Dave wrote:

NM writes

And you can argue black is white until the cows come home but this
will not change the simple fact that Thameslink are responsibe for
keeping to their own timetable.


*sigh*

It's a shame that you are so blinkered and unwilling to learn.

What can they do if the timetable foisted upon them is unworkable?
Refuse to publish an unworkable timetable.
Just
not bother to run any trains at all?
Best idea yet.

What can they do if the infrastructure (tracks, signalling, power
supply) is unreliable?
Make sure they are.

What can they do if another company's train makes the Thameslink train
late?
See that there is no recurrence.

There are many reasons for trains not running to time that are totally
outside of the control of the operating company.
Yeah, everyones fault but theirs.
You also appear to
have selective memory, apparently forgetting that I said "What
Thameslink have to ensure is that it maintains its trains and systems so
that the timetable is achievable." Thameslink can't be held responsible
if a Midland Main Line train breaks down and delays a Thameslink train
(or for that matter a Connex, SouthCentral, Virgin, Gatwick Express,
Thames Trains or SWT train either).
Why not. I, as a punter hold them responsible, my contract is with them,
if others **** them up it's up to them to take whatever redress they see
fit.

But your lack of clue fails to surprise me. Never mind, stick to the
Nijnte books eh? You might learn something.

The only thing I have learnt from you is that you are a PT apologist. PT
is pants.

"NM" wrote in message
m...

*sigh*

It's a shame that you are so blinkered and unwilling to learn.

What can they do if the timetable foisted upon them is unworkable?
Refuse to publish an unworkable timetable.
Just
not bother to run any trains at all?
Best idea yet.

What a brilliant idea. No trains must be much better than late trains.


What can they do if the infrastructure (tracks, signalling, power
supply) is unreliable?
Make sure they are.

Thameslink are not responsible for the infrastructure, Network Rail are.

What can they do if another company's train makes the Thameslink train
late?
See that there is no recurrence.

How? Creep into the other companies depots in the middle of the night and
sabotage all their trains to give the Thameslinks a clear run?

There are many reasons for trains not running to time that are totally
outside of the control of the operating company.
Yeah, everyones fault but theirs.

So what is this magic way for Thameslink to run all their trains on time? I'm
sure you could make millions if you could run a perfect 100% reliable train
service.

You also appear to
have selective memory, apparently forgetting that I said "What
Thameslink have to ensure is that it maintains its trains and systems so
that the timetable is achievable." Thameslink can't be held responsible
if a Midland Main Line train breaks down and delays a Thameslink train
(or for that matter a Connex, SouthCentral, Virgin, Gatwick Express,
Thames Trains or SWT train either).
Why not. I, as a punter hold them responsible, my contract is with them,
if others **** them up it's up to them to take whatever redress they see
fit.

Like what?

Peter Smyth

Peter Smyth wrote:
"NM" wrote in message
m...


*sigh*

It's a shame that you are so blinkered and unwilling to learn.

What can they do if the timetable foisted upon them is unworkable?

Refuse to publish an unworkable timetable.
Just

not bother to run any trains at all?

Best idea yet.


What a brilliant idea. No trains must be much better than late trains.


What can they do if the infrastructure (tracks, signalling, power
supply) is unreliable?

Make sure they are.


Thameslink are not responsible for the infrastructure, Network Rail are.


What can they do if another company's train makes the Thameslink train
late?

See that there is no recurrence.


How? Creep into the other companies depots in the middle of the night and
sabotage all their trains to give the Thameslinks a clear run?


There are many reasons for trains not running to time that are totally
outside of the control of the operating company.

Yeah, everyones fault but theirs.


So what is this magic way for Thameslink to run all their trains on time? I'm
sure you could make millions if you could run a perfect 100% reliable train
service.


You also appear to

have selective memory, apparently forgetting that I said "What
Thameslink have to ensure is that it maintains its trains and systems so
that the timetable is achievable." Thameslink can't be held responsible
if a Midland Main Line train breaks down and delays a Thameslink train
(or for that matter a Connex, SouthCentral, Virgin, Gatwick Express,
Thames Trains or SWT train either).

Why not. I, as a punter hold them responsible, my contract is with them,
if others **** them up it's up to them to take whatever redress they see
fit.


Like what?

Peter Smyth


That's for them to decide, legal action perhaps, some sort of pressure,
whatever, as a punter it's not my problem my contract is with Thameslink.

