AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Agreed: London transport inadequate

17th February 1967
Page 39
Page 39, 17th February 1967 — Agreed: London transport inadequate
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Keywords : Bus, Transport, Transit Bus

LONDON TRANSPORT was doing a superlative job with an outmoded system of transport, said Mr. C. W. Glover, the inventor of the Passenveyer, in London on Wednesday.

Mr. Glover was proposing the motion, "That this house is of the opinion that the present system of passenger transport within the Central London area is totally inadequate, and that more modern methods should be introduced without delay", at a joint Institute of Traffic Administration and Transport Studies Society debate. The motion was carried by 39 votes to 27.

Some of the points made by Mr. Glover:—

The speed of a stopping system (bus services) could not compete with a non-stop system such as the Passenveyer (a continuously moving belt with carriages strapped to it and stations at 1-mile intervals, normally elevated above streets or buildings).

Even with the best conditions the cost of operating buses was high. Passenveyer transport would cost one-twentieth of bus costs under present conditions and one-eighth of the bus under ideal conditions (roads free of other traffic). Savings on buses would pay for MON than 17 miles of Passenveyer a year.

Mr. L. Evans, seconding the motion: Users need cheap, reliable, quick and comfortable transport. LTB had tried various methods —but even the Red Arrows were subject to delay. The driving of buses often left much to be desired.

Mr. A. E. T. Griffiths, British Railways, opposing the motion;—

Was it seriously suggested that a new system like the Passenveyer would save existing congestion? Bus transport was not entirely successful but it was a thundering success compared with the proposal. Cost of improving the present system would be very much smaller.

Mr. D. T. Cairns, opposing:—

It was necessary to look at the present before looking at something unproved and uncosted. Offices had gone up without regard to transport, for example Millbank Tower. Yet Euston station provided a first-class train service without nearby offices. Reserved bus lanes should be the target.


comments powered by Disqus