|
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
[x-posted to utl, solely to annoy Walter Mann]
On Jul 13, 10:50*pm, Bruce wrote: START QUOTE TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it Posted by: Mark Hansford 12 July, 2011 By 2031 there will be 1.3 million more Londoners and 750,000 new jobs in the capital. But getting those Londoners to those jobs will be impossible unless Transport for London (TfL) is able to wrestle control of suburban rail services away from the Department for Transport and its phalanx of train operating companies (TOCs). That at least is the view of TfL, which late last month went public on a very bold plan to take charge of routes currently operated by a bewildering array of 10 TOCs. Its point is simple: more than 600,000 extra passengers will need to be carried at peak times by the public transport system by 2031, a large proportion by rail; Londoners make more than five times as many rail trips than the rest of England, and pay higher fares, yet receive only a quarter of the public expenditure per trip; significant long term investment is needed to avoid trains becoming more crowded and service quality falling. In short, without investment, London’s ability to grow and support the UK economy will be undermined. The wheels are already turning on this one: London mayor Boris Johnson has agreed to provide transport secretary Philip Hammond with an independent review of the case for devolution of inner suburban services in London; TfL’s London Rail division has already commissioned one from NERA economic consulting. The report has not been published, but TfL managing director for rail Mike Brown has told TfL’s rail and underground panel that it concludes that “TfL has put forward a compelling case for adopting a different approach to rail services in London, and for being given the powers to provide the leadership that is required in London”. The report, Brown says, focuses on two devolution options: joint TfL/DfT franchising of rail services and TfL concessions. He says NERA finds that these options could deliver a higher level of services and standards but at a lower cost if revenue risk is transferred from the TOCs to TfL. Industry experts who spoke to NCE were surprised by the boldness of TfL’s message. “I’ve not heard them [TfL] be as bold as that before,” said one. But TfL is coming from a position of some strength, with the early indications that its London Overground concession is proving a storming success. In April, London Overground was the best performing part of Britain’s national rail network, with 96.3% of trains arriving on time. This builds on 12 months of good performance – over the last year 94.9% of Overground trains were on time, the highest annual figure of any train operator in Britain. Customer satisfaction on the Overground has also reached an all time high. Then May saw the completion of £550M of improvement work on the North London part of the London Overground network, delivering up to double the number of trains on a key Olympic rail route to Stratford, and following on from the introduction of new trains and refurbishment of stations. In total Transport for London has invested £1.4bn in the route since taking over the former Silverlink network in 2007. It runs it through a concession, awarded to a joint venture of MTR and Deutsche Bahn and differs from DfT franchises because TfL takes 90% of the revenues for reinvestment in London’s transport network, leaving just 10% for the joint venture. The concession runs stations and the trains; Network Rail maintains the track and signals. TfL would use a similar structure to run other lines that come under its control. Investment would largely be focused on providing 12 car trains on most routes, along with providing additional connectivity and capacity on the West Anglia Main Line through phased four-tracking. This makes the job not dissimilar to the work done on the East London and North London lines through London Overground, where capacity has been greatly increased through two or three significant infrastructure investments, several smaller scale junction improvements and a big investment in rolling stock and station upgrades. The timing is good, should such a move come off. *The Greater Anglia franchise – which serves a massive planned housing development area in West Anglia – is currently out to tender for a short term replacement franchise that will start in February 2012 and run until July 2013, with a possible extension of up to 12 months. Stagecoach, Netherlands State Railways and Go Ahead are in the frame. The Southeastern franchise has been extended by two years and will now run until March 2014. “It’s an important time for rail planning,” Brown told NCE’s London Rail summit. “It’s time to put our case.” And a good case it would seem to be. END QUOTE Mark Hansford is managing editor of New Civil Engineer magazine. *The above appeared yesterday (12 July) on his blog. Not a new idea of course - the London Regional Rail Authority concept was being pushed a few years back by TfL under then Mayor Ken. Any plans to wrest more control over to TfL of London area rail