1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 
C ar and Bus MR NEAL EXAMINES THEIR RELATIONSHIP ‘ 4 THE
Page 115
Page 116
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
fact that the universal possession and unrestricted I use of cars can nullify so many of its advantages and spoil, if not destroy, the charm and attractiveness of so many delightful places, both in town and country, means little or nothing to the various owners. The appeal to the selfish streak in all of us, as well as its actual detrimental effects, has made the car almost a monster', but nevertheless it is a most attractive monster '• In fact, it is so attractive and so useful that every effort must be made to control and direct the worst of its ill effects.
The problem of the car, its effects on modern life, and its correct relationship with public transport, is very much a topic of serious study today, as will be very apparent from the frequent references to it in this copy of the journal alone. It is •a subject that was chosen by Mr. A. F. Neal, former general manager of Manchester City Transport, whose quotation appears above, for a paper he delivered to the PTA Conference this week.
The paper, said Mr. Neal, was an attempt to deal with aspects of personal transport on land and, in particular, on roads. Bus and rail operators would be deluding themselves if they did not recognize that the most important and main means of personal transport was already the car. Taking the country as a whole, public transport was only a complement to the car, although for some purposes and in some large cities, notably London, public transport was the most important at peak hours.
Traffic changes in Manchester over the years 1950 to 1964 had been compared with those in London and indicated that bus travel per household was rather lower and the loss of bus passenger journeys by day about 4: per household instead of 5. There might, however, be other reasons for reduction in bus travel which would affect car-owning and non-car-owning households alike.
The car could not provide all the transport needed by the community. It had been abundantly clear for some years that public transport needed to be carefully and, in some cases, specially planned, but unfortunately for so long the extent of planning had seemed to be the provision of a bus station too often in an inconvenient place. Planning for all transport had now become probably the major aspect in the whole field of planning—and rightly so, as the total transport costs, without aviation but including all land and sea costs, formed 16 per cent of the gross national product..
To give an attractive alternative to the private car, public transport had to be comparable with it, both in reliability and speed. To do this it was essential that some form of rapid transit be introduced for the longer journeys, giving partial or full segregation of public transport from other traffic. For Manchester, Mr. Neal had suggested that the bus which could run express, with limited stops or local stops, and branch off to housing estates as required, was the best mode of public transport for the future, provided that it was planned and, more especially, planned for. It was this latter requirement which was so difficult to get across to planners. highway engineeis and the various Ministries affected. It might be that the past performances at the bus were responsible for this attitude.
The most important requirements of the public in regard to both public and private transport were reliability, speed, convenience, comfort and reasonable cost. With regard to buses, reliability meant running to time without failure, and safety with room for all intending passengers. Comfort consisted primarily of a smooth-riding vehicle and provision of reasonably comfortable seats. But perhaps the most important and controversial factor was that of providing a separate seat for each passenger. Any future system should be based on all passengers being seated, which meant that present practices such as on the London Underground and the Continent could not be accepted as a proper standard for any new system.
Two other requirements which were becoming more and more important to the public were those of no smoke and less noise. In both respects the bus compared unfavourably with the car and it was to be hoped that the manufacturers would be able to make substantial improvements
in both respects. Continued overleaf Although the traffic position in the area of every undertaking 'needed, surveying to a greater or lesser degree, it seemed that the same general pattern would emerge and public passenger journeys per person would fall. In some rural areas it had long been below the economic limit and had now reached the position where services could not be operated without a subsidy. Even then it was becoming increasingly difficult to justify a service at all.
This position inevitably must spread to more areas and services, including a number in urban areas. This in no way reduced the need for efficient public transport for those who would still require it and the industry would have to so improve its performance that it should retain an appreciable amount of traffic. To do this most effectively required a target of first-class quality—and to attain this a lot was required from the industry itself and public authorities, both national and local.
Already a good standard of bus was being produced and operated, but it did seem that all buses should have full or near-full air-conditioning, individual suspension (probably of pneumatic type, ensuring uniform step height), a low floor with no intermediate steps and not too severe ramping, and easily controlled transmission, equal to the best automatic traction. The engine position in single-deck vehicles was still a determining factor and further improvements were needed. The completely segregated system—either rail or buses, in a reserved lane'would always give the best service speeds, but on a service with frequent stops and traffic congestion, the rate of acceleration was more important.
Mr. Neal went on to describe the advantages of express bus operations, advocating the use, wherever possible, of separate or "reserved " lanes. A recent development in America, for automatic control from a wire under the surface in a reserved lane was claimed to allow 1,000 buses per hour to proceed safely at high speeds, giving a passenger capacity of about 6,000 per hour.
In these days of multi-lateral roadways a reserved road would not create an insuperable problem. It could well be that single-deck buses would prove the most suitable. As a guide to what was actually needed the heaviest bus route in Manchester carried about 8,000 passengers in the rush hour and this number could be handled with ease on one reserved bus lane with some lay-bys. To carry them by car would need four lanes and possibly five.
It was suggested that one-man operation should be developed as rapidly as possible for all types of service, including stage carriage in cities. It had by far the greatest potential in what was vitally essential to the industry— namely, productivity from manpower. Simplification of fare systems was long overdue and it was impossible to understand why id. steps had been retained for so long. One of the needs most frequently mentioned by the industry was that for greater co-operation by the trade unions, particularly in one-man bus operation. This was vital, but it must be remembered that co-operation was not only joint but two-way.
*There was no doubt that. the .bus could make a most important contribution in the transport of the community and assist in good planning. But it was essential that this planning provided for many privileges such as separate bus lanes both with and (in one-way streets) against the traffic flow, buses to turn right when other traffic was not allowed to, to move first at traffic signals (particularly when turning right), and exclusive use by buses of selected roads or sections of road. Bus stations should be adjacent to or underneath main shopping and business centres.
a46
Some matters on which it was felt that progress was too slow included the use of double-deckers for one-man operation, permission for the infirm and aged to stand in the lower saloon when the upper saloon was• not fully occupied, and the fuel tax which had placed an increasing burden on the industry. Another matter which was felt by some as becoming more important and urgent, Was the power to make on-the-spot penalty charges or fines for over-riding or similar abuse of one-man buses.