Electric black cabs

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

I've seen them on the streets for a while up until now from a distance. Today
I saw one up close - they're pretty big brutes. Bigger than a current diesel
cab and bigger , though lower , than a range rover I suspect. I'm sure thats
nice for the cabbie and the passengers but it can't help the range much
dragging that much mass about.

[John Williamson]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I've seen them on the streets for a while up until now from a distance. Today
I saw one up close - they're pretty big brutes. Bigger than a current diesel
cab and bigger , though lower , than a range rover I suspect. I'm sure thats
nice for the cabbie and the passengers but it can't help the range much
dragging that much mass about.

As it's a six seater, it's more of a replacement for the Mercedes van
conversions than the TX4, so the passengers get the same space each if
fully loaded, as there has to be space for the built in wheelchair ramp.

It is also built using fibreglass panels cladding an aluminium frame,
so even adding the battery weight, it weighs, according to LEVC, less
than the current cabs.

https://www.levc.com/technology/body-structure/

[Recliner]

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I've seen them on the streets for a while up until now from a distance. Today
I saw one up close - they're pretty big brutes. Bigger than a current diesel
cab and bigger , though lower , than a range rover I suspect. I'm sure thats
nice for the cabbie and the passengers but it can't help the range much
dragging that much mass about.

As it's a six seater, it's more of a replacement for the Mercedes van
conversions than the TX4, so the passengers get the same space each if
fully loaded, as there has to be space for the built in wheelchair ramp.
It is also built using fibreglass panels cladding an aluminium frame,
so even adding the battery weight, it weighs, according to LEVC, less
than the current cabs.
https://www.levc.com/technology/body-structure/

Yes, LEVC seems to have used some of the lightweight body construction
techniques of sister company Lotus. And the engine comes from Volvo,
another sister company.

[John Williamson]

Post by Recliner
Yes, LEVC seems to have used some of the lightweight body construction
techniques of sister company Lotus. And the engine comes from Volvo,
another sister company.

<Wonders what Lode Lane in Solihull would have come up with.>

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 16:20:19 +0100

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I've seen them on the streets for a while up until now from a distance. Today
I saw one up close - they're pretty big brutes. Bigger than a current diesel
cab and bigger , though lower , than a range rover I suspect. I'm sure thats
nice for the cabbie and the passengers but it can't help the range much
dragging that much mass about.

As it's a six seater, it's more of a replacement for the Mercedes van
conversions than the TX4, so the passengers get the same space each if
fully loaded, as there has to be space for the built in wheelchair ramp.
It is also built using fibreglass panels cladding an aluminium frame,
so even adding the battery weight, it weighs, according to LEVC, less
than the current cabs.
https://www.levc.com/technology/body-structure/

Interesting. Browsing the site it seems these cars have a petrol engine
range extender too. If they have to use that I can imagine the cabbies will
be able to here the sound of the money being sucked from their wallets.

Unfortunaley there are few specifics on the site and I'm not giving all
my details just to download a pdf. Pity.

[Someone Somewhere]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 16:20:19 +0100

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I've seen them on the streets for a while up until now from a distance. Today
I saw one up close - they're pretty big brutes. Bigger than a current diesel
cab and bigger , though lower , than a range rover I suspect. I'm sure thats
nice for the cabbie and the passengers but it can't help the range much
dragging that much mass about.

As it's a six seater, it's more of a replacement for the Mercedes van
conversions than the TX4, so the passengers get the same space each if
fully loaded, as there has to be space for the built in wheelchair ramp.
It is also built using fibreglass panels cladding an aluminium frame,
so even adding the battery weight, it weighs, according to LEVC, less
than the current cabs.
https://www.levc.com/technology/body-structure/

Interesting. Browsing the site it seems these cars have a petrol engine
range extender too. If they have to use that I can imagine the cabbies will
be able to here the sound of the money being sucked from their wallets.
Unfortunaley there are few specifics on the site and I'm not giving all
my details just to download a pdf. Pity.

I do wonder as and when we move to primarily electric vehicles whether
that will change the desirability of a large chunk of London housing
which is close to major roads - if the noise reduces dramatically and
the pollution pretty much disappears...

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 17:28:16 +0100

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Interesting. Browsing the site it seems these cars have a petrol engine
range extender too. If they have to use that I can imagine the cabbies will
be able to here the sound of the money being sucked from their wallets.
Unfortunaley there are few specifics on the site and I'm not giving all
my details just to download a pdf. Pity.

I do wonder as and when we move to primarily electric vehicles whether
that will change the desirability of a large chunk of London housing
which is close to major roads - if the noise reduces dramatically and
the pollution pretty much disappears...

I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway and trailing a cable out into
the street across the pavement simply isn't an option, nor is sitting at
a service station for 2 hours.

[John Williamson]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway and trailing a cable out into
the street across the pavement simply isn't an option, nor is sitting at
a service station for 2 hours.

In a number of residential areas, they are now installing kerbside fast
chargers for residents to use.

The other side of it is that where there used to be a single charging
system, with connectors for all cars available and a single payment
method, which was academic, as they were mostly free, increased
popularity has led to queueing for charging points, and a number of
incompatible systems to pay for the charge, with Visa not being an
option, so electric car drivers now need to have a number of accounts
to ensure they can get a charge (Unless they are Tesla drivers, in which
case, they can only use Tesla chargers...(Are Tesla the Apple of the
electric car world?)).