services are to be welcomed I reckon - Livingstone failed to persuade the last government that the inner suburban (aka South London Metro) routes should be transferred over to TfL control, but succeeded in winning all sorts of passenger benefits under the new Southern franchise. TfL have stuck their oar and money in across the London rail network for the benefit of the passenger and of London. In a sense this is just all just the age old issue of the LT / LU and BR / NR divide in Greater London, which bubbled up all those years ago in the Fares Fair wrangle of the early 80's, and continues to live on in one form or another (its most acute reincarnation of recent years - being the inability, until Jan 2010, for passengers to be able to use Oyster PAYG on much of the NR network in London). It was encouraging to hear Bozza, early on in his Mayoralty, commenting on how it seemed obvious that there should be a better way of handling the rail network in London - though to be fair he probably hadn't the faintest about how it all worked until he found himself plonked on the top floor of the glass testicle with a remit to actually do something about such things. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 14/07/2011 00:03, Mizter T wrote:
Not a new idea of course - the London Regional Rail Authority concept was being pushed a few years back by TfL under then Mayor Ken. Any plans to wrest more control over to TfL of London area rail services are to be welcomed I reckon As long as it doesn't mean my 377s are replaced by 378s, or the focus becomes entirely on zone 1 with a "there be dragons" approach to anything which heads beyond zone 6. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 14, 12:03*am, Mizter T wrote:
[x-posted to utl, solely to annoy Walter Mann] On Jul 13, 10:50*pm, Bruce wrote: START QUOTE TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it Posted by: Mark Hansford 12 July, 2011 By 2031 there will be 1.3 million more Londoners and 750,000 new jobs in the capital. But getting those Londoners to those jobs will be impossible unless Transport for London (TfL) is able to wrestle control of suburban rail services away from the Department for Transport and its phalanx of train operating companies (TOCs). That at least is the view of TfL, which late last month went public on a very bold plan to take charge of routes currently operated by a bewildering array of 10 TOCs. Its point is simple: more than 600,000 extra passengers will need to be carried at peak times by the public transport system by 2031, a large proportion by rail; Londoners make more than five times as many rail trips than the rest of England, and pay higher fares, yet receive only a quarter of the public expenditure per trip; significant long term investment is needed to avoid trains becoming more crowded and service quality falling. In short, without investment, London’s ability to grow and support the UK economy will be undermined. The wheels are already turning on this one: London mayor Boris Johnson has agreed to provide transport secretary Philip Hammond with an independent review of the case for devolution of inner suburban services in London; TfL’s London Rail division has already commissioned one from NERA economic consulting. The report has not been published, but TfL managing director for rail Mike Brown has told TfL’s rail and underground panel that it concludes that “TfL has put forward a compelling case for adopting a different approach to rail services in London, and for being given the powers to provide the leadership that is required in London”. The report, Brown says, focuses on two devolution options: joint TfL/DfT franchising of rail services and TfL concessions. He says NERA finds that these options could deliver a higher level of services and standards but at a lower cost if revenue risk is transferred from the TOCs to TfL. Industry experts who spoke to NCE were surprised by the boldness of TfL’s message. “I’ve not heard them [TfL] be as bold as that before,” said one. But TfL is coming from a position of some strength, with the early indications that its London Overground concession is proving a storming success. In April, London Overground was the best performing part of Britain’s national rail network, with 96.3% of trains arriving on time. This builds on 12 months of good performance – over the last year 94.9% of Overground trains were on time, the highest annual figure of any train operator in Britain. Customer satisfaction on the Overground has also reached an all time high. Then May saw the completion of £550M of improvement work on the North London part of the London Overground network, delivering up to double the number of trains on a key Olympic rail route to Stratford, and following on from the introduction of new trains and refurbishment of stations. In total Transport for London has invested £1.4bn in the route since taking over the former Silverlink network in 2007. It runs it through a concession, awarded to a joint venture of MTR and Deutsche Bahn and differs from DfT franchises because TfL takes 90% of the revenues for reinvestment in London’s transport network, leaving