In message

, at 02:19:48 on Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Recliner
remarked:
From
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...rground-24-hou
r-tube-night-trains

Trains will run through the night from 12 September 2015, with six running
an hour across the five “night tube� lines – Jubilee, Victoria
and most of
the Piccadilly, Central and Northern lines.

Transport for London (TfL) said the move would support almost 2,000
permanent jobs and provide a £360m boost to the economy.
....

Mick Cash, the new RMT general secretary, said...
the truth is that the mayor threw this plan in as a diversion from
his massive cuts and closures programme that will axe a thousand staff and
decimate services and safety.�

So what is it: 2,000 more or 1,000 less?
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 11:37:18 on
Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Paul Corfield remarked:
Transport for London (TfL) said the move would support almost 2,000
permanent jobs and provide a £360m boost to the economy.
...

Mick Cash, the new RMT general secretary, said...
the truth is that the mayor threw this plan in as a diversion from
his massive cuts and closures programme that will axe a thousand staff and
decimate services and safety.�

So what is it: 2,000 more or 1,000 less?

I rather suspect the 2,000 jobs are jobs in the wider economy not in
TfL / LU. That's how I read it.

Given the number of taxi and bus drivers it'll put out of a job, I'm not
sure where the increase in jobs outside TfL will come from.

If it requires 2,000 people to run a
partial Night Tube service then something's seriously wrong!

Shift working for drivers, signallers, station staff etc. I don't know
how many they require for the current manning pattern on those lines,
but it'll need an increase of two shifts a week.

I wonder what they'll do about cleaning and maintaining the trains those
nights - not bother, or do half on a Friday night and the other half
Saturday night?

It is clear that circa 1,000 posts are to be removed from LU. I think
it is in the high 900s but TUs will always round up the number.

--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:46:01 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 11:37:18 on
Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Paul Corfield remarked:
Transport for London (TfL) said the move would support almost 2,000
permanent jobs and provide a £360m boost to the economy.
...

Mick Cash, the new RMT general secretary, said...
the truth is that the mayor threw this plan in as a diversion from
his massive cuts and closures programme that will axe a thousand staff and
decimate services and safety.”

So what is it: 2,000 more or 1,000 less?

I rather suspect the 2,000 jobs are jobs in the wider economy not in
TfL / LU. That's how I read it.

Given the number of taxi and bus drivers it'll put out of a job, I'm not
sure where the increase in jobs outside TfL will come from.

I don't suppose there will be any reduction in night buses. And I
don't suppose any taxi drivers will be put out of a job.

If it requires 2,000 people to run a
partial Night Tube service then something's seriously wrong!

Shift working for drivers, signallers, station staff etc. I don't know
how many they require for the current manning pattern on those lines,
but it'll need an increase of two shifts a week.

I wonder what they'll do about cleaning and maintaining the trains those
nights - not bother, or do half on a Friday night and the other half
Saturday night?

It's only a limited service on a subset of lines for two nights a
week, so the fleet will still be in a depot for at least five nights a
week. Even on those weekend nights, only a reduced fleet will be in
service.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:37:39 +0100
Recliner wrote:
It's only a limited service on a subset of lines for two nights a
week, so the fleet will still be in a depot for at least five nights a
week. Even on those weekend nights, only a reduced fleet will be in
service.

Anyone know the reason why its only deep level tube lines? I'd have thought
the sub surface lines would have been the easiest to run a night service
on wrt to maintenance.

--
Spud

In message , at 19:44:51 on
Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Paul Corfield remarked:
Introducing the "Night Tube" does raise the issue of what happens if
there is planned engineering work. Do we get "night tube replacement
bus services"?

Or they could do the work on Sun-Thu nights only.

For serious stuff they could close it all day Sunday (from 4am anyway),
as they do already.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 21:11:22 on
Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Paul Corfield remarked:

Introducing the "Night Tube" does raise the issue of what happens if
there is planned engineering work. Do we get "night tube replacement
bus services"?

Or they could do the work on Sun-Thu nights only.

And it would take rather long than if every night was available -

Yes, but we have to assume they've done their sums. In particular why
this new initiative is only possible after a whole year of normal/
current timetabling.

especially Sat to Sun which is the longest break in service because of
the later Sunday start times. The SSR resignalling is already up
against it in terms of time. In order to save face I imagine LU will
want maximum productivity on multiple sites every night of the week
(assuming no clashes).

For serious stuff they could close it all day Sunday (from 4am anyway),
as they do already.

Serious stuff needs 52 hours, sometimes longer. This is why you get
Friday night to Monday morning closures.

These could still take place. I don't think they've announced that
"night tubes" will be any more uninterruptable than the current ones.
--
Roland Perry

On 2014\09\24 23:55, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 21:21:41 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

Serious stuff needs 52 hours, sometimes longer. This is why you get
Friday night to Monday morning closures.

These could still take place. I don't think they've announced that
"night tubes" will be any more uninterruptable than the current ones.

I agree that such an announcement hasn't been made. However there is a
credibility point about not launching a new service and then
immediately cancelling it for umpteen weekends in a row. All that will
do is upset prospective passengers and give the media an easy story to
beat TfL with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly ;-)

Does anyone know why the Bakerloo has been left out?

On 2014\09\24 11:46, Roland Perry wrote:

Given the number of taxi and bus drivers it'll put out of a job, I'm not
sure where the increase in jobs outside TfL will come from.

Proper taxi drivers will probably do well out of it, since it will keep
suburban ranks busy all night, and reduce long loss-making jobs for
central area drivers to the suburbs... but thousands of minicab drivers
might be out of a "job".

There are not suburban taxi ranks throughout the outer suburbs.

As for minicab drivers, those working for firms near suburban stations will do
quite well because undoubtedly people will travel in the early hours to the
station nearest their home and get a minicab for the last leg of the journey.

The drivers who will suffer are those - mostly unlicensed - minicab drivers
who tout for work in Central London and then charge rip-off prices to the
suburbs.

On 2014\09\24 18:08, Robin9 wrote:
'Basil Jet[_4_ Wrote:
;144764']On 2014\09\24 11:46, Roland Perry wrote:-

Given the number of taxi and bus drivers it'll put out of a job, I'm
not
sure where the increase in jobs outside TfL will come from.-

Proper taxi drivers will probably do well out of it, since it will keep

suburban ranks busy all night, and reduce long loss-making jobs for
central area drivers to the suburbs... but thousands of minicab drivers

might be out of a "job".

There are not suburban taxi ranks throughout the outer suburbs.

As for minicab drivers, those working for firms near suburban stations
will do
quite well because undoubtedly people will travel in the early hours to
the
station nearest their home and get a minicab for the last leg of the
journey.

The drivers who will suffer are those - mostly unlicensed - minicab
drivers
who tout for work in Central London and then charge rip-off prices to
the
suburbs.

.... who will give up working Central London and work the suburbs
instead, taking work off the drivers who you say will do well?