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:41:36 +0100

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway and trailing a cable out into
the street across the pavement simply isn't an option, nor is sitting at
a service station for 2 hours.

In a number of residential areas, they are now installing kerbside fast
chargers for residents to use.

The obvious problem with those is some kids coming along late at night and
finding it hilarious to unplug all the cars in a road so no one has charge
in the morning. Unless they factor in the human element with secure locking
systems it just won't work.

Post by John Williamson
to ensure they can get a charge (Unless they are Tesla drivers, in which
case, they can only use Tesla chargers...(Are Tesla the Apple of the
electric car world?)).

Their car interiors certainly give that impression. All a bit minimalist with
a nice looking but not very usable dashboard. Putting every single function
into a touchscreen is just idiotic - I don't want to have to pull over just
to change the feckin aircon setting, never mind the radio.

[Recliner]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:41:36 +0100

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway and trailing a cable out into
the street across the pavement simply isn't an option, nor is sitting at
a service station for 2 hours.

In a number of residential areas, they are now installing kerbside fast
chargers for residents to use.

The obvious problem with those is some kids coming along late at night and
finding it hilarious to unplug all the cars in a road so no one has charge
in the morning. Unless they factor in the human element with secure locking
systems it just won't work.

Post by John Williamson
to ensure they can get a charge (Unless they are Tesla drivers, in which
case, they can only use Tesla chargers...(Are Tesla the Apple of the
electric car world?)).

Their car interiors certainly give that impression. All a bit minimalist with
a nice looking but not very usable dashboard. Putting every single function
into a touchscreen is just idiotic - I don't want to have to pull over just
to change the feckin aircon setting, never mind the radio.

That's only the "low cost" [ie, not really] Model 3.

[Recliner]

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway and trailing a cable out into
the street across the pavement simply isn't an option, nor is sitting at
a service station for 2 hours.

In a number of residential areas, they are now installing kerbside fast
chargers for residents to use.
The other side of it is that where there used to be a single charging
system, with connectors for all cars available and a single payment
method, which was academic, as they were mostly free, increased
popularity has led to queueing for charging points, and a number of
incompatible systems to pay for the charge, with Visa not being an
option, so electric car drivers now need to have a number of accounts
to ensure they can get a charge (Unless they are Tesla drivers, in which
case, they can only use Tesla chargers...(Are Tesla the Apple of the
electric car world?)).

That’s what Tesla wants to be, but there’s one minor problem: while Apple
is hugely profitable and generates billions in free cash, Tesla is hugely
loss-making, and consumes billions of cash. Apple outsources its
manufacturing to highly competent low cost suppliers in Asia; Tesla makes
its cars itself, very inefficiently, in expensive California.

A number of major manufacturers have now formed a consortium to roll out a
standard, high speed charging network. Most EVs are likely to be compatible
with it.

<https://qz.com/1119770/german-carmakers-and-ford-launch-ionity-joint-venture-to-set-up-a-european-network-of-ultra-fast-ev-charging-stations/>

<http://www.21stcentech.com/shell-acquires-ev-charging-provider-joins-car-consortium-build-ev-station-network-europe/>

<http://nissaninsider.co.uk/nissan-leading-consortium-planning-network-of-rapid-chargers/>

[Someone Somewhere]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 17:28:16 +0100

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Interesting. Browsing the site it seems these cars have a petrol engine
range extender too. If they have to use that I can imagine the cabbies will
be able to here the sound of the money being sucked from their wallets.
Unfortunaley there are few specifics on the site and I'm not giving all
my details just to download a pdf. Pity.

I do wonder as and when we move to primarily electric vehicles whether
that will change the desirability of a large chunk of London housing
which is close to major roads - if the noise reduces dramatically and
the pollution pretty much disappears...

I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

[David Cantrell]

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

[Someone Somewhere]

Post by David Cantrell

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

Please cite evidence because this is just not my experience for the
large majority of roads in London that I travel on and/or have seen.

Yes - sections of arterial road and the north circular etc may well do,
but that's not the vast majority of London, and I would challenge anyone
outside of those roads to even do 15 miles in an hour, let alone 30.

[Robin9]

On 06/07/2018 13:34, David Cantrell wrote:-
On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 10:49:07AM +0100, Someone Somewhere wrote:-
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly aroun
30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed road
it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffi
OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.-
So, London then?-
Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.
-
Please cite evidence because this is just not my experience for the
large majority of roads in London that I travel on and/or have seen.
Yes - sections of arterial road and the north circular etc may well do
but that's not the vast majority of London, and I would challenge anyon
outside of those roads to even do 15 miles in an hour, let alone 30.

Only those sections of the North Circular Road which have not bee
"improved" by TfL allow traffic to flow smoothly. Those sections whic
TfL have "improved" e.g. New Southgate and Palmers Green are now fa
worse than they used to be. TfL strikes again


--
Robin9

[David Cantrell]

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by David Cantrell
Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

Yes - sections of arterial road and the north circular etc may well do,
but that's not the vast majority of London, and I would challenge anyone
outside of those roads to even do 15 miles in an hour, let alone 30.

I recommend that you explore away from the major arterial roads and away
from the centre. None of the bits of outer London that I regularly drive
through are clogged up and slow.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by David Cantrell

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

Which, presumably, explains why the average speed of traffic in London
is about 8mph.

