Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
"Bun is such a sad word, is it not?" -- Watt, "Waiting for Godot"

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                     

Underground 1st Class Compartments

You Pays More, You Gets Better Service
  (+5, -6)
(+5, -6)
  [vote for,
against]

How about this, for those that know that 'full-carriage-in-height-of-Summer' smell:

Underground Trains to be divided into Economy, Business and First Class sections. Regular One-trip and season tickets available for all ticket types.

Economy - regular seating, some mumbling drunkards, graffiti, fast-food, no guarantee of seat.

Business - Guaranteed seat, higher comfort level, piped music, scented air

First Class - Snack trolley, tea/coffee, recliner seats, newspapers, TV

Now doesn't that sound tempting for the regular commuter? Even as an only occasional user of the London Underground, I think I'd plump for at least a business ticket each time.

Think of the revenue!

littlechef, May 22 2001

[link]






       I came up with this idea when I was living in New York and rode the subway daily, though in a more simple version-- just one or two 'premium' cars per train. Premium couldn't be so fancy that a ticket would cost the same as taking a cab, or else people would just take cabs. Just make sure it's clean, well-maintained, more comfortable, and staffed with private security.
ejs, May 22 2001
  

       What's the point? Journeys on the tube are too short to enjoy a sit down, let alone a premier class carriage.
[ sctld ], May 22 2001
  

       You may be willing to pay £5 for a nicer tube car, but such a car would necessarily hold fewer people than the normal one. Since the tube is already operating essentially at capacity and there's no practical way to extend the 375' platforms I don't think any idea that would reduce capacity would go over really well.   

       Actually, the Tube is quite an impressive system, especially considering that the shallow parts of the underground opened in IIRC 1865 and the first deep lines in IIRC 1901. The central portions of Picadilly, Bakerloo, and IIRC one branch of Northern opened in 1906. Quite amazing that the 375' platforms put in place then are still adequate today (having rolling stock that can extend past the platform ends helps some) but amazing nonetheless.
supercat, Aug 05 2002
  

       fab idea. however, i thought of it to, riding miami's sole mass transit rail line.   

       also, if this were put into place it would probably only be on routes serving the more expensive areas of town. in that case, those particular stations might be able to be extended.   

       finally, in response to ejs.............cabs are often disgusting...so i would definitely still take the train.
politiquefiction, May 10 2004
  

       good idea. but lets just call it 3rd, 2nd, and 1st classes.
FireElf, Jun 09 2006
  

       The Paris Metro used to have 1st class carriages, at least up until the late 1980s. Baked probably since the early 20th century.
AbsintheWithoutLeave, Jun 10 2006
  

       //The Paris Metro used to have 1st class carriages, at least up until the late 1980s. Baked probably since the early 20th century.// and the KCR in hong kong still has first class carriages.
FireElf, Jul 10 2006
  

       Great idea, but too elitist for public transportation. WWKMD? (What would Karl Marx do?)
My_Nutball_Fiance', Jul 10 2006
  

       Imagine the scene - a packed platform and the gentleman in the suit and bowler hat wades his way through the throng to the far end "Pardon me, I intend to make my way to the Aristocratic Compartment. Make way! By Jingo! Make Way!"
The filthy proletariat in the tunnel murmur to one another, eventually turning aside to continue their debauched natural roles of drinking, fighting, copulating and the general harbouring and transmission of an entire ecosystem of unpleasant skin diseases.
The gentleman waits for the gush of air that hails the arrival of the next train while the teeming horde defecate and jeer at one another as they perform violative sex acts upon sad and dishevelled farm animals.
As the train arrives, the shiny doors at one end *fshooom* themselves open, revealing a red velvet lined drawing room with a fully stocked library and a globe-shaped drinks cabinet.
"Barrington!" - a voice from within the thick cigar smoke at one end of the carriage. "What a pleasure to see you! Come in and have a glass of this Chateaux 44!"
"Dr Moreaux? I never realised you travelled 'sous les sol'! I'm only going a couple of stops, but why not eh?!"
Meanwhile, as is their wont, the unwashed masses fight their way onto the septic remainder of the train, smearing themselves and one another in a pungent solution of faeces, blood and semen in the process...
zen_tom, Jul 10 2006
  

       I like zen_tom's description but surely the superior traveller would have a seperate entrance in order to avoid contact with the lower classes? Surely?
DrBob, Jul 10 2006
  

       As if the Aristocratic Compartment patrons would ever use such disgusting language.
methinksnot, Jul 10 2006
  

       The underground should be run like a public service and not a business.   

