Great Western Coffee Shop

Will we need those road-widening, queue-busting, capacity-increasing transport schemes for the future?

From Forbes Magazine (https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/04/03/motoring-boss-questions-whether-uks-27-billion-road-plans-can-survive-virus-crisis/)


Talk / discussions have started to move towards "We slammed the lid on this, but isn't it going to be very much harder for us to lift the lid in a due course, in a controlled and safe way?"

I think the realisation that working from home is a sustainable BAU option for many, not just in a crisis, and its favourable impact on work/life balance will lead to an expectation and demand from employees for it to become part of their working pattern, and this will impact on all forms of transport as the number of people doing the daily commute reduces.

Took me a minute (call me "slow from Melksham") to get BAU to "business as usual".

Totally agree with your analysis.

Indeed, things were slowly heading that way anyway, and that might not be such a bad thing for the railway industry.  Especially certain franchises with a heavy commuting bias, like SWR, SouthEastern and Southern, that might not need to park up 100s of carriages between the morning and evening peaks and therefore might be able to run with much more efficient asset utilisation.

In my case it prompted the company I work for to do some small but significant changes to the IT services and really have made it BAU for me and I do wonder when if ever I will go back to working from the office every working day.

Many businesses that were ‘ahead of the curve’ were certainly not expecting people in five days a week in recent years anyway.  I think there will be few cases where people will just work from home all the time, but can see a three or perhaps even two day week at the office becoming fairly normal - the benefits of face to face interaction remain difficult to achieve perfectly on conference calls.

As someone now getting used to homeworking for the first time in his sixties, I agree that there looks like an emerging "modal shift" in travel to work patterns. Having participated in my first departmental virtual social function on Friday I am also not  quite so worried about the social isolation aspects of this.

There are though other aspects that deserve consideration.

Firstly, I can see that there is likely to be a proportion of the population who will be sufficiently worried about picking up infections on public transport that they will avoid it even when there is no current epidemic. It has been interesting to see how some younger colleagues have reacted, especially those with relatives in at risk categories. This may further reduce public transport use, but lessen the reduction in road traffic.

Secondly, it will be interesting to see how different places are affected. I have been struck by the difference between the location of the main concentrations of offices (and therefore travel to work patterns) in different parts of the country. There's two quite different patterns in the Thames Valley and the "Solent Conurbation" (Southampton and Portsmouth). In Reading, the town centre is still where the main professional practices and other service sector businesses tend to locate their offices. Indeed, the international accountancy firm KPMG is relocating back into the town centre having moved out to the Arlington Business Park at Theale in the 1990s. By contrast many equivalent businesses in the Solentside area have relocated to business parks alongside the M3 and M27 - all the way from Chandler's Ford to Havant. Many are at places some distance from the nearest railway station, and that nearest station may be on the slow line that meanders between Southampton and Portsmouth via Netley and Bursledon.

If the increasing trend to home working continues, which is more likely to suffer? Or will the patterns of public transport use become more differentiated in different areas?

Finally, away from work, I fear that the era of easy overseas travel to almost all the world other than "failed states" may be over for the time being. It is difficult to see how many third world nations are going to be able to control coronavirus by social distancing, and not difficult to see that the closing of international borders might become a regular response to future outbreaks of disease. The silver lining to this cloud may be the revival of domestic tourism/holiday making - which should be seen as an opportunity by our railway industry.

From my point of view, as a cyclist, it appears that the 15% still on the road are the least considerate of the road users. Lack of passing space, despite almost clear roads, and I get the impression far higher speeds. Did I read somewhere that somebody was recorded doing 100+ in a 40 mph limit.

Not particularly what I would want as the new normal.

Having dropped my daughter off for her supermarket job earlier today, I was driving in a 20mph limit and slowing for a red light when I was overtaken by eight or so lycra-clad cyclists - all of whom completely ignored the red light and then proceeded to ride two-abreast in close proximity.

I made some notes a few days back ... sharing here as this thread is covering the bigger question of "what are we taking the lid back off?" as well as how do we do it?".   Not intended to be a complete list; some items provocative; some big things probably missed and little things given undue prominence.

