On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:29:03 +0100 [UTC], Zen83237 wrote:
"Ross" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 18:07:38 +0100 [UTC], Zen83237 wrote:

[big snip]
Sorry but I think for a **** up on that scale a rant is deserved.

If you're only concerned with ranting you may as well go and stand on
a street corner shouting at passers-by.

If, on the other hand, you want some sensible reactions and possibly
advice about the best ways to get something done about what is indeed
a serious issue, it might help if you calm down, stop ranting at
people who don't respond the way you want - and post messages that are
actually readable.

Otherwise people won't even bother reading your messages and you'll be
wasting your time.


(Before you ask, no, I don't work for LU or any bit of TfL or have
anything to do with LU trains)
[...]

Well had it been left to people reading the TfL report they would have
successfully swept the problem under the carpet. I assume you would rather
believe the TfL version.

You do make some rather huge assumptions, starting with assuming that
we know any more than what you've told us.

So: What TfL version? What TfL report?

Note - in railway language a report is a formal document, not (for
example) the bull some spokescritter comes out with when a journalist
phones up.


If there is a TfL Report, that means there has been an investigation.
From experience investigations take time - as in weeks, not days or
hours.

So: When did this incident happen? Your original posting implied it
had only just happened (i.e. sometime today), but if there's a TfL
Report then it happened some time ago. If it did happen today, then
not only has there not yet been a report, there hasn't been time for
an investigation either.


Rant or not enough people read it.

Only until they get bored of it, as I for one am now doing.
Have you noticed how fewer and fewer people are replying to you?
That should tell you something: it suggests that people are beginning
to ignore you.


It's simple, really; you can either post reasonably and get both
understanding of the issue (and how it's affected you), and advice of
what you need to do and how to escalate beyond TfL to the important
people, or you can carry on ranting at everyone, carry on asserting
that we're opposed to you - and carry on being ignored by more and
more people.
--
Ross

Speaking for me, myself and I. Nobody else
- unless I make it clear that I am...

On 12/07/2011 21:23, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:55:04 +0100, wrote:

So: What TfL version? What TfL report?

Note - in railway language a report is a formal document, not (for
example) the bull some spokescritter comes out with when a journalist
phones up.


If there is a TfL Report, that means there has been an investigation.
From experience investigations take time - as in weeks, not days or
hours.

So: When did this incident happen? Your original posting implied it
had only just happened (i.e. sometime today), but if there's a TfL
Report then it happened some time ago. If it did happen today, then
not only has there not yet been a report, there hasn't been time for
an investigation either.

I am sure the OP will respond for himself but I think he is referring
to the TfL response in the Evening Standard article. This is
available on line on the ES site but I believe it is from a
"spokescritter" as you so eloquently put it ;-)

Loved how that article lead off by describing passengers as "terrified."

wrote in message
...

Loved how that article lead off by describing passengers as "terrified."

Their random hyperbole generator usually gets stuck on 'misery' - perhaps it
has been fixed?

Paul S

On Jul 13, 11:06*am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
wrote in message

...

Loved how that article lead off by describing passengers as "terrified."

Their random hyperbole generator usually gets stuck on 'misery' - perhaps it
has been fixed?

Paul S

No, misery is only generated when delay or minor inconvenience is
involved, though it is a totally inappropriate word since commuting
is, almost by definition, a misearable affair.

Terrified is for when something out of the ordinary happens. The
average passenger not having a clue as to how the railway works, then
becomes terrified. For example, when they see the train driver letting
go of the steering wheel they will be terrified that the train will
veer across the tracks and crash. Or the wrong colour train turns up
and they are terrified that it might transport them to some far-flung
and probably hostile part of the country. Oddly, the one circumstance
in which very few passengers don't even bat an eye, let alone get
terrified, is when the driver applies full emergency braking.

"W14_Fishbourne" wrote in message
...
On Jul 13, 11:06 am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
wrote in message

...

Loved how that article lead off by describing passengers as
"terrified."

Their random hyperbole generator usually gets stuck on 'misery' - perhaps
it
has been fixed?

Paul S

No, misery is only generated when delay or minor inconvenience is
involved, though it is a totally inappropriate word since commuting
is, almost by definition, a misearable affair.

