As usual the obvious is missed

See

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

As usual the obvious is missed - use a bike more for those shorter journeys...
so much for "creative ways"!

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
**$om $

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

Response to dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

As usual the obvious is missed - use a bike more for those shorter journeys...
so much for "creative ways"!

As usual indeed. And it includes:

___
VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS

Speed limits are adjusted depending on traffic volumes and weather in
order to smooth flow, cut accidents and so reduce congestion... It works
by reducing heavy braking, stopping cars bunching together and so forming
jams... Results from the M25 have been positive, reporting a cut in
serious accidents of 10-20%...
___

So not only do there seem to be reasons other than safety for speed
limits, but they actually seem to work! Now, *that* can't be right...


Also from yesterday, there's:
URL:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4043803.stm

"Agency 'slow tackling jam misery'"

That one has a "Have Your Say" link. ;-)


--
Mark, UK.
We hope to hear him swear, we love to hear him squeak,
We like to see him biting fingers in his horny beak.

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
See

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

As usual the obvious is missed - use a bike more for those shorter journeys...
so much for "creative ways"!

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
**$om $

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--



There's a bit in Martin Amis' "London Fields" where one of the
characters (Guy), driving back from hospital, complains about the
traffic. His wife rounds on him, "How many times? You *are* the traffic."

I saw there was nothing in the NAO report that suggested it might
actually be drivers' fault for making unnecessary journeys or living too
far from work (IIRC the average commute distance has doubled in the last
10 years, or something like that; my own employer used to require
staff to live within 12 miles of work to get a staff mortgage and now
only requires they live within 1.5 hours, ffs).

Gonzalez wrote:


To be fair it almost exclusively looks at methods of cutting
congestion on motorways. Few journeys that use motorways could
reasonably be expected to be transferred to bicycle.

I transferred my 2 junctions on the M3 to a 15 mile bike commute, and I
know of a lot of my collegues who could aviod the one junction on the
motorway by using a bike with much less distance than I did.

In urban areas a lot of traffic on Motorways will be local traffic, some
of which could use a bike.

--chris

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers vaguely muttered something like ...
See

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

As usual the obvious is missed - use a bike more for those shorter
journeys... so much for "creative ways"!

Probably 'cos they were talking about major routes rather than 'normal'
cycling routes, which suggests they were on about longer journeys, though I
haven't read the report, only the link you posted ....

"Congestion on England's trunk roads and motorways could be cut with a
little creative thinking, according to a new report."



--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules !!!
"A tosser is a tosser, no matter what mode of transport they're using."

"Mark McN" wrote in message
T...
Response to dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

As usual the obvious is missed - use a bike more for those shorter
journeys...
so much for "creative ways"!

As usual indeed. And it includes:

___
VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS

Speed limits are adjusted depending on traffic volumes and weather in
order to smooth flow, cut accidents and so reduce congestion... It works
by reducing heavy braking, stopping cars bunching together and so forming
jams... Results from the M25 have been positive, reporting a cut in
serious accidents of 10-20%...
___

So not only do there seem to be reasons other than safety for speed
limits, but they actually seem to work! Now, *that* can't be right...


Oh it can - and indeed this system should be rolled out across the entire
motorway network IMV

Shame its brought into disrepute by some of the less well thought out limit
schemes ;-)

Zog The Undeniable wrote:
dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:

See

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

As usual the obvious is missed - use a bike more for those shorter
journeys...
so much for "creative ways"!

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
**$om $

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is
switched off--



There's a bit in Martin Amis' "London Fields" where one of the
characters (Guy), driving back from hospital, complains about the
traffic. His wife rounds on him, "How many times? You *are* the traffic."

I saw there was nothing in the NAO report that suggested it might
actually be drivers' fault for making unnecessary journeys or living too
far from work (IIRC the average commute distance has doubled in the last
10 years, or something like that; my own employer used to require staff
to live within 12 miles of work to get a staff mortgage and now only
requires they live within 1.5 hours, ffs).

I certainly don't like your phrase 'living too far from work'. Two
years ago I was made redundant from a job that was 4.5 miles from home,
I found another job after three weeks but it was 47 miles from home. I
was unemployed so I accepted it. No way would I consider moving to the
area, it turned out to be a crap job and I left after 12 months for a
job 37 miles from home. This was a good job and we did talk about moving
closer.Unfortunately the company made me redundant after 8 months so
again I am thankful that I didn't move closer to my workplace. Now I am
4.5 miles away again and don't use my car to travel to work. It
certainly was my fault for living too far from work, I chose to accept
those job offers but the alternative would have been £42/week Job
Seekers Allowance which does not cover my outgoings, my fault but not an
option I am afraid. If I had moved to Chesterfield I would be stuck in a
crap job which would have been no good for my health. If we had moved to
York/Taddie I would now be doing a long commute, probably to Leeds where
I am now. For some of us it is not easy to find suitable jobs in our
local area, thats just the way it is, this IS NOT OUR FAULT. I suspect
your quote refers to folk who have chosen to live in a rural area, some
distance from their jobs, but for some of us our jobs have been taken
away from us and moving home to follow work is not an option so we must
commute.

"dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers" wrote in
message ...
See

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4044803.stm

"Creative ways to beat congestion"

I normally drive to work earlyish avoiding congestion and it takes about 10
minutes. However, last week I left home during the rush(!) hour and it took
45 minutes.
To do it once was mind bogglingly frustrating but I mused that many of my
fellow frustratees probably do it every day, looking around most of the
cars(including mine) had only one occupant.
They must be mad. I'd have long ago kicked the car into touch and got on me
bike rather than face that situation every day (had I realised beforehand
the extent of the problem I'd have cycled that day).

And public transport in it's existing form is no solution as the buses, with
the exception of short bus lanes, were stuck in the same jams.

Pete

"MSeries" wrote in message
...

I certainly don't like your phrase 'living too far from work'. Two years
ago I was made redundant from a job that was 4.5 miles from home, I found
another job after three weeks but it was 47 miles from home. I was
unemployed so I accepted it. No way would I consider moving to the area,
it turned out to be a crap job and I left after 12 months for a job 37
miles from home. This was a good job and we did talk about moving
closer.Unfortunately the company made me redundant after 8 months so again
I am thankful that I didn't move closer to my workplace. Now I am 4.5
miles away again and don't use my car to travel to work. It certainly was
my fault for living too far from work, I chose to accept those job offers
but the alternative would have been £42/week Job Seekers Allowance which
does not cover my outgoings, my fault but not an option I am afraid. If I
had moved to Chesterfield I would be stuck in a crap job which would have
been no good for my health. If we had moved to York/Taddie I would now be
doing a long commute, probably to Leeds where I am now. For some of us it
is not easy to find suitable jobs in our local area, thats just the way it
is, this IS NOT OUR FAULT. I suspect your quote refers to folk who have
chosen to live in a rural area, some distance from their jobs, but for
some of us our jobs have been taken away from us and moving home to follow
work is not an option so we must commute.


House prices dictate where we live, I cannot afford to live closer to work,
28 miles each way Houses need to become places to live in and not
investments. This has a big effect on congestion.

A Railman

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:04:43 +0000 (UTC), Chris Gerhard
wrote:

In urban areas a lot of traffic on Motorways will be local traffic, some
of which could use a bike.

There are far too many junctions on British motorways for them to be
considered truly 'long distance' roads. Compare them with French
motorways which seem only to have one junction per major town, and
even that is a fair way out of town.