More people working from home, medium and long term
Death of the high street as people move more online
People not returning to public transport
More staycations, less long distance holidays
Respect for the emergency, health and utility services
Cutting of food waste and food miles - a return to seasonality
Steps towards cleaner climate; climate change and pollution benefits
A more caring society with compassion for others
Police state and elections on hold / voter ID checks
Consolidation of heritage railways - fewer around
Argument about returning services and some may never return
Spike in the birth rate around Christmas but fewer children born to casually aquainted parents
Increase in domestic abuse
Burying bad news and changes sneaked in
Acts of madmen and increased suicide rate
Donald Trump will still be US president in April 2021
In a year, we will still be in trouble; in a decade Covid-19 will be ancient history
Strange looking people with Mum's haircut!

I regret to say that I am not surprised. Unfortunately the "sport" end of cycling all to often resemble the road behaviour of the 15% of motorists I referred to, with a holier than thou attitude as well.

I suspect that just about every moving activity has its share of participants who have a need for speed.  From the "boy racers" on the road through the downhill skiers who flash through the nursery areas, and I understand some pretty silly things have been done by speedboats ... thank goodness we don't have racing trains, though even there some pretty silly stuff was done in the past - Salisbury 1906 comes to mind.

Freud had a theory about it.

I rather think all assumptions pointing to much reduced private vehicle usage post-Coronavirus are misguided. Going back to the 2000 'Integrated Transport' scheme courtesy of Mr. Prescott, and earlier, it is clear that all government attempts to get people out of their cars have failed miserably. I see no reason why that will change and I am certain that once the lockdown ends traffic volumes will rapidly return to previous levels.

I think you may be right, and I think that if there is one thing that has been brought into stark relief by the current crisis in terms of public transport, it is that the car is King.

But what is the overall traffic balance for private cars ... based on a potential strong upwards pressure for a mode of travel that maintains distance from other people who are not a part of the household unit, and a potential strong downward pressure based on much increased home working?

We talk of the (rail) peaks not returning to anything like their prior level as people discover they can work from home - but rail commute numbers are dwarfed by numbers of people who have driven to work prior to recent weeks, and they will have the same pressures / motivations to work from home where they can.

This is a shame, not only for what they're doing in itself but because of the bad image it allows people to form and magnify. The two clubs I know have scrapped all group activities, most are still doing solo rides but limiting them to an hour or so. And turbo trainers (ie indoor exercise bikes) have apparently become an unobtainable item as demand outstrips supply. It really is only a minority who are behaving irresponsibly.

My rather optimistic view of this is that certainly the peak pressure on the railway will be relieved, this might be the rather extreme way of limiting everyday travel into major metropolis's for work but we can't go on forever throwing money at a problem which only increases with every new upgrade. Rail capacity demands will be different in the future, perhaps a bit more room for freight will become available.

This may also have a great effect on local shopping. Parades and the local corner shop may come back into business and the edge of town Hypermarkets dominance reduced (this would be very welcome in the Reading suburb of Calcot where I am as there is little in the way of local shops anymore and everyone is in the car to fetch goods). Even town centres could be revived providing shared office space for people working remotely from their company (hot desks? I'm not sure, I've never experienced work in the same spot all day). In my opinion, after this will be the time for the Government to start focussing transport investment locally, where it will have the biggest effect on everybody, rather than the interurban travel focus we've had for the past few decades. More will walk, run and cycle to places, it will be time to actually improve those footpaths and remove the pedestrian hostile road crossings we associate with post war urban transport schemes. I've there is one thing that people might realise out of all this, it's that they can walk further than they perhaps thought, and that things may not have been as far away on foot as perceived from inside a car.

You never know, in ten years time the A33 and IDR in Reading might be single carriageway roads. Third Thames bridge? Na, we don't need it ;)

The title of this thread is explicitly about the transition to the new normal, but all that follows is about that afterwards itself. I think that's probably a waste of effort now, as is the similar outpouring more widely in all media. It's the transition - what goes back to normal (i.e. neonormal) first, and what stays longer - that will tell us what the new normal is to be. Several reasons for that:

1. it will last longer

2. it will be more recent in time so better remembered

3. it will be explicitly an attempt to be more normal, while now isn't and can be discounted as an interlude of unreality

4. it will become the new normal, with no clear boundary felt at the time and quite likely none agreed on afterwards.

Of course the starting point of the transition will be where we are now plus whatever changes but isn't labelled "the start of the unlocking". But some of that will just stop, and people will go back to their previous with ... well, a huge amount of haggling with the Treasury for a start. Which restrictions will have to remain is going to be shaped by the infection control measures - whether we follow the German/South Korean model or one of the others, for example.

