"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...
Charles Ellson ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Ummm, lemme guess... No buffets on tube trains?

Pullman cars Mayflower and Galatea ran on the Met between 1910 and 1939.

Not quite tube trains in any sense.

The Met is certainly a tube line.

It is not. It is entirely surface (or subsurface in some places), but never
tube. That line is run entirely by A stock, which is surface stock, and
would
not fit in tube tunnels.

Even if you consider the Metropolitan to include the Circle,H+C,ELL, it
still
isn't tube.

Richard [in SG19]



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

Richard M Willis ) gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

Ummm, lemme guess... No buffets on tube trains?

Pullman cars Mayflower and Galatea ran on the Met between 1910 and
1939.

Not quite tube trains in any sense.

The Met is certainly a tube line.

It is not. It is entirely surface (or subsurface in some places), but
never tube. That line is run entirely by A stock, which is surface
stock, and would not fit in tube tunnels.

Even if you consider the Metropolitan to include the Circle,H+C,ELL,
it still isn't tube.

sigh
Tube in the sense of "London Underground", rather than tube in the sense of
the actual engineering behind the line itself.

On 05 Jul 2006 08:09:17 GMT, Adrian wrote:

Richard M Willis ) gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying :

Ummm, lemme guess... No buffets on tube trains?

Pullman cars Mayflower and Galatea ran on the Met between 1910 and
1939.

Not quite tube trains in any sense.

The Met is certainly a tube line.

It is not. It is entirely surface (or subsurface in some places), but
never tube. That line is run entirely by A stock, which is surface
stock, and would not fit in tube tunnels.

Even if you consider the Metropolitan to include the Circle,H+C,ELL,
it still isn't tube.

sigh
Tube in the sense of "London Underground", rather than tube in the sense of
the actual engineering behind the line itself.

"Tube" in the sense of a buzz-word slavishly copied without bothering
to recognise the correct meaning ?
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

Charles Ellson ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

The Met is certainly a tube line.

It is not. It is entirely surface (or subsurface in some places),
but never tube. That line is run entirely by A stock, which is
surface stock, and would not fit in tube tunnels.

Even if you consider the Metropolitan to include the Circle,H+C,ELL,
it still isn't tube.

sigh
Tube in the sense of "London Underground", rather than tube in the
sense of the actual engineering behind the line itself.

"Tube" in the sense of a buzz-word slavishly copied without bothering
to recognise the correct meaning ?

Yes, that'll be it.

Otherwise known as "in the sense that several million Londoners use it
every day, rather than the sense that a handful of railway anoraks insist
on it being used when they're feeling *really* pedantic and trying to score
points..."

On 05 Jul 2006 18:12:46 GMT, Adrian wrote:

Charles Ellson ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

The Met is certainly a tube line.

It is not. It is entirely surface (or subsurface in some places),
but never tube. That line is run entirely by A stock, which is
surface stock, and would not fit in tube tunnels.

Even if you consider the Metropolitan to include the Circle,H+C,ELL,
it still isn't tube.

sigh
Tube in the sense of "London Underground", rather than tube in the
sense of the actual engineering behind the line itself.

"Tube" in the sense of a buzz-word slavishly copied without bothering
to recognise the correct meaning ?

Yes, that'll be it.

Otherwise known as "in the sense that several million Londoners use it
every day, rather than the sense that a handful of railway anoraks insist
on it being used when they're feeling *really* pedantic and trying to score
points..."

So the proper usage by hundreds of staff (to whom the system actually
"belongs") doesn't count ? Many Londoners also mis-name St.Stephen's
Tower (and others slavishly follow) but that doesn't mean their usage
is correct.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

Charles Ellson ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

sigh
Tube in the sense of "London Underground", rather than tube in the
sense of the actual engineering behind the line itself.

"Tube" in the sense of a buzz-word slavishly copied without
bothering to recognise the correct meaning ?

Yes, that'll be it.

Otherwise known as "in the sense that several million Londoners use it
every day, rather than the sense that a handful of railway anoraks
insist on it being used when they're feeling *really* pedantic and
trying to score points..."

So the proper usage by hundreds of staff (to whom the system actually
"belongs") doesn't count ? Many Londoners also mis-name St.Stephen's
Tower (and others slavishly follow) but that doesn't mean their usage
is correct.

If you want to be really pedantic about it, the outer reaches of the Met
are neither London nor Underground...

"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170...

Otherwise known as "in the sense that several million Londoners use it
every day, rather than the sense that a handful of railway anoraks
insist
on it being used when they're feeling *really* pedantic and trying to
score
points..."

LOL! And several million tourists and visitors to London. Nice one!

Ian