Terrified is for when something out of the ordinary happens. The
average passenger not having a clue as to how the railway works, then
becomes terrified. For example, when they see the train driver letting
go of the steering wheel they will be terrified that the train will
veer across the tracks and crash. Or the wrong colour train turns up
and they are terrified that it might transport them to some far-flung
and probably hostile part of the country. Oddly, the one circumstance
in which very few passengers don't even bat an eye, let alone get
terrified, is when the driver applies full emergency braking.

They must have short memories. VEPs used to depart Victoria every few
minutes with doors open:-)

John

On Jul 13, 9:03*pm, "John C" wrote:

They must have short memories. VEPs used to depart Victoria every few
minutes with doors open:-)


But I bet more arrived with doors open than departed.

--
Nick

"D7666" wrote in message
...
On Jul 13, 9:03 pm, "John C" wrote:

They must have short memories. VEPs used to depart Victoria every few
minutes with doors open:-)


But I bet more arrived with doors open than departed.

--
Nick


Agreed, especially on peak trains and even more so after TPWS. Several
passengers from the front coach would
pass the buffer stops before the train stopped.

John

On 13/07/2011 13:14, W14_Fishbourne wrote:
On Jul 13, 11:06 am, "Paul
wrote:
wrote in message

...

Loved how that article lead off by describing passengers as "terrified."

Their random hyperbole generator usually gets stuck on 'misery' - perhaps it
has been fixed?

Paul S

No, misery is only generated when delay or minor inconvenience is
involved, though it is a totally inappropriate word since commuting
is, almost by definition, a misearable affair.

Terrified is for when something out of the ordinary happens. The
average passenger not having a clue as to how the railway works, then
becomes terrified.

The way it was described makes me think that it was the train that
stopped, rather than the driver taking any action.

It sounds like the train started, with the driver thinking that he had
all his doors closed -- possibly because something happened with a door
circuit. When he pushed the start button, that door circuit did what it
was supposed to do and cut back in.


Or the wrong colour train turns up
and they are terrified that it might transport them to some far-flung
and probably hostile part of the country.

I'm not quite sure about that, to be honest. I once saw a YouTube video
of an excursion train, I think a 38 stock. The train had come into
Camden Town and was holding at the platform for the starter signal,
obviously with its doors shut.

IIRC, people on the platform were confused about why the train wasn't
opening it doors, oblivious to the fact that the rolling stock was
completely out of the ordinary. The train itself was probably shorter
than usual.

On 13/07/2011 22:58, wrote:


I'm not quite sure about that, to be honest. I once saw a YouTube video
of an excursion train, I think a 38 stock. The train had come into
Camden Town and was holding at the platform for the starter signal,
obviously with its doors shut.

IIRC, people on the platform were confused about why the train wasn't
opening it doors, oblivious to the fact that the rolling stock was
completely out of the ordinary. The train itself was probably shorter
than usual.

Indeed, this happens on a regular basis on the 38TS tours, especially at
central London stations (with tourists who may believe that LU still run
75 year old stock on a daily basis).

Incidentally, it's also quite common for the 38 stock to be moving along
with one of the doors open.

"Spyke" wrote in message
...
On 13/07/2011 22:58, wrote:


I'm not quite sure about that, to be honest. I once saw a YouTube video
of an excursion train, I think a 38 stock. The train had come into
Camden Town and was holding at the platform for the starter signal,
obviously with its doors shut.

IIRC, people on the platform were confused about why the train wasn't
opening it doors, oblivious to the fact that the rolling stock was
completely out of the ordinary. The train itself was probably shorter
than usual.

Indeed, this happens on a regular basis on the 38TS tours, especially at
central London stations (with tourists who may believe that LU still run
75 year old stock on a daily basis).

Incidentally, it's also quite common for the 38 stock to be moving along
with one of the doors open.

Some people are more picky than others. There was a time when the 1845
Cambridge
to King's Cross frequently turned out a 317 vice 365. It was viewed with
suspicion by the
locals who were used to a 365. The same unit then did the 2007 to
Peterborough. The
commuters didn't bat an eyelid and piled on.

Another anecdote, when the EPB farewell tour was at Redhill platform 2 the
locals assumed
it was going to Victoria. In fact when the same tour stopped at London
Bridge en route to
Charing Cross several passengers did get on.

John