On 5 avr, 12:11, Neil Williams wrote:
On Apr 5, 11:44*am, Chris *Tolley (ukonline

really) wrote:
Well, I'd certainly agree that an announcement every so often saying
"Unfortunately we do not have any firm information about when trains
will be able to leave" would convey the idea that somebody was
interested in the passengers, but I can't see what else could be said
when there is no information to convey.

That's roughly the same as the Tube one. *It might also be worth
suggesting alternatives that are known to exist as others have posted
and cross-ticket acceptance arranged where sensible. *But such an
announcement does have value - or LU clearly believe so!

And reassurance. *The human factor is very important, but often
neglected.

That may be a by-product of compensation culture. In the past, I reckon
there was much more of a "we're all in this together" attitude, whereas
nowadays, there's a prevalent, "whose fault is this and how much can I
screw them for?"

I disagree. *It may well be that the railway used to leave people
stranded or ignore them through its own self importance. *That doesn't
mean to say they should now. *Airlines are atrocious at this, I find,
the railway is rather better. *Is that not a good thing?

FWIW, I do not claim Delay Repay money from the railway in an event
causing delay that is beyond its control, such as the one this thread
is discussing; that would seem unreasonable to me. *But it does seem
reasonable to me that regardless of the cause of the delay the railway
should assist the passengers and provide them information, even if
that information is "we haven't forgotten you, but by the way there is
no information". *It might similarly mean that the railway isn't in a
position to pay for hotel accommodation, but will assist you in
finding it, for instance, or might even pay for it out of goodwill, or
park a train in the platform to let people kip on there (as I believe
Eurostar have done once or twice). *It's not about who is strictly
liable, it's about a company's moral responsibility to its customers.

So I gather from your previous postings. The only time I've bothered
with Twitter (not railway related) I haven't found anything sufficiently
interesting to persevere with it.

I haven't found a use for it other than transport information. *But it
does pretty well at that if the TOC do their job. *I have LM, VT and
Chiltern on there, and while they differ in how they work, all of them
are useful. *Vastly more up to date and relevant than the Nexus Alpha
sites, or the now uselessly out of date NRE site.

Neil

My railway experience of yesteryear was that in general the system was
flexible to the point where trains could be provided at very little
notice. In those days of course, the railway staff themselves were
very much users of the system as their primary ( and free) means of
daily transport. Todays railways by their basic organisation is less
able to react at short notice and has resurrected all the petty
weaknesses of mid 19th century wars of access and running rights!

On Apr 5, 12:53*pm, Sailor wrote:
On 5 avr, 12:11, Neil Williams wrote:



On Apr 5, 11:44*am, Chris *Tolley (ukonline

really) wrote:
Well, I'd certainly agree that an announcement every so often saying
"Unfortunately we do not have any firm information about when trains
will be able to leave" would convey the idea that somebody was
interested in the passengers, but I can't see what else could be said
when there is no information to convey.

That's roughly the same as the Tube one. *It might also be worth
suggesting alternatives that are known to exist as others have posted
and cross-ticket acceptance arranged where sensible. *But such an
announcement does have value - or LU clearly believe so!

And reassurance. *The human factor is very important, but often
neglected.

That may be a by-product of compensation culture. In the past, I reckon
there was much more of a "we're all in this together" attitude, whereas
nowadays, there's a prevalent, "whose fault is this and how much can I
screw them for?"

I disagree. *It may well be that the railway used to leave people
stranded or ignore them through its own self importance. *That doesn't
mean to say they should now. *Airlines are atrocious at this, I find,
the railway is rather better. *Is that not a good thing?

FWIW, I do not claim Delay Repay money from the railway in an event
causing delay that is beyond its control, such as the one this thread
is discussing; that would seem unreasonable to me. *But it does seem
reasonable to me that regardless of the cause of the delay the railway
should assist the passengers and provide them information, even if
that information is "we haven't forgotten you, but by the way there is
no information". *It might similarly mean that the railway isn't in a
position to pay for hotel accommodation, but will assist you in
finding it, for instance, or might even pay for it out of goodwill, or
park a train in the platform to let people kip on there (as I believe
Eurostar have done once or twice). *It's not about who is strictly
liable, it's about a company's moral responsibility to its customers.

So I gather from your previous postings. The only time I've bothered
with Twitter (not railway related) I haven't found anything sufficiently
interesting to persevere with it.

I haven't found a use for it other than transport information. *But it
does pretty well at that if the TOC do their job. *I have LM, VT and
Chiltern on there, and while they differ in how they work, all of them
are useful. *Vastly more up to date and relevant than the Nexus Alpha
sites, or the now uselessly out of date NRE site.

Neil

My railway experience of yesteryear was that in general the system was
flexible to the point where trains could be provided at very little
notice. In those days of course, the railway staff *themselves were
very much users of the system as their primary ( and free) means of
daily transport. *Todays railways by their basic organisation is less
able to react at short notice *and has resurrected all the petty
weaknesses of mid 19th century wars of access and running rights!

What would Gerry Fiennes have done??

"tony" wrote

What would Gerry Fiennes have done??

Get the Spitalfields Pilot out to drag the failure up the bank to Bethnal
Green
Shunt the truck train for the express (unless Masher May was on the front of
the truck train, it was a Saturday morning, and March Town were playing at
home).
What he wouldn't do is to forget to tell Upminster that the direct line to
Pitsea was blocked by a derailment and everything would have to be diverted
via Ockendon and Tilbury.

Peter

On 5 avr, 15:15, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"tony" wrote

What would Gerry Fiennes have done??

Get the Spitalfields Pilot out to drag the failure up the bank to Bethnal
Green
Shunt the truck train for the express (unless Masher May was on the front of
the truck train, it was a Saturday morning, and March Town were playing at
home).
What he wouldn't do is to forget to tell Upminster that the direct line to
Pitsea was blocked by a derailment and everything would have to be diverted
via Ockendon and Tilbury.

Peter

Well, he was an operations superintendant at the period referred to.
His record seems to point to a pragmatic man rather than a **** taker.

tony wrote:
On Apr 5, 12:53*pm, Sailor wrote:

My railway experience of yesteryear was that in general the system was
flexible to the point where trains could be provided at very little
notice. In those days of course, the railway staff *themselves were
very much users of the system as their primary ( and free) means of
daily transport. *Todays railways by their basic organisation is less
able to react at short notice *and has resurrected all the petty
weaknesses of mid 19th century wars of access and running rights!

What would Gerry Fiennes have done??


He would have written a book - or perhaps several - pointing out the
serial weaknesses of his colleagues while praising (to the heavens!)
his own contribution, such as it was.