London's mayor is offering public transport tips to Venezuela's
capital

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index....ID=1&subID=746

Is it possible that Hugo Chavez one day entered a ragged central London
tube station, forked out three quid for a ticket, walked down the
stationary escalator, joined the throng waiting for a delayed train and
thought, "Hombre, we must have a bit of this"?

Old Boy wrote:
London's mayor is offering public transport tips to Venezuela's
capital

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index....ID=1&subID=746

Is it possible that Hugo Chavez one day entered a ragged central London
tube station, forked out three quid for a ticket, walked down the
stationary escalator, joined the throng waiting for a delayed train and
thought, "Hombre, we must have a bit of this"?

It's one of those interesting reminders that, much as certain rags and
whiners like to relentlessly slate TfL, people worldwide whose job is
to actually understand these things realise that London's transport
system features a great many practices worth emulating (alongside the
areas where it could do better and could learn from other cities,
naturally).

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John B wrote:


It's one of those interesting reminders that, much as certain rags and
whiners like to relentlessly slate TfL, people worldwide whose job is
to actually understand these things realise that London's transport
system features a great many practices worth emulating (alongside the
areas where it could do better and could learn from other cities,
naturally).


I got on my first tube train in months this morning and we made it from
Euston to Kings X where the train came to an abrupt stop short of the
end of the platform. The then followed several minutes of staff running
up and down the platform with the doors shut. We are told we would have
to detrain and that there was a train right behind. A few more minutes
of nothing much happening then the doors shut then more nothing then
the train shunts back then stops then shunts back again. It then
proceeds forward but instead of going straight on stops and the doors
open. The entire platform full of people stare in amazement until one
brave person decides well the doors are open I'm getting on followed by
everybody else.
We then proceeded with the journey apart from the obligitory reopening
of the doors.
And after January I will have to pay £4 to experience this. Wonderful.

Kevin

Kev wrote:
John B wrote:


It's one of those interesting reminders that, much as certain rags and
whiners like to relentlessly slate TfL, people worldwide whose job is
to actually understand these things realise that London's transport
system features a great many practices worth emulating (alongside the
areas where it could do better and could learn from other cities,
naturally).


I got on my first tube train in months this morning and we made it from
Euston to Kings X where the train came to an abrupt stop short of the
end of the platform. The then followed several minutes of staff running
up and down the platform with the doors shut. We are told we would have
to detrain and that there was a train right behind. A few more minutes
of nothing much happening then the doors shut then more nothing then
the train shunts back then stops then shunts back again. It then
proceeds forward but instead of going straight on stops and the doors
open. The entire platform full of people stare in amazement until one
brave person decides well the doors are open I'm getting on followed by
everybody else.
We then proceeded with the journey apart from the obligitory reopening
of the doors.
And after January I will have to pay £4 to experience this. Wonderful.

Kevin

The only thing at which L.T. (or T.F.L. as it is now called) excels
seems to be providing llimp excuses for the joke that passes for
"service" nowadays.

This morning's painfully slow journey between Fulham Broadway and Earl'
Court at about 7.45a.m. must surely have broken the record.

Delays of several minutes at Fulham Broadway, repeated on the approach
to West Brompton. Then further minutes' delays on leaving West Brompton
and then on the approach to Earl's Court.

Here's a list of the excsues provided by the driver (in the order in
which they were announced):-

1. Engineering works at Earl's Court which meant a delaysed engineering
possession this morning.

2. Signalling problems at Earl's Court meant that trains were "passing
through Earl's Court, but very slowly".

3. A train ahead of us at Earl's Court had to be "reformed" (whatever
that means - the thought of shunting maneouvres at Earl's Court
intrigues me!).

4. The train ahead of us was in the platform at Earl's Court and was
awating a driver.

Do readers think this info (or misinfo) was being provided to the
driver by the Department for Lame Excuses or was he told "make it up as
you go along"?

Marc.

