I ride a bike, but take a lot of buses.

Can go on the back?

Genuinely, I’ve never been found using a car because I didn’t use a bus.

London busses are useful but in my experience, outside of it, much less so.

First.Aspect

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

I mean it's changed dramatically in London in 10 years. Oddly I think hire bikes are the biggest factor in this.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

I mean it's changed dramatically in London in 10 years. Oddly I think hire bikes are the biggest factor in this.

That and I think the bombings sent a lot of people on the bike?

focuszing723

TheBigBean said:

Another difference between London and other places is that the buses seem to carry more people. The definition of full is quite a bit different.

The buses for the park and ride in Bath are always very full. It does attract a lot of
tourists though. I think it works very well there.

Park and ride with lots of charging point around Cities and Towns would be great.

With the demise of the high street will there be such a demand for Town and City travel in the future, especially with the progression of working from home?

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

super_davo

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

I mean it's changed dramatically in London in 10 years. Oddly I think hire bikes are the biggest factor in this.

That and I think the bombings sent a lot of people on the bike?

Yep, Central London shows that statements like "the UK is a cycle hating culture" are b******. There was the 7/7 bomb, the hire bikes, the infrastructure, the fact that once you get past a certain threshold barriers drop away.

I've seen the same thing happening elsewhere; where I used to live in Chelmsford there is super impressive cycling storage and the number of bikes parked daily is in the thousands. In Greater Manchester cycling also seems to be greatly increasing in use and I can see it reaching that crucial tipping point where its the most normal, easiest way of getting from A to B in the next few years given current trajectories.

This "enlightenment" is certainly not universally spread round the country. But I would hope that within a forum full of cyclists we'd have people prepared to challenge where it's not.

rick_chasey

Sure.

Round here a journey to the other side of town is either 2 very slow busses, a 20-40 minute car ride (they're not allowed near the centre so they have to go around), depending on traffic, or a 15 min bike ride.

TheBigBean

There probably has been some change. You do now see signs telling drivers to not overtake cyclists. But I still find it all pretty irritating. Cars still pull out in front of bikes on a regular basis, pedestrians never look, some cyclists forget that you drive on the left in the UK, the roads make it feel like Paris-Roubaix etc.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

super_davo

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

I think you need to get out of your bubble....

Long way to go to break car dominance and for cyclists to become a major mass transport in the UK but it is possible, as London clearly demonstrates, with other cities somewhere along that transition.

First.Aspect

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

I think you need to get out of your bubble....

Long way to go to break car dominance and for cyclists to become a major mass transport in the UK but it is possible, as London clearly demonstrates, with other cities somewhere along that transition.

Londoner talking about a bubble. Nice.

Look, London, Cambridge, Bristol and Oxford are more and more cycle friendly than they used to be, which is great, and more and more people cycle. But my bubble includes everywhere else. Basically, the weather is bad up north and/or there are hills bigger than the Col du Richmonde. For whatever reason, there are a fraction of the number of people who commute by bike in most other places, the roads are less friendly and people are less used to what to do around bikes. Since London hasn't had frost since about 2009, the roads are better there on the whole as well.

In Scotland, you also have "Scottish man" to deal with, which is a sub species of h o m o sapien that stopped evolving about 75000 years ago. Scottish man is unable to give an inch, and considers any criticism of driving skills to be the equivalent of killing everywoman and child in his clan.

super_davo

FWIW I'm in rural Essex, with parents in Greater Manchester and in laws in Fife and I've also worked a lot in central belt Scotland. I know how car dominated most of the UK is.

It was a properly tongue in cheek comment referencing your ULEZ arguments, and calling out that even here, change is possible.

pangolin

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

I think you need to get out of your bubble....

Long way to go to break car dominance and for cyclists to become a major mass transport in the UK but it is possible, as London clearly demonstrates, with other cities somewhere along that transition.

Londoner talking about a bubble. Nice.

Look, London, Cambridge, Bristol and Oxford are more and more cycle friendly than they used to be, which is great, and more and more people cycle. But my bubble includes everywhere else. Basically, the weather is bad up north and/or there are hills bigger than the Col du Richmonde. For whatever reason, there are a fraction of the number of people who commute by bike in most other places, the roads are less friendly and people are less used to what to do around bikes. Since London hasn't had frost since about 2009, the roads are better there on the whole as well.

In Scotland, you also have "Scottish man" to deal with, which is a sub species of h o m o sapien that stopped evolving about 75000 years ago. Scottish man is unable to give an inch, and considers any criticism of driving skills to be the equivalent of killing everywoman and child in his clan.

Sorry you don't get a monopoly on bellends in cars.

Nor rain, it is the entire west side of the UK that is wet, not just Scotland.

And the roads in Bristol are dreadful, much like a lot of the UK.

For all you go on about bubbles you do seem to be assuming most places south of Hadrian's wall are basically London.

pinno

English bloke who's grammar is terrible...

'Bristol and Oxford are more and more cycle friendly...'

'...have become'?

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas,

Good that you recognise to some extent that this is really only a solution for cities - and probably the central/inner bits of the larger of larger ones. For everyone else, its business as usual. And when you talk of this ever increasing urbanisation, don't forget there are a lot of people live in what might be classed as urban because they are in towns, but those towns simply aren't large enough to need or justify the sort of public transport 'solutions' that you propose.

Stevo_666

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

I think you need to get out of your bubble....

Long way to go to break car dominance and for cyclists to become a major mass transport in the UK but it is possible, as London clearly demonstrates, with other cities somewhere along that transition.

