On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:23:45 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Oh clever old you, you spotted a spelling mistake. Pat yourself on the back
and be your usual smug self for the day.

From your previous answer, it quite obviously wasn't a spelling mistake.
You simply didn't know what the word meant. Have you now looked it up in a
dictionary, or asked an English-speaker what it means?

Its always amusing when you're so desperate for a comeback that you spout
any old crap that just makes you look even more of a Grade A prize ass, which
believe me, is quite an achievement since you're already an Oscar contender
for that role

--
Spud

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:41:37 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:23:45 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Oh clever old you, you spotted a spelling mistake. Pat yourself on the back
and be your usual smug self for the day.

From your previous answer, it quite obviously wasn't a spelling mistake.
You simply didn't know what the word meant. Have you now looked it up in a
dictionary, or asked an English-speaker what it means?

Its always amusing when you're so desperate for a comeback that you spout
any old crap that just makes you look even more of a Grade A prize ass, which
believe me, is quite an achievement since you're already an Oscar contender
for that role

You really need to get some remedial lessons from your ESL teacher. It
would help you communicate more effectively in English, which might
reduce your perpetual frustration and anger. And buy a dictionary with
words longer than four letters.

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 11:36:18 +0000
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:41:37 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:23:45 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Oh clever old you, you spotted a spelling mistake. Pat yourself on the back
and be your usual smug self for the day.

From your previous answer, it quite obviously wasn't a spelling mistake.
You simply didn't know what the word meant. Have you now looked it up in a
dictionary, or asked an English-speaker what it means?

Its always amusing when you're so desperate for a comeback that you spout
any old crap that just makes you look even more of a Grade A prize ass, which
believe me, is quite an achievement since you're already an Oscar contender
for that role

You really need to get some remedial lessons from your ESL teacher. It
would help you communicate more effectively in English, which might
reduce your perpetual frustration and anger. And buy a dictionary with
words longer than four letters.

Ironically, four letters is all thats needed to describe you

--
Spud

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 11:41:41 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 11:36:18 +0000
Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:41:37 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:23:45 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Oh clever old you, you spotted a spelling mistake. Pat yourself on the back
and be your usual smug self for the day.

From your previous answer, it quite obviously wasn't a spelling mistake.
You simply didn't know what the word meant. Have you now looked it up in a
dictionary, or asked an English-speaker what it means?

Its always amusing when you're so desperate for a comeback that you spout
any old crap that just makes you look even more of a Grade A prize ass, which
believe me, is quite an achievement since you're already an Oscar contender
for that role

You really need to get some remedial lessons from your ESL teacher. It
would help you communicate more effectively in English, which might
reduce your perpetual frustration and anger. And buy a dictionary with
words longer than four letters.

Ironically, four letters is all thats needed to describe you

Yes, that's the problem with your limited vocabulary. As I said, you'd
be a lot less frustrated and unhappy if not hampered by such poor
communications skills.

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.

--
David Cantrell | Nth greatest programmer in the world

Do not be afraid of cooking, as your ingredients will know and misbehave
-- Fergus Henderson

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

--
Spud

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

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:33:55 +0000
Mike Bristow wrote:
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.

Feel free to tell me why the actual cost matters, rather than as a percentage
of the total cost of the ELLX.

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 imagine the MTBF would be the same as other sets on that line. When was
the last time any of them failed and the line had to be closed because of it?

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

Oh didn't they just. Every time there's a problem on the piccadilly line half
the damn line has to close. Genius.

--
Spud

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

It's more than a couple of sets of points of course. There is also the
signalling, and the scarce resource of signalling engineers to commission
the signalling. Costs an arm and a leg these days, sadly.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 17/02/2016 09:21, d wrote:

On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:21:30 +0000
Mizter T wrote:
On 15/02/2016 12:06, d wrote:
I see the ELL is closed it for 9 days. I had my suspicions that it wasn't
being taken seriously as a transport link by TfL given its slow service
and poor timetable, and this rather proves it. Can you imagine any tube
line being closed for that many consecutive days now unless there had
been a major incident?


You're such a plonker.

I'll take that as a complement, coming from the man who sets the benchmark
of it on here.

I do, do I?

You make quite a good case for moderated forums Mr S. tuberosum.