One aspect of that is how much of the virus there will still be knocking about in the public. Even with full and even over-enthusiastic testing and contact-tracing, obviously there will be people catching it and some of them getting very ill. What implications will that have - such as will specific extra restrictions apply to slightly/more/most vulnerably groups until an effective vaccine has been deployed?

It's already been mooted that release from confinement will be by age (in part, anyway), with those at least risk of dying coming out first (e.g. age band 20-30). But that leads to a higher rate of infection among that group, even it they suffer less from it. That only works if those at higher risk have few interactions with them, so its practicality is not clear. Also, where will they go when they get ill and have to be looked after in isolation? We don't have South Korea's isolation wards; will we need them?

There's a related question, which may be hard to separate when it happens, in the rebound from now. I suggested in another thread that the economic aftermath will be more about excess demand and inflation that intractable enduring depression. In non-financial terms, there will be people rushing out trying to do whatever they haven't been doing over spring/early summer (at least) all at once in a short interval. How long will that go on? Will it start so soon that businesses haven't recovered yet? Is there any planning for that?

Transition period for rail travel would need some managing, to maintain 2 metres apart for the whole journey, perhaps only advance tickets, with a seat reservation, in a train where only every 4th set is reservable to maintain social distancing? No turn up on the day travel permited.

I predict that the transition will be:

a) gradual possibly age related or sector related
b) involve a large amount of testing and contact tracing - so these will have to be in place first
c) will require continued social distancing so:
    (1) will impact public transport capacity so fewer people will be able to travel leading to continued working from home
    (2) will mean workplaces will need more space so will continue to encourage working from home as far as possible
d) will restrict large gatherings for quite some time

The timing will depend on:

a) how quickly the lock down brings down the infection rate
b) how quickly the testing and contact tracing infrastructure is in place
c) whether and when effective treatments come along.

Needless to say I expect to be working from home for some time yet. 

And the use of face masks for shopping and travel on public transport, though infections way in can be though the eyes, my worry is where do I obtain a mask? and how often should they be washed, therefore I would need at least 3, and how should they be removed, we had training course at work a few years ago, on how to remove protective gloves, most thought it a bit of a joke at the time, being in an aerospace electronics enviroment, but having done some truly horible jobs on the track, in my second life, where steam engine sit and fill up with coal/water, in the tar like 'stuff' certainly good training.

France now appears to be aiming for gradual deconfinement from May 11. I found this interesting interview with the SNCF CEO. (https://mobile.francetvinfo.fr/sante/maladie/coronavirus/le-pdg-de-la-sncf-demande-l-obligation-du-port-de-masques-pour-les-voyageurs-des-la-levee-du-confinement_3917333.html#xtref=acc_dir) English translation below:


If this approach means that by the end of May, I have a viable train timetable to somewhere by the sea such as Saint Brieuc or Paimpol, a beach to walk along, and a flask of tea and a pack lunch in my backpack, then that will do for me for starters.

The trouble with any national plan is that there is no national infection curve. It varies from city to city and region to region. In UK, France and Spain, the national capitals are from a few days to two weeks ahead of the rest of their respective countries. So if you start to unwind lockdown when the infection rates have declined sufficiently in London/Paris/Madrid, other parts of the country will be just hitting their peaks and the most remote places (which also tend to have the least health facilities) will still be some way down the upward curve. Germany, with its federal system and lesser dominance of any one city, has an advantage here, but not one we can replicate.

That's not how it works. If the behaviour change ("lockdown") happens nationwide at one time, and reduces the reproduction rate of the disease below one, it will start to decrease wherever it was on its upswing. And if it starts to decrease, it must have past its peak - first in infections, then (after a week) in cases, then (another week) in hospitalisations, the (another week) deaths. (Time delays very roughly in weeks.)

And nowhere (among here or similar countries) was the infection anywhere near its natural peak with normal behaviour - that's the curve that led to a predicted total of roughly 500,00 deaths. But the unknowns in all this are huge, even with the best data available.

I'm talking about releasing the lockdown, not introducing it. The idea is to release the damping effect of the lockdown at a time when infection rate is coming down. This means the rate will start to increase again, with a delay. Before the rate gets too high, lockdown is reimposed, so keeping cases at a level where, in theory at least, health services can cope. Repeat for as long as necessary. The idea being that cases are never too many at any one time but society/economy can function more 'normally' during the release periods. The problem is that if the phasing is set by what's happening in eg London, the damping effect of lockdown will be released when rates are still climbing in some other places, thus exacerbating the situation locally.

