More QE on the way?

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

its got nowt on clapham junction.......


Clapham Junction is reportedly Europe's busiest station in terms of through daily rail traffic.
The station is situated in the south west London borough of Wandsworth and as a result many routes from London's two busiest stations – Waterloo and Victoria – pass through its platforms.
It is estimated that each day about 2,000 trains pass through Clapham Junction, while during peak times 180 trains reportedly pass through the station each hour, 117 of which stop. All services from Waterloo are operated by South West Trains while many from Victoria are catered to by Southern and Gatwick Express.

Seems it has. You have confused trains passing through with trains stopping and unloading.

All trains stop and unload / load in Mumbai Central Station.

No train can simply rail through. It's the end of the line.

Mumbai trains themselves are designed to hold 1,700 passengers (our average is 600). However, they hold up to 3 times that at peak time.

It's not simply the amount of trains passing throught he station, it's the footfall the station serves too.

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

great we can leave it at......

cities that don't have a subway able to transport over a billion passengers a year...for instance mumbai... should not be used as an example of how bad traffic is if the population goes up

You really do need to do some research.

Does it matter if the trains run underground or overground? What difference does it make?

Mumbai's train network carries over 2.5 billion passengers a year.

I don't see your point that if it's overground instead of underground it can't be compared. To be honest, I doubt you have any idea either if your argument has amounted to this nonsense.

lisyloo

What's the difference between a 2D space and a 3d space?
Are you kidding asking that question?

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You really do need to do some research.

Does it matter if the trains run underground or overground? What difference does it make?

Mumbai's train network carries over 2.5 billion passengers a year.

I don't see your point that if it's overground instead of underground it can't be compared. To be honest, I doubt you have any idea either if your argument has amounted to this nonsense.

you were crying that mumbai traffic is too much to bear and that the surface trains are packed

well if they build a metro like most big cities, that metro would take up some 2 billion passenger journeys for a city with that big a population. That means a lot less traffic


also i dont think you understood my car argument, I reckon more trips in London are done by car than by the rails (tube and surface). I have lived in London over 25 years and its definitely true for me and most people I know. India is still very poor and with only ~20 cars per 1,000 people that means that the rails and buses have to take a lot of the strain of public transport whereas in the uk the cars take most of that strain. So as the indians get richer and build roads for cars and a tube system their traffic problems will be less of an issue. in time they will also do more national air travail to alleviate some rail stress. eg how millions fly from Edinburgh to heathrow or Manchester to Heathrow


but who cares, you should retract your points about mumbai traffic chaos as its got nothing to do with us. instead you should say you think london is to dense and you would like to see a mass migration out of London to the rest of the country