just 10% for the joint venture. The concession runs stations and the trains; Network Rail maintains the track and signals. TfL would use a similar structure to run other lines that come under its control. Investment would largely be focused on providing 12 car trains on most routes, along with providing additional connectivity and capacity on the West Anglia Main Line through phased four-tracking. This makes the job not dissimilar to the work done on the East London and North London lines through London Overground, where capacity has been greatly increased through two or three significant infrastructure investments, several smaller scale junction improvements and a big investment in rolling stock and station upgrades. The timing is good, should such a move come off. *The Greater Anglia franchise – which serves a massive planned housing development area in West Anglia – is currently out to tender for a short term replacement franchise that will start in February 2012 and run until July 2013, with a possible extension of up to 12 months. Stagecoach, Netherlands State Railways and Go Ahead are in the frame. The Southeastern franchise has been extended by two years and will now run until March 2014. “It’s an important time for rail planning,” Brown told NCE’s London Rail summit. “It’s time to put our case.” And a good case it would seem to be. END QUOTE Mark Hansford is managing editor of New Civil Engineer magazine. *The above appeared yesterday (12 July) on his blog. Not a new idea of course - the London Regional Rail Authority concept was being pushed a few years back by TfL under then Mayor Ken. Any plans to wrest more control over to TfL of London area rail services are to be welcomed I reckon - Livingstone failed to persuade the last government that the inner suburban (aka South London Metro) routes should be transferred over to TfL control, but succeeded in winning all sorts of passenger benefits under the new Southern franchise. TfL have stuck their oar and money in across the London rail network for the benefit of the passenger and of London. In a sense this is just all just the age old issue of the LT / LU and BR / NR divide in Greater London, which bubbled up all those years ago in the Fares Fair wrangle of the early 80's, and continues to live on in one form or another (its most acute reincarnation of recent years - being the inability, until Jan 2010, for passengers to be able to use Oyster PAYG on much of the NR network in London). It was encouraging to hear Bozza, early on in his Mayoralty, commenting on how it seemed obvious that there should be a better way of handling the rail network in London - though to be fair he probably hadn't the faintest about how it all worked until he found himself plonked on the top floor of the glass testicle with a remit to actually do something about such things. IIRC the original LPTB pooled income and investment. I do not recall how large was its area of control. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
"1506" wrote: [...] IIRC the original LPTB pooled income and investment. I do not recall how large was its area of control. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LPTA_map.png |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 14, 12:03*am, Mizter T wrote:
[x-posted to utl, solely to annoy Walter Mann] On Jul 13, 10:50*pm, Bruce wrote: TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it But TfL is coming from a position of some strength, with the early indications that its London Overground concession is proving a storming success. The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 07:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
1506 wrote: But TfL is coming from a position of some strength, with the early indications that its London Overground concession is proving a storming success. The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. I used the ELL to get from highbury to canada water recently. 10 minute wait at highbury. A pointless 5 minute wait at dalston junction. Then a what seemed like 25mph max trundle all the way to my stop with 30 waits at every station whether anyone got out or not. If TfL are modelling the ELL service on some blueprint by George Stevensons then they've done quite well. B2003 |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
|
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
Arthur Figgis wrote:
Not a new idea of course - the London Regional Rail Authority concept was being pushed a few years back by TfL under then Mayor Ken. Any plans to wrest more control over to TfL of London area rail services are to be welcomed I reckon As long as it doesn't mean my 377s are replaced by 378s, or the focus becomes entirely on zone 1 with a "there be dragons" approach to anything which heads beyond zone 6. Personally I'd like to see my 315s replaced with a better laid out carriage and the 378 lay out would probably be the best for the crush crowds on the Shenfield Metro. But I agree about the beyond Zone 6 attitude (although if Oyster PAYG was extended to some of those stations it would be a significant improvement). |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