A survey from South Western Railway:

https://www.research.net/r/SWRailway

Surely the economic impact of successive shutting and opening is likely to be even more damaging to business than a longer shut-down or semi-shut down.  Sounds a bit like the way successive waves of low level water pollution kill of aquatic life as the fish are hit again while in a weakened state from the last exposure. 

Better to release only enough that the infection rate does not go above 1. So cases do not multiply again. The way WHO suggests this is to go back to test-trace-isolate.  That is lots of testing, when a case is identified tract the contacts and them quarantine them so that if hey have the infection they cannot pass it on.  This would probably need to be combined with some more limited social distancing measures. 

The "best buy" method being considered now is I think, closer to the South Korean example - driving the infection level in the population to low enough levels to keep it there by test and trace with minimal other measures. In a UK context, that means ramping up testing capacity and starting testing as many suspect cases in the general population as possible, to reduce the infection rate quickly. Then lift some restrictions, as justified, based on hospital admissions (the earliest reliable measure). Only by lowering the infection rate overall can you avoid the need for severe and very severe restrictions on the vulnerable and most vulnerable - or protect those in care homes, which has not been found practical so far anyway. But the Korean way is not just to test and trace, but then to isolate (e.g. in requisitioned hotels) all those traced contacts - without saying "please".

Comparisons with other countries may give some hints, subject to the obvious problems that they differ in relevant but hardly known ways. According to the Dutch themselves (https://www.rivm.nl/en/novel-coronavirus-covid-19/what-are-we-doing-in-the-netherlands-in-response-to-the-coronavirus), they (like the Swedes) are avoiding strict rules and only trying to reduce the infection rate by the minimum set by hospital capacity (though bizarrely they label this "maximum control"). But the measures they have applied (https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/large/content/gallery/rijksoverheid/content-afbeeldingen/onderwerpen/coronavirus/poster_alleensamen6_en_v3-1.jpg) are very like here, if less heavy-handed. Logically, they should be doing more to protect all the vulnerables, but I've not found out if that's so.

Germany still looks like an anomaly, to be explained, but for us and the rest the message is much the same: the nature of this disease means that the "do minimum" objective calls for the full range of measures anyone thinks possible. And even then, the spread has only been stopped - it's not reducing fast enough to allow much relaxation for a long time.

I have yet to be convinced that test and trace will work in this country. We have been "promised" 100,000 tests per day by the end of the month. Other countries are doing 400,000 or 1,000,000 tests a day. Secondly contact tracing would require an army of people to do it by the traditional method, or a possible infringement of peoples privacy if done digitally. Contact tracing has traditionally been done by public health staff (who have been decimated since they were moved to local government) or primary care who almost certainly don't have the capacity.
Possibly more sensible thoughts can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_tracing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_tracing)

Testing and contact tracing has to be an element of the solution I am afraid.  That is why there is pressure on government to come up with a road map as this requires it to address the very issues you raise in short order.  We know it is trying to address the testing issue and I am convinced it can get to 100,000 tests - though whether this is by the end of the month we will have to see. 

On contact tracing it seems to be placing its hopes in the app.  I hope it is also looking to build up the functions of public health staff. 40 years ago local authorities would have been able to redeploy staff from other functions to do this work, but administrative changes including contracting out and privitisation have reduced this capability. 

I am getting the feeling that the Government are not saying that 100,000 at the end of the month will be achieved; they're saying it's a target/aim point.
Listening to the press questions after the advisers talk really gets me very agitated, but I'm reading the Gov. are saying it's an aim - if we meet it, great; if we don't meet it, we'll keep on trying.
My agitation comes from the press questions. Minister has stated for weeks now they won't talk in public about unlocking us.  I totally agree with this.  There will be a 'trump-like' band who will take this as gospel and start gatherings.  That will spread.
Unlocking will be discussed at these briefings months (?) later, so the press really ought to stop asking when and how.
Apologies, rant over.  >:(

I'd agree that it serves little purpose to discuss the next steps in the exit strategy now.  PM on Radio 4 yesterday discussed the results of a poll that said that was huge support for the lockdown, and the public understands it's need and isn't half as interested in hearing the next steps now in the way that the media seem to think we are.