[bob]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by David Cantrell

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

Which, presumably, explains why the average speed of traffic in London
is about 8mph.

I suspect different definitions of “London” are being used. I would guess
the 8 mph is central London, which is not where the majority of “Londoners”
live.

Robin

[David Cantrell]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by David Cantrell

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

Which, presumably, explains why the average speed of traffic in London
is about 8mph.

The average speed in London is *not* 8 mph. It's 8.something in
*central* London, and the average over *all* of London, including the
centre, is 19.something.

[John Williamson]

Post by David Cantrell
The average speed in London is *not* 8 mph. It's 8.something in
*central* London, and the average over *all* of London, including the
centre, is 19.something.

According to TfL, it was 7.8mph in central London, and 17.4 everywhere
else in 2017

Expect major problems over the next year or three as various bits of the
Victoria embankment get closed in one or both directions while they
update the sewer under it.

[Roland Perry]

Post by John Williamson

Post by David Cantrell
The average speed in London is *not* 8 mph. It's 8.something in
*central* London, and the average over *all* of London, including the
centre, is 19.something.

According to TfL, it was 7.8mph in central London, and 17.4 everywhere
else in 2017

Given the rollout of whole boroughs limited to 20mph I find the latter
figure hard to believe.

Post by John Williamson
Expect major problems over the next year or three as various bits of
the Victoria embankment get closed in one or both directions while they
update the sewer under it.

[Mike Bristow]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by John Williamson

Post by David Cantrell
The average speed in London is *not* 8 mph. It's 8.something in
*central* London, and the average over *all* of London, including the
centre, is 19.something.

According to TfL, it was 7.8mph in central London, and 17.4 everywhere
else in 2017

Given the rollout of whole boroughs limited to 20mph I find the latter
figure hard to believe.

A quick glance suggests that there are _no_ boroughs that are 100%
20mph; it varies of course, but in general the "first mile" and
"last mile" roads are more likely to be 20mph and the "middle 8
miles" tend to higher.

Perhaps you could name a borough that you think is 100% 20mph and I'll
point out the roads in it which aren't.

Cheers,

[John Williamson]

Post by Mike Bristow
Perhaps you could name a borough that you think is 100% 20mph and I'll
point out the roads in it which aren't.

I can't be bothered checking which ones, but while a few claim to be
completely 20mph, they all have roads which are part of the national
trunk network in them, which are at least 30mph, as they can't set the
limits on those roads, due to them being under DFT control.

[Roland Perry]

Post by John Williamson

Post by Mike Bristow
Perhaps you could name a borough that you think is 100% 20mph and I'll
point out the roads in it which aren't.

I can't be bothered checking which ones, but while a few claim to be
completely 20mph, they all have roads which are part of the national
trunk network in them, which are at least 30mph,

And being trunk roads are congested enough that 8mph is a more realistic
figure.

Post by John Williamson
as they can't set the limits on those roads, due to them being under
DFT control.

[Mike Bristow]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by John Williamson

Post by Mike Bristow
Perhaps you could name a borough that you think is 100% 20mph and I'll
point out the roads in it which aren't.

I can't be bothered checking which ones, but while a few claim to be
completely 20mph, they all have roads which are part of the national
trunk network in them, which are at least 30mph,

And being trunk roads are congested enough that 8mph is a more realistic
figure.

Rubbish. Last time I drove on the A12 from the Green Man to Bow,
it was at the posted speed limit the whole way. And that was
at 5pm-ish, arriving at the Albert Hall at 5:45 (albeit on a Sunday).

A similar journey arriving at the National Theatre at around 6ish
on a Friday evening had a similar average speed.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by John Williamson
as they can't set the limits on those roads, due to them being under
DFT control.

I'm not sure which roads are controlled by the boroughs, which by
TfL and which by the DfT; I'm just looking at the boundries of the
boroughs.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry

Post by John Williamson

Post by Mike Bristow
Perhaps you could name a borough that you think is 100% 20mph and I'll
point out the roads in it which aren't.

I can't be bothered checking which ones, but while a few claim to be
completely 20mph, they all have roads which are part of the national
trunk network in them, which are at least 30mph,

And being trunk roads are congested enough that 8mph is a more realistic
figure.

Rubbish. Last time I drove on the A12 from the Green Man to Bow,
it was at the posted speed limit the whole way. And that was
at 5pm-ish, arriving at the Albert Hall at 5:45 (albeit on a Sunday).
A similar journey arriving at the National Theatre at around 6ish
on a Friday evening had a similar average speed.

But we are speaking *average* speeds, not the fastest possible.

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry

Post by John Williamson
as they can't set the limits on those roads, due to them being under
DFT control.

I'm not sure which roads are controlled by the boroughs, which by
TfL and which by the DfT; I'm just looking at the boundries of the
boroughs.

It's my understanding that TfL can veto the 20mph limit on major roads
which are bus routes, bicbw.

[Mike Bristow]

Post by Roland Perry
But we are speaking *average* speeds, not the fastest possible.

Yes; but you said that trunk roads in London were so congested that
the average speed couldn't be more than 8mph. But a journey I made,
during the friday evening rush hour, had an average speed well in
excess of 8mph - and the fastest section - by far - was a trunk
road!

