|
District Line trains crashed into each other
|
District Line trains crashed into each other
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 " Kevin Bootle, LU's District line Manager said: "On 1 May two trains came into slight contact with each other while they were travelling between East Putney and Southfields stations, ascertaining very minor damage. Yes indeed Kevin, "ascertain" certainly sounds a lot more impressive than "sustain" does it not ? It's even got two more letters. Shame it means something totally different though. Care to ascertain what that is ? michael adams .... |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 12/05/2014 18:26, michael adams wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 " Kevin Bootle, LU's District line Manager said: "On 1 May two trains came into slight contact with each other while they were travelling between East Putney and Southfields stations, ascertaining very minor damage. Yes indeed Kevin, "ascertain" certainly sounds a lot more impressive than "sustain" does it not ? It's even got two more letters. Shame it means something totally different though. Care to ascertain what that is ? The Standard story is AFAICS the only one in which that wording appears, so I wouldn't rule out it being their doing. |
District Line trains crashed into each other
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... On 12/05/2014 18:26, michael adams wrote: "Basil Jet" wrote: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 " Kevin Bootle, LU's District line Manager said: "On 1 May two trains came into slight contact with each other while they were travelling between East Putney and Southfields stations, ascertaining very minor damage. Yes indeed Kevin, "ascertain" certainly sounds a lot more impressive than "sustain" does it not ? It's even got two more letters. Shame it means something totally different though. Care to ascertain what that is ? The Standard story is AFAICS the only one in which that wording appears, so I wouldn't rule out it being their doing. Then who's to say the reporter's name wasn't Kevin as well, then ? If I was betting on it, I would say its a straight copy and paste of a press release, written by yet another Kevin in the LT PR department, assuming they have one. michael adams .... |
District Line trains crashed into each other
If I was betting on it, I would say its a straight copy and paste
of a press release, written by yet another Kevin in the LT PR department, assuming they have one. TfL press releases are online - http://www.tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media...es?intcmp=4536 Nothing there. My bet would be on the manager being put in the frame to speak about the incident when the new broke yesterday - quite possibly at short notice. I don't blame an operational manager for misusing a word. I'd much rather have an operational manager who can manage the operations than manage the media. And even if he's had some media training I can well imagine the struggle not to say something like "it was just a bloody scrape - a bit like what Ed Balls didn't even notice in the car park - and while of course it shouldn't have happened the union are making too much of it" -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
District Line trains crashed into each other
A friend of mine has a bronze award certificate from an LUL manager thanking her for her assistance with a customer "who could of made the wrong choice with her life."
Of course, spellcheckers would very rarely pick up errors like those. |
District Line trains crashed into each other
Watching LUL spelling and grammar is a bit like watching a train wreck.
|
District Line trains crashed into each other
Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ...
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article ,
Offramp wrote: Watching LUL spelling and grammar is a bit like watching a train wreck. (ahem) I think you mean a train minor side-scrape ;-) Nick -- "The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life" -- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996 |
District Line trains crashed into each other
"Offramp" wrote
A friend of mine has a bronze award certificate from an LUL manager thanking her for her assistance with a customer "who could of made the wrong choice with her life." Of course, spellcheckers would very rarely pick up errors like those. But they might. Spill Chucker's have improved. Thus doing a little light proofreading (Google Docs so a browser) ‘straight forward’ was flagged for attention, and indeed ‘straightforward’ was intended, yet all three words are valid alone. 'principle' and 'principal' one day ? -- Mike D |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 12/05/2014 21:32, Richard J. wrote: Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/district-line-trains-smashed-into-one-another-on-notorious-section-of-track-9353270.html Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? LU is the infrastructure owner of the Wimbledon branch, and maintains it in house (it's ex-Metronet). The signalling is still done (under contract) by Network Rail, not sure what the masterplan is here in terms of the SSL signalling upgrade and continuing use by NR trains. The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. Point being, if the track was out of alignment, it's solely an LU matter. I wonder if there's a drainage problem around there - just south of East Putney where the line curves (next to Keswick Road) there's a bit of a cutting, though it's nothing dramatic. And just south of that there's a cut-and-cover tunnel under West Hill (aka the A3) - maybe it's soggy it there? They've banned mention of it on DD? Seems a bit OTT, but they do tend to get a bit jumpy about such things. |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article , (Mizter T) wrote:
