• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

South Wales electrification

Status
Not open for further replies.

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
Surely such a suggestion would only strengthen the case for wiring the South Wales route? If CDF-MFH, a non-leccy route, was to be replaced on the core Swan Line section then why not do so with an EMU? Or is that too "sensible" for the railways of Great Britain?

[shudder]

No thank you <(


Yes as many have tried to point out to the DFT it isnt just the Swansea - London service which would benefit if the wires reach Swansea.

Whats wrong with them Ivo the class 315's would be overhauled and refurbished with new interiors I wouldnt worry to much Ivo besides they will be better than the class 150's which FGW are currently using on the Severn Beach line.

That said just to annoy you even more Ivo perhaps we could persuade London midland to get some class 380's to displace the class 323's to FGW:lol:


Sorry for going off topic slightly there but there was talk of ATW possibly getting some additional emu's to work non electrified services after electrification (A part of me suspects the class 165's from ATW, now that would be a strange sight at Swansea)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,306
Class 315s (possibly rebuilt with toilets) or Pacers....

Your call.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
Yes as many have tried to point out to the DFT it isnt just the Swansea - London service which would benefit if the wires reach Swansea.

Whats wrong with them Ivo the class 315's would be overhauled and refurbished with new interiors I wouldnt worry to much Ivo besides they will be better than the class 150's which FGW are currently using on the Severn Beach line.

That said just to annoy you even more Ivo perhaps we could persuade London midland to get some class 380's to displace the class 323's to FGW:lol:

Can we not? 315s are bad enough <(

What's wrong with a 315? Not as much as a 323 - but not by much. At least they sound like an EMU should and not a GP2 car that is about to retire.

Sorry for going off topic slightly there but there was talk of ATW possibly getting some additional emu's to work non electrified services after electrification (A part of me suspects the class 165's from ATW, now that would be a strange sight at Swansea)

Sorry - you'll have to try again. I assume you mean additional DMUs, such as 165s from FGW?

Class 315s (possibly rebuilt with toilets) or Pacers....

Your call.

Pacers :p
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
Suspect you're going to be on your own there Ivo, given the choice I suspect most commuters and other passengers would pick a 315 over a 143/142 ;)

I suspect so too. The main difference being I have plenty of experience both on numerous occasions whereas half of the populace of the Valleys have probably never seen an EMU, never mind travelled on a 315 (or 313 or 314)!

The thing to remember is that I grew up on the LTS route. EMUs aren't particularly interesting to me, and the more bland examples such as the 315 are worse!
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
I've no idea what hypothecated means, and I can't claim to understand how the Barnet formula thingy works (or what it is) but in answer to the quoted section of your post, this is what I think happens (I could be wrong):

Westminster allocates a chunk of money to WAG for road projects, another for NHS capital costs etc. (of which rail infrastructure is not something they give WAG money for). WAG are then free to divert the money which has been allocated for one of these into rail infrastructure if they see fit (hence Gowerton and Wrexham re-doubles and Fishguard & Goodwick station) but this means they can't spend that money on whatever it was Westminster gave it to them for (eg. building schools). It is therefore Westminster's official responcibility to pay for electrification in Wales, but WAG could do it if they sacrifice money given to them for school or road projects to pay for it.

Spot on there's nothing stopping them apart from wanting to spend the £ on the other things. There is a degree of inbuilt flex in the system that is well used in years gone by.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,591
A couple of people have mentioned money going to things like the heads of the valleys duelling instead. Just a point on that. That road needs to be a dual carriageway. Not just because of speed and capacity, but because of safety. The number of accidents on that road that happen when someone is overtaking and ends up in a head on collision (and similar) is just scary.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
A couple of people have mentioned money going to things like the heads of the valleys duelling instead. Just a point on that. That road needs to be a dual carriageway. Not just because of speed and capacity, but because of safety. The number of accidents on that road that happen when someone is overtaking and ends up in a head on collision (and similar) is just scary.

One problem this forum occasionally sees is an attitude whereby rail is always the correct way to proceed. In this particular instance, although wiring the Valleys would certainly be sensible and economically beneficial, it isn't essential. Dualling the A465 is. As such, we have to give priority to the road infrastructure project, and therefore the WAG have it right. (If that's even possible of course :p)

N.B.: If anyone reads this and feels that I am criticising them, please don't. This isn't aimed at anyone in particular; it's an observation.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
I do agree that dualing the A465 is a good idea as it has become useful for lorries to avoid the brynglas tunnels @ Newport and the severn bridges.