My main worry is that our lockdown has not been as rigorous as Italy and Spain to date, yet their deaths are proving very stubborn to fall.  (Italy's have been level now at between 550 and 600 for 9 days, using a 3 day moving average.) And we are still reporting around 4,500 positive tests a day, which might suggest our death rate per day based on new infections of around 600 in a couple of weeks.

So what do we do?  Keep things in lockdown just enough to keep hospitalisations within the capacity of the NHS and accept that we are going to see deaths of 500+ a day for several months?  And if not what?  And that's before you add in all the extra deaths above those reported by the daily figures, which based on ONS figures suggests the underlying increase in deaths is at least 50% higher.   

I agree. For one thing, it makes planning impossible if there is the continual possibility, expectation even, of another lockdown, but no one knows quite when or for how long or in what way it will be implemented. And if closing schools for half a year and improvising GCSE* and A level results is an educational disruption, what will be the effect of closures every other month?

*My son's comment "I learnt those poems by heart and now what for?" to which I pointed out that he had at least enjoyed them (well, most of them).

The latest police guidelines (https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/coronavirus/lockdown-covid-19-police-shopping-drive/) (to which I've referred elsewhere in this Forum) seem to lift the lid a little  - and I'm still blinking very hard at some of them, even the one that might benefit me a lot, "People can drive to do a country walk but only if the walk is longer than the drive".

And one can "buy a small amount of a staple item or necessity (for example a newspaper, pet food, a loaf of bread or pint of milk)". Two days ago, I decided against buy just a newspaper AND some milk because it would have meant exchanging coins.

Oh, the irony! I've gone from wondering whether my walks in excess of an hour were antisocial to believing that some of the latest guidance makes a nonsense of being expected to Stay at Home.

Edit to clarify link - Grahame

The latest police guidelines (https://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/COVID-19/Documents/What-constitutes-a-reasonable-excuse.pdf) read almost like the original Sunday Trading Laws. IIRC, you could by a top-shelf magazine, but you could not purchase a copy of The Bible.

The bit that stood out for me [on the latest police guidelines] relates to visiting a local DIY store. Apparently, you are allowed to buy a fence panel, but you cannot purchase paint - i.e. you can repair, but you cannot renew!

Leaving aside the pros and cons of buying such products at this time, I would be more at risk trying to install a fence panel  than painting it!

But Our Glorious Leaders hve said that if it is on sale in a shop that is allowed to stay open, you can buy it.

Hands not knowing what the other is doing spring to mind, as does my old mother's favourite saying - "clear as mud"

I don't have a problem with that - it's quite clear.  As it says, 'The regulations specify maintenance and upkeep. This does not extend to renovation and improvements.' 

It would be unreasonable to ban repairs to property damage, but they are trying to prevent people from going DIY crazy for the sake of it.  That of course leads to many additional people piling into DIY shops to get the equipment and materials needed.

See B&Q are reopening some stores, as are some car plants, and from Constrution news, thre is ashotage of plasterboard, being used for the Nightingale hospitals, also a shortage of bricks and morter, so some brickworks and other factorys are reopening.
Also the South Africans will be able to buy cigarettes from 1st May, but no alcohol so far.
We will have to see social distancing for many months yet, how railways get back to even som sort of break even situation is beyond me. Both the main UK network, heritage and smaller railways.

Happy St George's day too.

Do not think that any increase in train services to the reported 80% will mean there will be 80% of the normal capacity as social distancing will need to be maintained both on trains and stations

Specific GWR inputs - http://www.passenger.chat/23306 - in the "Transport Scholars" area.  If you are not a member there (where we get into dispassionate detail on occasions) please message me, or like this post, and I can add you in.

Just to let you know that my post-lockdown dream has now been fulfilled. I did get my viable timetable to Paimpol, I did get my beach to walk along, and I did eat the feast-like pack lunch provided by the missus.

I even got my long-craved McDonald's bonus for dinner, although this involved walking into the restaurant with a mask, cleansing my hands with gel, keeping the mask on while placing my order on the touchscreen and paying by contactless debit card, and keeping it on while sitting down at my table, through being served by my masked waitress, cleansing my hands with gel again, and only then taking it off to eat my food, then putting it straight back on after finishing and leaving straightaway was probably one of the most bizarre dining experiences ive ever encountered...

Oh, and yes I was the only customer at the time.