Subway today

[crusty_bint]

touché. I was thinking more Executive and Parliament tho

[dave2]

To be fair. most Edinburghers don;t want the tram's or the EARL and certainly not both. Most opinion seems to favour their (already good) bus service, and a bus link from Edinburgh Park / South Gyle to the airport. Or if they must have trams, then they are running from the city centre to Edinburgh Airport past at least 3 main line stations. The Council like the idea of trams, and Transport Scotland / Council like the EARL in its current form of underground tunnels full of diesel trains and very steep inclines either side.

A new station on the Fife Line and the Glasgow line by teh Airport and moving walkways to the airport (about 4 miels worth) would be cheaper than the proposed station.....

The EARL will add up to 4 minutes to the Glasgow-Edinburgh journey time, so unless Transport Scotland obtain either very fast Diesel trains or electrify the line to Glasgow, journey times could be typically over the 50 minute mark going via EARL.

[Dugald]

I have read all the postings today with a touch of sadness as well interest. The sadness, because of Glasgow's wee subway earning those disparaging remarks, and the interest, because I was involved to some extent in part of the development of Toronto's subway system.
I used the Glasgow subway times without number, and found it a tremendously convenient mode of transport. I lived in Govan and it was exceptionally well-served with public transit. Yes, I know, this earlier success in moving people has already been acknowledged by several posters. It seems to me however, that there appears to be a strong desire to abandon the wee circular system.

We read for example: "...the subway will never pay its way as its too small, ". As has already been mentioned, for a subway system to worthwhile, it has to serve high-density regions. This is axiomatic. However, I don't believe for one moment that a transit system must be "profitable". I believe the success of an underground transit operation should be judged largely on the number of people it can move, and how this affects travel-time and living stadards in the metropilitan area.

I don't know what the passenger-usage statistics for the Glasgow subway are, and I can only guess, on the basis of my awareness of the disastrous demographic changes to Govan, that they're at best, dismal. It seems a substantial increase in subway usage is required in order to make the subway worthwhile. To this end there appears to be a desire to see the underground system extended in order to serve suburban areas. Extensions of the magnitude I have seen mentioned on this thread, would be extremely expensive, and I doubt very much that this kind of capital would be available. (Today in Toronto, a fast-growing metropolis, they still have to fight tooth and nail to get funds for subway extensions!).

If I had anything to do with Glasgow's subway I'd refurbish the present system and develop the population conurbations! It's a helluva lot cheaper to develop inner-city population conurbations than it is to extend underground rapid transit lines! What I wonder would be the cost involved in extending the present subway to serve the southside to say Pollkshaws? I'd guess astronomical. Hey, don't close Kinning Park and West St., turn them into population conurbations!

I can imagine it'll be a tough campaign to get money for subway refurbishment, (but it'd be a more worthwhile use of public money than building a bicycle velorome!). I think Glasgow is in the grip of the automobile adherents, the build-new-motorway types, and they are ever reluctant to spend money moving people when they can spend the money moving cars instead.

[Mori]

This is a great site that has all the facts and figures of subways & rail links all around the world.


http://www.reed.edu/~reyn/transport.html

[crusty_bint]

Sorry Dugald, perhaps I should have been clearer when talking abut the subway paying its way, what I meant was that it will never be seen as cost effective to expand the subway system simply because of the numbers involved. The BBC tonight quoted a 3 million ppy drop over the last 5 years, a substantial figure when you consider the proportion of the Glasgow population the system serves.

Its all very well saying that we should repopulate the areas served by the stations I mentioned could be closed in lew of expansion (and thats the important part), but have a look on google earth and you will see 10+ lanes of M8 (and soon to be more with the construction of the M74 link which will join the M8 at Shields Rd) somewhat hindering this tidy solution. Indeed have a look at the 1930's maps on the Old Glasgow Map thread and compare the sprawl with todays google earth view showing that the present system will never serve the city properly. It serves the west and central areas very well, but no-where else really.

The disparaging marks are not aimed at our cherished little system, I see it as the jewel in the crown (in a sort of oxymoronic way) of Glasgows Victorian engineering heritage and would never advocate its colsure. No-one in their right mind would. The remarks are merely an expression of frustration that our unique system has been allowed to stagnate for so long.

