Why is London the most congested city in Europe?

[PGAT]

Some quick random thoughts with roads:

1. Ringways were never built - Paris got one downtown. Dublin has M50
2. Speed limits are mostly 20 and main feeder roads like the A40/A3/A2 have slower speed limits than when new.
3. Road improvements for free flow like the A40 and North Circular were abandoned after compulsory purchase and some schemes watered down like the Coulsdon A23.
4. Buses are slower even with bus lanes. I know it is in part down to safety but remember a Leyland Titan or Metrobus being able to leave a stop as doors were closing (no buzzer delays disabling power) and doing up to 40 mph along London bridge!

Saying all that, I do get also an extra lane brings more cars.

Regarding bus speeds I’ve heard alot of complaints about ISA (Intelligent Speed Assist) being the culprit for slower journeys. Not only do they cap the bus at the local speed limit they are often faulty and pick up side roads with lower speed limits

 

[renegademaster]

London is just very low density compared to most European cities, it's like to Paris like how los Angeles is to London, and the lack of road improvements south of the river doesn't help either

 

[The exile]

There will be no end of reasons stacking up - some of them apparently only tenuously connected to transport. Here, I’m thinking of things like the concentration of services and policy regarding the choice of school children go to.
And yes, the road network.and the policing of its (ab)users is inadequate - as is the density of the fast urban transport network - particularly radially in the outer suburbs. Once people “need” cars for those journeys, they’re going to use them for others as well - after all, it’s only the others who are causing congestion.

 

[stuu]

Enormously valuable paths on a highly trafficked main line in a highly congested part of london are provided to stone trains for effectively nothing.
The mendip-london rail traffic should not exist (at least not in daytime), it is maintained only by indirect subsidies, which distort the aggregates market.

Looking at today's timetable, there are never more than 1-2 paths per hour from the Mendips to London on the GWML. There are other freight paths as well, but they aren't from the Mendips. So the stone traffic on it's own isn't the major limit on EL frequency west of Paddington

(Other days might be different of course)

 

[Harpo]

The mendip-london rail traffic should not exist (at least not in daytime), it is maintained only by indirect subsidies, which distort the aggregates market.

By logical extension then, no subsidised railways as they distort public travel costs?

As a low value product, stone is very susceptible to transport costs. Kill off daytime access and the resource base probably trebles, forcing it onto roads.

So, road stone goes onto the roads at higher cost to, er, the taxpayer together with the environmental impacts, extra road congestion (the topic here) and increased road wear and tear which will need even more road stone. By road.

 

[HSTEd]

By logical extension then, no subsidised railways as they distort public travel costs?

As a low value product, stone is very susceptible to transport costs. Kill off daytime access and the resource base probably trebles, forcing it onto roads.

So, road stone goes onto the roads at higher cost to, er, the taxpayer together with the environmental impacts, extra road congestion (the topic here) and increased road wear and tear which will need even more road stone. By road.

The traffic won't go onto the roads because it is comically uncompetitive.
It would get so expensive that sea shipping of aggregates would drive it out of the market. It would be cheaper to ship in aggregates from a thousand miles away by sea than to move it from the Mendips to London/SE by road.

Or so expensive that the aforementioned underground mining of aggregates in the South East would take off and remove the need for long distance movements at all.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2025 ==

Looking at today's timetable, there are never more than 1-2 paths per hour from the Mendips to London on the GWML. There are other freight paths as well, but they aren't from the Mendips. So the stone traffic on it's own isn't the major limit on EL frequency west of Paddington

(Other days might be different of course)

There aren't that many trains, but they are pretty low performance trains.
I'm looking at a randomly chosen example from today, Avonmouth Hanson Agg. (Fh) to Ardingly Hanson Aggregates. The WTT has it take 62.5 minutes to get from Reading to Acton Main Line.
That is slow enough that each freight train consumes smore than one path that could have been given to a crossrail train.

 

[stuu]

There aren't that many trains, but they are pretty low performance trains.
I'm looking at a randomly chosen example from today, Avonmouth Hanson Agg. (Fh) to Ardingly Hanson Aggregates. The WTT has it take 62.5 minutes to get from Reading to Acton Main Line.
That is slow enough that each freight train consumes smore than one path that could have been given to a crossrail train.

Avonmouth to Ardingly shouldn't be going via London at all. Presumably that's dredged sand out of the Bristol Channel, rather than aggregate

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Avonmouth to Ardingly shouldn't be going via London at all. Presumably that's dredged sand out of the Bristol Channel, rather than aggregate

And yet the route could be almost entirely driven by an electric class 92