Dave Arquati wrote:

I'll support that experiment. As long as none of the lost items are bombs.

I don't think the announcements will affect the rate of bombs intentionally
left
--
Michael Hoffman

Dave Liney wrote:

Such an announcement did make realise that I was about to leave my coat on a
overhead rack on a train once. I normally blocked them out but part of my
brain must have been listening.

Good to know it helped at least one person. Actually even knowing that
reduces some of my opposition but I'd still like to see the
experiment .
--
Michael Hoffman

Michael Hoffman wrote:
Dave Liney wrote:

Such an announcement did make realise that I was about to leave my
coat on a overhead rack on a train once. I normally blocked them out
but part of my brain must have been listening.

Good to know it helped at least one person. Actually even knowing that
reduces some of my opposition but I'd still like to see the
experiment .

The experiment went on for about 130 years, from 1863 onwards.

Brimstone wrote:
The experiment went on for about 130 years, from 1863 onwards.

And did they collect data after the change?
--
Michael Hoffman

Michael Hoffman wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
The experiment went on for about 130 years, from 1863 onwards.

And did they collect data after the change?

The data would be in the form of the number of items retrieved as "lost
property".

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

The reduction will be by way of the removal of the transverse seats,
which has already happened on other deep-level lines because they
aren't wide enough for two average people, and don't have enough
legroom for anything other than midgets to sit opposite one another.

Not my observation on the Victoria Line. Rarely do four people fail to sit
down at a facing pair, even holding bags as I was yesterday. It's a lot
more comfortable than having to stand.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article .com,
(Boltar) wrote:

They also replaced the transverse seats on the C stock and
replaced them with longitudinal seats which seemed to be a child sized
profile which no one can sit comfortably in.

They replaced the transverse seats with the same number of facing seats. I
don't have a problem with that. It's replacing 16 facing seats on 1967/72
stock with 10 longitudinal seats on modern stocks that is so annoying. I
do prefer transverse seating because I prefer to travel facing or back to
the direction of travel too. I also prefer to sit between the bogies on
bogie rolling stock because I prefer the ride there.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article . com,
() wrote:

Boltar wrote:
Call me a cynic but I can't help thinking that flip up seats are
probably a lot cheaper than the real thing though I'm sure this
in no way would influence their decision , no no, not at all.

IMO flip up seats are more expensive than normal fixed seats - they
move and hence need more maintenance, they require more spares to be
kept vs. having all fixed seats, and they require more space - you
can't house equipment under them.

A cheaper option would be perch seats, which one leans against. The
Jubilee 1996 stock has these in place of the Northern 1995's flip ups,
which often seem to have broken springs and don't return to upright.

The perch seats are unusable by people of normal height.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Ian Jelf wrote:
In message , Brimstone
writes
Announcements to remind people to take their belongings are very
recent in the history of train and bus travel
But signs, at least here in the Midlands, are not.

Midland Red instituted "Have you forgotten anything" signs in the
forties which lasted until the early seventies.

Cynic
I suppose people still forgot things, though.
(/cynic

I was referring to audio announcements. I agree that printed signs have been
around for a long time.

Michael Hoffman wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

I'll support that experiment. As long as none of the lost items are
bombs.


I don't think the announcements will affect the rate of bombs intentionally
left

Unless terrorists look for items people have left behind and *then*
place bombs in them.

I'm willing to accept that may be slightly unlikely, but these days you
can't be too careful... then again, the level of terrorist activity in
London is probably no different (or even less) than 15 years ago.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London