On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:43:35 -0700, MIG wrote:


I replied to the consultation as well, on the lines that while larger
numbers of people might answer that they'd like to be able to get home
more easily after nights out, their journeys weren't as important (and
didn't need to be as quick) as people who work on Saturday mornings or who
have trains or planes to catch.

You should only answer consultations based on your own circumstances and
not speak on behalf of others, if they are concerned enough to respond
then they can. Your opinion of the importance of a journey is not based on
any stats or research and will be just based on you own experiences. Why
are workers in the hospitality industry deemed less important than other
worker anyway?

But in the end it looks like they went with making things slightly more
convenient for a larger number and threatening livelihoods and
appointments of a smaller number.

You could also argue that those that livelihoods are threatened are those
working for industries that open early for a minor convenience of others.
People that make appointments/book travel when they cannot get there on
time are just foolish.


Night buses are good enough now that non-urgent getting home after
clubbing is not really a problem for most places that the Underground
goes to, and many more.

This shows why you should not answer on behalf of others as you clearly
don't know the facts. Clubbers would loose out due to the later start on
Sunday and will not benefit from a slightly travel closure, people don't
leave clubs at 1am.

steve wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 10:43:35 -0700, MIG wrote:


I replied to the consultation as well, on the lines that while larger
numbers of people might answer that they'd like to be able to get home
more easily after nights out, their journeys weren't as important (and
didn't need to be as quick) as people who work on Saturday mornings or who
have trains or planes to catch.

You should only answer consultations based on your own circumstances and
not speak on behalf of others, if they are concerned enough to respond
then they can.


Which is exactly what I did. I said that I would probably use late
Friday and Saturday services more often than early Saturday and Sunday
services, but that when I do use the latter it is always for a much
more important journey.

But in any comments section I would have said that if the results are
based on how many people said they would use the late services, pure
numbers don't necessarily reflect the relative importance.

This seems to be one of those "choice" situations. All TV should be
quizes and soap operas because more people watch them etc.

Your opinion of the importance of a journey is not based on
any stats or research and will be just based on you own experiences. Why
are workers in the hospitality industry deemed less important than other
worker anyway?

But in the end it looks like they went with making things slightly more
convenient for a larger number and threatening livelihoods and
appointments of a smaller number.

You could also argue that those that livelihoods are threatened are those
working for industries that open early for a minor convenience of others.
People that make appointments/book travel when they cannot get there on
time are just foolish.


Are they foolish because the services are being withdrawn?




Night buses are good enough now that non-urgent getting home after
clubbing is not really a problem for most places that the Underground
goes to, and many more.

This shows why you should not answer on behalf of others as you clearly
don't know the facts. Clubbers would loose out due to the later start on
Sunday and will not benefit from a slightly travel closure, people don't
leave clubs at 1am.


I didn't say that clubbers would use the Underground at 1 am (except
maybe on the way to the club). I was saying that there is a good
all-night service that allows clubbers to get home, which demonstrates
that there is a good all-night service.

steve wrote in
news
SNIP
This shows why you should not answer on behalf of others as you
clearly don't know the facts. Clubbers would loose out due to the
later start on Sunday and will not benefit from a slightly travel
closure, people don't leave clubs at 1am.


You're right. It's nothing to do with clubs, which tend to close at 6 in
the morning (some clubs close around 3 or 4 but these tend to be on the
outskirts of London).

So it'll be a major PITA for clubbers, which is annoying as the last thing
you want to do on a Sunday morning is wait for the tubes to open. So we'll
end up getting ripped off or raped by very dodgy minicabs, or driving under
the influence of drugs and drink.

This whole public consultation would have been probably rejected by
clubbers.

But for drinkers, it's good. People do now leave pubs around that time, so
those not into clubbing will benefit.

What I don't understand though is why they've stitched us up by half an
hour. Add half an hour at night, but a whole bleedin' hour in the morning?
Are they having a laugh?

