On 9 Jul, 20:35, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 08:32:43 -0700, "


To be completely honest I don't see that the FT report is particularly
correct. There are specified tests and criteria as to how the assessment
is made and trying to stop already agreed plans for closures will cost
Metronet even more money and thus increase the volume of the claim
against LU. While I don't like the line being closed earlier in the
evening I would much prefer that the line upgrade happens on time rather
than dragging on for year after year after year with the resultant
appalling performance that the Central Line suffered during its £750m LU
controlled upgrade. Do you really want to see the Victoria Line sink
through the floor in terms of service performance because there is only
so much time left for the trains, track and signalling / control
systems?

--
What i would really like to see is London Underground given the
political support from central government to hold Metronet properly to
account, rather than just saying that any money Metronet has to spend
to get itself out of its current mess, will have to be claimed back
from LU and hence the taxpayer. According to an article in today's
evening Standard, central government could actually bring effective
pressure to bear, given that the contractors behind Metronet are
heavily reliant on other government contracts, too. If such pressure
is brought to bear i don't see why it can't say 'enough is enough' and
put an end to this curfew nonsense - but that will only happen if we
let our MPs and GLA reps (as well as Metronet et al) know how strongly
we feel.

I've used the Victoria line more or less daily since I was a teenager,
it used to be brilliant, and i must admit over the last year or two
i;ve been thinking 'if it ain't broke...

Admits to being a ****ed off newbie campaigner!

On Jul 9, 9:48 pm, "
wrote:
On 9 Jul, 20:35, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 08:32:43 -0700, "

To be completely honest I don't see that the FT report is particularly
correct. There are specified tests and criteria as to how the assessment
is made and trying to stop already agreed plans for closures will cost
Metronet even more money and thus increase the volume of the claim
against LU. While I don't like the line being closed earlier in the
evening I would much prefer that the line upgrade happens on time rather
than dragging on for year after year after year with the resultant
appalling performance that the Central Line suffered during its £750m LU
controlled upgrade. Do you really want to see the Victoria Line sink
through the floor in terms of service performance because there is only
so much time left for the trains, track and signalling / control
systems?

--

What i would really like to see is London Underground given the
political support from central government to hold Metronet properly to
account, rather than just saying that any money Metronet has to spend
to get itself out of its current mess, will have to be claimed back
from LU and hence the taxpayer. According to an article in today's
evening Standard, central government could actually bring effective
pressure to bear, given that the contractors behind Metronet are
heavily reliant on other government contracts, too. If such pressure
is brought to bear i don't see why it can't say 'enough is enough' and
put an end to this curfew nonsense - but that will only happen if we
let our MPs and GLA reps (as well as Metronet et al) know how strongly
we feel.

I've used the Victoria line more or less daily since I was a teenager,
it used to be brilliant, and i must admit over the last year or two
i;ve been thinking 'if it ain't broke...

Admits to being a ****ed off newbie campaigner!

Its all old kit though, life expired from the 60's!

The Govt wont get rid of PPP (well Brown wont anyway) as they took the
Tory idea of PFI (which is good IMHO for new-builds) and took it to
bizzarre extremes. Just look at the sell off of the Revenue and
Customs buildings to a firm called Mapeley STEPS, who are in a tax
haven and are making a fortune out of us!
So long as Metronet can persuade their bankers to keep them going they
will be okay after all in 20 years they earn the mega bucks.

wrote in message
ps.com...
On 9 Jul, 20:35, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 08:32:43 -0700, "


To be completely honest I don't see that the FT report is particularly
correct. There are specified tests and criteria as to how the assessment
is made and trying to stop already agreed plans for closures will cost
Metronet even more money and thus increase the volume of the claim
against LU. While I don't like the line being closed earlier in the
evening I would much prefer that the line upgrade happens on time rather
than dragging on for year after year after year with the resultant
appalling performance that the Central Line suffered during its £750m LU
controlled upgrade. Do you really want to see the Victoria Line sink
through the floor in terms of service performance because there is only
so much time left for the trains, track and signalling / control
systems?

--
What i would really like to see is London Underground given the
political support from central government to hold Metronet properly to
account, rather than just saying that any money Metronet has to spend
to get itself out of its current mess, will have to be claimed back
from LU and hence the taxpayer. According to an article in today's
evening Standard, central government could actually bring effective
pressure to bear, given that the contractors behind Metronet are
heavily reliant on other government contracts, too. If such pressure
is brought to bear i don't see why it can't say 'enough is enough' and
put an end to this curfew nonsense - but that will only happen if we
let our MPs and GLA reps (as well as Metronet et al) know how strongly
we feel.

I've used the Victoria line more or less daily since I was a teenager,
it used to be brilliant, and i must admit over the last year or two
i;ve been thinking 'if it ain't broke...

Admits to being a ****ed off newbie campaigner!

Then the Government would be acting illegally. Metronet have the right in
law to claim back additional out of scope expenses, just as any contractor
does, whether you or Ken like it or not. It would be a sad day that the
Government could just rip up lawful contracts as it sees fit.
Just wait until 2011/12 and see the size of the claims for extras. No
different to Connect or Wembley Stadium although I thought that Multiplex's
claim one minute that the FA cup would be held in Wembley in 2006 then a few
weeks late well it was all late due to delys in design were bizarre. Funny
there was no delay to design in Feb 2006.

Kevin

chunky munky wrote:

Information about Engineering Works is appallingly vague and causes a
lot of frustration for staff.

Funny...Last time I looked at a Traffic Circular (admittedly, that's not
generally available to members of the public) it had fully detailed
information for that weekend's Engineering Works (e.g. a list of *all*
the bus routes where tickets were being accepted during a weekend
closure of the Charing Cross branch of the Northern Line).