And yes, it will be a tough fight to get the estimated £300million for a refurb (apparently the high cost is due to the Glasgow system being smaller than the standard systems involved today meaning carriages etc have to be bespoke) christ, we cant even get them to commit to funding Crossrail where most of the infrastructure is already in place, and an extension is probably completely out of the question, as I think we'd already agreed... soooo... yeah. Bummer.

[McShad]

And after they spend £300m, will those new yellow electronic information signs STILL say 'Signs under test' and be drastically wrong about the approach of trains?
Seriously, how long does it take to install and debug a system like that?

[Dugald]

I found your post very interesting Crusty Bint. My knowledge of the Glasgow system is based entirely on my own observations and I don't think it quite measures up to yours, and it certainly isn't as up to date as yours. Anyway, I understand what you are saying and can appreciate the concern over a 3 million drop in riders over 5 years. The very fact that it is declining, regardless of the magnitude, is a problem in itself. I'll wager there a few rapid transit lines in the world with suffering a decline in riders! The problem I guess, is simply to attract more riders. I know, easier said than done.

I realise too, the difficulty in repopulating the sparsely populated regions of the South Side for example. I didn't have to look at a 1930's map to note the changes. I recall what it was like then and I know what it is like now. (Incidentally, I never could understand why there was a West St. station even way back then!). In reading many of the discussions dealing with planned improvements in the city I have been encouraged by the plans for Govan, and this is the sort of idea that leads me to feel redevelopment of stagnent city areas is viable. Likewise, developing 95 Morrison St. into apartments, was, I feel, a great idea.

My suggestion of redevelopment as an alternative to extending the subway really amounts to attracting people to live nearer the heart of the city. Other big cities are doing this. Toronto and Detroit, for example, have had a fair measure of success in doing this. The important thing to bear in mind is that Glasgow, by reducing the problem to one of population development rather than an extension of the subway, would move the burdon of cost from the shoulders of the public-transit people onto the private sector.

You have brought up an issue which I must admit to having overlooked... that damned accumulation of miscellaneous motorway eyesores that bodes ill for the Shields Rd area. That's already a fait accompli and makes any "tiny solution" a great deal more difficult... but not impossible. I'm not a transit engineer, but I know enough of municipal politics to know that without a very strong tranist engineer, the city fathers will bend to the roads-people at every opportunity. Glasgow needs an E.R.L. Fitzapyne!

The other problem you bring up, the one regarding the Glasgow system being smaller than the standard systems of today. Geez, I thought Glasgow at one time built all their own carriages (Copielaw Works???); couldn't this be done again? It might be expensive but not as expensive as building an entire new subway system. And yes, getting a commitment for funding is tough, and again it comes down to getting a tough guy on the side of public transit, which is after all, the only genuine solution to moving people in a city. I can appreciate your frustration, C.B.

I visited Mori's suggested web site above and had a look at all the Glasgow information. Happily (I don't feel like studying traffic volumes) there was no information about traffic volumes, but I did note that the subway trains run every 4 minutes at peak times, every 6 minutes during the day and every 8 minutes in the evenings. To me this isn't a bad schedule at all. Of course, it doesn't tell us how many fares are being generated, but one can assume it to be appropriate. Let me say I like your "oxymoronic" attitude!

Cheers Dugald

[Simba]

And after they spend £300m, will those new yellow electronic information signs STILL say 'Signs under test' and be drastically wrong about the approach of trains?
Seriously, how long does it take to install and debug a system like that?

It's been working for the last 3 weeks okay hasn't it? I think it'd be better if they told you in the ticket concourse (at Hillhead at least) how long until the next train rather than the frequency of the trains.

[Dexter St. Clair]

Article in Tonight's Evening Times

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/opinion/display.var.1237421.0.0.php

It is affectionately known as the Clockwork Orange because the carriages are small compared to the London system and most are painted orange.

I think there is a "only by the saftest of reporters" missing somewhere in the above sentence.

Own up is there anyone on here who refers to the Subway or Underground as "The Clockwork Orange"?

[Flyingscot]

::): touché. I was thinking more Executive and Parliament tho

Who'd want the ugly parliament cluttering Glasgow! I actually chuckle, the Executives offices in Leith are nice as office blocks go.

