Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:

It has been well document in a number of press reports that the
service disruptions of 2009/2010 were caused by a lack of rolling
stock, which was in turn caused by a lack of maintenance, which was
in turn caused by a closedown of an important workshop, which had
been ordered by the management to reduce costs, which was in turn
done to transfer higher profits to the owner company DB.

So the root cause of all the problems is the desire to make profit in
the management,

The desire has been to convert the S-Bahn Berlin GmbH into a company
showing comparable efficiency than other S-Bahn Systems in Germany.
Is this a mistake?

It wouldn't be a mistake if it actually had been the management's
desire. Did you actually read what I wrote above?

Yes. But this is not the full story. You forgot the technical problems
existing on a distinct type of EMUs of the S-Bahn, which roots in the
construction, not in their maintennance. And cutting maintenance
facilties to a level showed to be adequate to other S-Bahn systems in
Germany should have worked oerfectly. But the staff brushed the management
when working according to the book.

Even after this cut the S-Bahn Berlin is still quite unefficient.

You should have said: Because of this cut. Without it there wouldn't
have been any service disruptions.

It has been inefficient vefore and still is, or hwo would you call that,
when S-Bahn Berlin needs to employees where one can do the job at other
S-Bahn systems?

The mentality to run something efficient is "disastrous"?

Could you try to address what I said?

I do all the time.

Please tell me then, how Deutsche Bahn manages to do well in other
S-Bahn systems in Germany like Hamburg. Munich or Stuttgart.

Are they?

Yes, they do.

I don't live there and I don't follow the local press. Are
there really no problems there?

It may be not 100% perfect, but all the other systems are well run,
and usually work well and need far less staff per passenger kilomerte,
train kilometre, network length etc.

How to make profit with a company with a lack of
50% in efficiency compared to other ones, when all bidding for the
same tender?

The subsidies are coming in regardless.

Do they?

Yes. And that is why privatisation is pointless.

The amount of suibsidies has not to be a fixum. This is one of the
key results in 15 years experience of tendering rail services in Germany,

I snipped everything else you said, because you never addressed the
problems of privatisation.

There is no problem in privatisation. There is a problem of of
badly run companies, a problem which per definition not bound to
the type of company (public or private). And the Berlin S.Bahn is
such a badly run company.

I can well understand that you snipped all, as you have no arguments
to explain, why the S-Bahn Berlin needs so much more staff to offer
a worse product than elsewhere.


Oliver Schnell

On 02/01/2012 23:47, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:
Graeme wrote
in :

Is there a good book in English about the Berlin S& U Bahns?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Berlin-S-Bah...dp/1854141856/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Berlin-U-Bah...dp/1854141848/

Better written than some of their German counterparts.


Thanks, I've got other books by him

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 20:46:35 +0100, Wolfgang Schwanke
wrote:
That is an important distinction.

That it is, but it is still nationalised.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 23:36:05 +0100, Lüko
wrote:
Really, really crazy.

Not at all. Have you ever looked up "nationalised" in a dictionary?

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

On 03/01/2012 00:19, Lüko Willms wrote:

Please elaborate on the subject of discussion instead of constantly
trying to turn the attention of your public away from it by makeing loud
noises about off-topic issues?

A tip: when you're engaged in a ****ing contest about German political
systems in two UK newsgroups you're in no position to complain about
someone else being off-topic.


--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

On 03/01/12 00:06, Lüko Willms wrote:
insult. Claiming false facts to denigrate the standing of other people,
against better knowledge.

Says the man who has repeatedly claimed that I am a Hitler apologist.

Ian

On 03/01/2012 09:47, The Real Doctor wrote:
On 03/01/12 00:06, Lüko Willms wrote:
insult. Claiming false facts to denigrate the standing of other people,
against better knowledge.

Says the man who has repeatedly claimed that I am a Hitler apologist.


I thought Lüko was just defining his personal approach to discussions.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 00:55:13 +0100, Lüko
wrote:
Are we talking about the ICE-1 or the ICE-3?

ICE1 - the wheel design that caused Eschede.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Graham Nye disait le 01/03/12 que :

On 03/01/2012 00:19, Lüko Willms wrote:

Please elaborate on the subject of discussion instead of constantly
trying to turn the attention of your public away from it by makeing loud
noises about off-topic issues?

A tip: when you're engaged in a ****ing contest about German political
systems in two UK newsgroups you're in no position to complain about
someone else being off-topic.

What the **** does a discussion about Berlin S-Bahn in 2 uk newgroups ?

Stop crappy crossposting !

--
Le travail n'est pas une bonne chose. Si ça l'était,
les riches l'auraient accaparé

"Lüko Willms" wrote in message

Am 02.01.2012 21:47, schrieb Wolfgang Schwanke:

Friedrichstraße was quite a complicated labyrinth back then. I
mostly preferred to cross there, when I did not come by car.

If you'd been an Ossie, presumably you wouldn't have had the option to
cross anywhere (without being shot)?