NM wrote:
Peter Smyth wrote:
"NM" wrote in message
m...


*sigh*

It's a shame that you are so blinkered and unwilling to
learn.

What can they do if the timetable foisted upon them is
unworkable?

Refuse to publish an unworkable timetable.
Just

not bother to run any trains at all?

Best idea yet.


What a brilliant idea. No trains must be much better than
late trains.


What can they do if the infrastructure (tracks,
signalling, power
supply) is unreliable?

Make sure they are.


Thameslink are not responsible for the infrastructure,
Network Rail are.


What can they do if another company's train makes the
Thameslink train late?

See that there is no recurrence.


How? Creep into the other companies depots in the middle
of the night and sabotage all their trains to give the
Thameslinks a clear run?


There are many reasons for trains not running to time
that are totally outside of the control of the operating
company.

Yeah, everyones fault but theirs.


So what is this magic way for Thameslink to run all their
trains on time? I'm sure you could make millions if you
could run a perfect 100% reliable train service.


You also appear to

have selective memory, apparently forgetting that I said
"What
Thameslink have to ensure is that it maintains its
trains and systems so that the timetable is achievable."
Thameslink can't be held responsible
if a Midland Main Line train breaks down and delays a
Thameslink train (or for that matter a Connex,
SouthCentral, Virgin, Gatwick Express,
Thames Trains or SWT train either).

Why not. I, as a punter hold them responsible, my
contract is with them,
if others **** them up it's up to them to take whatever
redress they see fit.


Like what?

Peter Smyth


That's for them to decide, legal action perhaps, some sort
of pressure, whatever, as a punter it's not my problem my
contract is with Thameslink.

What about when some dickhead road vehicle driver who can't maintain control
decides to dump his vehicle on the track in front of an approaching train,
is that the train operating companies fault?

Cast_Iron wrote:



That's for them to decide, legal action perhaps, some sort
of pressure, whatever, as a punter it's not my problem my
contract is with Thameslink.


What about when some dickhead road vehicle driver who can't maintain control
decides to dump his vehicle on the track in front of an approaching train,
is that the train operating companies fault?


Ultimately yes, as the punter my contract is with Thameslink, they fail,
for whatever bull**** reasons, it's their fault AFAIC. Accidents and
catastrophes aside, I thought we were talking about normal daily
running, it's notable how weak your position is when you have to use
extreme unusual accidents to justify the TOC's poor performance.

NM wrote:
Cast_Iron wrote:



That's for them to decide, legal action perhaps, some sort
of pressure, whatever, as a punter it's not my problem my
contract is with Thameslink.


What about when some dickhead road vehicle driver who
can't maintain control decides to dump his vehicle on the
track in front of an approaching train, is that the train
operating companies fault?


Ultimately yes, as the punter my contract is with
Thameslink, they fail,
for whatever bull**** reasons, it's their fault AFAIC.
Accidents and catastrophes aside, I thought we were talking
about normal daily
running, it's notable how weak your position is when you
have to use
extreme unusual accidents to justify the TOC's poor
performance.

Taking the railway as a whole people depositing their cars on the track is
not unusual nor extreme. There is also the situation where blind lorry
drivers try to stuff their high vehicle under a low bridge, a daily
occurence.

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 09:29:53 +0000 (UTC), "Cast_Iron"
wrote:

snip

What about when some dickhead road vehicle driver who can't maintain control
decides to dump his vehicle on the track in front of an approaching train,
is that the train operating companies fault?

Yes, if they PT wasn't so bad he wouldn't need a vehicle [1] :-)

I reality there is SFA bar 3 feet thick concrete barriers they could
do. After all if they did less than that and a tank carrier spilled
another Samaritan over the barrier there would be another pointless
outcry.

[1] No I'm not being serious :-)


--
This post does not reflect the opinions of all saggy cloth
cats be they a bit loose at the seams or not
GSX600F - Matilda the (now) two eared teapot, complete with
white gaffer tape, though no rectal chainsaw

"Peter Smyth" writes:

"NM" wrote in message
om...

[42 lines snipped]

Why not. I, as a punter hold them responsible, my contract is with them,
if others **** them up it's up to them to take whatever redress they see
fit.

Like what?

Who cares? Not my problem.


--
"The road to Paradise is through Intercourse."
The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html
[email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk]