Here, it’s a peak off period; it’s the last train. There s always the same gap between “ “multimodal modes “ and single modes.
3) 0300 on Saturday 22 November 2003
At the time Underground and Rail were closed. So, cycling became the fastest means of Transport, twice time faster than the bus, it’s a little amazing.
Cycling + Bus + Walking were not enough efficient because of the ten minutes’ transfer time. It’s took only 8 minutes more on the bike to reach Leicester Square: Why take the bus and pay for it if it’s not faster.
4) 1500 on Sunday 23 November 2003
Some disparities are visible. It’s why I would privilege one more time, cycling. Underground is faster but his price make him off race.
We saw that for short distance “ non-motorized” are often quicker than Public Transport. Everyone have the choice the right to choose the Public Transport instead of the Cycling even if it’s faster. For me I took Public Transport only for “long journey “ and when journey time is shorter than cycling.
B) Route 2: Wembley Park to Willesden Junction
The route is 3.6 miles length.
1) 0800 on Tuesday 18 November 2003
Now the train is competitive with the Underground but as I can’ t obtain the prices. I would rather choose the Underground. The combination between “cycling + Underground + Walking “ was not so bad, but it’s the same price that if you took the Underground.
2) 2100 on Tuesday 18 November 2003
Underground was one more time the efficient mean of transport. Bus is efficient too but more expensive because of the fare zones.
3) 0300 on Saturday 22 November 2003
One the night we have the choice between using bike or taking the bus. Rail and Underground were out of service. Personally I would took the bus principally for the 17 minutes of transfer time and second for the price £ 2. It’s expensive for a journey that I was able to do by bike.
4 ) 1500 on Sunday 23 November 2003
On Sunday afternoon, underground is one more time the convenient modes, I think. First it’s cheaper, second it’s faster.
The amounts of cycling or walking aren’t profitable enough to be use. I think that the route is not long enough to benefit from every asset of each mode.
C) Route 3: Finchley Central to Baker Street
The route is 7.3 miles length.
1 ) 0800 on Tuesday 18 November 2003
Underground is cheaper and faster than “underground + bus “ so it’s would be ridiculous to combine to mean of transport. It’s same report for “ Cycling+ Underground + Bus + Walking “. Why would I use a bike if I don’t realize an economy. But cycling is necessary some times to reach station particularly during the peak off. But it’s my own point of view
Bus was the cheapest mode unfortunately is too slow to compete with the underground. Nevertheless people would choose bus for financial reasons.
2 ) 2100 on Tuesday 18 November 2003
On Tuesday evening offered the same compromise between time and travel cost.
“ Bus + Underground “ cost turned down is use. £3.8 instead of £1 with the bus, just to reach to reach Baker Street 2 minutes earlier! I think that people are not willing to pay £ 2.8 more for 2 minutes.
3 ) 0300 on Saturday 22 November 2003
Journey time was shorter on the night. Every half hour there were two bus one who needed an interchange and one whom didn’t. There were two scope, I would choose the bus at 03:01 even if is more expensive. Because here there’s a gap between journey time ( 41 minutes ).
4 ) 1500 on Sunday 23 November 2003
Bus was attractive on Sunday, most of people don’t work they have more time to travel thus they could choose to travel by bus. The journey time wasn’t as important as the rush hour during the working week. Lack of time is not a criterion of choice on Sunday.
For choose the mean of transport I made a correlation between time and cost in order to select the best solution for each modes. For me, the main point was journey time but I took into account the price when there were only few differences between modes.
II) How useful I found the Journey Planner:
Benefits:
The layout of the website is very convenient. Its main asset was the easiness of utilisation, a beginner wouldn’t be lost. Particularly for people who came in London for the first time
The site provides several information that we could modify such as the optimisation of walking or using Cycle and Ride facilities.
I compared the Tfl with equals French website that I usually use such as (French Railways Board ), ( Public Transport in Paris ) and ( Public Transport in Lyon ). There are no bad but they don’t give some much detail.
Option for disabled persons are suitable because nowadays some Public Transport Network forgot to include facilities for disabled persons.
The Journey Planner will work out the best way of undertaking your chosen journey using public transport.
By following the simple instructions set out below any journey using buses or using the rail network can be calculated using the Journey Planner.
I noticed that the instructions about the transfer time are very useful because it’s during the time that people lose themselves.
It’s easy to assess the journey time of same that fare. Nowadays lack of information about services is one of the major barriers to public transport use. Tfl don’t suffer of less information.
The software is frequently updated with all the problems on the network such as repair.
Drawbacks:
Despite I found the Tfl software very useful there are some defects. I can’t obtain fare for the train, so it’s why I choose Underground sometimes instead of Train. Some people who certainly had made the same choice. To make a choice we need to have all the information.
I stress an example the Tfl proposed me to take the Underground at 00:15 and than to change and waited until 05:00pm the first underground. It’s seemingly an error because it’s provided 4 hours to wait!
When I looked up of the timetable, Tfl provided different possibilities even if I choose the same options for cycling particularly (17 min instead of 18 min).
For my second routes Tfl proposed me to walk for 55 min or to cycling for 40 min, for me it’s not a genuine estimation. Cycling is faster 2, 3 times than walking.
Too many information kill information, I think that for some people there are too many possibilities and they can be afraid, it’s not my case.
On average people don’t use all the software options I think.
CONCLUSION
This coursework should make us aware of non-car travel options in a very large city. Good Public Transport can reduce car dependency and improve the environment for everybody.
If I have the opportunity to travel in London I will probably use the Transport for London software to help me in my journey.
Seemingly London Public Transport Network is very efficient particularly with connections between several modes. Such software were benefit for people they can schedule their journey before arrive in London, so they will be less stress. It’s easier to look at the scope of travel on Internet than on a counter.