I travellled by bus from Swansea to Pontypridd a few years ago which used the A465 most of the way as far as Hirwaun and the road was very busy then
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
Someone said they were talking to someone at the Fishguard & Goodwick re-openning event and it emerged that Gowerton redouble would be done using a possession of a few weeks in Easter 2013.

There has been soem activity at each end of the Loughor bridge in the last few weeks. It looks as though areas are being cleared which could be used as access ways and work areas.

I was hoping that this was preparatory work for bridge renewal and redoubling!

Confirmed and would result in Milford Haven - Manchester services running via the Swansea district line with I believe the Pembroke Dock - Swansea services terminating @ Llanelli although some may also be extended to Cardiff.

That is what I expect to happen. I intend tot ake leave to avoid any disruption to my usual commute!

I
would like to hop that there will be additonal services between Cardiff & Swansea to cover for the loss of the Manchester services.

So do I, but it may be that there are just replacement buses :cry:
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,914
Location
Mold, Clwyd
There has been soem activity at each end of the Loughor bridge in the last few weeks. It looks as though areas are being cleared which could be used as access ways and work areas.
I was hoping that this was preparatory work for bridge renewal and redoubling!

Not that I know anything, but Network Rail have a habit of doing major jobs in phases over a couple of years (Cotswold, Bicester, Leven Viaduct etc).
Isn't the Loughor job two things - bridge replacement and then redoubling (6 miles, new platform at Gowerton, remodelling/resignalling at both ends etc)?
At the very least they have to slew the old line to its new location before they can get on and lay the new one.

Bet they have at least two lengthy possessions for it and take a year or more all told...
 

Pacerpilot

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2010
Messages
347
Major work will start in the Autumn, with Ballast being dropped every night from late September onwards.
 
Last edited:

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
One problem this forum occasionally sees is an attitude whereby rail is always the correct way to proceed. In this particular instance, although wiring the Valleys would certainly be sensible and economically beneficial, it isn't essential. Dualling the A465 is. As such, we have to give priority to the road infrastructure project, and therefore the WAG have it right. (If that's even possible of course :p)

N.B.: If anyone reads this and feels that I am criticising them, please don't. This isn't aimed at anyone in particular; it's an observation.

The A465 literally eats the lions share of the transport infrastructure budget - somewhere near 50% of it. Road usage nationally is now in decline and given the likely trend in petrol prices and the fact we now have a generation growing up that don't aspire to motor vehicle anywhere near the same degree due to I pods being more desirable/affordability issues the need for alternatives I would argue is greater - sure the section between A & B maybe sub optimal but the reality is less and less vehicles will be using it in the years to come and the accident rate will decline correspondingly.

If you factor in declining traffic levels the BCR does not come out favorably. Why chuck £ millions at it in the name of safety if a natural solution is on the way? And please don't tell me it will deliver economic prosperity - theirs already a dual carriageway from Cardiff to Merthyr (A470) and the A55 Expressway across Anglesey and no economic miracle to be observed in either area as a result of the road infrastructure.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
Not that I know anything, but Network Rail have a habit of doing major jobs in phases over a couple of years (Cotswold, Bicester, Leven Viaduct etc).
Isn't the Loughor job two things - bridge replacement and then redoubling (6 miles, new platform at Gowerton, remodelling/resignalling at both ends etc)?
At the very least they have to slew the old line to its new location before they can get on and lay the new one.

Bet they have at least two lengthy possessions for it and take a year or more all told...

Yes, I don't think it is a simple job, I was hoping this meant that work would be starting this year, and it looks like it is.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,591
Road usage nationally is now in decline

Any figures to back that up? As far as I was aware it is still increasing.

the fact we now have a generation growing up that don't aspire to motor vehicle anywhere near the same degree due to I pods being more desirable/affordability issues

I would disagree.
Also, what on earth do iPods have to do with it??

the reality is less and less vehicles will be using it in the years to come and the accident rate will decline correspondingly.

I really don't think that is the case at all, especially with the heads of the valleys road.

Why chuck £ millions at it in the name of safety if a natural solution is on the way?

Err to save lives?

And please don't tell me it will deliver economic prosperity - theirs already a dual carriageway from Cardiff to Merthyr (A470) and the A55 Expressway across Anglesey and no economic miracle to be observed in either area as a result of the road infrastructure.

Certainly not "miracle", but it certainly has enabled those who live in the valleys better access to Cardiff, and thus has better allowed them to expand their search for jobs.
 

Gwenllian2001

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2012
Messages
671
Location
Maesteg
A couple of people have mentioned money going to things like the heads of the valleys duelling instead. Just a point on that. That road needs to be a dual carriageway. Not just because of speed and capacity, but because of safety. The number of accidents on that road that happen when someone is overtaking and ends up in a head on collision (and similar) is just scary.