On 12/05/2014 21:32, Richard J. wrote: Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...smashed-into-o ne-another-on-notorious-section-of-track-9353270.html Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? LU is the infrastructure owner of the Wimbledon branch, and maintains it in house (it's ex-Metronet). The signalling is still done (under contract) by Network Rail, not sure what the masterplan is here in terms of the SSL signalling upgrade and continuing use by NR trains. The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. Point being, if the track was out of alignment, it's solely an LU matter. I wonder if there's a drainage problem around there - just south of East Putney where the line curves (next to Keswick Road) there's a bit of a cutting, though it's nothing dramatic. And just south of that there's a cut-and-cover tunnel under West Hill (aka the A3) - maybe it's soggy it there? They've banned mention of it on DD? Seems a bit OTT, but they do tend to get a bit jumpy about such things. I always thought of it as quite a deep cutting when I used the footbridge over it between Keswick Road and Lytton Grove as a child. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
District Line trains crashed into each other
|
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 12/05/2014 23:43, Paul Corfield wrote: [Wimbledon branch] I believe the track is maintained by LU and I think ownership moved to LU a number of years ago. [...] I think it was transferred at the time of rail privatisation in the mid 90's (ditto W&C line). |
District Line trains crashed into each other
Sorry if this is stating the obvious but not every press release
reaches the TfL website. I've been sent releases by others that have never materialised on the site. Sorry. My mistake. Though it's an interesting interpretation of TfL's commitment to transparency if this is material they "push" ;) I know the Line General Manager in question and he's perfectly competent and very experienced and will have had media training. If the words got mangled along the way I think I'd look to others as to who was doing the mangling! My apologies for any offence. -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 12/05/2014 23:57, Mizter T wrote:
On 12/05/2014 21:32, Richard J. wrote: Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/district-line-trains-smashed-into-one-another-on-notorious-section-of-track-9353270.html Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? LU is the infrastructure owner of the Wimbledon branch, and maintains it in house (it's ex-Metronet). The signalling is still done (under contract) by Network Rail, not sure what the masterplan is here in terms of the SSL signalling upgrade and continuing use by NR trains. What's also going to happen between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham when they upgrade signals on that line? The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 12/05/2014 23:43, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 12 May 2014 21:32:37 +0100, "Richard J." wrote: Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? I believe the track is maintained by LU and I think ownership moved to LU a number of years ago. Clearly SWT have retained their historic running rights. The southern end of the line has been notorious for years with poor drainage, wet beds, ponding etc. It also used to flood causing signal failures whenever there was reasonably heavy rain. From memory LU spent a lot of money to deal with the worst sections of track so rain didn't kill the service. I would expect the line to have had a fair amount of attention in recent years to get the route prepared for S Stock deployment. What are those green objects that are at track level by the end of every station where S Stock runs, BTW? |
District Line trains crashed into each other
|
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 13/05/2014 23:33, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
wrote On 12/05/2014 23:57, Mizter T wrote: The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? When they feel like it. As I and others have noted SWT passengers going home on any service that passes Wimbledon occasionally (twice a year perhaps) find themselves using these rails. Inexperienced commuters are often a little startled. Is there any regularly NR scheduled service via the Wimbledon branch at this point? |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article , () wrote:
On 12/05/2014 23:57, Mizter T wrote: On 12/05/2014 21:32, Richard J. wrote: Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...smashed-into-o ne-another-on-notorious-section-of-track-9353270.html Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? LU is the infrastructure owner of the Wimbledon branch, and maintains it in house (it's ex-Metronet). The signalling is still done (under contract) by Network Rail, not sure what the masterplan is here in terms of the SSL signalling upgrade and continuing use by NR trains. What's also going to happen between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham when they upgrade signals on that line? The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? Just the odd working IIRC. The only candidate I can see from a quick inspection of table 152 suggests the 0042 from Waterloo to Strawberry Hill. Realtimetrains confirms my hunch. No sign of it in table 149, however, nor of any Up trains. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
District Line trains crashed into each other