And that is a direct counter to your argument.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry
But we are speaking *average* speeds, not the fastest possible.

Yes; but you said that trunk roads in London were so congested that
the average speed couldn't be more than 8mph. But a journey I made,
during the friday evening rush hour, had an average speed well in
excess of 8mph - and the fastest section - by far - was a trunk
road!
And that is a direct counter to your argument.

You appear not to be able to distinguish between the average speed of
all traffic (over all roads, at all times of day), and the speed you
averaged on one particular trip.

[Mike Bristow]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry
But we are speaking *average* speeds, not the fastest possible.

Yes; but you said that trunk roads in London were so congested that
the average speed couldn't be more than 8mph. But a journey I made,
during the friday evening rush hour, had an average speed well in
excess of 8mph - and the fastest section - by far - was a trunk
road!
And that is a direct counter to your argument.

You appear not to be able to distinguish between the average speed of
all traffic (over all roads, at all times of day), and the speed you
averaged on one particular trip.

You think that trips made outside the peak are going to be *slower*?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry
But we are speaking *average* speeds, not the fastest possible.

Yes; but you said that trunk roads in London were so congested that
the average speed couldn't be more than 8mph. But a journey I made,
during the friday evening rush hour, had an average speed well in
excess of 8mph - and the fastest section - by far - was a trunk
road!
And that is a direct counter to your argument.

You appear not to be able to distinguish between the average speed of
all traffic (over all roads, at all times of day), and the speed you
averaged on one particular trip.

You think that trips made outside the peak are going to be *slower*?

First, sort out in your head the difference between statistical average
speeds, and the average speed for one specific trip.

[Mike Bristow]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Mike Bristow
You think that trips made outside the peak are going to be *slower*?

First, sort out in your head the difference between statistical average
speeds, and the average speed for one specific trip.

This subthread started out with you disbelieving the TfL supplied
figures (in ***@mid.individual.net, John Williamson quoted
them; in ***@perry.co.uk you rubbished them).

After some to-and-froing over the basis of your disbelief I gave
an example journey that more-or-less matched the figures of TfL.

At which point you suggest I misunderstand averages.

You seem to prefer your own theories over the measurements carefully
made by experts which matches the experience of a Londoner who
regularly uses London's roads. I think that's bold; but trying to
be the irresistible argument to your immovable opinion is likely
to bore the audience: don't take my future silence as tacit agreement.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Mike Bristow

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Mike Bristow
You think that trips made outside the peak are going to be *slower*?

First, sort out in your head the difference between statistical average
speeds, and the average speed for one specific trip.

This subthread started out with you disbelieving the TfL supplied

"Finding something hard to believe" is a very gentle form of
'rubbishing'.

Post by Mike Bristow
After some to-and-froing over the basis of your disbelief I gave
an example journey that more-or-less matched the figures of TfL.

Indeed.

Post by Mike Bristow
At which point you suggest I misunderstand averages.

And you do (misunderstand). Average speed figures are calculated from
thousands of journeys on different roads with different degrees of
congestion (and at different times of day).

The fact you made one journey which 'matched' is simply co-incidence.

I could just as easily have spoken of a trip I did in perhaps 2015 from
Aldwych to Marylebone, about 3.5miles in 45 minutes, and claim that the
8mph figure is therefore wrong.

That was on an unremarkable weekday lunchtime, but anecdata can also be
affected by special events - my most likely reason to be driving in
London these days is traversing Watford and Uxbridge to get to Heathrow
airport because the M25 is closed. I don't expect that to correlate with
any of the published data.

But it can look pretty on a map:

<https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/19511243_1015447893752163
7_7216041464188430701_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=a39052329a8fcf074041113eaa72770
c&oe=5BDD14A9>

Post by Mike Bristow
You seem to prefer your own theories over the measurements carefully
made by experts

I was questioning the continued validity of the measurements given the
roll-out of 20mph zones, which are of course a top limit before delays
caused by "weight of traffic", traffic lights, vehicles double parked,
and even road works.

I'd be happier if it was known what radius from the centre TfL's 7.8mph
represented, and thus where 17.4mph kicks in. This 2017 study as London
at 5.13mph (up to 1 mile) and 8.34mph (up to 5 miles):

<https://www.aph.com/community/holidays/commute-getting-slower-average-
speeds-uks-major-cities-revealed-2017/>

Also whether the 8.34mph is for all the traffic within 5 miles, or just
that between 1 and 5 miles. Ditto for the TfL data.

[John Williamson]

Post by Mike Bristow
You think that trips made outside the peak are going to be *slower*?

Okay, you made a trip in the rush hour going against the traffic, and
claim that it was made at a good speed. You quote 45 minutes from the
Green Man to the Albert Hall. Fine, that's a fact I can accept.

The same journey in the other direction at the same time (RAH - Green
Man) would probably take almost two hours. That gives an average time of
90 minutes or so to cover at most 10 miles.

On my side of town, I regularly travel from Heathrow to hotels in the
centre of town, and travelling with the main traffic flow in the rush
hour takes about 100 minutes (Using all available bus lanes), where
travelling against it takes 40 minutes or so without using a bus lane.

On occasion, even outside the rush hour, the trip either way can take
well over an hour.

In my experience, bearing in mind I drive in London at all times of the
day and night, the TfL average speeds I quoted earlier in the thread
are, if anything, optimistic.

