On 21/10/2010 20:47, Mizter T wrote:

On Oct 21, 7:47 pm, wrote:
In the Standard's reportage of this incident today at
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...e-23890197-.do
there is a phrase that hit my head like an elbow:
"The Jubilee line opened a year late and only just in time for the
Millennium Dome celebrations. It cost more than £2 billion to build."
I thought the Jubilee Line Extension opened ahead of schedule. New
Year's Day 1999/2000 was not originally part of the deadline. Or am I
wrong?

It was late - the tabloid version of history has it that Blair brought
in Bechtel to ensure it got finished on time (where on time was
'before the bloody chimes strike on the new millennium'!).

A year before...

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Oct 21, 11:25*pm, Graeme wrote:
In message
* * * * * Mizter T wrote:



On Oct 21, 7:47*pm, Offramp wrote:
In the Standard's reportage of this incident today at
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...e-23890197-.do
there is a phrase that hit my head like an elbow:
"The Jubilee line opened a year late and only just in time for the
Millennium Dome celebrations. It cost more than £2 billion to build.."
I thought the Jubilee Line Extension opened ahead of schedule. New
Year's Day 1999/2000 was not originally part of the deadline. Or am I
wrong?

It was late - the tabloid version of history has it that Blair brought
in Bechtel to ensure it got finished on time (where on time was
'before the bloody chimes strike on the new millennium'!).

Well they did it with a year to spare.

So the ES reporter was wrong, was he not? He said it opened a year
late.
My memory is that the first deadline was 2001 or 2002, but that a
general media surge suggested to punters that New Years Eve 1999/2000
was the deadline.

Offramp wrote:

My memory is that the first deadline was 2001 or 2002, but that a
general media surge suggested to punters that New Years Eve 1999/2000
was the deadline.

It was certainly late - I remember the 1994 tube maps predicting a 1997
completion date and throughout 1998 & 1999 there were reports of further
delays - Westminster station was especially problematic and initially the
extension opened as just a separate shuttle service from Stratford to North
Greenwich, later Bermondsey then Waterloo.

"Arthur Figgis" wrote:

On 21/10/2010 20:47, Mizter T wrote:

On Oct 21, 7:47 pm, wrote:
In the Standard's reportage of this incident today at
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...e-23890197-.do
there is a phrase that hit my head like an elbow:
"The Jubilee line opened a year late and only just in time for the
Millennium Dome celebrations. It cost more than £2 billion to build."
I thought the Jubilee Line Extension opened ahead of schedule. New
Year's Day 1999/2000 was not originally part of the deadline. Or am I
wrong?

It was late - the tabloid version of history has it that Blair brought
in Bechtel to ensure it got finished on time (where on time was
'before the bloody chimes strike on the new millennium'!).

A year before...


Yeah yeah yeah...

Thanks for that. I was not being jejune or sarcastic - just my memory
is at fault!

"Graeme" wrote in message
...
In message

Mizter T wrote:


On Oct 21, 7:47 pm, Offramp wrote:
In the Standard's reportage of this incident today at
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...e-23890197-.do
there is a phrase that hit my head like an elbow:
"The Jubilee line opened a year late and only just in time for the
Millennium Dome celebrations. It cost more than £2 billion to build."
I thought the Jubilee Line Extension opened ahead of schedule. New
Year's Day 1999/2000 was not originally part of the deadline. Or am I
wrong?

It was late - the tabloid version of history has it that Blair brought
in Bechtel to ensure it got finished on time (where on time was
'before the bloody chimes strike on the new millennium'!).

Well they did it with a year to spare.

--
But wasn't it finished without the signalling system that it was supposed to
have. Does that count as completing ahead of schedule. If you don't build
what you started out to build then surely the goal posts moved.

Kevin

Another bunch of rather less intelligent people insist that there was
a year zero, ...

Actually, there was a year zero but for reasons that are self-evident
if you know what happened then, there's been a huge cover-up ever
since. You're not supposed to know that. Despite the disinformation
that it was a rather ordinary year in Augustinian Rome, it's when
people first realized that the al~~~r~~~!~
NO CARRIER

"John Levine" wrote in message
...
Another bunch of rather less intelligent people insist that there was
a year zero, ...

Actually, there was a year zero but for reasons that are self-evident
if you know what happened then, there's been a huge cover-up ever
since. You're not supposed to know that. Despite the disinformation
that it was a rather ordinary year in Augustinian Rome, it's when
people first realized that the al~~~r~~~!~

Well it's flipping well all made up based upon an event that didn't happen,
so why does it matter?

tim

tim.... wrote:

"John Levine" wrote in message
...
Another bunch of rather less intelligent people insist that there was
a year zero, ...

Actually, there was a year zero but for reasons that are self-evident
if you know what happened then, there's been a huge cover-up ever
since. You're not supposed to know that. Despite the disinformation
that it was a rather ordinary year in Augustinian Rome, it's when
people first realized that the al~~~r~~~!~

Well it's flipping well all made up based upon an event that didn't happen,
so why does it matter?

What event would that be?

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632945.html
(43 040 at London Paddington, 30 Apr 1999)

"Chris Tolley" (ukonline really) wrote in message
.. .
tim.... wrote:

"John Levine" wrote in message
...
Another bunch of rather less intelligent people insist that there was
a year zero, ...

Actually, there was a year zero but for reasons that are self-evident
if you know what happened then, there's been a huge cover-up ever
since. You're not supposed to know that. Despite the disinformation
that it was a rather ordinary year in Augustinian Rome, it's when
people first realized that the al~~~r~~~!~

Well it's flipping well all made up based upon an event that didn't
happen,
so why does it matter?

What event would that be?

A "virgin birth" (as I understand)

tim