Why don't they instead lose half an hour's maintenance work in the morning,
and simply employ more staff to get the jobs done quicker with the revenue
created from all those £3 single journeys created as people take the tube
home instead of a cab! :-))

TRISTÁN

In message . 145,
Tristán White writes

What I don't understand though is why they've stitched us up by half an
hour. Add half an hour at night, but a whole bleedin' hour in the
morning? Are they having a laugh?

Why don't they instead lose half an hour's maintenance work in the
morning, and simply employ more staff to get the jobs done quicker with
the revenue created from all those £3 single journeys created as people
take the tube home instead of a cab! :-))

They've added 30 mins to Friday and Saturday night services and then
start up Saturday services 1 hour later. They haven't touched Sunday
services which will still start at the same (later) time. Therefore 1
hour extra service = 1 hour later start, that way, engineering hours
remain the same albeit moved about slightly.

The problem with 'losing' engineering time as you suggest is that there
are only so many people you can fit into an area the size of a tube
tunnel to do any meaningful work. Anyway, most of the time is spent
with safety procedures starting and ending work - in reality only about
2 hours work gets done in any night for the (roughly) 3.5 hour
closedown.

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?

The Mayor put it in his manifesto.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?

The Mayor put it in his manifesto.



I'm sure the manifesto mentioned it running later. Didn't Steve Norris
promise to have it running all night (maybe in 2000)?

But if he had won and then said "by the way, in order to have it
running all night it won't run in the day any more", people might have
felt a bit cheated.

On 1 May 2006 12:58:49 -0700, "MIG" wrote:


Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

I have lived in London for 10 years now - if I want to go out for the
night, I get the night bus home and have never used a cab. It's not a
problem and never has been, so why all the clamour to have a train
service running anyway?

The Mayor put it in his manifesto.

I'm sure the manifesto mentioned it running later. Didn't Steve Norris
promise to have it running all night (maybe in 2000)?

Steve Norris may have promised it but he could not have delivered it.
I'm afraid I really struggle to see the point in the tube running later
at weekends when, as others have said, there is a generally very good
night bus network. There are some gaps but it would take little effort
and a damn sight less expense to create those extra night buses than
what later tubes will cost. Don't be surprised if the word "strike"
appears between now and whenever it is implemented.

But if he had won and then said "by the way, in order to have it
running all night it won't run in the day any more", people might have
felt a bit cheated.

Indeed but that is not what is happening here. There is some loss of
service which I still think is daft but thankfully not the original
proposal for Sunday mornings. Having flown into Heathrow in the early
morning and been faced with the current Sunday service I could not
imagine how anyone could contemplate starting it even later.

I don't quite understand how you service a 24 hour city by reducing the
tube service in the early part of that 24 hour period when lots of
people are out and about to get the engine of commerce started that
drives so much related economic activity.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On 1 May 2006 12:58:49 -0700, "MIG" wrote:


Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 1 May 2006 12:00:29 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

snippitty Don't be surprised if the word "strike"
appears between now and whenever it is implemented.

Indeedy, in fact I've already had one of my drivers asking me when the later
finishing times were agreed with the unions...
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.

On Mon, 01 May 2006 05:22:48 -0500, Tristán White wrote:

steve wrote in
news
SNIP
This shows why you should not answer on behalf of others as you clearly
don't know the facts. Clubbers would loose out due to the later start on
Sunday and will not benefit from a slightly travel closure, people don't
leave clubs at 1am.


You're right. It's nothing to do with clubs, which tend to close at 6 in
the morning (some clubs close around 3 or 4 but these tend to be on the
outskirts of London).

So it'll be a major PITA for clubbers, which is annoying as the last thing
you want to do on a Sunday morning is wait for the tubes to open. So we'll
end up getting ripped off or raped by very dodgy minicabs, or driving
under the influence of drugs and drink.

http://www.uk-cl.co.uk/uk_club_round...east/jaded.htm

steve wrote in newsan.2006.05.01.21.30.25.306486
@ID-00000.user.uni-berlin.de:

http://www.uk-cl.co.uk/uk_club_round...east/jaded.htm


Good point, there's always the afterparties to go to if the tubes are not
yet running. :-)