|
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote:
On Jul 14, 12:03 am, Mizter wrote: [x-posted to utl, solely to annoy Walter Mann] On Jul 13, 10:50 pm, wrote: TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it But TfL is coming from a position of some strength, with the early indications that its London Overground concession is proving a storming success. The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, "
wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: On Jul 14, 12:03 am, Mizter *wrote: [x-posted to utl, solely to annoy Walter Mann] On Jul 13, 10:50 pm, *wrote: TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it But TfL is coming from a position of some strength, with the early indications that its London Overground concession is proving a storming success. The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 12:09*am, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, " wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. But lets just look at the current incarnation: How do the passenger facilities at Baker Street compare with Marylebone? Think about platform indicators, and concourse spaciousness? Does Baker Street have an M&S food outlet? Can Baker Street handle wheelchair users? Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? The rolling stock: Do you really think "S" stock with its lack of seating, not to mention WCs, compares to 166s? Consider the height of the seat backs and seat comfort levels, which is the better? "S" stock may be fine for short journeys on the Circle Line. I would not wish it on anyone for a trip to the County of Buckingham. One can only pity those with back problems. And then there is the courtesy level of the respective organization's employees. I will leave others to draw the obvious conclusions. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 8:09*am, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, " wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 1:31*am, Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:09*am, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, " wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes.- Try based on growing up in Aylesbury and moving to London as a teenager and travelling back frequently. And, I have passed Baker Street and Marylebone several times in the last month. I changed trains at Baker Street 4 weeks back. Do not assume. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 1:31*am, Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:09*am, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, " wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes. Which btw is not so odd as your friend "Timmy the terrorist supporter" who believes who knows more about US politics than those who live and vote there. And I took you for one of the brighter folk here. :-( |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 1:31*am, Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 17, 8:09*am, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, " wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes. Usenet is losing posts. I have passed by Marylebone and Baker Street several times in recent months. I have even changed trains at Baker Street. Moreover, my familiarity with the route to Aylesbury spans several decades. You assume incorrectly. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 17/07/2011 09:29, 1506 wrote:
On Jul 17, 12:09 am, Paul wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29 pm, wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. But lets just look at the current incarnation: How do the passenger facilities at Baker Street compare with Marylebone? Think about platform indicators, and concourse spaciousness? Does Baker Street have an M&S food outlet? Can Baker Street handle wheelchair users? Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? The rolling stock: Do you really think "S" stock with its lack of seating, not to mention WCs, compares to 166s? Consider the height of the seat backs and seat comfort levels, which is the better? "S" stock may be fine for short journeys on the Circle Line. I would not wish it on anyone for a trip to the County of Buckingham. One can only pity those with back problems. I recently took a ride out to Chesham on an S-8 -- not very comfortable at all, really. It makes me think that I will miss the 62A stock. I notice that they don't have any space that allows you to comfiortable stand by the doors, without getting in the way of embarking and disembarking passengers. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 11:56*am, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 01:29:17 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 12:09*am, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29*pm, " wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. * [snip] So, in short, your own opinion based on using the services. Hardly a statistically reliable comparison given you set out the proposition about "performance" and then yatter on about Marks and Spencers, toilets and relative comfort of the stock. As LU is a Metro and Chiltern most definitely is not then the basis of your comparison is flawed and does not relate to the usual performance parameters like reliability, punctuality, availability of facilities. Oh and Baker Street does possess *Gents and Ladies loos before you say "facility" equals "toilets". *If you were unaware of this fact then your ability to compare operators is not exactly very good. -- Passenger experience, of rolling stock comfort, information, amenities, and treatment by staff, is REAL passenger experience. Spout stats all you like. But ask a customer whether he, or she, would prefer to travel from Marylebone, or Baker Street to Amersham, other things being equal he, or she, will choose Marylebone. Now if said parson is alighting from the Circle Line, or has travelled from Aldgate, then other things are not equal. He or she, regards it as a suburban journey. Metro stock has limited use beyond Harrow, and no place beyond Moor Park/Watford. I know it is hard for operators to understand, but passenger experience is all that really counts. Get out more, and travel in the real world. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 17/07/2011 09:29, 1506 wrote:
Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? Dunno, but there is a bog. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 17/07/2011 12:27, 1506 wrote:
On Jul 17, 11:56 am, Paul wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 01:29:17 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 17, 12:09 am, Paul wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29 pm, wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. [snip] So, in short, your own opinion based on using the services. Hardly a statistically reliable comparison given you set out the proposition about "performance" and then yatter on about Marks and Spencers, toilets and relative comfort of the stock. As LU is a Metro and Chiltern most definitely is not then the basis of your comparison is flawed and does not relate to the usual performance parameters like reliability, punctuality, availability of facilities. Oh and Baker Street does possess Gents and Ladies loos before you say "facility" equals "toilets". If you were unaware of this fact then your ability to compare operators is not exactly very good. -- Passenger experience, of rolling stock comfort, information, amenities, and treatment by staff, is REAL passenger experience. Spout stats all you like. But ask a customer whether he, or she, would prefer to travel from Marylebone, or Baker Street to Amersham, other things being equal he, or she, will choose Marylebone. Now if said parson is alighting from the Circle Line, or has travelled from Aldgate, then other things are not equal. He or she, regards it as a suburban journey. Metro stock has limited use beyond Harrow, and no place beyond Moor Park/Watford. I know it is hard for operators to understand, but passenger experience is all that really counts. Get out more, and travel in the real world. But avoid Spain and Portugal if you don't like metro-style and tiolet-less trains being used on some very long journeys (1 or even 2 hour+). -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 2:35*am, "
wrote: On 17/07/2011 09:29, 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 12:09 am, Paul *wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29 pm, wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. *But lets just look at the current incarnation: *How do the passenger facilities at Baker Street compare with Marylebone? *Think about platform indicators, and concourse spaciousness? *Does Baker Street have an M&S food outlet? *Can Baker Street handle wheelchair users? *Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? The rolling stock: Do you really think "S" stock with its lack of seating, not to mention WCs, compares to 166s? *Consider the height of the seat backs and seat comfort levels, which is the better? *"S" stock may be fine for short journeys on the Circle Line. *I would not wish it on anyone for a trip to the County of Buckingham. *One can only pity those with back problems. I recently took a ride out to Chesham on an S-8 -- not very comfortable at all, really. It makes me think that I will miss the 62A stock. The wrong stock for that route. The Metropolitan Railway ran Pulman cars thereon. It is hard to imagine that now isn't it? I notice that they don't have any space that allows you to comfiortable stand by the doors, without getting in the way of embarking and disembarking passengers. Probably a design feature . . . Seriously. "S" Stock should stay on the H&C and Circle where it truly belongs. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 17/07/2011 20:34, 1506 wrote:
