ukclique > railway

Roland Perry (27.08.2017, 19:04)
"A NEW 41m railway station has been branded a 'white elephant' less
than a year after it opened - as figures show it was used by barely a
third of the expected number of passengers."

Marc Van Dyck (27.08.2017, 19:57)
Roland Perry explained on 27/08/2017 :
> "A NEW 41m railway station has been branded a 'white elephant' less than a
> year after it opened - as figures show it was used by barely a third of the
> expected number of passengers."
>


As is the tram going over there too, it seems. I have been there for
a few days last week and never saw more than 10-15 people on any tram
that crossed my way. Meanwhile, the buses were packed to capacity.
Why's that ?
BevanPrice (27.08.2017, 22:55)
On 27/08/2017 17:04, Roland Perry wrote:
> "A NEW £41m railway station has been branded a 'white elephant' less
> than a year after it opened - as figures show it was used by barely a
> third of the expected number of passengers."
>


A complete lack of comprehension about people by the journalists &
politicians.

It can take years for people to change their travel habits. I would
regard an increase from zero to 4000+ per week as a promising start for
a new station; anyone who expected 10000+ passengers per week to
suddenly materialise must be living in some kind of dreamland.

Yes - more needs to be done to stop gross over-runs of construction
costs, but it will probably be 5 - 10 years before we can really assess
whether a new station is a "success" or "failure".
Scott (27.08.2017, 23:09)
On Sun, 27 Aug 2017 20:55:09 +0100, BevanPrice
<bevanprice666> wrote:

>On 27/08/2017 17:04, Roland Perry wrote:
>A complete lack of comprehension about people by the journalists &
>politicians.
>It can take years for people to change their travel habits. I would
>regard an increase from zero to 4000+ per week as a promising start for
>a new station; anyone who expected 10000+ passengers per week to
>suddenly materialise must be living in some kind of dreamland.
>Yes - more needs to be done to stop gross over-runs of construction
>costs, but it will probably be 5 - 10 years before we can really assess
>whether a new station is a "success" or "failure".

Though is it not the case most other (re)openings in Scotland have
exceeded forecasts? I don't know about timescales thought - whether
this is comparing like with like.
Certes (27.08.2017, 23:17)
On 27/08/17 17:57, Marc Van Dyck wrote:
> Roland Perry explained on 27/08/2017 :
> As is the tram going over there too, it seems. I have been there for
> a few days last week and never saw more than 10-15 people on any tram
> that crossed my way. Meanwhile, the buses were packed to capacity.
> Why's that ?


There's still a lot of local resentment at spending money we didn't have
on years of disruption, for a vehicle that has fewer seats than a double
decker and can serve only a tiny fraction of the destinations.

The tram runs between the city centre and the airport, but regular
travellers know that bus 100 is faster and cheaper for that journey.
Scott (27.08.2017, 23:22)
On Sun, 27 Aug 2017 21:17:23 +0100, Certes <none> wrote:

>On 27/08/17 17:57, Marc Van Dyck wrote:
>There's still a lot of local resentment at spending money we didn't have
>on years of disruption, for a vehicle that has fewer seats than a double
>decker and can serve only a tiny fraction of the destinations.
>The tram runs between the city centre and the airport, but regular
>travellers know that bus 100 is faster and cheaper for that journey.


I'm resentful the money was spend in Edinburgh when it could have been
better spent in Glasgow.
R. Mark Clayton (27.08.2017, 23:24)
On Sunday, 27 August 2017 17:57:40 UTC+1, Marc Van Dyck wrote:
> Roland Perry explained on 27/08/2017 :
> > "A NEW £41m railway station has been branded a 'white elephant' less than a
> > year after it opened - as figures show it was used by barely a third ofthe
> > expected number of passengers."
> >


The whole Edinburgh tram project was a total fiasco from start to finish and is still badly run at a huge loss (small operating profit, but nearly a billion in debt).

> As is the tram going over there too, it seems. I have been there for
> a few days last week and never saw more than 10-15 people on any tram
> that crossed my way. Meanwhile, the buses were packed to capacity.
> Why's that ?


Easy £5 surcharge price gouge to go to the airport on the tram. Arriving tourists may pay it - locals and those who have sussed it out while staying rarely do.
Graeme Wall (27.08.2017, 23:25)
On 27/08/2017 21:22, Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2017 21:17:23 +0100, Certes <none> wrote:
> I'm resentful the money was spend in Edinburgh when it could have been
> better spent in Glasgow.


