"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