One of the problems with the redesigned TfL site, however, is that the
amount of detail for Engineering Works where replacement buses *aren't*
provided (e.g. Northern Line Charing Cross Branch) has reduced
significantly.

Cheers,

Barry

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 13:48:40 -0700, "
wrote:

On 9 Jul, 20:35, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 08:32:43 -0700, "


To be completely honest I don't see that the FT report is particularly
correct. There are specified tests and criteria as to how the assessment
is made and trying to stop already agreed plans for closures will cost
Metronet even more money and thus increase the volume of the claim
against LU. While I don't like the line being closed earlier in the
evening I would much prefer that the line upgrade happens on time rather
than dragging on for year after year after year with the resultant
appalling performance that the Central Line suffered during its £750m LU
controlled upgrade. Do you really want to see the Victoria Line sink
through the floor in terms of service performance because there is only
so much time left for the trains, track and signalling / control
systems?


What i would really like to see is London Underground given the
political support from central government to hold Metronet properly to
account, rather than just saying that any money Metronet has to spend
to get itself out of its current mess, will have to be claimed back
from LU and hence the taxpayer. According to an article in today's
evening Standard, central government could actually bring effective
pressure to bear, given that the contractors behind Metronet are
heavily reliant on other government contracts, too. If such pressure
is brought to bear i don't see why it can't say 'enough is enough' and
put an end to this curfew nonsense - but that will only happen if we
let our MPs and GLA reps (as well as Metronet et al) know how strongly
we feel.

I wonder why you seem to believe the government are involved or would
bring any pressure to bear. The PPP is a Treasury invention and is
designed to ensure that cock ups that are the fault of the Infraco are
paid for by the Infraco and its funders / shareholders. If the
government wouldn't intervene to stop MG Rover shutting down in what is
a politically sensitive (for them) region of the UK then I really don't
see them really caring about the PPP in London. Under the devolved
governance arrangements the PPP is Ken Livingstone's political
responsibility and he seems to prefer the threat of him dismembering
himself in public before he'll stump up the cash. I also don't see why
you believe that LU does not have the support of the Mayor in its stance
against Metronet.

In real life it is more complex than this but the government cannot get
involved behind the scenes to threaten Metronet or its constituent
members. There are EU procurement processes and various severe
sanctions that would be brought against the government if it was to
interfere. It should also be remembered that this is "a two way street"
and there may well be things that the government urgently needs from the
private sector rail industry and if it is farts about with that industry
then it could be on the receiving end of a lot of bad news in years to
come. Not exactly what is needed when it is about to launch the High
Level Output Spec for the mainline network.

I've used the Victoria line more or less daily since I was a teenager,
it used to be brilliant, and i must admit over the last year or two
i;ve been thinking 'if it ain't broke...

Yes but the line *is* falling to bits. It absolutely has to be upgraded
and delaying it or cancelling it is just a false economy. I imagine
you'd be first at the barricades moaning like hell when it broke down
irreparably in a few years time because no one had thought to upgrade
it. The real issue is the 40 year old signalling and control system -
the trains can't move without it and much of it is obsolete and I'd
guess that in a few years time some parts will not be able to be
purchased or reliably overhauled. You then have no train service - not
what you, I or London wants or needs.

Admits to being a ****ed off newbie campaigner!

Yes you may well be but the fact is that the closures will go ahead and
provided it is well managed - like the Brixton closures in recent years
have been - I suspect most people will grin and bear it and will adapt
their journey plans. It is not as if Walthamstow is Outer Mongolia and
bereft of decent alternative transport links.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Jul 9, 10:38 pm, Barry Salter wrote:
chunky munky wrote:
Information about Engineering Works is appallingly vague and causes a
lot of frustration for staff.

Funny...Last time I looked at a Traffic Circular (admittedly, that's not
generally available to members of the public) it had fully detailed
information for that weekend's Engineering Works (e.g. a list of *all*
the bus routes where tickets were being accepted during a weekend
closure of the Charing Cross branch of the Northern Line).

One of the problems with the redesigned TfL site, however, is that the
amount of detail for Engineering Works where replacement buses *aren't*
provided (e.g. Northern Line Charing Cross Branch) has reduced
significantly.

Cheers,

Barry

Yes but the posters and other media available to passengers are vague
and they then take their frustration out on staff. And there have been
a number of (rather critical to customer information) errors in the
Traffic Circular regarding engineering works too.

"Barnsely Bill" wrote in message
...

Funny, this information about service cuts is buried near the bottom of
a press release titled "Mayor announces acceleration of Tube Investment
Programme."

http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_...eleaseid=11710
--

and it says that it will shut at 23.00 not reported by the OP.

Looks like the train from Liverpool Street are going to be full when the
pubs shut...


TfL website says closes at 10pm, banners at Blackhorse Rd say please aim to
finish your journey by 10:30pm
I'm not happy about the weekend closures, never mind closures during the
week

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 11:24:51 -0700, "
wrote:

No information about a rail replacement bus (!) either.

Not too surprising, since every station on the Victoria line bar
Pimlico is, IIRC, an interchange station.

James Farrar wrote:

No information about a rail replacement bus (!) either.

Not too surprising, since every station on the Victoria line bar
Pimlico is, IIRC, an interchange station.

Yes but with *very* convoluted routes between them!

On 9 Jul, 22:51, Paul Corfield wrote:

Yes you may well be but the fact is that the closures will go ahead and
provided it is well managed - like the Brixton closures in recent years
have been - I suspect most people will grin and bear it
--
Paul C

Actually talking about Brixton; any chance this is going to get
finished after 4 years?