As for EARL and the trams- I don't see what trams give over buses than giving the city an 'ego' boost, making it 'euro chic'. If your concerned about emissions, hydrogen buses are going and if not many cities still use trolleybuses, although not in the U.K. Someone else mentioned a connection between Airport and Edinburgh Park-South Gyle, currently the 35 Lothian Bus runs Airport-Ingliston P+R-RBS Gogarburn-Gyle Centre. Wouldn't take too much effort to redirect this service- it is already a round the houses effort! IMHO what Edinburgh could do with is a subway linking the Suburban areas without the traffic congestion. Even a subway line along the A8 to the airport would be fairly quick and profitable. Just look at the stops you can have- Airport-Ingliston-Drum Brae-Corstorphine-Zoo-Murrayfield-Haymarket-West End-City Centre. Would be quick direct and give the rest of Edinburgh a boost. Expensive granted but are we really serious about public transport. (After all petrol tax is expensive, and the £30 fines in Edinburgh are making a mint)

Likewise for Glasgow, we could improve areas by making the subway larger. The subway (and general rail systems) are popular methods of transport and for whatever reasons, rightly and wrongly are percieved as 'better' as buses. We could therefore get people back into public transport (reliable journey times, clean new railways) and reduce the switch to cars, but also the need for so many buses, thus improving traffic and emmisions in the City. Indeed we could probably see a fall in car use and subsequent congestion which can only be good for the City. It might also invigorate certain areas needing regeneration, far more than the M74 will do in my opinion and thus free the £800million designated to increase congestion and for a road to where we already have roads to. In the end if the subway works well we can reduce the congestion to a level where the the M74 might not be needed. Add to that getting all buses back into an organised network run by an independant organisation that also runs the trains and the subway (SPT if need be) and not Worst Group, as well as integrated ticketing, perhaps a version of Hong Kong's Octapus, or London's Oyster (perhaps Glasgows should be known as the Haddock in honour of our love for Fish Suppers! ). Once that is done a few high speed rail intercity links between cities (Glasgow and Auld Reekie, The South and Stirling for starts) and then look at expanding motorways like the A9 etc and tolling all the motorways outside of cities like the French (we'd have the rail network now of course) and we're on the way to actually having a transport solution instead of a major headache.

Right we have £800 million. Lets get digging!

[Dugald]

I read your article Dexter; interesting stuff. I don't see anything extraordinary about the £5 million going into routine maintenance for the system over a year, but I'd worry about the threat of it disappearing under 5ft of water as a result of the silty sand around it. I suppose newspaper articles of this type might be expected to exaggerate the problem a bit, but I don't know. I had never heard the name " Clockwork Orange" until I read Mori's recommended web site.

[McShad]

And after they spend £300m, will those new yellow electronic information signs STILL say 'Signs under test' and be drastically wrong about the approach of trains?
Seriously, how long does it take to install and debug a system like that?

It's been working for the last 3 weeks okay hasn't it? I think it'd be better if they told you in the ticket concourse (at Hillhead at least) how long until the next train rather than the frequency of the trains.

Not really

[lynnski]

I us the tube on a daily basis, and i can confirm that the yellow signs have been working fine for around 3 weeks, Until Monday. They're buggered up again! As for the Clockwork Orange, I first heard that back in my childhood, (before I even lived in Glasgow but would come to visit relatives via Hillhead Station) so it's been called that for at least 20 odd years.

As far as regeneration goes, it can only be a good thing. But no more 'Luxury Apartments' please! What Glasgow needs is decent affordable housing that isn't out of folks reach. They're building on Paisley Road West, just around the Kinning Park area, lets hope it's not the usual £150, 000 odd for a shoebox nonsense.

[JayKay]

They're building on Paisley Road West, just around the Kinning Park area, lets hope it's not the usual £150, 000 odd for a shoebox nonsense.

That will be Capitol Park, described here as an
exclusive development of 36 apartments...include urban crash pads and also one and two bedroom apartments designed for today's modern lifestyle.

Morehere

Fair and square aiming for the trendy shoebox market.

Mind you, it is handy for the Louden Tavern, the Govan Orange Hall and the Blue Star Social Club, facts they strangely fail to draw attention to...

[AlanM]

They're building on Paisley Road West, just around the Kinning Park area, lets hope it's not the usual £150, 000 odd for a shoebox nonsense.

That will be Capitol Park, described here as an
exclusive development of 36 apartments...include urban crash pads and also one and two bedroom apartments designed for today's modern lifestyle.

Morehere

Fair and square aiming for the trendy shoebox market.

Mind you, it is handy for the Louden Tavern, the Govan Orange Hall and the Blue Star Social Club, facts they strangely fail to draw attention to...

Funny that