It's amazing how cyclists will make almost exactly the same arguments in favour of riding their private bikes everywhere that car drivers make in favour of driving their private cars everywhere.

At a certain point, private transportation does not scale, and that applies to bicycles too.

Sure, it happens at WAY higher volumes for bikes than for cars, but it does happen.

I don't want trains and stations getting filled up by private bikes. I want more room for people to take public transit.

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

If you read my posts as "we should ban all bikes on trains" then you have problems with reading comprehension.

Yes, you should BE ABLE to take a bicycle on a train sometimes.

That is totally different than "train companies should encourage people to take their bicycles on trains and add extra bike carriages to their trains."

It should be POSSIBLE to bring a bike on a train but a) it should not be encouraged & b) there should be an extra charge to account for the space taken up by the bike.

Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (1 settimana fa)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I don't understand, though. Why should it not be encouraged? Why should there be an extra charge? The marginal cost of adding an extra train car or even an extra train is likely not exhorbitant and carries additional benefits.

Furthermore, I doubt there will ever really be *that many people* who want to bother with taking a bicycle on a train.

Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (1 settimana fa)
in reply to Gemma β­οΈπŸ”°πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ πŸ‡΅πŸ‡­ 🎐

@Gemma β­οΈπŸ”°πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ πŸ‡΅πŸ‡­ 🎐 @Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡± @Ati the marginal cost of adding an extra car could be very low, or it could be extremely high, depending on whether the trains that are running are already at the maximum length for the stations they serve.

And adding one extra train may be extremely expensive when an area is already running at capacity.

And anyway it would be one less extra car / train for other passengers.

Of course it depends on the time of the day: on the commuters' trains around Milan bicycles are usually allowed, trains have room for them etc. and usually are not an issue, but they are not allowed during rush hour, when close to Milan trains tend to be already filled to the brim with standing people. (and of course at that hour the system in that area is already running at capacity, with trains that are as long as possible and as frequent as possibile)

in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla''

@valhalla @gcvsa My point is if for whatever reason we cannot carry bikes on trains -we should do whatever is needed to be able to carry bikes on trains. Alternative is not bike on trais ban = 0 cost cos rail industry doesn't see it and everybody happy. Alternative is people using cars to carry bikes which always means much greater cost + long list of disfunctions for everyone: infra cost, security (funding dictatorships with oil money), roads, parking space, disfunctional cities..
in reply to Ati

@Ati @Gemma β­οΈπŸ”°πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ πŸ‡΅πŸ‡­ 🎐 @Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡± not really: when also the car infrastructure is basically at capacity (which is the case for the area I'm thinking about) the alternative is people considering whether they *really* need to do that trip, and possibly deciding that they don't, which is the best outcome
in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla''

@valhalla @gcvsa Lesson learned from polish transformation in last 30 years is opposite. When public transport from socialist era started to wind down people immediatelly switched to cars. That resulted in close to 20million cars per less than 40 million people, massive infrastructure investments forced by those people on politicians, spreading of cities, cars parked everywhere and people not even willing to use new public transport built 30yrs later cos they already have cars πŸ’β€β™‚οΈ
in reply to Ati

@Ati @Gemma β­οΈπŸ”°πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ πŸ‡΅πŸ‡­ 🎐 @Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡± yeah, but there the car infrastructure wasn't already at capacity, there was room to expand it, and that's what people did

the places I'm thinking about have both train and car infrastructure at capacity, and no room to expand eitherΒΉ, because there is also a housing crisis, and space to build anything is frigging expensive.

and you can't just add another car to a train when the train is already as long as the station, and on either side of the station you already have tall-ish apartment blocks that prevent any expansion (and if you could, it should be for people, not for bikes).

ΒΉ in the area where the congestion is. they have tried to build more car infrastructure just outside of it, where land is cheaper and less developed, to try and reduce the congestion from people who didn't really need to go through the congested point but around it, but it didn't really work.

in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla''

@valhalla @gcvsa Ok I have an impression we re talking different things. I mean general approach and you seem to be talking about some very specific mega city case that does not represent general country wide or even continent wide transport challenges. I saw you saying "rail should not move peoples bikes" and you maybe meant "rail should not move peoples bikes in downtown LA/London/Paris" etc ...
in reply to Ati

@Ati @Gemma β­οΈπŸ”°πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ πŸ‡΅πŸ‡­ 🎐 @Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡± I'm saying that whenever people can't just hop on the train with a bike and find place for it, it's probably not cheap nor easy to find a solution.

while on the places where it would be easy, there is probably no need to find a solution to a problem that is not there in the first place.

and yes, the case where there is this problem tend to be at least small cities (the place I know more of is in Italy, we don't have *mega* cities here)

in reply to Elena ``of Valhalla''

@valhalla @gcvsa I don't get it anymore at this point. Small Italian city where both rail and car infrastructure is at 100% capacity and rail station is to small to accomodate trains needed to move people and their bikes and land so crazy expensive authorities / trafic planers can do literally nothing to deal with that situation other than tell people to stay home and don't move...? Like, where would that be? πŸ€”
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I'm more in agreement with b) than with a)

I'm fully on board with encouraging it and having a dedicated cargo space SO LONG AS I have to pay for it properly.

