You are reading a single comment by @Oliver Schick and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Oliver Schick-
Yes, but don't forget for parts of the country rail travel is an irrelevance. Stations are too far away or don't go anywhere that's relevant.
-
Well, perhaps we need a market for transport that incentivises low carbon travel. We won't get that with a rail state monopoly (BR) or the current oligopoly that is the rail franchise system.
Peter_Carter
I'd be happy if trains were even remotely competitive with driving. I mean £300+ for a Liverpool return could fly me half way around the world. Is it any wonder people just choose to drive. Same as going to Wales/Poole for a couple of audaxes last year. I think the trains were almost £200 and then you're stuck waiting for them and if you miss them you're fucked. Whereas driving costs me maybe at the most £100 for fuel and in this case saves time as well (at least the Liverpool train is faster than driving). The one time I try to take a train to Bristol for an audax and I almost don't get onto my "bike space" because ALL SIX are full. Six. FFS. Then I spend the entire journey standing up and it's an hour late because of some rowdiness (which was quite fun but still). So, basically, trains are fucked. Make them about 100x cheaper, put entire bike carriages on them and every station should have bike storage and hire. Then you'd be getting somewhere. Fuck the shareholders off and make it a useful transport solution.