E. Zackatackali wrote:
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On 13 Jun 2006 08:30:45 -0700, "CJB"
wrote:
There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of
the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked
by George Dubya.

Not at all, Paul. I think you always have something interesting and
informative to say about transport in London.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Why 'admits'? You're not ashamed of LU, are you?

Because there's usually some fool who wants to have a rant at someone
who works for LU about their crappy journey, and just as Paul provides
useful information to this group, he sometimes gets a battering too!

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

On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:53:46 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:

E. Zackatackali wrote:
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On 13 Jun 2006 08:30:45 -0700, "CJB"
wrote:
There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of
the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked
by George Dubya.

Not at all, Paul. I think you always have something interesting and
informative to say about transport in London.

Thanks.

Admits to working for London Underground!

Why 'admits'? You're not ashamed of LU, are you?

No I'm not. We are not perfect but we do get a lot of people moved
around London with assets that are not necessarily the best. If in a few
years time when lots of assets have been improved and processes changed
to make things run more efficiently the public are still having delays
inflicted on them then I think public outrage about how had LU is will
be justified.

Whether we like it or not we are not the same railway and do not have
the same culture as say the Hong Kong MTR, Tokyo Subway or Singapore
MRT. Therefore we cannot (yet) produce the same service quality or
reliability. Hopefully one day we will run to those levels of service
quality and reliability.

Because there's usually some fool who wants to have a rant at someone
who works for LU about their crappy journey, and just as Paul provides
useful information to this group, he sometimes gets a battering too!

While the above is a true statement it is not an explanation of the
comment. The explanation is that I decided I would say I worked for LU
and not hide behind a pseudonym. I'm not criticising those who do use
such things but I think it's better to be open about who you work for
when posting to a group like this when "expert" or "inside" knowledge
will quickly be detected.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Chris Read wrote:
In simple terms, the power
of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the
RM.


Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement?

Marc.

wrote:
Chris Read wrote:
In simple terms, the power
of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the
RM.


Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement?

I'm guessing becuase of reasons stated in the previous 2 sentences that
you chose to snip:

"2. They make faster progress than the RM when on the move. This has
surprised me, but would anyone deny it is true? "

Dave Newt wrote:
wrote:
Chris Read wrote:
In simple terms, the power
of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the
RM.


Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement?

I'm guessing becuase of reasons stated in the previous 2 sentences that
you chose to snip:

"2. They make faster progress than the RM when on the move. This has
surprised me, but would anyone deny it is true? "

The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of
driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and
Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting,
the lesser braking / acceleration offered the better.

Marc.

wrote:

The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of
driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and
Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting,

Ah, so you've used the 63 then! A service with drivers that seem so
sick of their job, that throwing people around is the only thing that
gives them job satisfaction!

Jonathan

"Jonathan Morris" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:

The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of
driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and
Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting,

Ah, so you've used the 63 then! A service with drivers that seem so
sick of their job, that throwing people around is the only thing that
gives them job satisfaction!

I'd rather have a lunatic driver than one who waits until every
last persun has sat down before starting off.

Why *is* it that when I get up to let an OAP on one of the priority seats,
they insist on walking all the way to the back of the (almost empty) bus,
taking about 3min to do so ?

Similarly with people who run along the platform to get on the
train at a door distant from the one that they're near.

Richard [in SG19]



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Richard M Willis wrote:
"Jonathan Morris" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:

The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of
driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and
Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting,

Ah, so you've used the 63 then! A service with drivers that seem so
sick of their job, that throwing people around is the only thing that
gives them job satisfaction!

I'd rather have a lunatic driver than one who waits until every
last persun has sat down before starting off.

I hope and pray that you're not a bus driver! Why should the public
(some of whom are old and infirm) be subjected to violent acceleration
and braking? It is precisely BECAUSE of such inconsiderate driving that
I will not get up to move to the door of the bus UNTIL the bus is
stationary, and I don't care how much bell-ringing I have to do to
enure the door is still open by the time I get there.


Why *is* it that when I get up to let an OAP on one of the priority seats,
they insist on walking all the way to the back of the (almost empty) bus,
taking about 3min to do so ?

A slight exaggeration methinks. And, I have yet to meet the bus driver
who dies not zoom off the very moment the doors are closed, whatever
the state of passengers' movements. You must have some remarkably
civilised drivers where you are if they even notice whether everyone is
seated before they move off!

If it's an almost empty bus, why do you use the priority seat in the
first place? I always go upstairs and leave as much place as possible
for those unable to use the stairs.

Similarly with people who run along the platform to get on the
train at a door distant from the one that they're near.

Possibly they are doing so to get away from you (sorry, couldn't resist
that one: no offence intended!)


Richard [in SG19]


Marc.

wrote:

A slight exaggeration methinks. And, I have yet to meet the bus driver
who dies not zoom off the very moment the doors are closed, whatever
the state of passengers' movements. You must have some remarkably
civilised drivers where you are if they even notice whether everyone is
seated before they move off!

Come to Milton Keynes; they tend to wait round here. OK, it's mainly
minibuses, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't relevant that traffic jams
and driver assaults are pretty much unheard of in the land of
roundabouts. London is probably so much more stressful for a bus
driver.

If it's an almost empty bus, why do you use the priority seat in the
first place? I always go upstairs and leave as much place as possible
for those unable to use the stairs.

If it's a single-decker, the priority seat and the exit seat are
usually the only ones with any legroom. If the exit is taken, the
priority seat it is.

Neil

wrote in message
oups.com...

Conductor 119466 on the 15H made no use of his ticket machine on Monday
from Tower Hill c1830 to Charing Cross. Oyster Cards were merely looked
at, so no idea if these were valid and no stored value debited. On the
plus side at least 8 people boarded between stops showing what are/were
truly the most accessible buses in London.

Try using one in a wheelchair, and then let us know just how accessible it
is. Or if you're old, or have limited mobility. Or even if you're over 6'4
tall - sitting doesn't work, and standing certainly isn't. I saw an older
guy thrown off the back of one as it went round a corner, so it seems their
accessibility can be a little bit too good for some people, in some
occasions

RMs are great for able-bodied people - the leaping-on/off really is great,
and will be the reason I miss RMs the most. The only problem is that they
are complete non-starters for a large sections of the community. Its
luggage capacity is ridiculous, too, not to mention you can't fit a stroller
on it (let alone 3, complete with occupants, as I witnessed on a 38 the
other day).

dave