6 ms·

How do you ration limited seats on a train? By charging more at certai times you encourage those who can choose less desirable services to do so.

baroffoos 7y ago
By adding more trains on the route at peek times. "Less desirable services" means taking limited space using cars
- isostatic 7y ago
  Rail lines can take a certain amount per hour (say 32 on the Victoria line). They are already maximum length and maximum capacity, and already leave people behind. Buses are cheaper but slower. Those who aren’t in as much of a hurry can take the bus or walk. With no cost differential people will base it just on time, increasing time taken on the rail service. Same applys on long distance. Sometimes I need to be in London at 9am so will take a more expensive busier peak train. Sometimes I don’t need to be there until the afternoon so I travel on quieter or slower trains, saving money and freeing space for those who do have to be in by 9am.
  - CaptainZapp 7y ago
    Rapid Bus Transit[1] systems seem to be a good way to combine high capacity with (almost) guaranteed transit times and much lower costs than building rail, let alone subway systems. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit
  - tty2300 7y ago
    Add more tracks. We have 8 lane highways but a 4 track train line is unthinkable?
    - luckylion 7y ago
      That might work in the US but it won't in Europe where cities are generally densely packed. You can't just tear down a few rows of houses/dig new tunnles/turn the city into one big construction project to add more space for tracks.
    - isostatic 7y ago
      That's what we're doing with the WCML. Adding two new tracks to the existing 4. Obviously they can't go through the middle of towns - demolishing that many buildings would be unthinkable even without the cost, so they bypass the towns they don't serve (currently half the high speed trains run non stop through places like Harrow, Watford, Hemel, Bletchly and Milton Keynes) Building new tracks (and indeed building new highways), even in the countryside where land is cheap, is very expensive and has massive amounts of opposition. In London, crossrail is adding two new underground tracks to the central line. It's running years behind schedule and costs billions. And underground is crowded too -- there's one point on crossrail where they had a 30cm margin of error between existing tunnels. Free public transport in London would cost £5b a year. This would mean those who travel a lot on expensive services (like city workers on the tube) will be being subsidised by those who don't travel (like people who walk to work in the local school).
- lovemenot 7y ago
  Tokyo underground trains are currently running an interesting campaign to get people onto specific off-peak trains. Such as the 07.31 out of Ikebukuro, and many others. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/01/18/national/tokyo-metro-aims-ease-morning-rush-hour-overcrowding-free-soba-tempura/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/01/18/national/tokyo-... Riders are offered a small reward simply for being on that train. But the size of the reward depends on the size of ridership. More riders, bigger reward to everyone. So there's an appeal to group solidarity.
anigbrowl 7y ago
First come first served works fine. Making poor people wait longer impoverishes them by imposing a significant time cost. There is no particular reason to privilege better-off people on basic services, you are not more important just because you have more money.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  > First come first served works fine. Do you mean first to book in advance? Then people could squat on tickets, taking more than they need. Do you mean first to arrive at the station? Then that's a drag on the economy as workers waste time being at the station early so they can get a seat on a train.
  - iknowstuff 7y ago
    For long distance train journeys, you could have named tickets in that scenario. No squatting. For city trams, subways and buses, it is simply first come (to the stop) first served. The solution is to expand capacity, as the economy is helped when large amounts of people are moved efficiently across the city.
    - closeparen 7y ago
      It's in the nature of public transit to have hard capacity plateaus that take half-century capital projects to break through. You do need a plan for the next few decades.
      - CaptainZapp 7y ago
        You do need a plan for the next few decades. Which is exactly what successfully managed cities do. There's usually something like a master plan that outlines the greater strategy for the next 20 years, or so. Of course there's no expectation that it will be exactly implemented as planned, but is immensely helpful as a general outline and to define the overall strategy of where a city is going with things like housing, population, public and non-public transit, etc.
flukus 7y ago
Is there any evidence that people with flexible schedules choose to jump on peak hour standing room only trains? I rearrange my work schedule to avoid busy times whenever possible.
- mattlondon 7y ago
  I have flexibility in my hours but I am in the busiest trains in the morning usually. Flexible working is not just to miss rush hour IME, it's more than that. E.g. ability to take the odd morning/afternoon for personal reasons, or leaving an hour earlier or later than usual etc without clearing everything with your boss. Trust and personal responsibility etc. You might be thinking about offset-hours rather than flexible hours?
  - wikibob 7y ago
    Sorry, you don't have flex time in the common usage of the term. You simply have a standard professional, non-hourly, job.
- isostatic 7y ago
  > Is there any evidence that people with flexible schedules choose to jump on peak hour standing room only trains? Yes From Upminster into London, the price is the same on the fast train and the district. The district you get a seat, but the fast train you have to squeeze on. People take the busier train. Conversely people take cheaper means of transport. If the coach from Exeter to London was the same price as the train, why would you take the coach (2 hours longer)? You'd end up with an empty coach and a full and standing train (I for one would rather stand than take the coach), rather than a mostly full coach and a mostly full train.
  - flukus 7y ago
    > People take the busier train. Neither of those examples are comparing like for like, they're comparing two different services, not the same service at different times. Congestion pricing on trains is supposed to level out the distribution of travelers, not to move them to different services.
te_chris 7y ago
That's not how any metro transport works. The Tube is manic at peak times, because...peak. But everyone mostly pays a flat rate for using the whole system each week (within the zones they travel to at least). This is a solved problem.
- isostatic 7y ago
  Except some people take the bus or walk because it's cheaper. Those arriving at Euston in the peak and getting on the Victoria line to Oxford Circus may choose to save £4 return and walk for half an hour instead of taking 15 minutes on the tube. If they didn't have the saving they may simply add to the crush
- Scoundreller 7y ago
  Flat rate sounds like a disincentive toward demand shifting (work 10-6 or 11-7 once a week) or working from home once a week. Either strategy would increase peak supply by 20%. Too often, citizens jump to “we need more subways” without exploiting the low-hanging fruit.
  - isostatic 7y ago
    I really dislike season tickets as they offer no financial incentive to do a 4, or even 3 day week.
- mostlystatic 7y ago
  > But everyone mostly pays a flat rate for using the whole system each week (within the zones they travel to at least). I was wondering how widespread travel cards are, since I never bought one personally. If you don't travel much on the weekends you end up paying more. In 2017 TfL sold weekly, monthly, and annual travel cards covering year-round flat-rate travel for ~0.8m people. Travel card journeys account for about 39% of all journeys. Maybe it was more common in the past, since travel card journeys dropped around 10% a year from 2015-2017. https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-2774-1718 https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-informa...
Theodores 7y ago
If everyone had a free pass for all public transport then you can make the free pass only free at certain times, with a standard ticket price for other times. Old retired folk don't need to get anywhere for 9 a.m. or be in a mad dash to get home at 5.30 p.m. They get a free pass that only works between 10 and 4. Essential public sector workers, e.g. school teachers get a free pass for the commuting hours or whatever is needed for their shift patterns. They could also have free evening and weekend travel not given to the senior citizens. School kids get a different pass again. The incentives can be many, if it is always kept as a perk that is seen as such even if 99% of the population can get it, then you can do the rationing. Until recently UK police had free passes to use transport networks when off duty. The cost cutting government got rid of this perk. This hacks people off, people in the police are no longer thinking the government is looking out for them. They no longer are made to feel part of a bigger family of public sector useful people because they don't get the guest treatment on the rails. Whether they used the pass or not is irrelevant, it is the treatment that matters. There were no incidents of off duty police officers travelling for free en masse and causing paying passengers to no be able to get a seat. So rationing is one of those problems that falls into the category of 'nice to have'.

