Get your travel irritations on the Government’s action list

I agree. I lived in Switzerland in the mid-1990s and the traffic lights turned to green automatically when you approached them. On the other hand, if you drove at over the speed limit, they would all turn red! Almost 20 years later, the UK still hasn’t caught up.

Also concerning traffic lights, we should have an automatic right to turn left on a red light while giving way to all other road users (unless signs indicate to the contrary). This right exists (for turning right) in the USA and parts of Eastern Europe.

I personally don’t think that it would wise to reinterpret a red light as “potentially proceed if it is safe” rather than “stop”. Arguably there are situations where a signal to this effect could be shown (but please not red), but these would not apply to all left turns, and might additionally apply to other exits. A separate light phase would be more helpful than lots of “this turn is/isn’t permitted in this situation” signs.

If the junction involves pedestrians crossing then allowing this would be extremely bad; for example the pedestrians might not yet have started to cross the road, but they see a green light for them to cross, but there would then be potential for collisions with vehicles. So not only would red not mean stop, but green also would longer mean go.

One also has to bear in mind visibility. Often there may be obstructions that prevent drivers from being able to see the whole of the left exit clearly enough to be able to determine whether it would be safe to proceed.

I believe it would be much better to fix problem junctions on an individual basis than applying your suggestion, and this could be through re-timing, smarter sensing, adding extra filter lanes etc.

We should also remember that an amber signal means STOP; the red light only means “don’t go”. I also am against a permissive left-turn at a junction where traffic is held at the signals. Just as visibility is sometimes impaired to the left by pedestrians and street furniture, visibility to the right is often blocked by vehicles in the parallel lane. A good technique employed at many junctions in the UK is the provision of full crossing control by means of pedestrian signalling, modern safety barriers with the vertical bars set at an angle to allow through vision [thus preventing young children from being obscured], and filter lights for the left-turning traffic. This is not suitable for all junctions, of course, so elsewhere drivers will just have to wait a few more seconds which is not too much to ask [all motorists are pedestrians sometimes but not all pedestrians are motorists; moreover, pedestrians don’t have accelerators so time spent in the rain is a pain]. It annoys me when I see banners and placards fastened to the pedestrian guard rails at road junctions by adjacent traders; perhaps they don’t understand the safety features incorporated in the barriers.

I am another one who is opposed to allowing vehicles to turn left when a red light is showing.

‘gg’ suggested that traffic lights should have a countdown timer to indicate the time remaining before the lights change. Modern traffic lights consist of a matrix of LEDs, so it would be easy to show times in seconds. I suspect it would just encourage motorists to speed up to beat the lights. 🙁
I wonder how well this works where the system has been tried.

During my travels on Saturday I saw a set of traffic lights with a countdown for the pedestrians. First time I’d seen that, my daughter said I see those quite alot .

And sorry if this is late to the party but what’s with traffic lights with grills over the green light Given the number of faulty lights I’ve come across in my driving life its not until I’m about 2 feet from them that I can tell their working. So not very useful.

And can highway planners at least be drivers, all too often when a new junction is added it takes about 6 weeks for the correct filters to be added giving the impression that its an after thought. Things like the main road has a filter for turning right yet the that road there’s no filter for turning left when there’s clearly going to be no traffic coming.

I believe that the grilles are intended to restrict the viewing angle, so that they cannot be seen as a green light except by those in the relevant queue of traffic. For example, grilles were installed at light controlled crossing soon after the traffic lights at a major junction near where I live. These grilles are sometimes set wrongly and cannot be suitable for both drivers of low sports cars and lorries with a high driving position.

I expect that a move to LEDs that provide a directional beam could be a better approach.

Traffic lights with filament lamps have very carefully designed lenses to give the directional beam specified. However, most traffic lights now are LEDs – they provide the colour without light-absorbing filters, and have long life and efficiency ; you can tell by how quickly the light is on and off – no decay. LEDs need lenses to concentrate their light intensity correctly – some are a part of the encapsulation, others are added to the front of the chip.

We are a fairly small country, with towns relatively close. Work out how long it takes you to travel to a station, wait for your train, and travel to your ultimate destination at the other end when you’ve spent 80 minutes getting to Birmingham. It reduces the value of ultra high speed. Do the same for intercity air travel – how long does it take you to get to the airport, through security, and again at the other end – having landed well out of town. It’s a vanity project resting on a myth. And look ahead 10 years – supposedly we will do much more from our offices rather than having to travel. For most people we need reliable affordable and fairly quick rail travel. They will not be able to afford HS2.

