Youre correct...just delete my message.

13) Sorry.


"Fustanella" wrote in message
...
1)

The 12 points you gave in reply to me don't seem to touch on my question.
Could you narrow 'em down, please? Thanks.

"Barry Salter" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:29:45 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:
It most likely is just station staff, given drivers want a Oh...And £35k+
a year for doing so.
Barry

This 32 hour, 4 day week business is made up nonesense - BY A TROLL. I've
never heard of such a proposal and i'm in ASLEF - ok agreed there is
'discussion' banded around over whether to go for a 4 day week merely as a
suggestion to give more family condusive time off but that doesnt mean less
hours into the bargain, it means a different arrangement of the existing
agreements i.e., 156 hrs per month spread over a longer working day
actually, my son! Also whats this crap you go on about - 35k+ a year? - not
even worth a comment

And your POINT is...????

"David FitzGerald" wrote in message
om...
(Kevin) wrote in message
. com...

My solution is that people go home earlier.

Fantasic. Why not take it further... people shouldn't go out at all,
and then we wouldn't need buses or a tube and all the roads would be
empty. Problem solved!

But in all seriousness, if there is a demand for public transport late
at night (even if going out late at night isn't *your* cup of tea)
then it seems only sensible that the demand should be satisfied where
possible.

There is a demand for public transport late at night and there are Night
Buses to meet this demand. In the small hours the roads are almost empty
(well maybe not Charing Cross Road) and the buses fly along. I remember
getting from Putney to King's Cross at 3am in a ridiculously quick time;
faster than the tube would have managed it.

Crossing from north to south (and equivalents) used to mean a change of bus
but since almost all of them went to Trafalgar Square that wasn't such a
problem. Out of interest now that is no longer the case are such journeys
harder or easier to make? Since moving out of London I've stopped having to
do it.

Dave

Dave Liney wrote:
"David FitzGerald" wrote in message
om...

(Kevin) wrote in message
e.com...


My solution is that people go home earlier.

Fantasic. Why not take it further... people shouldn't go out at all,
and then we wouldn't need buses or a tube and all the roads would be
empty. Problem solved!

But in all seriousness, if there is a demand for public transport late
at night (even if going out late at night isn't *your* cup of tea)
then it seems only sensible that the demand should be satisfied where
possible.


There is a demand for public transport late at night and there are Night
Buses to meet this demand. In the small hours the roads are almost empty
(well maybe not Charing Cross Road) and the buses fly along. I remember
getting from Putney to King's Cross at 3am in a ridiculously quick time;
faster than the tube would have managed it.

Crossing from north to south (and equivalents) used to mean a change of bus
but since almost all of them went to Trafalgar Square that wasn't such a
problem. Out of interest now that is no longer the case are such journeys
harder or easier to make? Since moving out of London I've stopped having to
do it.

There are more night or 24-hour routes since the congestion charge
improvements came in, so I'd say easier. It does depend how far you're
going. You have routes like the N74 (Roehampton - Putney), N28
(Wandsworth - Camden Town) and N31 (Clapham Junction - Kilburn) which
cross the centre without terminating.


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"LarryLard" wrote in message
om...
"Richard J." wrote in message
o.uk...
BBC news report at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4031397.stm

"A plan to run London Underground services for an extra hour on Friday
and Saturday nights will be put to Londoners, the Mayor has said. The
last Tube would run at 1.30am, but [the Tube] would not start running
until an hour later the next day to allow time for maintenance work.

TfL will consult Tube users, businesses and workers about the plans over
the coming months. If approved, services would be extended by the end of
2006."

Something makes me suspect that wannabe-late-night-tube-users will be
more vocal during the consultation period than
already-early-morning-tube-users, and we will end up with an hour more
of ****ed people and an hour less of useful workers, but that's just
me being cynical I guess.


What about people who've been out on Saturday, but whose trains (or ****ing
replacement coaches) arrive late back into London?

All the operators are guilty, but thinking specifically of Virgin Trains
West Coast mainline, it is not unlikely for trains from Glasgow, Liverpool
etc. to be delayed by more than an hour or two throughout the course of
their journey?

The /last/ thing I want to do when I've been travelling for about six hours
is to have to extended my journey further via a combination of night buses
to get to my destination.

BTN

"Sir Benjamin Nunn" wrote in message
...

What about people who've been out on Saturday, but whose trains (or
****ing replacement coaches) arrive late back into London?

All the operators are guilty, but thinking specifically of Virgin Trains
West Coast mainline, it is not unlikely for trains from Glasgow, Liverpool
etc. to be delayed by more than an hour or two throughout the course of
their journey?

The /last/ thing I want to do when I've been travelling for about six
hours is to have to extended my journey further via a combination of night
buses to get to my destination.

When I was delayed by 1.5 hours coming into Euston on the last train and so
had missed the last tube Virgin paid for a taxi back to Clapham for me. I
thought that was standard.

Dave

What about people who've been out on Saturday, but whose trains (or ****ing
replacement coaches) arrive late back into London?

All the operators are guilty, but thinking specifically of Virgin Trains
West Coast mainline, it is not unlikely for trains from Glasgow, Liverpool
etc. to be delayed by more than an hour or two throughout the course of
their journey?

The /last/ thing I want to do when I've been travelling for about six hours
is to have to extended my journey further via a combination of night buses
to get to my destination.

BTN

So I presume you are for the extended openning then?

redtube wrote:
What decent people travel home at that hour anyway?

A large number of revellers who support the central London economy and
therefore London Underground jobs?

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Paul Weaver wrote in message ...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:18:58 +0000, umpston wrote:
Yes you are. There is no need for an hour less of useful workers - in
todays "can do" society companies can just change their shifts to match the
tubes. Or helpfully advise their employees to get bikes. Anybody else has
no business to be up at such unearthly hours on the weekend.

A another 9-5 shiftist.

No. I work when I feel like it, whether it be 10-6 or 7-3. I'd
recommend the same for anybody.