ospam (Larry Roll K3LT) wrote in
:

In article , Alun
writes:

I think you should build the freeways, but mass transit should be
developped much more as well. I used to commute 23 miles each way into
London by train. I am now 27 miles by road from downtown Washington DC,
but I am 15 miles from the nearest station!!

As long as I have to drive half way there to get to the station I'm
going to drive all the way there. A system where the trains only run
about 15 miles out from the middle of downtown is basically hopelessly
crippled by European standards, and doesn't really count as 'available'
to most people.

When most of the commuters live way, way beyond the end of the line it
can never live up to it's potential. Sure, we are more spread out in
America, but all that should mean is that I may have to drive across
town to the station. It should never mean that I have to drive to
another town 15 miles away to catch a commuter train, but that's how it
is now, and needless to say, I don't do it.

Alun:

The situation you describe pretty much sums up the limitations that
geography imposes on public transit systems. A partial solution would
be to utilize demand-
response systems whereby busses travelling flexible routes on flexible
schedules can pick up commuters at their door, and transfer them to the
nearest fixed-route terminal. Once demand patterns are established,
the system can be re-scheduled at will to ensure maximum transit
vehicle utilization without inconveniencing passenger scheduling. This
is done all the time in my own line of work, which is Paratransit
operations. The concept can be easily overlayed on any other route
structure, and there would be the advantage that most, if not all, of
the passengers would be able-bodied, and there would be no time lost
loading and securing wheelchairs or providing assistance to slow-moving
people who have difficulty in boarding the bus. The problem, of
course, is that adding such a service would come at a high cost. Would
most commuters be willing to pay the price of being to leave their cars
home? A fare structure which required the rider to pay the full,
non-subsidized cost of the demand-response portion of his transit
service would mean forking over a fare of up to $10-15 for that portion
of the ride. Of course, some commuters pay that much just to park
their automobiles for the day. OTOH, they would not have the option of
making a trip to Home Depot on the way home.

The best solution would probably to simply arrange it so that more
people were able to work closer to where they live. Another is to
adopt the European paradigm of establishing communities with higher
population density in residential areas. That would mean more
townhouses and condominium apartment complexes, and fewer single-family
homes surrounded by acres of grass and concrete. When more people live
closer together, it becomes much more cost-effective to provide mass
transit.

73 de Larry, K3LT



I think what's missing is the political will to spend the money. Busses
are no solution. They have to use the same roads as the cars, so by the
time they have stopped to pick up and set down passengers they don't even
have a fighting chance to make the trip in the same time as a car, even
with HOV lanes. We have bus service, but it is rush hour only. It will be
a cold day in you know where before I ride the bus.

If you build the subway lines only half way to the suburbs, it becomes
easy to think they would not get enough passengers if extended further, as
they are already under-used. Of course they are under-used when they don't
go far enough to get you home. What else should anyone expect?

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message hlink.net...

It's a small jump from Socialist to Communist Dave. My life experience
tells me they are one and the same.

Dan,

You may find it useful to use the word "collectivist" as a general
term for what you're discussing. Meaning any system that values the
"collective" over the individual, and thereby denies individual rights
- and responsibilities.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
hlink.net...

It's a small jump from Socialist to Communist Dave. My life experience
tells me they are one and the same.

Dan,

You may find it useful to use the word "collectivist" as a general
term for what you're discussing. Meaning any system that values the
"collective" over the individual, and thereby denies individual rights
- and responsibilities.

73 de Jim, N2EY

No, sounds too pc to me Jim. I'll stick with my statement.

Dan/W4NTI