On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 22:49:27 +0100, Arthur Figgis
wrote:

On 13/07/2011 11:06, Paul Scott wrote:
wrote in message
...

Loved how that article lead off by describing passengers as "terrified."

Their random hyperbole generator usually gets stuck on 'misery' -
perhaps it has been fixed?

I think the railways will be Extremely Sorry if they try criticising the
Evening Standard for deploying machine-created emotions.

Won't the railways just carry on as normal, regardless of mass media?
The media are hardly in the business of transporting people about, are
they?

--
Frank Erskine

In message id, at
19:32:39 on Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Dr J R Stockton
remarked:
I really hate online web forms because you don't get a copy of what you
wrote for your own records. Or is this one unlike all the others? I wasn't
aware of the form and used the phone last time.

It may depend on the browser used - but you probably know the value of
having a choice - but try the File menu, Print Preview ; and try Alt-
PrtScn and paste into Paint or elsewhere ... . Non-Windows OSs should
have something similar.

Printing to a PDF is much more elegant, and far fewer keystrokes
(sometimes important when balancing a laptop on your knee while running
for a train).

Web designers often forget their users aren't sitting in nice warm
offices with 2000x2000 pixel screens, and a few feet from a working
printer, like what they are.
--
Roland Perry

On 13 July, 22:57, D7666 wrote:


For the train on topic here, all reports indicate the train did halt
with a least some some cars in the platform, which to me suggests a
controlled emergency stop. Some of the less hysterical reports also
indicate the doors problem was not all cars but only some. One door
open is not good, but get a grip on reality here.


Assuming that the photograph in the ES is of the train concerned,
which it appears to be, the vast majority of the train is in the
platform, contrary to the report from the OP which said that half the
train was in the tunnel.

However, I am a bit mystified why the door interlocking doesn't (a)
just prevent power being taken when a door is open rather than, as the
implication is here, (b) allowing power to be taken then cutting it
off if a door is open. Presumably interlocking of type (b) also covers
the event of a train door coming open while the train is moving,
giving two levels of protection for the price of one.

"D7666" wrote in message
...
On Jul 13, 9:03 pm, "John C" wrote:

They must have short memories. VEPs used to depart Victoria every few
minutes with doors open:-)


But I bet more arrived with doors open than departed.

--
Nick


Agreed, especially on peak trains and even more so after TPWS. Several
passengers from the front coach would
pass the buffer stops before the train stopped.

John

In message
, at
01:10:53 on Thu, 14 Jul 2011, W14_Fishbourne
remarked:
However, I am a bit mystified why the door interlocking doesn't (a)
just prevent power being taken when a door is open rather than, as the
implication is here, (b) allowing power to be taken then cutting it
off if a door is open. Presumably interlocking of type (b) also covers
the event of a train door coming open while the train is moving,
giving two levels of protection for the price of one.

Do these trains have lights over the doors to show they aren't closed
yet (like older tube trains)?
--
Roland Perry

"Spyke" wrote in message
...
On 13/07/2011 22:58, wrote:


I'm not quite sure about that, to be honest. I once saw a YouTube video
of an excursion train, I think a 38 stock. The train had come into
Camden Town and was holding at the platform for the starter signal,
obviously with its doors shut.

IIRC, people on the platform were confused about why the train wasn't
opening it doors, oblivious to the fact that the rolling stock was
completely out of the ordinary. The train itself was probably shorter
than usual.

Indeed, this happens on a regular basis on the 38TS tours, especially at
central London stations (with tourists who may believe that LU still run
75 year old stock on a daily basis).

Incidentally, it's also quite common for the 38 stock to be moving along
with one of the doors open.

Some people are more picky than others. There was a time when the 1845
Cambridge
to King's Cross frequently turned out a 317 vice 365. It was viewed with
suspicion by the
locals who were used to a 365. The same unit then did the 2007 to
Peterborough. The
commuters didn't bat an eyelid and piled on.

Another anecdote, when the EPB farewell tour was at Redhill platform 2 the
locals assumed
it was going to Victoria. In fact when the same tour stopped at London
Bridge en route to
Charing Cross several passengers did get on.

John

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:43:39 +0100
"John C" wrote:
Another anecdote, when the EPB farewell tour was at Redhill platform 2 the
locals assumed
it was going to Victoria. In fact when the same tour stopped at London
Bridge en route to
Charing Cross several passengers did get on.

I remember reading an anecdote on here years ago (god knows whether it was
true) that once when an LU engineering train stopped at a still open station
a few of the passengers tried to get onto the wagons. No doubt just happy
to get a seat.

B2003

wrote in message

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:43:39 +0100
"John C" wrote:
Another anecdote, when the EPB farewell tour was at Redhill platform
2 the locals assumed
it was going to Victoria. In fact when the same tour stopped at
London Bridge en route to
Charing Cross several passengers did get on.

I remember reading an anecdote on here years ago (god knows whether
it was true) that once when an LU engineering train stopped at a
still open station a few of the passengers tried to get onto the
wagons. No doubt just happy to get a seat.

Presumably thought they'd missed the last train, and just happy to take
any escape route.

wrote:

In article , (Mizter T)
wrote:

The Oyster maximum journey time limits are fairly generous - I
wouldn't generally expect a 'normal' delay on the Tube (of say 20
mins or whatever) to bust them.

Not that generous if you remember the discussion about a journey from King
Cross to Putney via Highbury & Islington, Willesden Junction and Clapham
Junction. :-)

Why on earth would they want to go that way? Victoria Line to Oxford
Circus, Bakerloo to Waterloo, then SWT would be a lot quicker.

(Yes, I know, Putney isn't the sort of place that anyone would hurry
to get to, and I can't blame them for wanting to delay reaching
there. But even Putney's got to be more pleasant than travelling on
the North London Line!)

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 06:12:42PM +0100, Mizter T wrote:

Refunds can be picked up when travelling from or to any station in London
(including NR stations)

Oh, that's new since the last time I asked about it. Good.

it's not just TfL stations - though I think some
people have suggested there might be a few stations missing from the list?
One needs to be making a journey from or to that station, the refund can't
just be picked up from a ticket machine.

Sucks for people who rarely travel by train, like those who mostly use
buses.

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

Support terrierism! Adopt a dog today!