It's one thing I like about amtrak's policy: if you have a normal bike, that's a fee. if you have a folding bike that fits in the same volume as luggage: you can use it as a carry-on, for free, _instead of luggage_.

It means that you're encouraging usage of portable bikes on mass transit over bulky ones, giving a reasonable option, and requiring that said reasonable option be paid for by the people utilizing it, not everyone else

I find this quite reasonable overall

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

and c) there should be options for people not to need to bring their own bike most of the time. Private transport is required in places where pop density is too low for public transport to be possible, but as you say, at some stage it doesn't scale. So there has to be interfaces where one switches from one to the other. Not only the central (intercity train) station, but also everywhere people from low density areas will catch buses.
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I think a lot of people outside NL have a hard time fathoming just _HOW MANY_ bikes would be on the train if this were an option. You'd only be able to carry half (or less) as many people, I imagine. Compared to somewhere like California where I was on a train car with "lots" of bikes - maybe 10! Commuting to the bay area on capital corridor.
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I also dislike the huge bike dumps in front of station, but I’m not quite sure how to fix those. Bikes on trains is a solution, but a bad one. Rental bikes solve the last mile, but not the first. So what would be a good solution? More expensive underground bike parking everywhere with fees beyond 24h? Take-home rental bikes? …?
Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (1 settimana fa)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I have arguments from time to time with people who think there's a divine right to bring bikes on a train for free. I usually say that if there was a (reasonable) charge for doing so, the train companies would have an incentive to make space for bikes, instead of just taking it away from paying passengers for nothing
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

it's the kind of thing that can't have a one-size fits all rule, uk you need to reserve on some trains, but it isn't really enforced, then it's a max of 2 bikes per carriage in the cycle store, folders are exempt, but the amsterdam to london eurostar has a complete ban on bikes i think, presumably because it'd be totally inundated otherwise, other eurostar routes have more relaxed rules
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

There already is an extra charge ("dagkaart fiets") for non-folding bikes (folding bikes count as luggage when folded), they're not allowed during peak hours, and space is limited. However, it would be nice if there were some more (flexible) space sometimes, as space is very limited in some train sets. With all NS trains being multiple units we can't just add a carriage (like we once had on the intercity Haarlem–Maastricht, a single-decker train with one double-decker carriage to add specifically bike space), but I do understand why people feel let down with the current capacity sometimes.
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

exactly, bikes on trains is not for commuting with your bike on the train, because that's not scaleable. And it might discourage people from taking transit because of lower level of comfort if there is too many bikes on board.

But to be able to bring your quite normal bike on a train occasionally, either with a fee and or not during high traffic times. Preferably with ticket-statistics on weather its possible to bring a bike or not when booking a train. Most trains are not full.

Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (1 settimana fa)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

The Train+bike vacation is something that kinda makes sense being catered for tbh. A bikevacation starting at home only takes you so far, a bike vacation a train ride away sounds like an awesome adventure. If that option is not really available reliably, a biking vacation starting away from home is only available for car owners, as with large kilometers you really want your own bike. If possible I'd encourage NS to increase capacity and/or ease restrictions during vacation season.
Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (1 settimana fa)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I disagree with that.

For things like work commute having rental bikes on both ends is ideal, but renting a bike for a holiday traveling is just not a good experience.

Cycle tourism is a good thing, and it can only happen if there are spaces on trains for bikes.

I'm fine with having to pay extra/travel outside of rush traffic, but there should be an option. Otherwise you're forcing cyclists to take the car, which they might not even own, or killing a good green tourism option.

in reply to Soso

@sgued I'd say that's two separate arguments. I agree with NJB that bicycles on transit don't scale, therefore bicycle spots shouldn't be added with the intention of everyone taking theirs with them. But a few spots on regional and long-distance trains for people to take their bikes on holiday that you pay extra for are perfectly fine. I'm sure they "waste" less space than first class lol
@Soso
in reply to Soso

@sgued sure there are cases where taking your bike on the train makes sense, but they're edge cases - 95% of the people who want to use a bike at the other end of their train ride aren't on a bikepacking tour, they just want a bike to get from the train station to their nephew's apartment in town.

