Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

Seat reservations

Seat reservations are popular with train companies, but less so with passengers. Research by Transport Watch has revealed that many passengers do not sit in the seat that they reserved. A glance down any carriage will reveal that many of the reserved seats have not been claimed.

If one travels on a long journey, for example, from Cologne to Hamburg, it is like a game of musical chairs as passengers move from one place to another.

There are probably two main reasons why people swap seats. They may not like the look of their neighbouring passengers - a broadcaster on "Thought for the Day" once said that passengers always walked past his compartment if he was wearing his clergyman's collar!

And there is the design of the rolling stock. People prefer a seat with a view out of the train even if they spend most of the journey watching a film on their laptop computer, but in many types of rolling stock introduced since the 1970s, windows and seats are misaligned and the view out is obstructed. This problem has been aggravated by the prevalence of airline-style seating, which also gives rise to a luggage problem. On aircraft there there is secure storage for large items of luggage. On trains, people prefer to have their luggage nearby, and when seats are arranged in facing bays there is space between the seat backs. But when the seats are arranged airline style, the luggage space is lost and space has to be provided somewhere else, usually near the doorway where anyone can walk off with it.

One answer is to reserve a place on the train rather than a particular seat. Another is to provide seating plans so that passengers can choose where they sit, as in the example above from Sweden which can be downloaded from the train company's web site. The real solution, however, is to arrange the vehicle interiors much like the original Danish IC3 stock, which ensures that most people will be satisfied, wherever they sit.

Kommentarer

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...

The Zombie Train that refuses to die

The Guardian has published a couple more articles against HS2, one by specialist rail commentator Christian Wolmar, and another today by journalist Simon Jenkins. The main arguments in favour will doubtless be wheeled out by the commentators: the need for capacity and the disruption caused by upgrading existing routes. HST itself will severely disrupt services to Euston during the construction period. Capacity can be increased at a fraction of the cost by a variety of measures, provided that it is accepted that the additional traffic will run at existing speeds. It is not generally known that the Midland main line is, or was, four track all the way from London to Trent Junction, between Nottingham and Derby. This is because the additional tracks are separate, having been added for coal trains which trundled down to Brent sidings, on the edge of London, from a collection point at Toton in Nottinghamshire, where the Midland Railway build a huge marshalling yard. Beyond Derby, the main l...

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...