Support making compensation for delays usable online where the cheapest tickets are to be had.
Never been able to use any of my vouchers obtained for cancelled or delayed services.
Even more important with more ticket offices up for closure.

This is an excellent idea, but it would be better implemented at a European level so that all eligible delayed flights are included.

This is already mandated by Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community, which states “The final price to be paid shall at all times be indicated and shall include the applicable air fare or air rate as well as all applicable taxes, and charges, surcharges and fees which are unavoidable and foreseeable at the time of publication“.

I agree with that but would also ban parking on the footway in such places. Where we live the county council has spent a fortune lowering the kerbs at road intersections to improve road safety and make life easier for people with mobility difficulties, pushchairs, etc, yet people are constantly having to move off the footway into the carriageway to get around cars parked partly or wholly on the pavement. These manouevres are precarious as there are usually no dropped kerbs at these points and drivers can suddenly confront a wheelchair or mobility scooter about to topple into their path.

I would also ban the practice of traffic wardens going round parking bays and making a note of the time the ticket runs out so they can pounce the second it has and actually make them target intersections.

Where I worked overlooked a roundabout and on one corner was a bank with a cash point , people would pull up blocking the roundabout to use the cash point and not once did I hear of anyone getting a ticket probably cos the wardens were too busy going round all the legal parking bays checking times, no doubt it is easy pickings for them.

There is no need for fuel supplements. The price of the ticket should account for the fuel costs, whether they be high or low. Charging a fuel supplement in addition to the main fare is simply a way of giving a misleading indication of price.

I am not sure about this but I think cruise lines reserve the right to add a fuel supplememnt if there is a significant upward movement in the price of oil between the date of booking and the date of sailing. A lot of cruise passengers tend to book a year or more in advance (a) so they can make sure they get their choice of cabin, and (b) to take advantage of early booking discounts. Over that time the price of oil could move significantly and there is presumably some formula for calculating the supplement. As the date of sailing gets closer the prices change, first upwards and then downwards as they try to sell the remaining places. These prices probaly incorporate the current and forecast fuel price so they might not be subject to a supplement. I certainly agree that the supplement formula and calculation should be transparent; I don’t know whether any fuel supplements have actually been applied in recent times or whether it’s inclusion in the terms and conditions is more of a hedge against unforeseeable events like a Middle East war. I also agree with Ron Reg about the refund of any port taxes if a port call is cancelled for any reason. I have no idea how much a cruise ship pays in port taxes but there must be considerable expense for the port authorities, police, customs, and immigration control. If a call is cancelled many of these costs ought to be avoided [depending on the amount of notice given] and passengers should be entitled to a refund. Obviously, the cruise company has other port expenses [like excursion coaches, tour guides, ship handlers, stevedores, and so on], and some perishable stores that were going to be taken on might have to be abandoned but still paid for; nevertheless, some of those various costs and charges might also be avoided enabling a refund. The unavoidable costs should be absorbed in operating expenses as part of the risk of running a ship on the high seas. Unfortunately I cannot see the likelihood of any campaign to achieve transparency and refunds gaining much traction since overall there is not much sympathy for the woes of cruise passengers; the crusie lines themselves project the image of a privileged class even if that is not entirely representative.

No, this is incorrect. Large commercial users of fuel can buy their fuel in the forward market for future delivery or at least hedge against price rises using derivatives. Therefore the price of the fuel is known, or certainly can be fixed, well before the time of booking. If a travel company fails to hedge or buy its fuel in advance, then it, and not the passengers, should bear the loss.

What you describe could equally apply to energy companies couldn’t it? Apart from, we all know who bears the brunt of their buyers not doing their jobs well enough.

The energy companies do buy forward to help even out price fluctuations, and to provide a hedge for fixed price contracts. It happens in lots of industries.

Why not? Because letting individual forces profit from the penalties they impose would lead to prioritising easy pickings and encouraging catching minor misdemeanors for revenue, rather than concentrating on more serious offences. Just as happened with loacal authority enforcement officers (is that what they are called?) when traffic wardens were abolished – parking fines at any opportunity, with some councils setting targets with incentives.
However, middle lane hoggers seem to abound on the M25. Travelling round it on Saturday I was astounded at how many cars stayed in the middle lane, and 3rd lanes on 4 lane sections, quite oblivious to the new law and to motorists swooping round them when overtaking.

