On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 19:40:00 +0000, Bruce
wrote:

Recliner wrote:
Bruce wrote:

I can't really see the point of this for the Metropolitan. The
Circle/Hammersmith and City, yes. The District, perhaps. But these
trains appear completely unsuited to Amersham and Chesham services
because of their comparative lack of seating and its comparative lack
of comfort. How anyone could select such trains for the Metropolitan
simply beggars belief.

Ah, the wonders of PPI schemes... Of course, initially the lack of
seating was justified by the higher frequency and shorter running
times that were planned to be introduced at the same time, thanks to
the new signalling system


Gordon Brown's PPI was always going to be a disaster. That much was
clearly apparent even before it started. Many have said Brown
insisted on it out of sheer spite to ensure that Ken Livingstone could
not gain political capital from the improvements to the Underground.

But after the PPI failed, there was still an opportunity to do
something about the seating. You have to wonder what all the people
are doing whose non-jobs were preserved after the PFI fell apart. They
are employed expensively by Transport for London to do what appears to
be f*** all.

I wonder if Bombardier was entitled to some draconian penalty if the
spec was changed in any way? After all, once Metronet had collapsed,
Bombardier had no reason to play ball.