[Mike Bristow]

Post by John Williamson

Post by Mike Bristow
You think that trips made outside the peak are going to be *slower*?

Okay, you made a trip in the rush hour going against the traffic, and
claim that it was made at a good speed. You quote 45 minutes from the
Green Man to the Albert Hall. Fine, that's a fact I can accept.

Against the traffic is a fair point from the Green Man to Bow, or
perhaps Poplar; but rapidly becomes less true from there on.

Post by John Williamson
The same journey in the other direction at the same time (RAH - Green
Man) would probably take almost two hours. That gives an average time of
90 minutes or so to cover at most 10 miles.

The last time I drove that sort of route with the flow was probably
from Paddington eastbound; I don't think the traffic was much slower.

The route was different (via the Mile End Road) so it's hard to
make an exact comparison; and it was quite a long time ago so my
memory isn't as clear, so take a pinch of salt or three.

Post by John Williamson
On my side of town, I regularly travel from Heathrow to hotels in the
centre of town, and travelling with the main traffic flow in the rush
hour takes about 100 minutes (Using all available bus lanes), where
travelling against it takes 40 minutes or so without using a bus lane.

Gosh; that sort of difference suprises me. But I don't drive as
often as you do.

Post by John Williamson
On occasion, even outside the rush hour, the trip either way can take
well over an hour.

Oh, yes; I've been lucky recently. If there is the wrong sort of
incident it all goes to pot very quickly (in some locations, anyway).

Post by John Williamson
In my experience, bearing in mind I drive in London at all times of the
day and night, the TfL average speeds I quoted earlier in the thread
are, if anything, optimistic.

Optimistic I wouldn't argue with; I've not seen the detailed
methodology. But total nonsense they aren't - and certainly as you
get further out, average speed do increase quite noticably.

[Robin9]

Post by Mike Bristow
Perhaps you could name a borough that you think is 100% 20mph and I'll
point out the roads in it which aren't.
I can't be bothered checking which ones, but while a few claim to be
completely 20mph, they all have roads which are part of the national
trunk network in them, which are at least 30mph,-
And being trunk roads are congested enough that 8mph is a mor
realistic
figure.-
Rubbish. Last time I drove on the A12 from the Green Man to Bow,
it was at the posted speed limit the whole way. And that was
at 5pm-ish, arriving at the Albert Hall at 5:45 (albeit on a Sunday).
A similar journey arriving at the National Theatre at around 6ish
on a Friday evening had a similar average speed.-
But we are speaking *average* speeds, not the fastest possible.
---
as they can't set the limits on those roads, due to them being under
DFT control.--
I'm not sure which roads are controlled by the boroughs, which by
TfL and which by the DfT; I'm just looking at the boundries of the
boroughs.-
It's my understanding that TfL can veto the 20mph limit on major roads
which are bus routes, bicbw.
--
Roland Perry

Old Street is a major road and a bus route, but now has a ludicrou
20mph speed limit


--
Robin9

[John Williamson]

Post by David Cantrell

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

On the major arterial routes, outside the rush hour, you may be right.

During the rush hour, average speed from Heathrow to Hyde Park corner
can take well over an hour, for an average speed of 10 mph.

Since Boris gave us the Cycle Superhighways, one coach company based
near Tower Bridge has seen a reduction in average speeds of their
coaches from 11 mph to 5.5 mph on all routes. According to TfL figures,
on the cycle superhighway from the Tower to Westminster, journey times
for motor vehicles have increased by 6 minutes on average , and for
cyclists by a minute or so. (They have also massively increased on the
Highway, due to the choke point introduced at the Tower of London.)

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 07:00:14 +0100

Post by John Williamson
Since Boris gave us the Cycle Superhighways, one coach company based
near Tower Bridge has seen a reduction in average speeds of their
coaches from 11 mph to 5.5 mph on all routes. According to TfL figures,
on the cycle superhighway from the Tower to Westminster, journey times
for motor vehicles have increased by 6 minutes on average , and for
cyclists by a minute or so. (They have also massively increased on the
Highway, due to the choke point introduced at the Tower of London.)

Which they almost certainly knew would happen beforehand. IMO the cycle
highway was simply a convenient cover for restricting traffic flow to try and
keep it out of central london.

[John Williamson]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 07:00:14 +0100

Post by John Williamson
Since Boris gave us the Cycle Superhighways, one coach company based
near Tower Bridge has seen a reduction in average speeds of their
coaches from 11 mph to 5.5 mph on all routes. According to TfL figures,
on the cycle superhighway from the Tower to Westminster, journey times
for motor vehicles have increased by 6 minutes on average , and for
cyclists by a minute or so. (They have also massively increased on the
Highway, due to the choke point introduced at the Tower of London.)

Which they almost certainly knew would happen beforehand. IMO the cycle
highway was simply a convenient cover for restricting traffic flow to try and
keep it out of central london.

You seem to be almost as cynical as I am. ;-)

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 13:13:29 +0100

Post by John Williamson

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 07:00:14 +0100

Post by John Williamson
Since Boris gave us the Cycle Superhighways, one coach company based
near Tower Bridge has seen a reduction in average speeds of their
coaches from 11 mph to 5.5 mph on all routes. According to TfL figures,
on the cycle superhighway from the Tower to Westminster, journey times
for motor vehicles have increased by 6 minutes on average , and for
cyclists by a minute or so. (They have also massively increased on the
Highway, due to the choke point introduced at the Tower of London.)

Which they almost certainly knew would happen beforehand. IMO the cycle
highway was simply a convenient cover for restricting traffic flow to try and
keep it out of central london.

You seem to be almost as cynical as I am. ;-)

Where TfL is concerned no other attitude is suitable :)

[Someone Somewhere]

Post by John Williamson

Post by David Cantrell

Post by Someone Somewhere

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.

So, London then?

Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.

On the major arterial routes, outside the rush hour, you may be right.
During the rush hour, average speed from Heathrow to Hyde Park corner
can take well over an hour, for an average speed of 10 mph.
Since Boris gave us the Cycle Superhighways, one coach company based
near Tower Bridge has seen a reduction in average speeds of their
coaches from 11 mph to 5.5 mph on all routes. According to TfL figures,
on the cycle superhighway from the Tower to Westminster, journey times
for motor vehicles have increased by 6 minutes on average , and for
cyclists by a minute or so. (They have also massively  increased on the
Highway, due to the choke point introduced at the Tower of London.)

Which has also massively increased rat running on local residential
streets, increasing pollution for people who didn't suffer massively
from it before. Nice one TfL.

[Robin9]

On 07/07/2018 07:00, John Williamson wrote:-
On 06/07/2018 13:34, David Cantrell wrote:-
On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 10:49:07AM +0100, Someone Somewhere wrote:-
I can't remember the exact speed, but at something very roughly around 30mph
most vehicle noises comes from the tyres anyway so on high speed roads it
won't make much difference noise wise. On rows with slow moving traffic OTOH it
could improve residents lives immensely.
So, London then?-
Traffic flows just fine in the vast majority of London, where the vast
majority of Londoners live, at about 30mph.
-
On the major arterial routes, outside the rush hour, you may be right.
During the rush hour, average speed from Heathrow to Hyde Park corner
can take well over an hour, for an average speed of 10 mph.
Since Boris gave us the Cycle Superhighways, one coach company based
near Tower Bridge has seen a reduction in average speeds of their
coaches from 11 mph to 5.5 mph on all routes. According to TfL figures
on the cycle superhighway from the Tower to Westminster, journey time
for motor vehicles have increased by 6 minutes on average , and for
cyclists by a minute or so. (They have also massively* increased on th
Highway, due to the choke point introduced at the Tower of London.)
-
Which has also massively increased rat running on local residential
streets, increasing pollution for people who didn't suffer massively
from it before. Nice one TfL.

. . . which TfL also knew beforehand would happen


--
Robin9

[John Williamson]

Post by Someone Somewhere
Which has also massively increased rat running on local residential
streets, increasing pollution for people who didn't suffer massively
from it before. Nice one TfL.

. . which TfL also knew beforehand would happen.

But, hey, BoJo's two wheeled, lycra clad mates are all delighted. It's
just all the rest of us that are annoyed.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway

Nor for many of them, a mains supply rated at 60A+ to feed a charger, if
more than about one in ten houses has such a charger.

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
and trailing a cable out into the street across the pavement simply
isn't an option, nor is sitting at a service station for 2 hours.

You appear to made a significant lifestyle choice in the characteristics
of your residence.

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:16:39 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway

Nor for many of them, a mains supply rated at 60A+ to feed a charger, if
more than about one in ten houses has such a charger.

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
and trailing a cable out into the street across the pavement simply
isn't an option, nor is sitting at a service station for 2 hours.

You appear to made a significant lifestyle choice in the characteristics
of your residence.

Eh? With houses you buy what you can afford, which isn't necessarily the ideal.
If I could have afforded a 5 bed in Esher I'd have bought one.

[John Williamson]

Post by Roland Perry
You appear to made a significant lifestyle choice in the characteristics
of your residence.

Such as not earning enough, you mean?

In Central London, unless you have a million or more to spare, all you
get is a flat or terraced house, and while there may be a car park under
the block, installing a charger in "your" parking slot is likely to be
forbidden.

Of course, housing is cheaper in Birmingham or Manchester, but then
again, wages are much lower, so most of us will have the same problem there.

[Roland Perry]

Post by John Williamson

Post by Roland Perry
You appear to made a significant lifestyle choice in the
characteristics of your residence.

Such as not earning enough, you mean?
In Central London, unless you have a million or more to spare, all you
get is a flat or terraced house, and while there may be a car park
under the block, installing a charger in "your" parking slot is likely
to be forbidden.
Of course, housing is cheaper in Birmingham or Manchester, but then
again, wages are much lower, so most of us will have the same problem there.

There's plenty of places in between, where people have made the
lifestyle choice of a reasonable house, plus perhaps a 1hr each way
commute to London.

[b***@cylonHQ.com]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 17:29:47 +0100

Post by Roland Perry

Post by John Williamson

Post by Roland Perry
You appear to made a significant lifestyle choice in the
characteristics of your residence.

Such as not earning enough, you mean?
In Central London, unless you have a million or more to spare, all you
get is a flat or terraced house, and while there may be a car park
under the block, installing a charger in "your" parking slot is likely
to be forbidden.
Of course, housing is cheaper in Birmingham or Manchester, but then
again, wages are much lower, so most of us will have the same problem there.

