The policy does always wonder why the public passenger transport is accepted in many places to slow at all. Today in the discussion, only the simple travel time from A to B are given. This leads me to believe that the waiting times are not considered adequate. This information is only for people of relevance to their needs precisely align the timetable of the system.
This is only a very small percentage of people the case. For those who go without work flexible hours, for example, is not true. It is not for all that is in any White in the external relations of their business operate. Because if, for example, a customer calls with a company, the employee can not say in the middle of conversation " sorry I'll give you over to an employee, I need to train or bus .
If the needs of the travel randomly distributed over the same time occurs, the result is a stroke-based system has an average wait of half the cycle time. This can be explained in a simplified way: Make It 's almost every minute of a travel request and we have a cycle time of one hour. Without loss of generality, I assume the train to the minute 0th Now you can combine two travel requests as the wait on average half an hour to be. (31 + 29) / 2 = 30, (32 + 28) / 2 = 30, ... , (59 + 1) / 2 = 30 Now there remain 30 and 0 minutes, but you can show that a transition to finer and finer structures of this case does not matter, because the proportion of the 0 to 1 / 60 is becoming smaller, the smaller the step size of the viewing is.
When a clock system that is half the cycle time can be regarded as average wait time. What is the situation now, if added to the rush hour so-called "amplifier units" or is exposed to the clock at times, as in the afternoon or at night? The reason is that the trains or buses at this time are usually very empty. Man can say that the traffic volume varies, but in general but in a way that can be transported per train an approximately constant number of people. This will then work for the average waiting time of half the average distance between trains.
now remains to be seen whether one should take into account the people in the middle of the waiting period, which may be based on the track. Speaks against the people miss the train, the full cycle time for the next must wait. Moreover, this factor would be different depending on each route calculated, for instance, for an airport link for the local flight plan no adjustment of the travel request. In a state with part producing one or a few employers with uniform staggered working hours in the vicinity of the stop could possibly from a significant proportion of people who are apt to accept. Nonetheless, this time enforced a restriction of freedom in comparison to the car. This is why I advocate that the "travel time" of a connection in the public transport to objectify the discussion must always be specified as actual driving time plus half the average of the distances between the Anfahrzeitpunkten. Most of all, it would be me, this set by EU regulation on consumer protection in order to aggravate a horrendous misallocation of funds as much Stuttgart 21.
What does that mean now concrete example for Stuttgart 21? Consider once the airport link to the main train station. For this issue in the settlement discussions, the following slide was shown.
A reduction in travel time from 27 to 8 minutes, that sounds cool, but it is not when one passes to the above-defined travel times. Schedule information can take the S2 and S3. The distances between the trains be, according timetable , alternately 10 and 20 minutes. the average wait time is to say after the above formula, 7 minutes 30 seconds. The journey time is ie 34 minutes 30 seconds. And to 8 mins ICE? Now This train only runs every 2 hours. Mean waiting time than 60 minutes travel time of 68 minutes. In short, the connection to the customer almost entirely without benefit. Only 2 S-Bahn trains for 2 hours, he can save time if money plays no role for the more expensive ticket. 15 minutes in the middle waiting for the 8-minute drive. A quarter of users can comment on ICE so with 23 minutes travel time. All in all, the journey time is for S-Bahn and ICE together at 31.625 minutes, ie an improvement by the Filder tunnel of 2.875 minutes. This is a ridiculous benefits!
An improvement for the customer is optimized with an additional express train for the customers much better. S2 and S3 keep on the way to the airport 10 times, which contributes at least 15 minutes driving time. The tunnel is fully safe, but to drive through Subway Express can take the Gäubahn. This route HBH airport should be overcome so less than 14 minutes, with an investment in 3 trains, which oscillate every 10 minutes between HBH and airport, the travel time can be on 14 minutes + 5 minutes waiting time = decrease 19 minutes. They are smooth for 15 less, compared with almost no money at Stuttgart 21. Even the travel times of eg the Schwab road to the airport still fall significantly, as is often worth it as when you take over 10 minutes waiting time to the nearest S-Bahn to HBH can to take from there the new express train.
To document the impact of false investment Bahn AG, I would point to the community in Kinding Altmühltal. It is located at the corner of the new high-speed travel from Nuremberg to Ingolstadt. Will you from Ingolstadt to chin thing down, so it needs a 15 minutes drive away.
But they drive, according to information from the DB , only one train every 2 hours. This is a totally useless journey time of 75 minutes makes. Each of the flexibility required, must take the car. Why so few trains go? Because the so-called infrastructure charge is horrendously high, when applying to the necessary to ensure profitability on paper. By the way, sales of locally listed freight trains is not a danger! Pending such consideration the travel time EU obligation, we must hold each of the local politician does not do its own organizing "Pack lies, lies Pack" demo.