Same way 95% of the people driving private cars on the highway aren't going on a camping trip, they're going to a town a reasonable rail network would get them to just fine.

@Soso
in reply to πŸ‡΅πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦ lazy home worker

@radiotea imagine trying to setup a cycle hire scheme that crosses borders (start in France, end up in Switzerland or start in NL and end in DE because 3 weeks only gets you so far) 😲

If only railway companies had a scheme where I could send the bike as cargo instead of luggage. *cough*

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I hear you and it is certainly a concern. on commuter trains I even agree with that (folding bicycles are a good compromise for those who prefer their own bike in that case). but for long distance trains I don't agree at all. you cant use a rental bike for (cycling) holidays. i did so twice in the past because it seems plausible and the better solution - but it was horrible on so many levels that i changed my mind.
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

Good point, above a certain city size, you just need to heavily favor mass transit. But at a lot of density levels, I do think that bikes cooperate well with mass transit, for many of the reasons you and others have highlighted in the past. Train station placement, for example, can reach fantastic levels of access and speed if people can use bikes to get to the train stations at the periphery of the city. Bikes on trains only works at low levels of usage or density.
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I think station fill up with private bike make sense and it should be that way for last mile transport. People shouldn't need to take a bus or rent a bike to do that every time they need to go to train station tho. OVFiet for the another end of journey is fine, but it should be an option not just bus/walk or rent to go back and forth all the time.
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

can't fully agree with this, since size matters. bikes take about 10x less space than cars.

stations filled up with private bikes is not a good argument either, since they would otherwise hire an OV fiets, which takes.. the same amount of space!

not wanting bikes on trains, okay, that's a fair argument. tho I suppose one could fix it by adding a specialized bike compartment to each wagon, which you can use for a fee. the fee would offset the cost of the extra amount of train needed. πŸ€·β€β™€οΈ

I think it'd scale fine, after all, a bike is about the same size as a person, so if bikes on public transport don't scale, people on public transport wouldn't scale very well to start with.

bigger problem with cars is the amount of road they need.. a bike sitting on a train really doesn't compare. like in the space a car takes on a road, you could fit like 200 bikes in the same space in a train..

Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I think having a limited number of reservable bike spots on trains is a good thing. Bikes don't take much space and they aren't heavy, but they let you do certain types of activities. Something similar (although of a higher priority ofc) is when we accommodate people with strollers or mobility scooters on transit.

I don't particularly like how some train operators simply let you come on a train only when there's enough capacity; it just adds a level of uncertainty to the trip.

Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (2 settimane fa)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I think there needs to be room for both.

City-owned bikes are great for most people, but there's a growing number of us who are disabled and ride adapted bikes. Often these adaptions are not noticed by other people, or are not obvious, but are quite important for us. I would like trains to continue to expand their bike spaces, the same way I want them to do so with wheelchair spaces; but I would like able-bodied folks to be conscious of this, and do as you by incorporating city-owned bikes into their journey, so that cycling and public transport is still accessible for those of us who are disabled.
(And to maybe, please, leave the end spaces on bike racks free, to accommodate our sometimes odd-shaped bikes).

But I do hope folks don't do the old 'how dare you park in the disabled space/take the disabled seat' thing they do when our disabilities aren't visible.

in reply to Lou Cyx

if it isn’t required but some people would like to bring their personal bicycles on board because they otherwise have no time for exercise, is this still wrong?

I’m blessed with a short commute but I have a colleague who takes the train (with her bike) on stormy days because hers is 30 km

Public transit takes 2 hours (have to take the train to the very centre of the city then a bus back out into the hills), cycling is 1 hour, cycling + train is around an hour too

And bike share bikes here are entirely unsuitable for longer distances

in reply to Lou Cyx

@loucyx Disagree. "If biking is still required, that's a failure in public transportation and lack of walkable infrastructure." With exception of the velomobile the bicycle is the single most energy efficient way of transportation we have. Thus biking can be a very efficient way of getting the last mile if we design public transportation accordingly.

And really, this is a non-problem. The OP kind of assumes almost everyone would have a bike on public transit. But if we look at reality there is never more than a few bikes on a train. Because not everyone requires or uses a bike.

Even more, most modes of public transportation are not interesting to cyclists. Going a few stations by subway, tram or bus? Most cyclists would simple cycle the part.