There's plenty of places in between, where people have made the
lifestyle choice of a reasonable house, plus perhaps a 1hr each way
commute to London.

Or at least thats what they thought. Then they started using Thameslink.

[David Walters]

Post by John Williamson
In Central London, unless you have a million or more to spare, all you
get is a flat or terraced house, and while there may be a car park under
the block, installing a charger in "your" parking slot is likely to be
forbidden.

That will change. Property management companies will soon spot the
opportunity to install one using their approved installers at a healthy
margin and then bill you for the additional electricity supply too.

[Roland Perry]

Post by David Walters

Post by John Williamson
In Central London, unless you have a million or more to spare, all you
get is a flat or terraced house, and while there may be a car park under
the block, installing a charger in "your" parking slot is likely to be
forbidden.

That will change. Property management companies will soon spot the
opportunity to install one using their approved installers at a healthy
margin and then bill you for the additional electricity supply too.

What ?!?! The electricity to charge an electric car isn't free?

Another myth exploded.

[David Walters]

Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Seems to me the range and performance of electric vehicles is now good enough
for most people. The problem is charging. Along with probably the majority of
people in this country I don't have a driveway and trailing a cable out into
the street across the pavement simply isn't an option, nor is sitting at
a service station for 2 hours.

The majority of homes (in England) have a garage (40%) or other off street parking (26%).

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6748/2173483.pdf
English Housing Survey HOMES 2010 2.33

I agree it's a problem for a third of homes though.

What I haven't seen is the figures further broken down by car
ownership. 23% of households don't have cars which might overlap with
the 34% without off-road parking.

[Roland Perry]

Post by David Walters
The majority of homes (in England) have a garage (40%)

Of which perhaps a half are too narrow to accommodate a car with
side-impact doors, and most of the rest are used as a shed.

[David Walters]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters
The majority of homes (in England) have a garage (40%)

Of which perhaps a half are too narrow to accommodate a car with
side-impact doors, and most of the rest are used as a shed.

There is often hard standing in front of the garage so even if the car
isn't under cover it is off the street and can be charged.

[Roland Perry]

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters
The majority of homes (in England) have a garage (40%)

Of which perhaps a half are too narrow to accommodate a car with
side-impact doors, and most of the rest are used as a shed.

There is often hard standing in front of the garage so even if the car
isn't under cover it is off the street and can be charged.

That depends when the house was constructed. There was a trend perhaps
10-15 years ago for planners to restrict the hard-standing to less than
a car-length (generally by having really short front 'gardens') in order
to dissuade people from multiple car ownership. And didn't that work out
well?

[David Walters]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters
The majority of homes (in England) have a garage (40%)

Of which perhaps a half are too narrow to accommodate a car with
side-impact doors, and most of the rest are used as a shed.

There is often hard standing in front of the garage so even if the car
isn't under cover it is off the street and can be charged.

That depends when the house was constructed. There was a trend perhaps
10-15 years ago for planners to restrict the hard-standing to less than
a car-length (generally by having really short front 'gardens')

There are also semi-detached houses that share a drive with the unattached
next door, have garages behind the house and the gap between the houses is
too narrow and lots of other examples which will be awkward or impossible
for an EV charger to be be usable but it's probably still possible to
install an EV charger at the majority of homes.

[Roland Perry]

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters
The majority of homes (in England) have a garage (40%)

Of which perhaps a half are too narrow to accommodate a car with
side-impact doors, and most of the rest are used as a shed.

There is often hard standing in front of the garage so even if the car
isn't under cover it is off the street and can be charged.

That depends when the house was constructed. There was a trend perhaps
10-15 years ago for planners to restrict the hard-standing to less than
a car-length (generally by having really short front 'gardens')

There are also semi-detached houses that share a drive with the unattached
next door, have garages behind the house and the gap between the houses is
too narrow and lots of other examples which will be awkward or impossible
for an EV charger to be be usable but it's probably still possible to
install an EV charger at the majority of homes.

In fact "installing chargers" isn't the main problem. It's
upgrading the local electricity supply infrastructure to be able to cope
with the extra load (even assuming central generating has the capacity).

[David Walters]

Post by Roland Perry
In fact "installing chargers" isn't the main problem.

boltar stated "the majority of people in this country ... don't have a
driveway" which is what I was questioning.

Post by Roland Perry
It's
upgrading the local electricity supply infrastructure to be able to cope
with the extra load (even assuming central generating has the capacity).

I don't really know about that. I've seen some people claim smart chargers
which know how busy the local grid is will save the day. If I had an
EV I'd plug it in almost every time I parked at home but it wouldn't need
anything like a full charge most of the time.

[John Williamson]

Post by David Walters
I don't really know about that. I've seen some people claim smart chargers
which know how busy the local grid is will save the day. If I had an
EV I'd plug it in almost every time I parked at home but it wouldn't need
anything like a full charge most of the time.

Although if the Powers That Be have their way, if it had charge in it
when you plugged it in, it would be used as reserve grid capacity for
any peaks, and so would need something approaching a full recharge
before you disconnected it. Sort of a mobile version of the Tesla Power
Wall.

Admittedly, this charge could be done off peak, but it could be a pain
if you need the car late at night before it had time to refill itself.

[Roland Perry]

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry
In fact "installing chargers" isn't the main problem.

boltar stated "the majority of people in this country ... don't have a
driveway" which is what I was questioning.

