sraka1 napisal/-a:
Bistvo tega, kar me zanima pa je sledeče: zakaj se ob slabih rezultatih niso spraševali "Kako lahko izboljšamo storitev, da dosežemo boljše rezultate?" namesto "Ali bi ukinili to povezavo?".
Tukaj se pa absolutno ne strinjam. Namreč, po mojem mnenju je finančna korist, ki jo s seboj prinese učinkovit javni prevoz (razlogi - boljša in zlasti hitrejša mobilnost ljudi in blaga, čistejše okolje in posledično zdravstvena slika prebivalstva, turizem, itd.) dolgoročno n-krat večja od začetnega vložka v kvalitetno infrastrukturo in storitve javnega prevoza. Iz tega se da sklepati, da ni učinkovit javni prevoz le za bogate države, temveč za vse države z vizijo (od katerih je resda veliko bogatih), ki z veseljem vlagajo evre tja, kjer se jim večkratno povrnejo. To pa mojem mnenju nedvomno Slovenija je.
I have heard that the BTC shuttle took 20 minutes to get from main station to BTC because the speed limit was 40 from main st. to cargo terminal, there the train had to turn around and from there continued with 10 km/h. Also that you could only buy the "city card" which cost more than 2€ and that there were only few trains in the day.
When we are talking about city shuttle trains, some conditions have to be met in order for the train to be successful:
1. they have to be very frequent
2. they have to be economical and the card has to be integrated for every public transport option at least in the city
3. train stations have to be frequent
4. speed is not crucial within the city but come on... the train at least has to be faster than a pedestrian (BTC shuttle was not)
5. timetable has to be integrated with other shuttle trains.
I believe the BTC shuttle can be successful but (1) it has to have an interval of at least 20 minutes, (2) it has to get integrated to the city public transport card, (3) more stations have to be built along the route, (4) stations must have sufficient amount of bike racks, (5) shuttle must be able to carry sufficient amount of bikes but the tariff must not be to expensive, (6) the tracks have to be renovated (so the limit can be 60 and 40 km/h and so E-train can run there - E-trains have better acceleration), (7) its ending station must not be main station but one of the Eastern satellite cities center (Kranj, Logatec) and (8) on the same platform other city shuttle trains with high frequency have to be accessible.
You are totally right about the public transport advantages. A modern transport system is composed of good public transport links between large employment, tourist and shopping centers. Public transport providers are integrated with each other and with other forms of sustainable mobility (cycling, car-pool, car-sharing...).
Public transport as a mode of transport is never profitable and it is not supposed to. That is because it is not a form of business branch, but a public service.
Schools, hospitals, administration and other forms of public services were never profitable and never will. Despite that, economy would be nothing without public services. I.e. there would be no innovations without good education and in modern world everything is based on good ideas (internet, electronic devices, engines, machines...)
Role of public transport is to provide mobility to all social groups, to be a fast, comfortable, safe and environmentally friendly link between places and thus reduce external costs (space consumption, emission, noise, accidents, time waste in traffic jams...)
A country without efficient transport system - that means that its backbone is good public transport - is not a modern country.