Of course, it might be that one is tired or hurt, or even just that the weather is bad and a cyclist takes a few stations by bus. But that is a very small minority.

More relevant though is regional train services: Taking 50km by bike each day might not be feasible, but combining bike and regional trains means quite good accessibility, even in more rural places.

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

The OV bikes are heavy, have no gears, and you need to know how to use the back-pedal for braking. And, if memory serves, they run 5 euro a day. Also, not available to non-residents, so you need a resident friend's OV card to get them.

One alternative that's great for the "last kilometer" problem is a kick-scooter. I didn't see these in the Netherlands, but they would be a good fit. They fold smaller than a person, and can go everywhere.

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I think there are probably two needs here that are both partially being met - those of the commuter / urbanist and those of the cycling enthousiast.

For commuters I would agree a larger OV fiets plan would be the better approach.

For the enthousiast, no rental will be a full replacement in terms of enjoyment and need. I'm not sure why train-bike facilities should not scale with their demands as well. Taking the bike in the train is already (rightly) a hastle over OV-fiets...

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I disagree. In the end nothing scales infinitely, so the scaling is a weak argument. And public transport β‰  public transport. Short distance buses and the like? Yeah, just cycle. Long distance travel? Take your bike with you!
If long distance trains had a well organised bike car you can easily transport fifty bikes on a single train. But that doesn’t scale so well with demand. Hence most bike cars have foldable seats so you can also put people in there.
in reply to root42

and the β€žprivate transportationβ€œ is also a kind if weak argument. In the end me walking is already private transportation. Maybe we can agree that not every train and bus requires a big bike compartment, but it is nice to have more than two bike racks (ahem ICE)…?
I think there is no β€žone size fits allβ€œ which is what I am reading into your arguments (apologies).
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I took a train to Philadelphia a few days ago and did bring a bicycle because I doubted the Philly bike share bikes had racks capable of carrying a bag or two. I was wrong! At least the e-bikes had a great rear rack that my fairly large pannier attached to perfectly! Next time, I will plan to use the bike share. I’m looking forward to it!
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

I still feel like both options are missing something, no matter which city you're in, but I've been wondering for years how to solve it (without success)

If I cycle with my own bike, I might not be able to take it on the train later. If I use a rental bike and the train, there might not be a rental bike at the destination station.

If I take my bike to the station, leave it there and go downtown, it's inconvenient if I later end my journey at a different station near my home.

Questa voce Γ¨ stata modificata (1 settimana fa)
in reply to justJanne

@justjanne yea. When I visited Amsterdam last year and arrived in Sloterdijk, it was actually a bit of an odyssey to figure out where to easily rent a bike for half a day. Can't get one of the OV Fiets w/o a Dutch bank account, and all the App bikes were unavailable/none closeby. Ended up accidentally walking into the Donkey repair workshop where one of the people was really nice an just gave me one without the need to unlock and trusted me I would just drop it at the train station
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

For normal cases, yes, using rental bikes at the destination is more reasonable than taking your own bike on the train.

But I doubt that occupying a rental bike for a week because you need to go outside of town is very efficient, and certainly not anywhere near the scope of the current OV-fiets system.

in reply to GemNico

@GemNico yes, that makes perfect sense.

I never suggested that bikes should NEVER be brought on trains, just that train companies should not be ENCOURAGING people to bring bicycles on trains.

Of course you should be able to take your bike on a train for the purposes you're suggesting. There should likely be an extra fee for it, given the extra space you're taking up, but sure, it's a perfectly good use-case for taking a bike on a train.

in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

"It's amazing how cyclists will make almost exactly the same arguments in favour of riding their private bikes everywhere that car drivers make in favour of driving their private cars everywhere."
Honestly, a selfish person is a selfish person. It might show a bit more clearly when they are behind the wheel in 2 tons of steel, but if you look closely, you can tell when they barrel down the walkway on a bike as well. :)
in reply to Not Just Bikes πŸ‡³πŸ‡±

that's reasonable but also those are problems for the better times for most of the countries I imagine. In Serbia you have to pay for your bike on a train and there are only so many space for them but I haven't seen this being an issue for people. Tiny (by Dutch standards) bike parking is rarely full either.

Maybe because despite I live in the most cyclist town here (Novi Sad), other towns are less friendly for biking and I'd rather wait for a bus or call a taxi there.

Questo sito utilizza cookie per riconosce gli utenti loggati e quelli che tornano a visitare. Proseguendo la navigazione su questo sito, accetti l'utilizzo di questi cookie.

⇧