       The underground is already working at 120% capacity and struggling to meet demand.   

       Reducing the overall capacity of the underground is just about the most damaging thing you can do to London's transport network.   

       It will have a number of negative consequences:   

       a) More commuters will seek alternatives to the underground, ie. cars and buses, increasing congestion and pollution on the roads. b) Some commuters will quit their job stop travelling alltogether, harming the economy of London. c) Supply/demand law: The overall cost and time of travel will increase (also for standard class passenges)   

       The external costs this measure would impose on the economy in general would outweigh any extra revenue made by the undergroud.   

       If you want to travel in luxury in London, take a helicopter.   

       fishbone.
kinemojo, Jul 11 2006
  

       That's kind of the point I was going to make [kinemojo] before getting carried away with the elitism of it all.   

       Let's do some maths.   

       If a carriage can hold <estimate> 200 people - nose-to-armpit - all paying their £3 single Zone 1 fare - that's £600 per carriage.   

       Now to maintain the same price per carriage, we need to estimate how many people we can get in there under 'Business Class' (i.e. someone else is paying) conditions. Let's say <estimate> 20 - still sitting uncomfortably close to one another, but without any of the levels of intimacy your average commuter is accustomed to.   

       So now, to maintain the £600 carriage cost/revenue, we need to charge each passenger £30 per Zone 1 ticket - for which, they could simply hail a taxi (£8), go a couple of times round the London Eye(£15), and still have enough for a couple of pints(£5) and a kebab(£2).   

       [methinksnot] foul language suitably edited - by Jingo!
zen_tom, Jul 11 2006
  

       I think I'll just get on the tube with a couple of pints and a kebab.
wagster, Jul 11 2006
  

       Can I just bun zen_tom's previous annotation (the one with the great story)?
dbmag9, Jul 11 2006
  

       On some metropolitan rail systems, it might be useful to have some higher-class facilities available for an elite clientelle, but many conditions would have to be met:   

       -1- There must be a small number of connection points among which the elite people will want to travel, and the rail infrastructure must allow travel among these points to be performed more quickly than via road vehicle.   

       -2- It must be possible to connect these points to the existing rail infrastructure and route the high speed traffic around the trains that are waiting at stations.   

       -3- Moving around a full-sized train with a few people on it would be wasteful; if the signalling infrastructure could handle different-length trains, that would help things.   

       London's Underground would be entirely unsuitable for a system like this because there would be no way for the elite carriage to avoid waiting behind the commuter carriages. In some other systems, though, there is extra tracking to allow the use of "A" and "B" trains. Such tracking might allow for Super-Express trains without requiring much extra infrastructure.
supercat, Jul 11 2006
  

       By Jingo, you annotation is now even funnier, [zen_tom].
methinksnot, Jul 12 2006
  

       // Now to maintain the same price per carriage, we need to estimate how many people we can get in there under 'Business Class' (i.e. someone else is paying) conditions. Let's say <estimate> 20 - still sitting uncomfortably close to one another, but without any of the levels of intimacy your average commuter is accustomed to.   

       So now, to maintain the £600 carriage cost/revenue, we need to charge each passenger £30 per Zone 1 ticket - for which, they could simply hail a taxi (£8), go a couple of times round the London Eye(£15), and still have enough for a couple of pints(£5) and a kebab(£2).//   

       um... it would prolly hold 90 people really, with his description. so then the required fare to maintain this benefit woud be 6.75, so if we make it 8, which is how much it will take to get a cab, which is something that is usually avoided, more money will be made.
FireElf, Jul 29 2006
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle