London Banter - View Single Post

Mike Bristow · February 17th 16, 03:33 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article ,
d wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:35:32 +0000
David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:29:01AM +0000, d wrote:

Compared to the total cost of the ELL extension an extra set of points
would be neither here nor there.

Ahh, so you advocate not bothering to look after the pennies and just
hoping that the pounds will still look after themselves.

That's certainly a novel approach.

So you think a set of reversing points which would have allowed the line
to run instead of being completely closed anytime there's an issue north of
shadwell is a waste of money and **** the passengers?

I don't have a good grasp of the cost/benefit ratio of your proposed
scheme. I don't think you do, either. But feel free to prove me
wrong by estimating the cost of installing - and maintaing for a
decade, say - a set of points, and the benefit of doing so - again,
expressed in cost terms.

This would enable us to talk sensibly about where in the priority
list your proposed scheme would go.

Don't forget to include the cost of increased delays when the points
fail. Obviously, you'll know the MTBF for points - I'd be interested
in knowing what that is, as it happens, so can you share your
estimate for that, too?

I guess you must work
for TfL. Either that or its idiot week on here again.

I'm quite happy to say there are things I don't know. TfL did spend
a lot of time removing reversing facilities on the tube - I think
because they felt that the cost of delays due to failure and the
cost of maintance was more than the benefit of the increased
operational flexibility. Does anyone have a link to any reports
on those measures? It might be interesting to read (and see if the
assumptions they made then still hold water).

--
Mike Bristow