wrote in message ... On 12/05/2014 23:57, Mizter T wrote: On 12/05/2014 21:32, Richard J. wrote: Basil Jet wrote on 12 May 2014 17:20:41 ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/district-line-trains-smashed-into-one-another-on-notorious-section-of-track-9353270.html Dear me, District Dave's forum has banned all discussion about this thankfully mild collision, and all u.t.l can do is debate the wording of the press release/report. The scrape occurred between East Putney and Southfields, on a section of the District Line that used to be part of Southern Region BR. I understand that LU now manage the stations, but that the signalling is still operated by Network Rail. The key question, since it is alleged that the incident was caused by movement of the track, is who now maintains the track. LU (ex-Metronet) or Network Rail? And if the latter, is it as a subcontractor to LU or as owner of the track? LU is the infrastructure owner of the Wimbledon branch, and maintains it in house (it's ex-Metronet). The signalling is still done (under contract) by Network Rail, not sure what the masterplan is here in terms of the SSL signalling upgrade and continuing use by NR trains. What's also going to happen between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham when they upgrade signals on that line? The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? wherever they need to use it as a diversion route I believe one late night train runs for "route learning" purposes tim |
District Line trains crashed into each other
|
District Line trains crashed into each other
wrote:
In article , (tim.....) wrote: wrote in message ... When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? wherever they need to use it as a diversion route I believe one late night train runs for "route learning" purposes 0042 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill as I posted yesterday. Also 0454 Basingstoke - Waterloo in the opposite direction. Peter Smyth |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article , (Peter Smyth) wrote:
wrote: In article , (tim.....) wrote: wrote in message ... When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? wherever they need to use it as a diversion route I believe one late night train runs for "route learning" purposes 0042 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill as I posted yesterday. Also 0454 Basingstoke - Waterloo in the opposite direction. Oh yes! How did I miss that in table 152? Ah! It's not in it. I forgot to check table 155 and anyway it's not so obvious there which trains might go that way. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
District Line trains crashed into each other
|
District Line trains crashed into each other
Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
wrote I believe one late night train runs for "route learning" purposes 0042 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill as I posted yesterday. Also 0454 Basingstoke - Waterloo in the opposite direction. Oh yes! How did I miss that in table 152? Ah! It's not in it. I forgot to check table 155 and anyway it's not so obvious there which trains might go that way. Any train that doesn't stop at Earlsfield is a possible and there are a great many. I wasn't aware however that the Woking stoppers now call at Earlsfield outside the peak. So peak commuters may still be surprised by their train taking this route The likelihood of an unplanned diversion in the peak is virtually nil as there isn't any spare capacity on the District line. Occassionally there is a more regular service at weekends due to engineering work on the main line. In this case some District trains usually terminate at Parsons Green or Putney Bridge in order to free up paths for SWT services. Peter Smyth |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article , (Michael R N
Dolbear) wrote: wrote I believe one late night train runs for "route learning" purposes 0042 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill as I posted yesterday. Also 0454 Basingstoke - Waterloo in the opposite direction. Oh yes! How did I miss that in table 152? Ah! It's not in it. I forgot to check table 155 and anyway it's not so obvious there which trains might go that way. Any train that doesn't stop at Earlsfield is a possible and there are a great many. On table 155, I agree. So many that I overlooked the possibility. On 152 they are much easier to spot. I wasn't aware however that the Woking stoppers now call at Earlsfield outside the peak. Nor me. I'm more of a Windsor Lines man. So peak commuters may still be surprised by their train taking this route I'm not sure the 0454 counts as "peak commuters"! -- Colin Rosenstiel |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article , (Peter Smyth) wrote:
Michael R N Dolbear wrote: wrote I believe one late night train runs for "route learning" purposes 0042 Waterloo to Strawberry Hill as I posted yesterday. Also 0454 Basingstoke - Waterloo in the opposite direction. Oh yes! How did I miss that in table 152? Ah! It's not in it. I forgot to check table 155 and anyway it's not so obvious there which trains might go that way. Any train that doesn't stop at Earlsfield is a possible and there are a great many. I wasn't aware however that the Woking stoppers now call at Earlsfield outside the peak. So peak commuters may still be surprised by their train taking this route The likelihood of an unplanned diversion in the peak is virtually nil as there isn't any spare capacity on the District line. Occassionally there is a more regular service at weekends due to engineering work on the main line. In this case some District trains usually terminate at Parsons Green or Putney Bridge in order to free up paths for SWT services. What will happen when the C Stock has gone? They won't be able to turn trains at Putney Bridge any more. I don't think they can reverse in the platforms at Parson's Green. They have to clear the trains and run via a siding. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 13/05/2014 23:33, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
wrote On 12/05/2014 23:57, Mizter T wrote: The power comes from Network Rail too, but I think there are plans for it to be provided by LU instead. When do NR trains run in revenue service on the Wimbledon branch, BTW? When they feel like it. As I and others have noted SWT passengers going home on any service that passes Wimbledon occasionally (twice a year perhaps) find themselves using these rails. Inexperienced commuters are often a little startled. Especially when a Waterloo- Surbiton train heads for Putney. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
District Line trains crashed into each other
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 That may be the most devoid-of-content reply I've seen in years. It would work as a text comment, but as a usenet reply it just looks laughable. |
District Line trains crashed into each other
Edward Cowling wrote on 22 June 2014
16:51:24 ... "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 That may be the most devoid-of-content reply I've seen in years. It would work as a text comment, but as a usenet reply it just looks laughable. Did you intend to comment on another post? The post from Basil Jet that you referred to was the first of the thread, not a reply, and we finished discussing it here over a month ago. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
District Line trains crashed into each other
In article ,
(Richard J.) wrote: Edward Cowling wrote on 22 June 2014 16:51:24 ... "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...mashed-into-on e-another-on-notorious-section-of-track-9353270.html?icn=ticker-2 That may be the most devoid-of-content reply I've seen in years. It would work as a text comment, but as a usenet reply it just looks laughable. Did you intend to comment on another post? The post from Basil Jet that you referred to was the first of the thread, not a reply, and we finished discussing it here over a month ago. He was quick then. One of his other comments was to something from last February! -- Colin Rosenstiel |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 2014\06\22 17:22, Richard J. wrote:
Edward Cowling wrote on 22 June 2014 16:51:24 ... "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 That may be the most devoid-of-content reply I've seen in years. It would work as a text comment, but as a usenet reply it just looks laughable. Did you intend to comment on another post? The post from Basil Jet that you referred to was the first of the thread, not a reply, and we finished discussing it here over a month ago. He's throwing his toys out of the pram in every group on Usenet just because I said this over in news:uk.politics.electoral ... https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=...s/VeOhnD_dvf8J |
District Line trains crashed into each other
The 2312 Waterloo to Basingstoke is scheduled via East Putney and usually runs that way. After meetings in London, I often have a coffee and wait a while just to do the hairy bit of track on my way to Winchfield.. Surprisingly few people on the train seem to notice.
Lawrie |
District Line trains crashed into each other
Basil Jet wrote on 22 June 2014 18:09:42 ...
On 2014\06\22 17:22, Richard J. wrote: Edward Cowling wrote on 22 June 2014 16:51:24 ... "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 That may be the most devoid-of-content reply I've seen in years. It would work as a text comment, but as a usenet reply it just looks laughable. Did you intend to comment on another post? The post from Basil Jet that you referred to was the first of the thread, not a reply, and we finished discussing it here over a month ago. He's throwing his toys out of the pram in every group on Usenet just because I said this over in news:uk.politics.electoral ... https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=...s/VeOhnD_dvf8J Oh, I see. A second-rate writer posts off-topically on usenet to promote his own blog, and his reaction when someone dares to criticise his writing is to retaliate maliciously and incompetently. I've encountered that sort before. Interesting circles you're moving in these days, Basil. :-) -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
District Line trains crashed into each other
On 2014\06\22 22:55, Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 22 June 2014 18:09:42 ... On 2014\06\22 17:22, Richard J. wrote: Edward Cowling wrote on 22 June 2014 16:51:24 ... "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...l?icn=ticker-2 That may be the most devoid-of-content reply I've seen in years. It would work as a text comment, but as a usenet reply it just looks laughable. Did you intend to comment on another post? The post from Basil Jet that you referred to was the first of the thread, not a reply, and we finished discussing it here over a month ago. He's throwing his toys out of the pram in every group on Usenet just because I said this over in news:uk.politics.electoral ... https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=...s/VeOhnD_dvf8J Oh, I see. A second-rate writer posts off-topically on usenet to promote his own blog, and his reaction when someone dares to criticise his writing is to retaliate maliciously and incompetently. I've encountered that sort before. Interesting circles you're moving in these days, Basil. :-) I've never noticed him before! I hope he's a teenager or senile - if this is his intellectual prime of life, that's not good. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk