On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 11:07:59 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 10:11:18 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
Or are you playing one of your silly nitpick games where you're going to say
that commuters are a specific type of passenger and you're actually referring
to passengers who arn't commuters? Whoever they may be. Trainspotters perhaps
or people going for a holiday in Reading.

Yes, you fell into the tabloid trap of thinking *all* passengers are
commuters. You also don't seem to realise the services that run on that
line.

Probably 95% of passengers on the railways are commuters. If commuting doesn't
justify electrification then its highly unlikely any other reason for travel
will.

https://news.surreycc.gov.uk/2016/05...-line-will-boo
t-economy-by-almost-2-billion/

"suggested that the electrification would create around 8,000 jobs and stimulate
£1.9 billion of economic growth."

In other words the figures were plucked out of someones arse just like those
for the heathrow 3rd runway.

"opening up exciting journey opportunities to support jobs and economic growth."

Ie: commuters. Though I'm not sure exciting is a word I'd use in this context
but politicians always over egg the pud and make themselves sound stupid.

So you think there's a weak case for electrifying the North Downs
line. And you may well be right.

But it has a *much* stronger case than electrifying a largely
single-track, quiet commuter line, which only has enough traffic for 1
tph for most of the day. And yet you're a fan of that. So make your
mind up.