On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:08:26 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

A guess but it is virtually impossible to stop people alighting from the
WAGN trains to head to the Tube regardless of how many announcements are
made [1].


Probably because the announcements are often complete crap !

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.

If you were told there was a fire would you ignore it and carry on
towards the hazard?

A bit of balance does no one any harm.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!,,

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.


You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

Something is woefully wrong with communications on our trains. Whether
it means better radios, or a complete revamp, it needs doing.

--
Edward Cowling London UK

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:41:29 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.


You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

This has been done to death. I would invite anyone with appropriate
knowledge of the railway who was presented with the events and
information as it came in to reach any other conclusion than the one
about a power problem.

You are making statements with the benefit of hindsight. You were not
present as the events unfolded within the organisation so don't make
simplistic statements.

God help us if there is a next time but I look forward to your
announcements being made on the public address system and on national TV
that completely and fully diagnoses the events given your clear and
obvious omniscience.

Something is woefully wrong with communications on our trains. Whether
it means better radios, or a complete revamp, it needs doing.

As you obviously have the answer to everything as you feel able to offer
criticism so freely then I'm sure the MD of LUL will receive your
proposal with open arms.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

God help us if there is a next time but I look forward to your
announcements being made on the public address system and on national TV
that completely and fully diagnoses the events given your clear and
obvious omniscience.

Again smart arse patronising comments about the poor old public who have
to travel on these part privatised, part god knows what transport
systems.

We're not talking about a scout jumble sale, where if the tanoy system
doesn't work we all say "good effort" and smile benevolently.

This is the transport for one of the busiest cities in the world !!

There should be not good communications, but first bloody rate
communications at all times. I'm beginning to think the RMT have a point
about striking to get safety issues looked at.... nothing else seems to
get it done.


--
Edward Cowling London UK

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 20:00:06 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

God help us if there is a next time but I look forward to your
announcements being made on the public address system and on national TV
that completely and fully diagnoses the events given your clear and
obvious omniscience.

Again smart arse patronising comments about the poor old public who have
to travel on these part privatised, part god knows what transport
systems.

Not patronising at all. You are sitting in judgement. Therefore I assume
you know what needs to be done. What technically has to be done and what
is not being done? What are the safety issues to which you refer?

I'm interested to know given that public address systems are being
replaced or upgraded, we're getting a new integrated radio system
installed, there are the new Home Office sponsored emergency service
radio systems as well. I'm also interested to know what part of the
emergency response to the terrorist events was mishandled where
apparently our communications were so inadequate. Strange that we got
several hundred thousand people off the network without injuring anyone
during that exercise.

I notice you declined to comment on my response to the 7th July
incidents - why is that then? Am I right or do you have evidence that
refutes what I said?

You seem to be confusing equipment with the fluidity of events in the
midst of what was a national emergency. Do you seriously expect
communications to be perfect in such an environment?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:41:29 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.


You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

Oh for ****'s sake. The electric surge story was fabricated by the
security services to avoid panic. Of course it wasn't factually
correct, but you can't blame the public transport operators for that.

In article ,
Ken wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:41:29 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:
You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

Oh for ****'s sake. The electric surge story was fabricated by the
security services to avoid panic.

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous incidents.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"We can also agree that Saddam Hussein most certainly has chemical and biolog-
ical weapons and is working towards a nuclear capability. The dossier contains
confirmation of information that we either knew or most certainly should have
been willing to assume." - Menzies Campbell, 24th September 2002.

David Boothroyd wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL tunnel,
it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range will know about
it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People who report to them ?
How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to find-out that it had been an
explosion ?

Richard [in PE12]

Endymion Ponsonby-Withermoor III wrote:
David Boothroyd wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous
incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL
tunnel, it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range
will
know about it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People
who report to them ? How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to
find-out that it had been an explosion ?

Because the symptoms were indicative of massive power failures and no one on
the spot was in a position to tell them otherwise for about twenty minutes.
A terrorist attack is not the first thing that comes to mind.

On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 15:27:12 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous
incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL
tunnel, it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range
will
know about it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People
who report to them ? How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to
find-out that it had been an explosion ?

Because the symptoms were indicative of massive power failures and no one on
the spot was in a position to tell them otherwise for about twenty minutes.
A terrorist attack is not the first thing that comes to mind.

I think there are two issues being confused here. There's no reason to
doubt that TPTB at LU spent the first 20 minutes (or hour or however
long) thinking a power surge was responsible for the incidents.
However, the public were told for *hours* afterwards that it was just
a power surge. For the whole morning, news organisations were
variously reporting up to 7 explosions on the Underground and up to 3
on buses, while being kept completely in the dark by official sources.
There was a definite witholding of information, be it at the behest of
LU, or the security services, or whoever.

I'm not particularly complaining, just trying to clarify.