baroffoos 7y ago

By adding more trains on the route at peek times. "Less desirable services" means taking limited space using cars

isostatic 7y ago
Rail lines can take a certain amount per hour (say 32 on the Victoria line). They are already maximum length and maximum capacity, and already leave people behind. Buses are cheaper but slower. Those who aren’t in as much of a hurry can take the bus or walk. With no cost differential people will base it just on time, increasing time taken on the rail service. Same applys on long distance. Sometimes I need to be in London at 9am so will take a more expensive busier peak train. Sometimes I don’t need to be there until the afternoon so I travel on quieter or slower trains, saving money and freeing space for those who do have to be in by 9am.
- CaptainZapp 7y ago
  Rapid Bus Transit[1] systems seem to be a good way to combine high capacity with (almost) guaranteed transit times and much lower costs than building rail, let alone subway systems. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit
- tty2300 7y ago
  Add more tracks. We have 8 lane highways but a 4 track train line is unthinkable?
  - luckylion 7y ago
    That might work in the US but it won't in Europe where cities are generally densely packed. You can't just tear down a few rows of houses/dig new tunnles/turn the city into one big construction project to add more space for tracks.
  - isostatic 7y ago
    That's what we're doing with the WCML. Adding two new tracks to the existing 4. Obviously they can't go through the middle of towns - demolishing that many buildings would be unthinkable even without the cost, so they bypass the towns they don't serve (currently half the high speed trains run non stop through places like Harrow, Watford, Hemel, Bletchly and Milton Keynes) Building new tracks (and indeed building new highways), even in the countryside where land is cheap, is very expensive and has massive amounts of opposition. In London, crossrail is adding two new underground tracks to the central line. It's running years behind schedule and costs billions. And underground is crowded too -- there's one point on crossrail where they had a 30cm margin of error between existing tunnels. Free public transport in London would cost £5b a year. This would mean those who travel a lot on expensive services (like city workers on the tube) will be being subsidised by those who don't travel (like people who walk to work in the local school).
lovemenot 7y ago
Tokyo underground trains are currently running an interesting campaign to get people onto specific off-peak trains. Such as the 07.31 out of Ikebukuro, and many others. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/01/18/national/tokyo-metro-aims-ease-morning-rush-hour-overcrowding-free-soba-tempura/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/01/18/national/tokyo-... Riders are offered a small reward simply for being on that train. But the size of the reward depends on the size of ridership. More riders, bigger reward to everyone. So there's an appeal to group solidarity.