On Jul 17, 2:35 am, wrote: On 17/07/2011 09:29, 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 12:09 am, Paul wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29 pm, wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. But lets just look at the current incarnation: How do the passenger facilities at Baker Street compare with Marylebone? Think about platform indicators, and concourse spaciousness? Does Baker Street have an M&S food outlet? Can Baker Street handle wheelchair users? Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? The rolling stock: Do you really think "S" stock with its lack of seating, not to mention WCs, compares to 166s? Consider the height of the seat backs and seat comfort levels, which is the better? "S" stock may be fine for short journeys on the Circle Line. I would not wish it on anyone for a trip to the County of Buckingham. One can only pity those with back problems. I recently took a ride out to Chesham on an S-8 -- not very comfortable at all, really. It makes me think that I will miss the 62A stock. The wrong stock for that route. The Metropolitan Railway ran Pulman cars thereon. It is hard to imagine that now isn't it? The one thing I must say that I did like about the S-8s were the large bay windows. When sitting down. I also found that they rode a bit rough. I notice that they don't have any space that allows you to comfiortable stand by the doors, without getting in the way of embarking and disembarking passengers. Probably a design feature . . . Seriously. Undoubtedly, to keep people from crowding around the doors. "S" Stock should stay on the H&C and Circle where it truly belongs. Or they could have properly modified the parlours for the S-8s when building them. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 22:12:34 +0100, "
wrote: On 17/07/2011 20:34, 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 2:35 am, wrote: On 17/07/2011 09:29, 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 12:09 am, Paul wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29 pm, wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. But lets just look at the current incarnation: How do the passenger facilities at Baker Street compare with Marylebone? Think about platform indicators, and concourse spaciousness? Does Baker Street have an M&S food outlet? Can Baker Street handle wheelchair users? Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? The rolling stock: Do you really think "S" stock with its lack of seating, not to mention WCs, compares to 166s? Consider the height of the seat backs and seat comfort levels, which is the better? "S" stock may be fine for short journeys on the Circle Line. I would not wish it on anyone for a trip to the County of Buckingham. One can only pity those with back problems. I recently took a ride out to Chesham on an S-8 -- not very comfortable at all, really. It makes me think that I will miss the 62A stock. The wrong stock for that route. The Metropolitan Railway ran Pulman cars thereon. It is hard to imagine that now isn't it? The one thing I must say that I did like about the S-8s were the large bay windows. When sitting down. I also found that they rode a bit rough. So did A stock at various locations. Wembley used to be particularly rough but that seemed to have been cured a few years back with one of the major bits of track renewal. I notice that they don't have any space that allows you to comfiortable stand by the doors, without getting in the way of embarking and disembarking passengers. Probably a design feature . . . Seriously. Undoubtedly, to keep people from crowding around the doors. "S" Stock should stay on the H&C and Circle where it truly belongs. Or they could have properly modified the parlours for the S-8s when building them. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
"1506" wrote: On Jul 17, 9:43 am, 1506 wrote: Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes. Which btw is not so odd as your friend "Timmy the terrorist supporter" who believes who knows more about US politics than those who live and vote there. And I took you for one of the brighter folk here. :-( Do grow up and stop being so pathetic. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 18, 4:00*am, "Mizter T" wrote:
"1506" wrote: On Jul 17, 9:43 am, 1506 wrote: Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes. Which btw is not so odd as your friend "Timmy the terrorist supporter" who believes who knows more about US politics than those who live and vote there. And I took you for one of the brighter folk here. :-( Do grow up and stop being so pathetic. Rather than respond imediately, I am giving you time to withdraw that remark. Do consider doing so. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 17, 2:12*pm, "
wrote: On 17/07/2011 20:34, 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 2:35 am, wrote: On 17/07/2011 09:29, 1506 wrote: On Jul 17, 12:09 am, Paul * *wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:51:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 1:29 pm, wrote: On 15/07/2011 15:21, 1506 wrote: The performance of the Metropolitan Line Vs. Chiltern tells a very different story. How so? Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Haha, I have been familier with the route on and off almost all of my life. *But lets just look at the current incarnation: *How do the passenger facilities at Baker Street compare with Marylebone? *Think about platform indicators, and concourse spaciousness? *Does Baker Street have an M&S food outlet? *Can Baker Street handle wheelchair users? *Do you have any gentleman's or lady's rooms at Baker Street? The rolling stock: Do you really think "S" stock with its lack of seating, not to mention WCs, compares to 166s? *Consider the height of the seat backs and seat comfort levels, which is the better? *"S" stock may be fine for short journeys on the Circle Line. *I would not wish it on anyone for a trip to the County of Buckingham. *One can only pity those with back problems. I recently took a ride out to Chesham on an S-8 -- not very comfortable at all, really. It makes me think that I will miss the 62A stock. The wrong stock for that route. *The Metropolitan Railway ran Pulman cars thereon. *It is hard to imagine that now isn't it? The one thing I must say that I did like about the S-8s were the large bay windows. When sitting down. I also found that they rode a bit rough. I notice that they don't have any space that allows you to comfiortable stand by the doors, without getting in the way of embarking and disembarking passengers. Probably a design feature . . . Seriously. Undoubtedly, to keep people from crowding around the doors. "S" Stock should stay on the H&C and Circle *where it truly belongs. Or they could have properly modified the parlours for the S-8s when building them. That would have been an option, much as electric units operating south of the Thames come in Metro, and Suburban, versions. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
"1506" wrote: On Jul 18, 4:00 am, "Mizter T" wrote: "1506" wrote: Which btw is not so odd as your friend "Timmy the terrorist supporter" who believes who knows more about US politics than those who live and vote there. And I took you for one of the brighter folk here. :-( Do grow up and stop being so pathetic. Rather than respond imediately, I am giving you time to withdraw that remark. Do consider doing so. Stop being so ridiculously pompous Adrian. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 04:54:06 -0700 (PDT), 1506
wrote: On Jul 18, 4:00*am, "Mizter T" wrote: Do grow up and stop being so pathetic. Rather than respond imediately, I am giving you time to withdraw that remark. Do consider doing so. What he said. Please collect the toys thrown out of the pram as you leave. |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
|
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 01:38:59 -0700 (PDT) [UTC], 1506 wrote:
[...] Do not assume. Why ever not? You do it all the time, after all, so we're only doing as you do... -- Ross Speaking for me, myself and I. Nobody else - unless I make it clear that I am... |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:00:45 +0100 [UTC], Ivor wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 04:54:06 -0700 (PDT), 1506 wrote: On Jul 18, 4:00*am, "Mizter T" wrote: Do grow up and stop being so pathetic. Rather than respond imediately, I am giving you time to withdraw that remark. Do consider doing so. What he said. Thirded. You really are behaving like an utter idiot, Adrian. Please collect the toys thrown out of the pram as you leave. Pointless. They'll only be thrown out again in a few hours or days. Might as well collect them and give them to the needy. -- Ross Speaking for me, myself and I. Nobody else - unless I make it clear that I am... |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
Arthur Figgis writes:
Get out more, and travel in the real world. But avoid Spain and Portugal if you don't like metro-style and tiolet-less trains being used on some very long journeys (1 or even 2 hour+). Hmm? A 1-hour journey is not so unusual in a large metro area... With metro-style timetables, on-board toilets really aren't necessary -- one can always disembark en-route and use a toilet in a station; the next train should be along shortly. -miles -- "Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." Mahatma Gandhi |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 20/07/2011 02:35, Miles Bader wrote:
Arthur writes: Get out more, and travel in the real world. But avoid Spain and Portugal if you don't like metro-style and tiolet-less trains being used on some very long journeys (1 or even 2 hour+). Hmm? A 1-hour journey is not so unusual in a large metro area... With metro-style timetables, on-board toilets really aren't necessary -- one can always disembark en-route and use a toilet in a station; the next train should be along shortly. I would say bogs are more desirable on infrequent services or rural branches where the basic stations have no (or no open) bogs. Or where incidents in the XXX area mean passengers can expect to get stuck between stops every so often. (Hendaye -) San Sebastian - Bilbao or Alacant - Denia are a fair trek on what are basically trams, and people were obviously making their own arrangements behind walls on Aveiro - Espinho via the scenic route (which no-one sane would do throughout, admittedly). -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On 20/07/2011 12:01, Tim Fenton wrote:
