In article ,
T i m wrote:
With luck you'll end up with better underground and overground links.

Well I suppose we could .. (not that I use them .. I avoid public
transport wherever possible as I can't avoid the cost nor time). Given
the choice I'd rather take the motorcycle, cycle or walk! (possibly a
reaction to 10 years commuting into the City) ;-(

Ok - but better public transport removes traffic from the roads, so
everyone wins.

Well, *some* traffic of course but I can't see us getting such in my
lifetime?

For every new housing estate they build there is more congestion. What
they don't seem to do is put the services / transport in FIRST and
once the buildings are up they are reluctant to knock them down to put
train lines in?

But this is exactly what they'll do for the olympic site. The transport
links will be there for the event.

Most housing developments are basically private money these days, so
they're not going to provide communal services unless forced to.

It is my belief that in other countries if they want to build a train
lkine from A to B they draw a straight line and build it, knocking
down whatever is in the way (within reason). Over here we twist and
turn around a cottage here and farmyard there, forcing the line to be
'poor' for time eternal?

Hardly - most railway lines were built under acts of parliament which
gave pretty extreme powers. But in the old days they tended to link just
about every town they could, so weren't designed for high speed inter city
use. The obvious exception is the east coast route which is pretty
straight for many miles. But then the terrain allowed it.

I must admit I'm not a train 'fan' (never have been), always had my
own transport from 17 and would rather 'endure' driving from say here
(London) to my girlfriend in Crewe by Morry Minor van than all the
cost / aggro of going by train (and we had some transport once we got
there).

It depends. I obviously like my cars, but for travelling around London,
public transport is just so much faster, and of course you don't have to
park. I realise many other cities are not so well off.

For me the only time public transport makes sense is if we (the
family) are on one of our motorcycle / camping / touring holidays and
we wan't to out as tourists for the day then we might get the bus /
train / taxi.

1) Because they are on time
2) Because they are clean
3) Because they are empty
4) It means we don't have to wear leathers ;-)

I would rather go into the City by motorbike in spite of the gear /
traffic / stress / parking because I could start and leave on time
(when I wanted) and could at least sit down for the entire journey ;-)

Of course I don't often commute by PT. So my comments are mainly about off
peak. Although even when I do use it to commute, I'm not travelling into
town like everyone else. ;-)

The only way I see for an improvement on our local line is to

Run more trains (not easy I'm told).

Make the trains longer (some platforms too short)

Get people to work / time shift (spead the load through the day)

Get people to consider working locally?

"Ah but we get a better quality of life and can buy a bigger house if
we live in the sticks" .. yes, if you count 4 hours commuting a day
and the cost of that to you / your family/ the environment 'better' ?

And those tend to be the ones who complain the most about PT. They want a
large house in some quiet village but expect to drive through London to
get to work, because the trains are so crowded and sometimes a couple of
minutes late. But of course would complain long and hard if their village
became a rat run...

I'd rather work locally for 20k than in the 'City' for 30 ..

I consider travelling part of my working day. So since these already are
far too long, prefer to live within a maximum of one hour each way.

--
*I'm planning to be spontaneous tomorrow *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.