William and Malcolm R, I quite agree. So my points would be:
* Really enforce no use of mobile phones when driving (and smoking, as this also takes a hand away from the process of driving);
* As there is now a law about mindless, brain-in-neutral lane cruising, let’s enforce that too; what those drivers don’t appreciate is that they are actually less aware of their surroundings because they have “turned off” – if they have to keep monitoring the road to facilitate overtaking they remain more alert. Overtake – pull in; it’s a very simple process that we are all taught at driving school.
* Please can we take a lesson from the continent and confine lorries to the nearside lane between 06:00 and 20:00; our motorways are more congested than a lot of those on the continent (with the possible exception of the Northwest corner of Belgium/Netherlands) and the HGV overtake crawl just reduces the available space for other traffic (as do the lane hoggers) and causes traffic crowding and tail-backs.
* Can we please do something about the epidemic of red-light crashers that we seem to have in this country? Simply install junction cameras and book them; 3 points and a fine. Perhaps surprisingly, some of the worst offenders are professional drivers like buses, taxis and vans; a professional driver should set a good example to the rest of us lowly mortals!
I think those are my main items that I think need addressing as far as road travel is concerned.

I notice a couple of weeks have elapsed since you posted this, so we must be getting close to having an announcement. Any idea when ?

Future. programme 2014 – Article 3

I am pleased The Transport Committee are forging ahead with HS2 Project in as much as it will provide fast and efficient connections between Northern and Southern Regions, spreading industrial and economic links and easing congestion at air terminals.

Beryl, have you thought of the actual time saved? How long will it take you to get to the HSs2 station, and how long to get to your final destination after leaving the train at Birmingham or Leeds. So the 40 mins travel time saved will be insignificant. Just get up a bit earlier. Spend the money on improving existing rail lines, freight terminals and commuters to reduce congestion. It’s just another Concorde vanity project that will be of no benefit to most people. Can’t we think of better ways to spend £60 billion? I can.
The best way to develop the North and Midlands is to encourage industry and business to locate there, then to make use of the cheaper and more abundant housing opportunities and relieve the pressure on the south-east. HS2 will only add to the pressure.

Yes Malcolm I have thought of the benefits which are incalculable. We have to look ahead to the future and provide for our grandchildren who will be the beneficiaries of this project. We are a densely populated and congested small island with a tendency to resist change but with increasing competition in a global market we cannot allow other countries to push ahead and progress while we sit back on our laurels and just hope it will all come good.

To answer your question I would suggest you log on to http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/000127999.pdf where you will see some of the many benefits of the excellent high speed rail system which has been in operation since 1964 in Japan and has contributed to the success of not only their economy but to the advantage of the environment and the populace in general. I have been there and found the whole experience quite awe inspiring.

Beryl, The Major Projects Authority prepared a report on the viability of HS2. I asked why this had not been made public. In reply – a “rarely-used veto” prevented the publication of this report raising “very serious concerns as to the content of the report;we can only assume that the conclusions reached are not ones the Government wishes to share with us”.
This suggests it is a politically-motivated project, not one with a robust commercial case.
I do not like secrecy when it comes to spending my taxes. Projects such as this should be subject to proper and public scrutiny.
There are better uses for my money if this project is not commercially viable.

I accept there is always going to be democratic opposition to a project of this magnitude as was the case when railways were first built in the 1800′, some of the reasons then being:

* Shareholders in turnpikes and canals
* Those whose livelihoods depended on coach travel
* Landed gentry who feared the destruction of their estates and livestock, or who said they did so
they could claim more money for the land that the railway companies wanted.
* Farmers who might lose land.

Nimby was a word unheard of in those days but thank goodness the opposition lost out!
There has to be political intervention in order for MP’s to study proposals and objections which is part of the democratic process before reports are placed in the public domain.

The Concorde project was an unfair comparison as it was a noisy and dirty pollutant which serviced only the privileged wealthy and was never commercially viable but nevertheless a beautifully designed aircraft. I lived under it’s flight path and the windows would shake and rattle as it flew over my house. High speed trains on the other hand are fast, efficient, reasonably quiet and environmentally friendly, they will ease congestion and pollution on motorways, encourage tourism and will eventually pay for themselves over time as more people will be encouraged to use them.

I hope I will still be around to enjoy the ride!