Spreading the Jam A T the first opportunity in the recent
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
broadcast discussion on road congestion, Mr. A. C. B. Pickford, the -new assistant general manager (traffic) of the Western Region of British Railways, expressed the opinion that full use should be made of surplus railway capacity " before we embark on heavy expenditure on roads." This was a bold beginning, for Mr. Pickford must know the weight of public opinion in favour of better roads, and must have realized that he was running the risk of antagonizing listeners before they had heard the whole of his argument.
The expected, and the only acceptable, solition to the problem of congestion is the improvement of the road system. This was put forward, in reply to Mr. Pickford, by Mr. A. R. Butt, the prominent West Midland haulier. He told the familiar story about the growing burden of taxation upon road users, for which they had received scarcely anything in return until the last year or so. Mr. Butt stressed particularly the need for improvement in towns, and asked that the authorities responsible should he given greater freedom of action.
Whether or not he was conscious of the likelihood of a hostile audience. Mr. Pickford appeared to he taking the approved Ivory Tower line. On the evening before the discussion was recorded, Mr. C. P. Hopkins, general manager, Southern Region, British Railways, began a talk on railway freight operation with the proposition that "there is somewhere quite a sizeable margin of spare railway capacity for dealing with more freight traffic." On the other hand, he could not deny that the railways, like road users, have to face the problem of congestion.
Traditionally, he said, the railways have regarded freight traffic as "the great adjuster." That is to say, it could be relied upon to use up the surplus line capacity "once the passenger train needs were provided for." Presumably, while this remains the policy, goods traffic is always at the end of the railway queue. When the traffic is plentiful. it must accumulate at certain points, perhaps even on lorries waiting to be unloaded at goods stations.
One-skied Protest A traffic jam on the roads is described as congestion, and becomes the subject of a public outcry. On the railways, it is the affair only of the British Transport Commission, and nobody protests, except perhaps the unfortunate traders whose goods are held up.
Mr. Hopkins admits that their protests are effective. His paper was mainly the outline of a plan for improving the reliability of the railway freight service, without waiting for the good results confidently expected from the modernization scheme. His main proposal was for a sound and " inviolable" freight time-table for all goods trains, with perfect oonnections in marshalling yards and elsewhere.
Some such improvement, he says, is all the more necessary because the effects of the modernization scheme will not be felt on the goods side until the scheme is nearly complete in 12 years' time. The railways cannot afford to wait as long as that, he suggests, before making a determined effort to keep the traffic they have, and perhaps to winthemselves some more. It would he too bad if. by the time the railways have evolved the perfect system,they no longer have anything left to carry on it.
Tt would be interesting to see Mr. Hopkins' proposal put into practice, and ultimately reinforced by the longterm scheme. In the meantime, the railways are apparently prepared to make good their claim that they have facilities for carrying the excess traffic now choking the road system.
During the debate on the air, Mr. Pickford said the railways could take 20 per cent_ more traffic than they -are at present carrying. As Mr. Butt pointed out in reply, this percentage must be scaled down to show its effect upon the present volume of traffic by road. If three times as great a quantity of goods goes by road as by rail, he said, an increase of 20 per cent. in the railway tonnage is only a transfer of 6per cent, from road. This would seem hardly significant in view of the magnitude of the present congestion, and of the accelerating increase in the number of vehicles.
Mr. Butt's figures are not universally acceptable. There are other objections, however, to the idea that a surplus of road traffic can simply be siphoned off and sent by rail.
Mr. Hopkins goes some way towards admitting that at times there is congestion on the railways. It is possible, even probable, that this is often found at the same centres as where there are road traffic jams. There may be spare capacity somewhere else on the railways, but to point this out as a remedy is no more effective than saying that there are quiet stretches of road.
Big Benefits from Small Works
In their joint paper to the Institute of Civil Engineers last November. Dr. W. H. Glanville, -Director of Road Research, and his deputy, Dr. R. J. Smeed, estimated that a quarter of the traffic was carried on 1 per cent, of the road system, and 60 per cent, of the traffic on 10 per cent. of the system. Dr. G/anville's conclusion is that improvements to only a very small proportion of the roads will be of benefit to a very large proportion of the traffic. Undoubtedly. this seemed a more sensible solution to him than compelling traders to send their goods, not by the form of transport they apparently prefer, but by a parallel, and perhaps equally over-taxed, rail route.
The survey to end all surveys on congestion has not yet been made. Perhaps it will never be made, when the problem has so many complications. On the strength of Dr. Glanville's figures, however, it seems sensible to define the cause of congestion as the desire to send too many vehicles—whether carrying goods or passengers—into one area at the same time: and the area may be a length of road. The long-term remedy is to disperse the traffic over a wider area, and perhaps to make a longer stretch of time available. Where there is a jam, it should be spread more thinly.
The cause of the concentration of trade and industry that leads to congestion can more often than not be traced back to the construction of a railway, and the general desire, when there was no alternative form of' transport, to be as near the station as possible. In those days, as Mr. Hopkinsfr)oints out, there was " more resilience in goods traffic, because the demands of the customer upon the railways were less exacting. Nowadays, he adds, "consignees no longer wish to provide for themselves a cushion against irregularities in the flow of their rail freight traffic."
In other words, they want an assurance of collection and delivery when it suits them, and this desire can be one of the reasons for congestion. It seems appropriate to look for the solution of any difficulties in the improvement of the roads that have made it possible to satisfy the desire.