Where is The Green Party?

zagubov

I can remember when it made financial sense to drive your car onto a train and take the motorail between Scotland and the South of England. This still goes on in Europe I believe (for the chronologically-impoverished, imagine an open-topped "le shuttle").

I suspect that to the rest of Europe, it might seem that transport (like housing) isn't one of the things we're particularly expert at in the UK.

Mr_Singleton

jack_pott wrote: »

Because motor transport is too cheap.

Or maybe, public transport is way too expensive?

How many 500? seat trains have I been on that have been pactically empty?

Kite2010

Mr_Singleton wrote: »

Ok I'll bite..... your right there is a (theoretical) time saving using the train but drill down into it and what do we find?

The train line.com is telling me that going tomorrow morning will cost £226.25 or up to £310.50 for a convenient time.

Just think if we both went together at 'a convenient time' Virgin would be relieving us of over £620. The car (albeit slower) would be about £52 each.

For the sake of completeness Ryanair would charge £163.50

No idea where you are getting £310.50 from as an anytime single for London - Glasgow is £182.50, which is valid on any train, available if you just rock up at Euston early one morning. I wonder how much Ryanair would charge for such flexibility, and don't forget to ditch your bottle of water before you go through security

But then only fools use The Train Line :rotfl:

Vast majority of passengers would be booking in advance for that route so only a tiny number would be paying the full £182.50 (which most will probably be claiming it back on business)

Johnmcl7

zagubov wrote: »

I can remember when it made financial sense to drive your car onto a train and take the motorail between Scotland and the South of England. This still goes on in Europe I believe (for the chronologically-impoverished, imagine an open-topped "le shuttle").

I suspect that to the rest of Europe, it might seem that transport (like housing) isn't one of the things we're particularly expert at in the UK.

We used to have motorail up here but it's long gone as is just about everything else. I was looking at an old photo from the 50's when the station was massive as a it was a hub for freight and a large range of passenger services with lines that extended down to the waterside for freight to be moved to and from boats plus some connections to warehouses as well. Now there's just a trickle of DMU's and the only freight is a single intermodal train for Tescos.

The idea of Motorail was great as well, park your car up, hop onto the sleeper and wake up at the other side of the country with your car. With the new diesel 68's just shy of a staggering 4,000bhp it's even more viable than it was particularly combined with the channel tunnel but no, we can't even get the basic sleeper service right.

Johnmcl7

Kite2010 wrote: »

Private transport being cheaper* & faster than public transport shocker!

Although I would like to see you attempting to drive from Central London to the centre of Glasgow in 4 and a bit hours.

It should be a shocker - private transport will always have the advantage of convenience but trains are vastly more efficient and can be significantly faster. With our ageing infrastructure and old trains I get that speed and comfort is out the window but the advantage of not spending any money on the trains or the infrastructure is they should be able to offer very low prices. Instead they charge a premium price for a poor service which makes no sense.

In terms of going to central London, I am booking a trip there and I've got the choice of taking a ten hour train journey costing between £120 to £180 for a discounted fare if I get in early. Or I can take a plane which looks at most will be less than a £50 return, that's on a newish plane as well vs a 45 year old train.

We are getting 'new' rolling stock here though with the 1970's Class 43's that have been dumped by England getting reused here and during their contract will enter 50 years of service. Not to be outdone, Abellio have the 'new' Class 73's dating back to 1960 which have been refurbished which developed a terminal problem with the alternators and are back to the drawing board.

It's a depressing situation anyway but even moreso that people defend it, our trains were leading the world many years ago and sadly we've never really moved on from then. When you see what's possible with current technology we are just so far behind.

Retrogamer

It's similar for me and my work using Scotrail.
Return train ticket to work is just under £9
Cost in fuel is about £6
Train's are often late or cancelled and when they're not you're unlikely to get a seat as they're overcrouded
If i take the train the commute is about 1 hour
If i take the car the commute is about 30 minutes

So car is cheaper, more reliable, comfier and quicker. Where's the incentive to use public transport?

lisyloo

So car is cheaper

I don't think just comparing fuel and ignoring capital costs, mot, servicing, repairs, insurance, breakdown cover etc is a fair comparison (ignoring parking charges, legal insurance, fines, congestion charges).

But in your case I'd agree it's better.
It's dependent on the situation no?

I have a car but we travel by train to central London as we probably can't park near our home for much less than < £50 per day (westminster before you ask and if you're thinking stinking rich then it's a social housing block).

Pennywise

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't think just comparing fuel and ignoring capital costs, mot, servicing, repairs, insurance, breakdown cover etc is a fair comparison

It is if you already own a car and need it for other reasons as those costs are therefore fixed whether you use it for your commute or not.

KeithP

Pennywise wrote: »

It is if you already own a car and need it for other reasons as those costs are therefore fixed whether you use it for your commute or not.

Isn't that bit like saying

"the train was going to make that journey anyway, so the only money an extra passenger should pay is for the extra fuel needed to carry the extra weight of one more person"?

Enterprise_1701C

I refuse to use the buses in our locale, we live in a small town outside a larger one, I don't know the bus fare anymore but I do know the buses are not dependable, they are just as likely to leave early as late, and they are not clean.

Trains are fine, we live 5 minutes walk from a station on a main line, though the fares are a bit steep. If you are going in on your own it is cheaper to take the train than to drive and pay for parking.

That said, I do not drive, I cycle everywhere, and I frequently beat people I know are driving in, although I think I cycle further than I need to through dodging all the potholes.

We have used public transport in many different countries. Hong Kong was good, quick and clean. Paris was actually quite impressive, the idea of double decker trains is a good one. I cannot list all the places we have been but I am pretty sure that they were all cheaper than the UK.

One stand out place for public transport is Madeira island. It relies on buses, nowhere to lay railway lines (even the airport is on a bridge!), but you can be in the middle of nowhere, in the tiniest of tiny hilltop villages, and you will come across a bus stop. Not only that, the buses are regular, punctual, and cheap. If I remember rightly a 60 minute journey cost 3 euros. And they were very busy, whatever time of the day. Set up a bus system like that in this country, cheap and dependable, and that would be extremely popular.