See my post above - maybe in the centre of the other big cities, but for the whole of the UK? No chance.

pinno

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas,

Good that you recognise to some extent that this is really only a solution for cities - and probably the central/inner bits of the larger of larger ones. For everyone else, its business as usual. And when you talk of this ever increasing urbanisation, don't forget there are a lot of people live in what might be classed as urban because they are in towns, but those towns simply aren't large enough to need or justify the sort of public transport 'solutions' that you propose.

That concept may be beyond Rick.

First.Aspect

pinno said:

English bloke who's grammar is terrible...

'Bristol and Oxford are more and more cycle friendly...'

'...have become'?

Fair.

Stevo_666

pinno said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas,

Good that you recognise to some extent that this is really only a solution for cities - and probably the central/inner bits of the larger of larger ones. For everyone else, its business as usual. And when you talk of this ever increasing urbanisation, don't forget there are a lot of people live in what might be classed as urban because they are in towns, but those towns simply aren't large enough to need or justify the sort of public transport 'solutions' that you propose.

That concept may be beyond Rick.

I worry that one day in the dim and distant future, his eyesight may be damaged by an enormous flash of the blindingly obvious.

First.Aspect

pangolin said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

I think you need to get out of your bubble....

Long way to go to break car dominance and for cyclists to become a major mass transport in the UK but it is possible, as London clearly demonstrates, with other cities somewhere along that transition.

Londoner talking about a bubble. Nice.

Look, London, Cambridge, Bristol and Oxford are more and more cycle friendly than they used to be, which is great, and more and more people cycle. But my bubble includes everywhere else. Basically, the weather is bad up north and/or there are hills bigger than the Col du Richmonde. For whatever reason, there are a fraction of the number of people who commute by bike in most other places, the roads are less friendly and people are less used to what to do around bikes. Since London hasn't had frost since about 2009, the roads are better there on the whole as well.

In Scotland, you also have "Scottish man" to deal with, which is a sub species of h o m o sapien that stopped evolving about 75000 years ago. Scottish man is unable to give an inch, and considers any criticism of driving skills to be the equivalent of killing everywoman and child in his clan.

Sorry you don't get a monopoly on bellends in cars.

Nor rain, it is the entire west side of the UK that is wet, not just Scotland.

And the roads in Bristol are dreadful, much like a lot of the UK.

For all you go on about bubbles you do seem to be assuming most places south of Hadrian's wall are basically London.

Well I've been in Manchester, Leeds, Exeter, Plymouth, Glasgow and Edinburgh in the last year or so. Oh, Sheffield and York as well.

All seem to have fewer cyclists than Oxford did 30 years ago. So there do seem to be regional variations.

super_davo

Stevo_666 said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

super_davo said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Trams are not the solution in a day of electric buses. Unless you want to make things more expensive, dangerous and incur a decade of inconvenience during construction.

Trams carry a lot more people. The (electric) bus I was on yesterday only had seating in the rear two thirds. Also, due to the batteries, the seating is set really high leavng me getting thrown around and feeling a bit travel sick. Horses for courses really, trams / light rail for the main routes and buses for the spurs with lower demand. With both they tend to be significantly better when on their own dedicated infrastructure rather than sharing roads with other modes.

Also, as for the comment above that trams are a bad idea around cyclists, a lot of cities where cycling is a popular means of transport also have extensive tram networks.

Trolley busses don't have (large) batteries.

And seriously, you have to be realistic about the UK. It is a cycle hating culture like the US and Aus/NZ. That's a real distinction between us and other places that have things that work quite well around cycling, and nothing is going to change that in out lifetimes.

You've not been to London in the last 10 years, have you?

Can even happen here.

Yes, but I didn't like it.

Sorry whats the "it"? Trams?

Sure, it's not exactly difficult from an engineering perspective. I don't really understand the enthusiasm for something that's slow, expensive to build and will cause disruption to build for a couple of decades. When there's an easier alternative with fewer downsides.

But knock yourselves out.

Trams in the Netherlands are great. Good value over the life-cycle of the tram too.

Now there's a country with extremely high density (double that of the UK) who moved from an entirely car orientated transport model to one where car driving only really dominates between urban areas and in rural areas, and even then there is pretty good use of public transport (though confidence has been significantly eroded by major lack of train investment, leading to a thoroughly unreliable service).

That was a conscious decision made by local and national government.

So I just don't buy the argument it's too hard to do etc. That's fatalistic nonsense.

Uh huh. Its doable, but there's no will here to do it and I'm afraid we are a small minority.

I think you need to get out of your bubble....

Long way to go to break car dominance and for cyclists to become a major mass transport in the UK but it is possible, as London clearly demonstrates, with other cities somewhere along that transition.

See my post above - maybe in the centre of the other big cities, but for the whole of the UK? No chance.

Cycling would be part of the transport picture, because we've made it easier, faster, better than the alternative e.g. getting stuck in a traffic jam, paying for parking, having to walk from parking outside the centre to where they need to be etc.

Some people will never get out of their cars, their choice.

I think the list of medium and large towns where that could and probably should be the case is much larger in the UK than you're giving credit for, it could replace/ reduce a lot of journeys

If cyclists don't aspire for that... who else will?

pinno

Our local authority only provide buses for rural children.
Even though the town buses are very reasonably priced (Young Scot card is available to all 18 and under for bigger discounts), many many parents take the kids to school by car.
The secondary school is like Piccadilly Circus Sauchiehall Street in the morning and afternoon.
Environmentally speaking, it's absolutely bonkers.

First.Aspect

We do see some school minivans, but in some areas, our local authority provide taxis for rural kids. Which does not seem much better than, I don't know, a car.

Can only assume the SNP has a lot of members who are minicab drivers.