anigbrowl 7y ago

First come first served works fine. Making poor people wait longer impoverishes them by imposing a significant time cost. There is no particular reason to privilege better-off people on basic services, you are not more important just because you have more money.

chrisseaton 7y ago
> First come first served works fine. Do you mean first to book in advance? Then people could squat on tickets, taking more than they need. Do you mean first to arrive at the station? Then that's a drag on the economy as workers waste time being at the station early so they can get a seat on a train.
- iknowstuff 7y ago
  For long distance train journeys, you could have named tickets in that scenario. No squatting. For city trams, subways and buses, it is simply first come (to the stop) first served. The solution is to expand capacity, as the economy is helped when large amounts of people are moved efficiently across the city.
  - closeparen 7y ago
    It's in the nature of public transit to have hard capacity plateaus that take half-century capital projects to break through. You do need a plan for the next few decades.
    - CaptainZapp 7y ago
      You do need a plan for the next few decades. Which is exactly what successfully managed cities do. There's usually something like a master plan that outlines the greater strategy for the next 20 years, or so. Of course there's no expectation that it will be exactly implemented as planned, but is immensely helpful as a general outline and to define the overall strategy of where a city is going with things like housing, population, public and non-public transit, etc.

flukus 7y ago

Is there any evidence that people with flexible schedules choose to jump on peak hour standing room only trains? I rearrange my work schedule to avoid busy times whenever possible.

mattlondon 7y ago
I have flexibility in my hours but I am in the busiest trains in the morning usually. Flexible working is not just to miss rush hour IME, it's more than that. E.g. ability to take the odd morning/afternoon for personal reasons, or leaving an hour earlier or later than usual etc without clearing everything with your boss. Trust and personal responsibility etc. You might be thinking about offset-hours rather than flexible hours?
- wikibob 7y ago
  Sorry, you don't have flex time in the common usage of the term. You simply have a standard professional, non-hourly, job.
isostatic 7y ago
> Is there any evidence that people with flexible schedules choose to jump on peak hour standing room only trains? Yes From Upminster into London, the price is the same on the fast train and the district. The district you get a seat, but the fast train you have to squeeze on. People take the busier train. Conversely people take cheaper means of transport. If the coach from Exeter to London was the same price as the train, why would you take the coach (2 hours longer)? You'd end up with an empty coach and a full and standing train (I for one would rather stand than take the coach), rather than a mostly full coach and a mostly full train.
- flukus 7y ago
  > People take the busier train. Neither of those examples are comparing like for like, they're comparing two different services, not the same service at different times. Congestion pricing on trains is supposed to level out the distribution of travelers, not to move them to different services.

te_chris 7y ago

That's not how any metro transport works. The Tube is manic at peak times, because...peak. But everyone mostly pays a flat rate for using the whole system each week (within the zones they travel to at least). This is a solved problem.

isostatic 7y ago
Except some people take the bus or walk because it's cheaper. Those arriving at Euston in the peak and getting on the Victoria line to Oxford Circus may choose to save £4 return and walk for half an hour instead of taking 15 minutes on the tube. If they didn't have the saving they may simply add to the crush
Scoundreller 7y ago
Flat rate sounds like a disincentive toward demand shifting (work 10-6 or 11-7 once a week) or working from home once a week. Either strategy would increase peak supply by 20%. Too often, citizens jump to “we need more subways” without exploiting the low-hanging fruit.
- isostatic 7y ago
  I really dislike season tickets as they offer no financial incentive to do a 4, or even 3 day week.
mostlystatic 7y ago
> But everyone mostly pays a flat rate for using the whole system each week (within the zones they travel to at least). I was wondering how widespread travel cards are, since I never bought one personally. If you don't travel much on the weekends you end up paying more. In 2017 TfL sold weekly, monthly, and annual travel cards covering year-round flat-rate travel for ~0.8m people. Travel card journeys account for about 39% of all journeys. Maybe it was more common in the past, since travel card journeys dropped around 10% a year from 2015-2017. https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-2774-1718 https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-informa...

Theodores 7y ago

If everyone had a free pass for all public transport then you can make the free pass only free at certain times, with a standard ticket price for other times. Old retired folk don't need to get anywhere for 9 a.m. or be in a mad dash to get home at 5.30 p.m. They get a free pass that only works between 10 and 4. Essential public sector workers, e.g. school teachers get a free pass for the commuting hours or whatever is needed for their shift patterns. They could also have free evening and weekend travel not given to the senior citizens. School kids get a different pass again. The incentives can be many, if it is always kept as a perk that is seen as such even if 99% of the population can get it, then you can do the rationing. Until recently UK police had free passes to use transport networks when off duty. The cost cutting government got rid of this perk. This hacks people off, people in the police are no longer thinking the government is looking out for them. They no longer are made to feel part of a bigger family of public sector useful people because they don't get the guest treatment on the rails. Whether they used the pass or not is irrelevant, it is the treatment that matters. There were no incidents of off duty police officers travelling for free en masse and causing paying passengers to no be able to get a seat. So rationing is one of those problems that falls into the category of 'nice to have'.