Neither garages nor "other off street parking" equate to "driveways".
Houses (and increasing so in new developments) have garages in blocks
some distance away. Again, often due to planning fashion, trying to hide
them away from view. Or older properties with garages at the end of
their garden reached by a narrow lane down the backs of the houses.

A bit of everything here https://goo.gl/maps/Wnf3zaaVXW82 including
houses with no front drives on the road, a block of garages at the end,
and round the corner to the right a row of maisonettes towards the lake,
with only pedestrian access.

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry
It's upgrading the local electricity supply infrastructure to be
able to cope with the extra load (even assuming central generating
has the capacity).

I don't really know about that. I've seen some people claim smart chargers
which know how busy the local grid is will save the day. If I had an
EV I'd plug it in almost every time I parked at home but it wouldn't need
anything like a full charge most of the time.

The National Grid has done extensive studies of this and has concluded
there are many homes which have little prospect of supporting EV
charging in the foreseeable future because the local supply is only
sized at about 2kW per property (and most of that will be used up by
existing consumption patterns).

They have predicted that overall generating and supply capacity would be
saturated at about 20% EV penetration, and that's if they spend the next
decade putting some remediation measures in place. And if every possible
smart/off-peak etc tuning is done.

[David Walters]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry
In fact "installing chargers" isn't the main problem.

boltar stated "the majority of people in this country ... don't have a
driveway" which is what I was questioning.

Neither garages nor "other off street parking" equate to "driveways".
Houses (and increasing so in new developments) have garages in blocks
some distance away. Again, often due to planning fashion, trying to hide
them away from view. Or older properties with garages at the end of
their garden reached by a narrow lane down the backs of the houses.

I think we should agree to disagree on how difficult this will be. I
know people who have installed EV chargers in places that weren't next to
their home and it was complicated but achievable and they were the first
to do it. I think it will get easier, there will be local installers to
take away the hassle etc.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry
It's upgrading the local electricity supply infrastructure to be
able to cope with the extra load (even assuming central generating
has the capacity).

I don't really know about that. I've seen some people claim smart chargers
which know how busy the local grid is will save the day. If I had an
EV I'd plug it in almost every time I parked at home but it wouldn't need
anything like a full charge most of the time.

The National Grid has done extensive studies of this and has concluded
there are many homes which have little prospect of supporting EV
charging in the foreseeable future because the local supply is only
sized at about 2kW per property (and most of that will be used up by
existing consumption patterns).
They have predicted that overall generating and supply capacity would be
saturated at about 20% EV penetration, and that's if they spend the next
decade putting some remediation measures in place. And if every possible
smart/off-peak etc tuning is done.

I can't find that study, do you have a link to it? I found
https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/articles/electric-dreams-future-evs
which is more than a little vague.

[Roland Perry]

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry
In fact "installing chargers" isn't the main problem.

boltar stated "the majority of people in this country ... don't have a
driveway" which is what I was questioning.

Neither garages nor "other off street parking" equate to "driveways".
Houses (and increasing so in new developments) have garages in blocks
some distance away. Again, often due to planning fashion, trying to hide
them away from view. Or older properties with garages at the end of
their garden reached by a narrow lane down the backs of the houses.

I think we should agree to disagree on how difficult this will be. I
know people who have installed EV chargers in places that weren't next to
their home and it was complicated but achievable and they were the first
to do it.

Early adopters will pay vastly more than the economic payback for
fashion statements like that.

Post by David Walters
I think it will get easier, there will be local installers to
take away the hassle etc.

Digging 2ft deep trenches in the road (there's one near me this week for
a brown-field new house) is neither trivial nor cheap.

And as I've said, there's little point in connecting yourself to a local
distribution network that's simply not sized to accommodate EV chargers.

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry

Post by David Walters

Post by Roland Perry
It's upgrading the local electricity supply infrastructure to be
able to cope with the extra load (even assuming central generating
has the capacity).

I don't really know about that. I've seen some people claim smart chargers
which know how busy the local grid is will save the day. If I had an
EV I'd plug it in almost every time I parked at home but it wouldn't need
anything like a full charge most of the time.

The National Grid has done extensive studies of this and has concluded
there are many homes which have little prospect of supporting EV
charging in the foreseeable future because the local supply is only
sized at about 2kW per property (and most of that will be used up by
existing consumption patterns).
They have predicted that overall generating and supply capacity would be
saturated at about 20% EV penetration, and that's if they spend the next
decade putting some remediation measures in place. And if every possible
smart/off-peak etc tuning is done.

I can't find that study, do you have a link to it? I found
https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/articles/electric-dreams-future-evs
which is more than a little vague.

Try "Electric vehicles, energy demand, future energy scenarios"

[David Cantrell]

Post by Someone Somewhere
I do wonder as and when we move to primarily electric vehicles whether
that will change the desirability of a large chunk of London housing
which is close to major roads - if the noise reduces dramatically and
the pollution pretty much disappears...

See the chart on page 8 of this:
http://www.ukna.org.uk/uploads/4/1/4/5/41458009/speed_and_road_traffic_noise.pdf

In summary, at 30mph and higher most traffic noise is not coming from
the engine. For newer vehicles (including internal combustion vehicles,
not just electrics) tyre noise predominates at lower speeds.