The road in question is not in itself unsafe. The question arises as to why head on collisions take place. The answer is, I'm afraid, that anyone who overtakes on a three lane section should be absolutely certain that the way ahead is clear. If it isn't, the person performing such an action should not be driving at all.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,857
One problem this forum occasionally sees is an attitude whereby rail is always the correct way to proceed. In this particular instance, although wiring the Valleys would certainly be sensible and economically beneficial, it isn't essential. Dualling the A465 is.
I disagree. I'm not sure why dualling the A465 would be seen as essential, maybe it should, but I certainly think that ValleyLines electrification IS essential. If ValleyLines electrification doesn't happen, with Pacers' (even if they are given an exemption from disability regs) future beyond 2020 looking decidedly short, then we can expect a MASSIVE order for DMUs. The enviromental (and likely the economic) cost of that would be massive.

So do I, but it may be that there are just replacement buses :cry:
They'll be needing plenty of replacment buses between Llanelli, Gowerton and Swansea, would they be able to source enough buses/coaches (Sundays excepted) to cover Port Talbot - Swansea too? Maybe if the Pembroke - Swansea services turn back at Llanelli (inc. the ones that currently extend to Cardiff) they could save a unit which could run between Port Talbot and Swansea. They'll probably have a spare 67+mark3s+DVT set around they could use too, and between 16 and mark2 coaches...

The A465 literally eats the lions share of the transport infrastructure budget - somewhere near 50% of it.
I once estimated that the £600m you once informed me was being thrown at the Heads Of The Valleys road could be enough to wire all the ValleyLines (using the same cost per mile as what has been mentioned for the Cardiff - Swansea OHLE) and order a fleet of brand new 377s to run them!

Not that I know anything, but Network Rail have a habit of doing major jobs in phases over a couple of years (Cotswold, Bicester, Leven Viaduct etc).
Isn't the Loughor job two things - bridge replacement and then redoubling (6 miles, new platform at Gowerton, remodelling/resignalling at both ends etc)?
At the very least they have to slew the old line to its new location before they can get on and lay the new one.

Bet they have at least two lengthy possessions for it and take a year or more all told...
Maybe the one lengthy possession mentioned will have a short gap in between the bridge works (and moving the existing track) and putting in the second line. The second platform at Gowerton might be something that can be done in a seperate possesion though (if it is done before the doubling).

Any figures to back that up? As far as I was aware it is still increasing.
Road use is declining (sadly only very slightly, compared to an alarming drop in bus usage) in Wiltshire at least.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
I wouldn't trust a graph from a source like that. It would be massively biased in favour the railway. It is very difficult to measure road usage on all but the busiest roads anyway.
 
Last edited:

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Road Traffic decline -

The DfT's own figures - peak traffic was in 2007 its been declining since.

See graphs in article beneath using DfT figures.

http://http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/blogs/roads/211111-RAC-traffic-growth

or try the Economist quoted from Christian Wolmar
There’s an interesting piece in this week’s Economist, confirming that we are moving around less: http://www.economist.com/node/21554203 It does seem odd given there are record numbers on the rails and on the Tube, and certainly travelling around the country, one rarely sees an open clear road, but the trend downwards in car travel has now lasted much of the decade and there is no doubting statistics

Safety


Close the 3rd lanes off simple, cheap and effective in life saving.

Commuting to Cardiff

Yes they do drive down the valley and then sit in a big traffic jam at the Coryton interchange - one of the major points with Valleys electrification is that will be a step change in provision by rail reducing this traffic.

Relevance of I pods

See Economist article young people prefer to spend money on them than cars.
 
Last edited:

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
Seems Stagecoach are cutting the number of buses between Pontypridd & Cardiff with service 60/60A now only operating between Aberdare & Pontypridd in addtion to changes to a few other routes.

Changes take affect from the beginning of July so currently there about 6-7 buses per hour between Pontypridd & Cardiff however this is likley to drop to 5 per hour
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
They'll be needing plenty of replacment buses between Llanelli, Gowerton and Swansea, would they be able to source enough buses/coaches (Sundays excepted) to cover Port Talbot - Swansea too? Maybe if the Pembroke - Swansea services turn back at Llanelli (inc. the ones that currently extend to Cardiff) they could save a unit which could run between Port Talbot and Swansea. They'll probably have a spare 67+mark3s+DVT set around they could use too, and between 16 and mark2 coaches...

