More fun and games with surveys
The DTI has published a survey on passenger satisfaction with train services. I can't the original on the DTI site, so I'll have to make do with the version on 24dash.com, which includes these rather non-matching figures:
Headline: "92% of passengers happy with rail travel"
"Respondents were positive overall about rail services. 63% of respondents rated short distance services as good; 20% as poor. For long distance services the respective figures were 62% and 14%".
Not spectacularly interesting, but I did like the reasons for not using rail:
The main reasons people do not use trains or only do so infrequently are the perceived convenience of other modes of transport, the location of stations, and the cost of rail fares. The most common factors mentioned as likely to increase use of rail services were a reduction in the cost of fares, better location of stations, and improved frequency, reliability or speed of services.
Shades of the old complaint about airports being so far away from city centres. Only much, much sillier.
Headline: "92% of passengers happy with rail travel"
"Respondents were positive overall about rail services. 63% of respondents rated short distance services as good; 20% as poor. For long distance services the respective figures were 62% and 14%".
Not spectacularly interesting, but I did like the reasons for not using rail:
The main reasons people do not use trains or only do so infrequently are the perceived convenience of other modes of transport, the location of stations, and the cost of rail fares. The most common factors mentioned as likely to increase use of rail services were a reduction in the cost of fares, better location of stations, and improved frequency, reliability or speed of services.
Shades of the old complaint about airports being so far away from city centres. Only much, much sillier.
This entry was posted
on Friday, September 15, 2006 at 12:51 pm.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
Trams connected to the main rail network would be a solution, it works in manchester.
Personally I prefer my car, the companys better.
No one ever mentions the tiny seats. I am quite thin, but to expect three people to squeeze into those tiny seats without getting married is an offence against public decency.
or maybe verity they were designed by perverts
Well the mancunian seats are indeeed tiny but are only two abreast, Fortunatley I have never had to commute,how/why people do that everyday is beyond me.
rigger/verity i think I have worked out why the tram seats are so tiny,the trams in this country are italian designed and built ,we all know that Italian men are groping perverts this was obviously in the mind of the designer.
Off at a tangent, apparently there are novelty brothels in Japan where men can pay to stand very to women in mocked up railway carriages and indulge in a spot of frottage.
South West Trains have those 3 abreast jobbies, and during winter when folk are becoated etc, they are intolerable.
Yes,Croydonian, trains into Euston have them as well. And, unbelievably, if there is a person in the (tiny and inadequate window seat) and a person in the similarly inadquate aisle seat, some large person with a briefcase will wedge himself in between. In British trains, the British are forced to be touchier than the Latins. It's utterly disgusting.
I wonder if they have done such a survey for the underground.
the Last time I took a real train was first class manchester to London and that was cramped , knees touching under the table (unwelcome)
second class is better.
» Post a Comment