"Miles Bader" wrote in message ... But avoid Spain and Portugal if you don't like metro-style and tiolet-less trains being used on some very long journeys (1 or even 2 hour+). Hmm? A 1-hour journey is not so unusual in a large metro area... With metro-style timetables, on-board toilets really aren't necessary -- one can always disembark en-route and use a toilet in a station; the next train should be along shortly. I'm trying to think where in Spain or Portugal there are metro style trains without toilets. The modern-looking wide gangwayed EMUs which run out of Porto didn't appear to have any (or so my friend who went looking for one reported). Euskotren. The Renfe Cercanias units - the older 44x and the new artic sets - have them, and on the CP, heck, even the rebuilt Allans have a toilet. The only example of a long journey without toilet facilities I can recall is the tram train from Alacant to Benidorm - made worse by the connection on to Denia also having no toilet, and that the only intermediate station with toilet facilities AFAIK is Benidorm, which is no good if you're changing trains, as it's a sharp connection. Unless, of course, the tram pulls out bang on time just as the DMU is arriving ever so slightly late. Which was actually quite handy, as a number of people headed for the facilities (which were just being locked). Having said that, does anyone other than tourists use the line throughout, or would normals get a coach (which I think the hotel said is quicker) or just drive? -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
TfL's bid to control trains has much going for it - Mark Hansford
On Jul 18, 4:00*am, "Mizter T" wrote:
"1506" wrote: On Jul 17, 9:43 am, 1506 wrote: Chiltern's level of comfort, PIS, punctuality, et al, far exceeds LU's on the London Amersham route. Based on what evidence and over what time period please? Based on close observation and first hand experience from the far side of the continent on the other side of the Atlantic, one assumes. And I took you for one of the brighter folk here. :-( Do grow up and stop being so pathetic. "Mizter T", let us review how we came to this point: You interjected your sarcastic remark into a perfectly civil discourse relating to the quality offered by the two operators on the route from London to Amersham.You suggested that somehow being a long term overseas resident invalidated my opinion. In point of fact there is no reason one cannot take an interest, and follow events from afar. And, as I pointed out your post was not only rude but incorrect. I have in fact been in the UK for a while and visited London a number of times After I responded, you resorted to words like "pathetic" and “pompous”. Well “Mizter T” let us consider the source (you): Several years back I started to notice posts under the name "Mizter T". IIRC you posted more on u.t.l than uk.r (BTW are you really a 300lb African American with 8oz of gold bling around his neck? That is not how I picture you at all). Your posts showed some intelligence and a level of education. I suspect you attained more than one “O Level”. Moreover, you showed a good knowledge of subject matter. What I most enjoyed was that your posts displayed a certain "energy". You have shown real enthusiasm for London’s transit infrastructure. On the other hand I noticed a dark side. You were quick to criticize newcomers. If someone's netiquette was not to your liking we could expect to see him or her receive a sharp rebuke from you. This is all very well. But, everybody is new at some point. I find it sad that someone of your education and ability has to resort to poor manners and sarcasm. Why not help new folks along? We would all like good netiquette. I would settle for good etiquette even, but this is 2011. Good manners would cost you nothing but buy you so much. Why do you act as if you are the umpire of UseNet? Could it be that your use of words like pathetic and pompous are really your ego defecting your own faults on to others? Think about it, you wouldn't be the first. Meanwhile, you have gathered a little group of followers. And remember, a man is known by the company he keeps. You have Ivor the "non-poster". He has posted under his chuffchuff moniker since December of 2009, but rarely says anything of substance. We can only wonder why he feels the need to jump into this conversation with his childish banter. And then, we have our old "pal" the Jobsworth from Lincolnshire. Ross is precisely what society receives when a small minded man is put into a uniform. And, if his employer doesn't like his attitude, they have to deal with his trade union. So, "Mizter T" (I still wonder why you are taking your name from a 1980s US TV series), it is time for me to killfile Ivor. It is also time to killfile Mr. Corfield, a sexual deviant in a union protected public sector job. Paul’s inability to hold together three logical thoughts, and his tendency to resort to hissy fits when he cannot win a debate mean his post are not worth reading. And, I do not want to deal with him. However, you and Ross will still appear on my home system. But, you should expect no further direct response from me. End of conversation, and end of mutual communication. Except to say "F__ you and f___ the horse on which you rode into town". |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:04 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk