The latest issue of Eurotransport discusses research done in Germany to assess the real value of public transport in an interesting way.

Supposing public transport operations in Koeln (Cologne) were halved - what would be the total cost of that?

Subsidies would reduce, by some 26.5m Euros - but costs elsewhere in the system would rise by 139.4m Euros.

Many of the passengers currently using transit would change to using a car. The city would have to pay out an extra 27m Euros in roads and parking space. The passengers themselves would have to pay an additional 130m Euros in parking and car running costs (and, in some cases, car purchase costs too). However, they would save 58m Euros on public transport fares.

Public transport related accident costs would go down by 15m Euros, but this would be more than offset by a 55m Euros rise in the cost of car accidents.

Much of the expenditure of the transit system is local. 59% of the 253m Euros spent by the local transit agency on goods and services went to suppliers in the city, and almost two-thirds of the 133m Euros wage bill is paid to Cologne-based employees. So 82c of each Euro spent stays in the region: 61c remains in Cologne itself.

Fascinating!

A number of German light rail or tram systems only use renewable energy for their operations.

These include Darmstadt, Dortmund, Erfurt, Freiburg and Krefeld.

Hamburg's rapid transit system also only uses renewable energy.

I have blogged in the past about the problems I had getting a pre-booked ticket out of the machines (and it was plural!) at Euston Station, caused by the presence and misleading description of two numbers on the on-line ticket booking form.

It's even worse if you try elsewhere!

I booked travel between St. Albans and Birmingham University, and opted to collect the tickets at St. Albans.

The booking confirmation gives two numbers - a 10 number described as 'Your booking reference' and an 8 digit number described as 'Your FastTicket Reference'.

When you go to the ticket machine and insert your credit card to identify yourself, you are asked for a booking reference.

But the booking reference is not what it needs - that doesn't work! It has too many digits (hence my frustration last time - I thought there was a problem with the screen!). You need to enter the FastTicket reference.

So why doesn't it say so?

I caught the 9:43 (from Euston to Glasgow via Birmingham): the platform was announced at 9:27 and I was on board (in the front coach) at 9:31.

The 9:40 Euston - Manchester alongside was full in standard class - possibly it was the first off-peak train.

Left 9:43:06, passed Watford (17 miles) 9:58. Milton Keynes (50 miles) arrived 10:15:53, left 10:17:26 (4 minutes late). Coventry arrive 10:42:18, depart 10:42:18 (2 late). Brief dead stand at mile post 104 at 10:53:25. Snowdrops growing randomly in the banks. Birmingham International (104.75 miles) arrive 10:56:07 depart 10:58:10 (7 late). New St. arrive 11:13:05.

Many signs of reconstruction work at New St. Station.

Caught 11:30 Cardiff train non-stop to University (class 170 dmu): left 11:33:05 arrived 11:39. On leaving New St., the guard said 'Good afternoon: welcome to the 11:30 to Cardiff'!

Just caught train back from University at 18:32: then caught 18:50 to Euston. Left 18:50:44. International arrive 18:59:50 depart 19:01:00 (1 minute late). Coventry arrive 19:09:29 depart 19:11:20 on time. Rugby arrive 19:20:01 beside London Midland train to Euston via Northampton: no cross platform interchange possible because its doors were shut although it didn't leave for a few minutes. Left 19:24:07 2 minutes late. Euston 20:13, 1 minute early (not 5 as was announced).

Caught 20:34 from St. Pancras: a neighbour gave me a lift home so I was indoors at 21:10, 170 minutes after leaving the lecture room at Birmingham University!

I've just tried to buy tickets on First Capital Connect's web-site.

I found two irritating features.

The first is that the number of passengers defaults to zero - and, of course, if you don't notice this you are then told to go back and enter a number greater than zero! Why not default to one adult?

My destination was University Station, in Birmingham. I started typing University in the destination box, and was offered 'University (Birmingham)'. That looked about right, so I accepted it.

Sadly, it wasn't right enough - because on the next screen, I was told I had an invalid destination! Come on, guys, you suggested it!

I had to start typing in University again, and this time was offered 'University (UNI)'. I accepted that, in the hope that this offered option would work: wonder of wonders, it did!

When you join the Virgin Flying Club, you are offered various options.

You can book a flight - of course - or you can book a car, hotel or airport parking.

What you do not seem to be able to do is to book a train journey - even though Virgin is a major UK train operator, and you can earn points on your Flying Club card when using their trains.

Odd.

Passenger Transport, the fortnightly magazine of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) is always irritating to read. It seems that every second article is continued six pages later and concluded two pages after that - so you are always skipping back and forth between pages. For no obvious reason, either!

What is particularly irritating is that I try to read this on the train going home. Doing this while standing up - skipping from page to page - is not easy. No doubt I am not the only reader who commutes, who sometimes stands, and who tries to read the magazine during the commute.

The 30 January issue - the most recent to reach me - only has one article which is carried over to another page. Wowee! It actually made it easy to read (and yes, I did have to stand for part of my journey).

What so often happens is that, if an article looks a bit marginal, I just don't bother to turn to page 28 to read the next third and then to page 32 for the remainder. In this issue, I actually read almost all of the articles.

I do hope it is a sign of better times to come!

I really liked this article - shocking though it is.

Read it on the web-site of the Atlantic Cities - I cannot improve on it.

Air Asia X, Malaysia's long-haul new entrant carrier, is allowing passengers to pay a small supplement to have an empty seat next to them, or to have a row of three seats to themselves.

This option is only available for on-line bookings: passengers have to go to the Upgrade section and select the Empty Seat Option.

The cost is US$20 - US$50, depending on destination and time of travel.

If it is not possible to provide the empty seat - presumably on busy flights - the premium will be refunded.

For more information, look at the Air Asia web-site.

The work to create a new Crossrail station at Paddington, London terminus of Heathrow Express, has necessitated the closure of Eastbourne Terrace to vehicles until 2014.

At the south end of Eastbourne Terrace, there is a traffic-light controlled cross roads - now only 3-way, rather than 4, because of the closure of Eastbourne Terrace.

Each of the four arms used to have a pedestrian phase on the traffic lights. Now, the Eastbourne Terrace crossing is of course no longer light controlled. The other three crossings are marked 'Crossing out of use' - even though the Green Man still beckons pedestrians to cross from time to time. Presumably a pedestrian phase on the temporary lights does not reliably work - or does anyone has any better reason why the crossings have been signed out of use?

The practical effect is zero. Pedestrians still cross the roads there - why wouldn't they, and where else would they cross?

Bizarre!

This morning I was waiting for a Jubilee Line train at West Hampstead station: the next train was in 4 minutes, an unusually long time at 8 in the morning. The second train was a minute after that, the third a minute after that, and the 4th two minutes later.

I noticed that virtually everyone, at virtually all of the stations that first train stopped at, pushed their way on to it - even though it was full and standing on arrival at West Hampstead, and got even more full thereafter. Very few waited for the next train - likely to have had much more room on.

This is a phenomenon I have noticed before, on several occasions - people will get on the first train even though it is very crowded, rather than waiting a few minutes (just one, in this case) for another likely to be less crowded.

Then, of course, they complain that they were 'forced' to stand!

I was travelling through West Hampstead Thameslink last night and saw that the digital clocks on two platforms were out of sync. In this day and age, how do they manage to do that? Aren't they all centrally controlled?

The one on the Up Slow was about two and a quarter minutes behind the one on the Down Slow - and it was the latter which was correct.

There was a nice exchange of correspondence in the railway press on this topic some years ago. Someone wrote to complain that all the clocks on King's Cross staion were showing different times. A response - no doubt unofficial - in the next month's issue was to the effect that there was no point in having more than one clock if they were all going to show the same time!

The editorial in the February issue of 'Air Transport World' was on safety.

Among other things, it claimed that, "Statistically speaking, flying commercially is by far the safest way to get from one point to another".

It then quoted some statistics. Total US aviation-related fatalities in 2010 were 472, well below those from boating (733), rail (813) and road (33,883).

I could not easily find the source of those statistics. What I can say is that they do not prove the assertion quoted above them.

Why? Because the vast majority of railway-related fatalities are related to trespass and suicide. The next largest contingent are level crossing accidents - and virtually all of these are the fault of a road user. The former certainly do not contribute to the likelihood of you getting from point A to point B safely: the latter rarely do (because you are much safer in a train hitting a road vehicle than in a road vehicle hit by a train).

US Rail transport accident statistics are collected by the Federal Transit Authority (for local railways) and the Federal Railroad Administration (for main-line railways).

2008 statistics from the FTA show that that there was 1 passenger fatailty, 10 fatalities among patrons (people not actually travelling), 92 to the public (of which 69 were trespass or suicide) and 3 to employees.

FRA's statistics for the same year show that 27 people were killed in train accidents (higher than average because of the Southern California Metrolink incident), 247 in highway/rail crashes and 444 'other' (mainly trespass/suicide).

To prove (or otherwise) ATW's assertion, one needs to know the risk - the number of passenger fatalities divided by the number of passenger kilometres, passenger journeys or passenger hours (because there are three measures of exposure, not one) by each mode.

I can find an approximation to these figures for Great Britain, in Transport Statistics Great Britain for 2011 (although I appreciate that they are not an exact comparison).

There were 8 fatalities caused by accidents involving UK aircraft: in Great Britain, there were 211m terminating passengers.

There were also 8 fatailites to rail passengers. In Great Britain, there were 1.4bn passenger journeys.

Comparable - or better - statistics for the US would be appreciated. Is ATW right or not?

There is a family friendly security lane at Terminal 5 at Heathrow.

When I went through on a recent Saturday morning there were plenty of people about - but few families. Result: 4 people staffing the lane standing around waiting for custom while at the other security lanes, people had to wait.

Not a downside of a family lane as such, but a downside of queue management.

Virgin Atlantic are gradually introducing a system called Travel Tip Catcher - initially on their first two A330s.

Passengers can use the touch-screen in-flight entertainment system to read tips about their destination. They can also send their own messages, search reviews, filter by category and rate information from other passengers.

Read more on the vtravelled blog.

I've just been sent a 2009 article from the Los Angeles Times - 'LAX parking lot is home away from home for airline workers'.

Apparently in Parking Lot B at the airport there is a nest of about 100 mobile homes.

They are occupied by aircrew, mechanics and other airport workers: it saves a very long commute or the expense of an apartment near to the airport, for people whose main residence is some distance away. Such is the demand for accommodation that there is a waiting list.

The area is policed by the airport authorities, who ensure that only aviation-related workers live there.

To allow sleep in the noisy and brightly lit environment, windows are blacked out; and some people have 'white noise' machines to help override the sound of aircraft low overhead.

One of the claims made in the article is that people living there actually get more rest than if they commuted: pilot fatigue has an issue in at least one recent air accident. According to the National Transportation Safety Board, of 137 New Jersey based pilots employed by Colgan Air, 49 travelled more than 400 miles to work and 29 more than 1000 miles. The residents of Lot B have main residences scattered from Indianapolis to Hawaii.

Given that there is near-continuous air traffic, what is the quality of sleep actually achieved?

You can read the full article on the website of the Los Angeles Times.

Rome's Leonardo Express has new trains - four Alstom Minuetto emus, of which two were delivered in December.

There are good and bad points about the service.

Among the good - the trains are low floor with level access from platforms (although with some areas accessed by internal steps), they go from a more convenient platform at Termini station (24, rather than 25 - a shorter walk from anywhere!), and there is a guaranteed service (by bus) in case of strikes.

Among the bad - trains have 109 fewer seats than the ones they replace (and they still only run every half hour), and tickets bought on-line are only good for a specific train (although they can be changed for another within 90 minutes).

You can get by rail from New York Penn Station to both JFK and Newark Liberty International Airport without too much trouble. But only if you know. Because provision of information about this within the station is very limited.

There are plans to expand passenger handling facilities at the station by building an extension - the Moynihan Building - in part of the former US Post Office (the Farley Building).

Last time the station received a major upgrade (1963), it handled 200,000 commuter trips a day: now it handles over 640,000: it is busier than JFK, LaGuardia and Newark airports combined.

As well as the welcome and much overdue expansion of capacity, one element caught my eye. One element of the new building is an information centre for the Airtrain services.

Wow! Information! Great!

But don't hold your breath. That's phase 2: likely completion date is 2015.

Car-sharing as an alternative to single-occupancy driving is quite common, and is promoted by many companies (like BA and BAA) to reduce their carbon footprint.

It does rely on people making much the same trip at much the same time on most days.

I saw a study of a system which could be used on a much more off-the-cuff basis. It was in Transportation Research Record 2217, in an article entitled "Real time ridesharing" by Andrew Amey and colleagues.

The aims of the project were to identify, highlight and discuss potential benefits and obstacles: it found a series of challenges.

The study looked at the idea of one-off ride-shares, arranged at relatively short notice. Clearly, these have become much easier to arrange with developments in technology (in particular, smart phones with constant network connectivity and Global Positioning Systems).

Research among stakeholders (including commercial ride-share service providers and public-sector promoters) was followed by a workshop session.

Economic challenges include information (about each other - driving record, criminal history), transaction costs (the time needed to set up the share, and the need for a diversion away from a preferred route), and the decreasing cost of car purchase (at an all-time low of 22 weeks income, compared with highs of 30 weeks 10-15 years ago).

Social and behavioural challenges include 'stranger danger' (but most car-shares are between people known to each other), power mismatch (the driver is 'in charge' and to a large degree able to dictate things like stops, routes and timings), flexibility and reliability.

Institutional challenges include institutional collaboration (difficult!), the business model (from the point of view of a commercial coordinator) and competition.

The study found that relatively few people wanted to arrange a ride at short notice: the need was more for a part-time or occasional arrangement made perhaps the evening before. This suggests that a real-time service could close at, say, 20:00 and send requests and offers out then.

Large employers are obvious potential organisers and beneficiaries.

An interesting idea, on which more work is necessary.

Theft of metal - particularly copper - is a major problem for railways among others. Cut a signal cable and you stop trains!

As I have reported before, several protective measures are being implemented - physical and legal.

Among recent ones I have seen are:

copper thieves being charged with economic sabotage rather than just theft (in South Africa);

securing lineside infrastructure - anchoring and burying cables, and CCTV protection in vulnerable areas;

remote monitoring systems, new fences, new lighting, additonal security staff;

trembler alarms and hidden cameras;

helicopters with heat-detecting night vison cameras;

unbreakable casings;

smart water and tracking tags which cannot be removed - the former seems to be particularly effective, reducing the problem on one line by a fifth, but it's not cheap; and

requiring sellers of copper to present photo identification, and not paying them cash (although this might drive sales away from legitimate scrap dealers.

An obvious low-cost measure is briefing drivers and other railway staff to look out for suspicious lineside activity - unmarked vans near the line, people not in official high-visibility clothing around the railway.

Other ideas welcomed!

The international railway union UIC has launched a project aimed at reducing trespass and suicide on railways.

The RESTRAIL project is part of the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development of the European Union.

Best practice in prevention, high-risk access points and countermeasures will be analysed, with the end product being a toolkit of steps to reduce the problem and to mitigate consequences.

For more information and to keep up to date with this vitally important project, look at the RESTRAIL web-site

I am always impressed by Utah Transit Authority, in Salt Lake City - now busy building their Airport Light Rail Line, likely to be completed this year.

Paul O'Brien, their Rail Services General Manager, gave an impressive presentation on their use of social media at the recent annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board.

Apart from the content of his presentation (excellent - entertaining and with real content) I was impressed by the style. Yes, he used a Powerpoint presentation: yes, there were a few good and relevant pictures. But interspersed among these were slides which had one to four simple words in white on a black background - and that was it! Wow! Powerful!

When talking about the development of their much-used twitter system, for example, he talked about the three stages of implementation - initial research, initial growth, and the present steady-state stage. These he described as Seeding, Feeding and Weeding. Each was introduced by a one-word slide, to which he spoke.

This of course is the complete antithesis of some speakers, who try to cram as many words as possible onto a slide (and then limply apologise - 'You probably cannot read this' - to which the obvious rejoinder is, 'Well why did you show it then?').

Many local buses in the US are equipped with racks on the front, to carry up to three bikes - something I have yet to see on this side of the Atlantic.

It brings problems as well as benefits - particularly the problem of delay, while they are loaded and unloaded.

Another problem is that - amazingly - they are sometimes not collected by their owners at the end of their bus ride.

The local transit agency in Columbus, Ohio, recently managed to dispose of 49 abandoned bikes in an imaginative way. After keeping them for 60 days for owners to claim them, they gave them to a local not-for-profit agency, the Mid-Ohio Foodbank. The bikes were spruced up by the local fire brigade: they were then passed on to local children for Christmas as part of the 'Firefighters 4 Kids' programme.