I have little doubt that they will be able to source sufficient coaches and buses. There have been times when I have seen half a dozen coahes outside Swansea station, ferrying passengers to Cardiff and all point in between. Given that some passengers will be dissuaded form travelling at all (including me I hope), then they will undoubtedly cope without any recourse to LCHS.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,306
The big problem with the Valley lines in terms of getting upgraded capacity on the route, as far as I can see is the fact that there are so many lines trying to shove through the "core" in Cardiff..... and no matter how many trains you want to put through it you are going to struggle getting more than 2 or 3 per hour to each one.

Either you need a second Cardiff "core" to take some load off or you need major resignalling works to drastically increase capacity.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,591
Road Traffic decline -

The DfT's own figures - peak traffic was in 2007 its been declining since.

See graphs in article beneath using DfT figures.

http://http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/blogs/roads/211111-RAC-traffic-growth

I think you are being mislead by graphs.
While on that link I take back what I said about it still increasing (although some other sources say it is still increasing), look at the scale used. Something I learned very early on in science is to look at the scale and how that can be adjusted to make changes in graphs look more dramatic. A change from a "baseline figure" of 100, to a peak of 120, to the current 115 isn't a massive change and probably can be easily accounted for by natural changes in habit.
The same applies to the economist article.

Close the 3rd lanes off simple, cheap and effective in life saving.

And drastically reduce capacity? Because that is such a great idea!
Why not just dual the road?

Commuting to Cardiff

Yes they do drive down the valley and then sit in a big traffic jam at the Coryton interchange - one of the major points with Valleys electrification is that will be a step change in provision by rail reducing this traffic.

Which would be great if:
1 - Journey times would be reduced enough.
2 - Prices do not go up (even as it is, a season ticket to Cardiff is pretty damn expensive).
3 - People worked in the city centre. Most people I know who commute to Cardiff would have to get an additional train or bus out to where they work if they ditched the car for the train. Not a realistic solution.

Relevance of I pods

See Economist article young people prefer to spend money on them than cars.

Ipods cost around £100-200. Nothing compared to the cost of a car. There is no way buying an ipod would stop someone buying a car.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The road in question is not in itself unsafe. The question arises as to why head on collisions take place. The answer is, I'm afraid, that anyone who overtakes on a three lane section should be absolutely certain that the way ahead is clear. If it isn't, the person performing such an action should not be driving at all.

I agree. But the reality is that you are never going to get those drivers off the road. And in some cases other organisations to blame (two people I knew from school were killed because the roads agency did not properly sort out drainage on the road). So the best course of action is to make attempts to make the road as safe as possible. Duelling the road is one thing that can be done to help that.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
One of the main parts on dualling the A465 is that it is far and away the easiest way to get from "Head" to "Head". In England such a road would only be single-lane if it was (a) very quiet, (b) miles from anywhere or (c) paralleled by something more prominent. Not to mention it is an easy way to from Swansea and the "Heads" to the A40 and the M5 without needing to worry about skirting round Cardiff etc on the indirect M4.

The A465 does need to be done, and soon. Three-lane roads are a dangerous situation and the alternative of going two-lane would cause major congestion.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,054
Location
Reston City Centre
The thing that people forget (or are deliberately ignoring?) about the Heads Of The Valleys road is that its primarily intended to take traffic away from the horribly busy section of M4 past Newport/ Cardiff etc.
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
The thing that people forget (or are deliberately ignoring?) about the Heads Of The Valleys road is that its primarily intended to take traffic away from the horribly busy section of M4 past Newport/ Cardiff etc.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I think you are being mislead by graphs.
While on that link I take back what I said about it still increasing (although some other sources say it is still increasing), look at the scale used. Something I learned very early on in science is to look at the scale and how that can be adjusted to make changes in graphs look more dramatic. A change from a "baseline figure" of 100, to a peak of 120, to the current 115 isn't a massive change and probably can be easily accounted for by natural changes in habit.
The same applies to the economist article.



And drastically reduce capacity? Because that is such a great idea!
Why not just dual the road?




Which would be great if:
1 - Journey times would be reduced enough.
2 - Prices do not go up (even as it is, a season ticket to Cardiff is pretty damn expensive).
3 - People worked in the city centre. Most people I know who commute to Cardiff would have to get an additional train or bus out to where they work if they ditched the car for the train. Not a realistic solution.



Ipods cost around £100-200. Nothing compared to the cost of a car. There is no way buying an ipod would stop someone buying a car.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
With the cost of insuring a car for the young £2000 plus in addition to petrol - if there are alternatives they take them given 25% unemployment in the 18-24 age range cars are beyond many young people reach - social media isn't.

