TRAIN AND BUS PASSENGERS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3804, 8 February 1927, Page 61

TRAIN AND BUS PASSENGERS.

TO THE EDITOR. SIB, —The figures quoted in the Witness relative to the number of passengers carried by bus and tram in London are of no value unless one takes into consideration the sizes of the two systems in the years mentioned. The increase for the trams is a very real increase on a system not appreciably larger than in 1914 —that is to say, it is a real increase in the number of passengers per car mile. . In 1914 there were less than one quarter the number of buses there are to-day, and none went beyond the county boundaries; now many routes extend upwards of 20 miles beyond the old termini) and it is over this enlarged system that the figures given for the buses apply. Again, there are "no trams in the central area, and here the buses have heavy traffic all day long. If, however, we compare the figures within the County of London it will be seen that the trams carry many more passengers than the buses or local railways, and if we go outside the boundary there are the passengers carried by half a dozen other tramways to be added on to the figures given in the Witness for the trams. (This represents perhaps 155,000,000.) The buses make no endeavour to deal with any rush-hour traffic beyond the normal daily service, and it is estimated that they deal with less than 30 per cent, of this traffic. Taking the country as a whole, the trams in 1926 ran 15,000,000 more car miles and carried 150,000,000 more passengers than in 1925. With regard to congestion, it must be evident that in London the worst congestion is in those parts where there are no trams. An average bus here seats 40 to 50 and a tram 80 to 95, so that twice as many buses as trams would be needed to carry the traffic.

If white lines are advantageous in splitting up lines of traffic, so are tram lines, and it often happens that a line of trams gets over a busy crossing with ease, where the flexibility of a bus, coupled with the desire of its driver to get to the front, would lead to a bad jam. It cannot be proved that the bus has any advantage in speed. In London the trains are distinctly faster than the buses, being allowed 20 miles per hour, compared with 12 to 16 for the bus. On a clear road the trams can do at least 25 to 30 miles per hour, and they can certainly start and stop more easily than a bus, thus having the advantage in speed on a stopping service. „ Another point where the tram scores is in the matter of running costs, it being indisputable that the tram costs less to run than the bus per seat per mile. In London the all-in running costs of the trams are only 13d per mile, a figure that a 50-seater bus could not come near. The reason for a good deal of the success of the bus is that it is relieved of all the -burdens thrown on the trqjnway companies. A bus company has merely to pay a license fee on each bus and to pay rates on its sheds. A tramway company has to (1) pay a. license fee on each car; (2) pay rates on the track, poles, and sheds; (3) maintain track in order; (4) maintain the road surface between tracks and for 18in on each side. Thus it will be seen that the tramway company has actually to pay for the road that its’competitors wear out-and do not contribute, a farthing to. In addition to this the tramway has to carry workmen at cheap fares morning and evening, another, burden which is not iiiiposed on the private buses. In the case of the tram these statutory burdens come to about five times those imposed on the buses. Even under these unfair conditions most tramways in this country are paying their way, but we may well ask how the buses would manage if they were required to pay even half their just responsibilities.

With regard to the question of further extending the. tramways the following facts may be of interest:—ln 1922 Manchester had 160 miles of track and 750 cars; in 1926 they have 195 miles of track and 980 cars. Leeds has recently ordered 200 new cars, and Sheffield 50. London has recently put 125 new cars into service, and has 200 more on order, and in addition is seeking powers for several important extensions. Berlin has completed about 50 miles of new track since the war, and has 300 cars on order from an English firm.

Traffic experts like Sir Henry Maybury (Director-General of Roads), Lord Ashfield, Viscount Peel, etc., all agree that the .tramcar is unequalled for the rapid transit of peak loads, and their opinion should count for more than that of those whose insensate slogan and parrot cry is “Scrap the Trams.” Finally, the whole subject is not one on which any casual critic without any special knowledge should express an opinion. This letter is rather long, but as a member of a Dunedin family I trust you will afford me a hearing.—l am, etc., _ . A. G. Fitz Gerald. London, December 28, 1926.