View Single Post
  #11   Report Post  
Old April 9th 05, 11:01 AM posted to uk.transport.london
Steve Steve is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Sep 2003
Posts: 57
Default the tube/ppp/northern line

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 23:30:38 +0000, Richard J. wrote:

steve wrote:
On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:25:49 +0100, Paul wrote:


A very good explanation I'd say. Plus at stations further down the
line if passengers see a full train with a long gap behind they are
probably more likely to try and shove on the train with possibly
even more delays as doors have to be shut several times, abusing
staff if they then can't get on etc. And, building on the point
above, on most lines that run through central London (rather than
just to it like the Met) the train is unlikely to be totally
packed throughout its trip so regulation somewhere is sensible
(and I'm sure most people would say that's fine so long as its
after "my" stop)


And that is the point, the system is there to provide a service, so
what is wrong with doing what benefits *most people*. Invariably
when a trains travels into London in the AM peak, if fills on the
way in, then it empties, the trains are mostly held when the train has
maximum capacity. The few that will benefit by holding the train is
less than those that benefit by actually moving it along the track
(what they are supposed to do).


Holding one train for regulatory purposes slightly delays the people in
that train but benefits the people in all following trains, for the
reasons I explained. There is therefore net benefit.


What you explain above is fatally flawed in that you ignore the fact the
more people arrive, not only where the train is held but at the downstream
stations.

For both the existing passengers and the new arrivals, seeing a train
delayed means the service is a mess, you can't trust the indicators at
the best of times (how many times does that train 1 minute behind arrive 5
minutes later) so you get whatever train you can. Think about it from POV
of passengers.

You argue that regulating the trains makes is

"more likely to try and shove on the train with possibly even more delays"

when in fact the opposite is true.

You acknowledge that trains travelling through central London get full
then empty (esp in the AM peak), and "regulation somewhere is sensible",
somewhere, yes, somewhere sensible too? Euston SB bank branch is not.