In message om,
" writes

This morning's painfully slow journey between Fulham Broadway and Earl'
Court at about 7.45a.m. must surely have broken the record.

Delays of several minutes at Fulham Broadway, repeated on the approach
to West Brompton. Then further minutes' delays on leaving West Brompton
and then on the approach to Earl's Court.

Here's a list of the excsues provided by the driver (in the order in
which they were announced):-

Which all sound quite plausible to me. As drivers we're expected to
pass as much information onto the customers as possible to reassure
them. We don't always receive an awful lot though.

1. Engineering works at Earl's Court which meant a delaysed engineering
possession this morning.

Often happens - more so these days since the management of the
maintenance passed to private companies under the PPP.

2. Signalling problems at Earl's Court meant that trains were "passing
through Earl's Court, but very slowly".

Which might or might not be related to the above. In any case,
'signalling problems' are so common (especially at EC) as to not cause
much reaction.

3. A train ahead of us at Earl's Court had to be "reformed" (whatever
that means - the thought of shunting maneouvres at Earl's Court
intrigues me!).

Ah, now.... jargon (which is frowned upon). What it means is that train
4 which was, maybe, going to Upminster has now been renamed to be called
train 12 which is going to Tower Hill and the driver who is booked to
drive train 12 needs to take it over. It's actually a very common
procedure on LU but is really of no concern to the customers.

4. The train ahead of us was in the platform at Earl's Court and was
awating a driver.

The aforementioned reform failed as the new driver was still having his
(late) meal relief and nobody (mainly the managers who should be
managing these things) realised?

Do readers think this info (or misinfo) was being provided to the
driver by the Department for Lame Excuses or was he told "make it up as
you go along"?

(As a driver!) I think the driver did his best to keep you all informed
with the limited information he had at his disposal. We're wrong if we
say nothing, and wrong if the information isn't 100% accurate, but we
can only pass on what we're told.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

"Steve Fitzgerald" ] wrote in message
...
In message om,
" writes

This morning's painfully slow journey between Fulham Broadway and Earl'
Court at about 7.45a.m. must surely have broken the record.

Delays of several minutes at Fulham Broadway, repeated on the approach
to West Brompton. Then further minutes' delays on leaving West Brompton
and then on the approach to Earl's Court.

Here's a list of the excsues provided by the driver (in the order in
which they were announced):-

Which all sound quite plausible to me. As drivers we're expected to pass
as much information onto the customers as possible to reassure them. We
don't always receive an awful lot though.

1. Engineering works at Earl's Court which meant a delaysed engineering
possession this morning.

Often happens - more so these days since the management of the maintenance
passed to private companies under the PPP.

2. Signalling problems at Earl's Court meant that trains were "passing
through Earl's Court, but very slowly".

Which might or might not be related to the above. In any case,
'signalling problems' are so common (especially at EC) as to not cause
much reaction.

3. A train ahead of us at Earl's Court had to be "reformed" (whatever
that means - the thought of shunting maneouvres at Earl's Court
intrigues me!).

Ah, now.... jargon (which is frowned upon). What it means is that train 4
which was, maybe, going to Upminster has now been renamed to be called
train 12 which is going to Tower Hill and the driver who is booked to
drive train 12 needs to take it over. It's actually a very common
procedure on LU but is really of no concern to the customers.

4. The train ahead of us was in the platform at Earl's Court and was
awating a driver.

The aforementioned reform failed as the new driver was still having his
(late) meal relief and nobody (mainly the managers who should be managing
these things) realised?

Do readers think this info (or misinfo) was being provided to the
driver by the Department for Lame Excuses or was he told "make it up as
you go along"?

(As a driver!) I think the driver did his best to keep you all informed
with the limited information he had at his disposal. We're wrong if we
say nothing, and wrong if the information isn't 100% accurate, but we can
only pass on what we're told.

Steve, I've told you before about telling the punters the truth. In future
give 'em the mushroom treatment as per company standard and there's a
tenners worth of thanks to you in it for you..;-)
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.