Forum Topic

Tube running at 90% of 2019 levels in 2022?

Given how unpleasant traveling on the Tube is during peak hours wouldn't it be better if we didn't get back to 100%?  We have an attitude in this country that everything has to run at capacity which leaves us vulnerable when unexpected events occur. Better to have a buffer!

David McLoughlin ● 1962d17 Comments

If people aren't using public transport then there is a good chance they will be driving so it will be good news when the tube is crowded again.

Francis Rowe ● 1962d

Crossrail should be open in the first half of 2022. That should persuade a few people out of their cars and the tube as the travel times are extraordinarily quick (for London!). For instance, Ealing Broadway to Canary Wharf is 25mins. It is at least double that by tube and 1-2 hours by car. There’s a route time calculator here:https://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/It should hopefully and helpfully reduce some traffic passing through Chiswick and the A4 to Heathrow.

Ed Saper ● 1962d

Low levels long-term will result in a large network being reduced in service or closed in parts or you will pay a lot more for traveling. And that willinclude tube and bus The network needs pre-lockdown numbers and even more on top of past levels to keep it operational and where needed upgraded and not downgradedor scrapped  Also means loss of jobs, it is a big network

Julian Pavey ● 1962d

More crowds = more coronavirus. And other viruses.

Claire Moran ● 1962d

We need tourists returning to London to drive public transport passenger numbers up. Pre-pandemic this was 30m + visitors a year.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1962d

Interesting article in today's NY Times about driving and congestion. I particularly liked the bit about congestion being nonlinear as in more cars doesn't cause congestion. The entire transit equation needs to be balanced. Comes down to engineered efficiency I think.https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/upshot/rush-hour-remote-work.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=The%20UpshotGood luck with Crossrail, Ed. Given multi-billion pound overruns and TfL being on borrowed time, that won't end well.

David Lesniak ● 1961d

Huge hold ups at Heathrow, and EU citizens being held at borders, tourists will think twice about coming here. We were never a country with a huge number of tourists. About eight on the world list. Germany was infact infront of us for tourist numbers.

Nicholas Beard ● 1961d

Huge hold ups at Heathrow, and EU citizens being held at borders, tourists will think twice about coming here. We were never a country with a huge number of tourists. About eight on the world list. Germany was infact infront of us for tourist numbers.

Nicholas Beard ● 1961d

>>TfL being on borrowed time<

Gordon McDonald ● 1961d

Well I suppose the tourists will be traveling after morning rush-hour. Crossrail will no doubt make traveling on the Piccadilly line pleasanter as the tourists won't be using that so much.  To reframe my question do we want the Tube to be as crowded during rush-hours as it was?  While we're at it a tourist tax on hotel rooms  of 50P per night  might be a better way of meeting TfL's deficit than encouraging more rush-hour use.

David McLoughlin ● 1961d

Interesting article David. Car congestion is only non linear if the road isn’t at capacity. At a tipping point any extra cars turn congestion into gridlock. But the good news is that if you remove only a small percentage of cars, you get big drops in congestion and travel times. The article gave the example of the Jewish holidays reducing traffic by only a small amount in NY but having a big impact. We see the same at half terms. The entire thrust of the article was that infrastructure planning has been focused on providing capacity at peak times - to make commuters’ journeys suck a bit less. CHR pre-pandemic wasn’t congested 24/7 - mainly during rush hour. If we were to widen CHR into 6 lanes, it wouldn’t be full at all times… at least until induced demand created more car journeys to fill it up!If a % of people work from home and those that do commute are flexible and travel outside peak, then there is more capacity for those with essential jobs, more capacity for those who commute and more road capacity to share with cycle lanes and pavements.

Ed Saper ● 1961d

“I particularly liked the bit about congestion being nonlinear as in more cars doesn't cause congestion.”That’s a misreading of the article. When a road is already congested, adding or subtracting a small amount of traffic makes little difference. A key goal of traffic management is to avoid traffic levels getting to that point through restricting increases in loads. The traffic meters on freeway on ramps in LA are a prime example. Congestion charging or more general load-dependent road pricing does the same.

Tom Pike ● 1961d

very sensible thought.

Colin Jarvis ● 1961d

"We were never a country with a huge number of tourists."You have got to be kidding.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1961d

I think it is roughly 40m visits to the UK, of which 30m go to London.As a country we get a lot fewer visitors than France (80-90m), but as a city, we get about the same as Paris - and half of their visits (15m) are to Disneyland :-)

Ed Saper ● 1961d

Oh good, Tom completely missed the point while, yet again, inferring my comprehension skills aren't what they should be. Interesting I'm never the one contorting "data" but, hey ho, let Tom take his swipes as and when.Take off the blinkers, Tom. The article was a broader view of what influences traffic and capacity.

David Lesniak ● 1960d

Gordon, it's not exactly rocket science to sort out TfL is on perilously shaky ground. Simply read the news and join the dots.Wasn't it just two weeks ago when, in a nail biter, TfL learned of its most recent bail out? Multiple billions of pounds to keep them operational simultaneous to multiple billions of pounds of cost overruns on Crossrail. Yes, let's continue to spend astronomical amounts on commuter trains in the new era of work from home. That'll end well.

David Lesniak ● 1960d