I agree. But the reality is that you are never going to get those drivers off the road. And in some cases other organisations to blame (two people I knew from school were killed because the roads agency did not properly sort out drainage on the road). So the best course of action is to make attempts to make the road as safe as possible. Duelling the road is one thing that can be done to help that.

I live in a rural are where the single carriageway roads follow ancient cart tracks - the logic of that argument is you need dual carriageways everywhere. How do you pay for them? As you can see with the A465 half the Welsh Capital transport budget this decade will go on dualling just 12 miles of it.

Road Stats
Well the base source its taken from is the DfT website using 1993 = 100 Are you questioning DfT's statistical credibility? CBT and the Economist have just used the stats as DfT presents them. Maybe on your basis that DfT mislead all the positive Cost Benefit Ratios for road schemes are suss too?

Not dualling
Its a huge proportion of a relatively small budget that only delivers some hypothetical time savings to people that need to hop between towns in the Heads of the Valleys - which is the reality of the majority of its use.
Roads aren't unsafe its the behavior of human beings that drive on them.

Cardiff Problems
Proper nations have integrated interlinking public transport. Agreed the problem of where you go once you get to Cardiff needs to be resolved. A characteristic of the areas/country's of europe with higher GDP is a higher usage of public transport. Poorer country's such as Wales are more heavily road reliant.
 
Last edited:

Gwenllian2001

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2012
Messages
671
Location
Maesteg
The thing that people forget (or are deliberately ignoring?) about the Heads Of The Valleys road is that its primarily intended to take traffic away from the horribly busy section of M4 past Newport/ Cardiff etc.

It was built before the M4 and to perform the same function as the railway that it replaced.
 

Gwenllian2001

Member
Joined
15 Jan 2012
Messages
671
Location
Maesteg
To allow the L&NWR to access the south Wales coalfields?

No, to allow easier travel between valleys. Places like Ebbw Vale; Rhymney are quite close, as the crow flies but the topography of the area ensured that they remained quite isolated from ech other.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,591
No, to allow easier travel between valleys. Places like Ebbw Vale; Rhymney are quite close, as the crow flies but the topography of the area ensured that they remained quite isolated from ech other.

Which surely kind of disagrees with the point you are making?
Public transport between the heads of the valleys is atrocious, and is likely to always be the case because of the geography of the area. So having a decent road connection is vital (from the top of the valley I am from it is 30 minutes to Merthyr using the heads of the valleys road, or 50 minutes if you go down the valley to pontypridd then up the merthyr valley, or around an hour and ten minutes by public transport).

I live in a rural are where the single carriageway roads follow ancient cart tracks - the logic of that argument is you need dual carriageways everywhere. How do you pay for them? As you can see with the A465 half the Welsh Capital transport budget this decade will go on dualling just 12 miles of it.

Errr I never said that you need dual carriages everywhere. Just that certain parts of single carriage roads should be duelled (the same is the case on the north devon link road for slightly different reasons).

Road Stats
Well the base source its taken from is the DfT website using 1993 = 100 Are you questioning DfT's statistical credibility? CBT and the Economist have just used the stats as DfT presents them. Maybe on your basis that DfT mislead all the positive Cost Benefit Ratios for road schemes are suss too?

I am not questioning the source (well, technically I am because other sources say contradictory things). But that isn't my point here.
What I am saying is that without looking at the numbers, the graphs appear to show quite dramatic changes. But when you then look at the scale they use, the changes are not so dramatic anymore.
Also don't forget that "being green" is something recent governments (and thus government bodies) love to do, and as part of that they have been trying to dissuade car use - so stats that would help them justify certain anti-car policies would be nice for them to have.

Not dualling
Its a huge proportion of a relatively small budget that only delivers some hypothetical time savings to people that need to hop between towns in the Heads of the Valleys - which is the reality of the majority of its use.
Roads aren't unsafe its the behavior of human beings that drive on them.

But again, that link is needed. As I said above, look at the difference in times. Also remember that the main link down the valleys can often be very congested.
And I disagree. Roads can easily be unsafe. To suggest otherwise is a bit naive to say the least. If a particular stretch of road has had quite a few high profile accidents in a short period of time, then there is something wrong there.

Cardiff Problems
Proper nations have integrated interlinking public transport. Agreed the problem of where you go once you get to Cardiff needs to be resolved. A characteristic of the areas/country's of europe with higher GDP is a higher usage of public transport. Poorer country's such as Wales are more heavily road reliant.

Apart from the fact that the geography of the area means that road reliance is just a fact of life. Using my example again, 30 minutes by car or 70 minutes by public transport, what would you choose?
And what exactly do you mean by "proper nations"? Because as far as I can tell, hardly anywhere has a a decent integrated public transport system (certainly the UK does not).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top