I get the impression that some Edinbuggers are resentful the money
wasn't spent in Glasgow…
Roland Perry (28.08.2017, 10:17)
In message <onv7qi$oum$1>, at 20:55:09 on Sun, 27 Aug
2017, BevanPrice <bevanprice666> remarked:

>A complete lack of comprehension about people by the journalists &
>politicians.
>It can take years for people to change their travel habits. I would
>regard an increase from zero to 4000+ per week as a promising start for
>a new station; anyone who expected 10000+ passengers per week to
>suddenly materialise must be living in some kind of dreamland.


Unless the expectation it is being measured against was produced by the
railways, and for its first year of operation.

>Yes - more needs to be done to stop gross over-runs of construction
>costs, but it will probably be 5 - 10 years before we can really assess
>whether a new station is a "success" or "failure".


East Midlands Parkway had a shaky start too, and four years after
opening was also running at a third of its predicted patronage.

It's be interesting to see how Cambridge North performs.

I have an idea that these stations are more "fantasy football" exercises
to boost the ego of local politicians (who never use trains anyway)
rather than something the travelling public ever really wanted.
Roland Perry (28.08.2017, 10:18)
In message <vk96qch7a2vcg0364oh9naf38ld1hpjeic>, at 21:09:27 on
Sun, 27 Aug 2017, Scott <newsgroups> remarked:

>Though is it not the case most other (re)openings in Scotland have
>exceeded forecasts? I don't know about timescales thought - whether
>this is comparing like with like.


What other stations on *existing* lines have been re-opened (if we want
to compare like with like)?
Lew 1 (28.08.2017, 11:41)
Roland Perry <roland> wrote:
> In message <vk96qch7a2vcg0364oh9naf38ld1hpjeic>, at 21:09:27 on
> Sun, 27 Aug 2017, Scott <newsgroups> remarked:
> What other stations on *existing* lines have been re-opened (if we want
> to compare like with like)?


When Luton Airport Parkway opened it was like a ghost station. The
escalators would run in slow-mode until they detected a passenger, and it
was extremely rare to arrive to find them already at full-pelt from
previous passengers.

Granted, in the station's early days the airport link buses still left from
Luton Town station, but even when they transferred it wasn't busy.

It's now so busy that the design of a cramped bank of 4 escalators and a
single, small (unreliable) lift to each platform looks like a mistake.

Hopefully any development of a rail link to the airport will fix these
issues.

Lew
Scott (28.08.2017, 11:46)
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:18:47 +0100, Roland Perry <roland>
wrote:

>In message <vk96qch7a2vcg0364oh9naf38ld1hpjeic>, at 21:09:27 on
>Sun, 27 Aug 2017, Scott <newsgroups> remarked:
>What other stations on *existing* lines have been re-opened (if we want
>to compare like with like)?


I suspect you are right, which is why I was hesitant in making the
direct comparison. The 'projects' seem to have surpassed
expectations, at least on Stirling-Alloa and the Borders. I'm not
sure about Airdrie-Bathgate but this has proved invaluable as a
diversionary route.
Roland Perry (28.08.2017, 13:16)
In message <1377167398.525601951.475720.email-nowhere.com>,
at 08:41:02 on Mon, 28 Aug 2017, Lew 1 <email> remarked:

>>> Though is it not the case most other (re)openings in Scotland have
>>> exceeded forecasts? I don't know about timescales thought - whether
>>> this is comparing like with like.

>> What other stations on *existing* lines have been re-opened (if we want
>> to compare like with like)?

>When Luton Airport Parkway opened it was like a ghost station.


Not in Scotland, though.

>The escalators would run in slow-mode until they detected a passenger,
>and it was extremely rare to arrive to find them already at full-pelt
>from previous passengers.
>Granted, in the station's early days the airport link buses still left from
>Luton Town station, but even when they transferred it wasn't busy.
>It's now so busy that the design of a cramped bank of 4 escalators and a
>single, small (unreliable) lift to each platform looks like a mistake.
>Hopefully any development of a rail link to the airport will fix these
>issues.


The planned people-mover station has its own unique set of suboptimal
passenger movement facilities.
Graeme (28.08.2017, 14:58)
On Monday, 28 August 2017 08:22:00 UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
> What other stations on *existing* lines have been re-opened (if we want
> to compare like with like)?


Laurencekirk was re-opened in May 2009.

Passenger figure are much higher than forecast in the business case.
Roland Perry (28.08.2017, 15:37)
In message <431a5fa9-aaa6-419c-83d9-d4f8e62954a9>, at
04:58:54 on Mon, 28 Aug 2017, Graeme <graeme.b.price>
remarked:
>On Monday, 28 August 2017 08:22:00 UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
>> What other stations on *existing* lines have been re-opened (if we want
>> to compare like with like)?

>Laurencekirk was re-opened in May 2009.
>Passenger figure are much higher than forecast in the business case.


Must be partly the *re*opening versus *opening* effect.

Very cheap too, at only 3m.

Similar Threads