Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 14 Feb 2007 17:09:50 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote:
On 14 Feb, 18:27, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:56:50 +0000, Paul Terry wrote: In message , Tom Anderson writes (snip) Secondly, am i right in assuming the "planned" was a mistake? Sounds like it: engineering work, yes, but not planned! Planned in the sense that LU allowed them on to the tracks but not planned in the sense of a long planned possession. Are you sure you're not practising for an appearance before the Assembly's transport committee Paul?! Not that I'm aware of. Thankfully Mr O'Toole usually gets that job. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 15 Feb, 19:12, Paul Corfield wrote:
On 14 Feb 2007 17:09:50 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote: On 14 Feb, 18:27, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:56:50 +0000, Paul Terry wrote: In message , Tom Anderson writes (snip) Secondly, am i right in assuming the "planned" was a mistake? Sounds like it: engineering work, yes, but not planned! Planned in the sense that LU allowed them on to the tracks but not planned in the sense of a long planned possession. Are you sure you're not practising for an appearance before the Assembly's transport committee Paul?! Not that I'm aware of. Thankfully Mr O'Toole usually gets that job. -- Paul C Always good to have the right O'Toole for the job. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 15 Feb 2007 14:25:58 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote:
On 15 Feb, 19:12, Paul Corfield wrote: On 14 Feb 2007 17:09:50 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote: On 14 Feb, 18:27, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:56:50 +0000, Paul Terry wrote: In message , Tom Anderson writes (snip) Secondly, am i right in assuming the "planned" was a mistake? Sounds like it: engineering work, yes, but not planned! Planned in the sense that LU allowed them on to the tracks but not planned in the sense of a long planned possession. Are you sure you're not practising for an appearance before the Assembly's transport committee Paul?! Not that I'm aware of. Thankfully Mr O'Toole usually gets that job. -- Paul C Always good to have the right O'Toole for the job. **groan** |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 19:12:13 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote: On 14 Feb 2007 17:09:50 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote: On 14 Feb, 18:27, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:56:50 +0000, Paul Terry wrote: In message , Tom Anderson writes (snip) Secondly, am i right in assuming the "planned" was a mistake? Sounds like it: engineering work, yes, but not planned! Planned in the sense that LU allowed them on to the tracks but not planned in the sense of a long planned possession. Are you sure you're not practising for an appearance before the Assembly's transport committee Paul?! Not that I'm aware of. Thankfully Mr O'Toole usually gets that job. That's why we pay him: to tell the politicians how Metronet/Tubelines have screwed up this time! ![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Bus Disruption Around Bexleyheath | London Transport | |||
getting around london on holiday | London Transport | |||
Car parking around Craven Cottage | London Transport | |||
How many people could this station turn around...? | London Transport | |||
she should attack once, believe weekly, then solve alongside the candle around the shower | London Transport |