Bomb fallout thought
 

Hmm,

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument to
pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads in
central London.

tom

--
I am listening to Girls aloud and drinking black tower...i think that
tells you everything you need to know -- ?

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:58:38 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument to
pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads in
central London.

Doubt it, just as the Tube bombings were not used as an excuse to
install airline style security in Tube stations, as it was just
impractical.

Nobody parks on-street in central London unless they have to due to
the excessive cost.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Neil Williams wrote:

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:58:38 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument
to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads
in central London.

Doubt it, just as the Tube bombings were not used as an excuse to
install airline style security in Tube stations, as it was just
impractical.

Nobody parks on-street in central London unless they have to due to the
excessive cost.

That still seems to be quite a lot of people! Charlotte St, for example,
routinely has cars parked all down it.

tom

--
I am listening to Girls aloud and drinking black tower...i think that
tells you everything you need to know -- ?

Bomb fallout thought
 

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:58:38 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an
argument to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on,
lots of roads in central London.

Doubt it, just as the Tube bombings were not used as an excuse to
install airline style security in Tube stations, as it was just
impractical.

Nobody parks on-street in central London unless they have to due to
the excessive cost.

You mean you don't, because it has been priced up to the point where the
number of people who can afford it is as low as the amount of available
space.

At night it's free, and residents parking bays are always nearly full.

Bomb fallout thought
 

Tom Anderson wrote:
Hmm,

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument
to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads
in central London.

tom


One of the reasons why they keep looking at pedestrianising Parliament
Sq is that it'll protect the HOP better from car bombs.

But then, one of the reasons why they say they can't pedestrianise the
Square is because they say too many people will be able to loiter in the
area and that's also a security risk...

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Jun 30, 11:58 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
Hmm,

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument to
pedestrianise,

That'd be nice, get rid of the menace of the buses.

or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads in
central London.

If you think that would stop someone causing an explosion in London,
you'd be crazy. Drive lorry up, drive motorcylce up, jump out of lorry
onto back of bike, leave lorry in trafalger square, 30 seconds later
police turn up and bomb goes off. Bike gets away, helmet means no
cctv.

tom

--
I am listening to Girls aloud and drinking black tower...i think that
tells you everything you need to know -- ?

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Jun 30, 9:21 pm, wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 12:36:19 -0700, Paul Weaver
wrote:

On Jun 30, 11:58 am, Tom Anderson wrote:
Hmm,

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument to
pedestrianise,

That'd be nice, get rid of the menace of the buses.

So what are people supposed to do who can't afford to buy and run a
car and don't like the tube Paul ? .

That don't like the tube? Nobody in their right mind uses a bus for a
car replacement.

Perhaps these people should use their legs, or get a bike.

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 02:40:57 -0700, Paul Weaver
wrote:

That don't like the tube? Nobody in their right mind uses a bus for a
car replacement.

In London many people do. If you know the network the buses are a far
more comfortable and practical way of getting around central London
then the Tube is, especially in the peaks.

Perhaps these people should use their legs, or get a bike.

Would bikes not also be banned if pedestrianisation was introduced,
surely?

(My view is that it won't happen at all)

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Bomb fallout thought
 

That don't like the tube? Nobody in their right mind uses a bus for a
car replacement.

..

Even if you ignore the cost differential (considerable even without
the C charge) bus could potentially be quicker than a car on many
routes because of the buslanes, plus the time taken to park in the
centre. If you are lucky enough to have a bus stop outside your door,
and another right by your destination it could even beat the tube.

Bomb fallout thought
 

Tom Anderson wrote:
I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument
to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads
in central London.

They'll probably use it as an excuse to perpetuate the pointless ban
on parking bicycles anywhere near Parliament.

[What few bike bombs there have been have been in bags attached to the
bikes, not hidden in the frame. Much bigger bombs can be carried in cars.]

Colin McKenzie

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, Neil Williams wrote:

On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 02:40:57 -0700, Paul Weaver
wrote:

That don't like the tube? Nobody in their right mind uses a bus for a
car replacement.

In London many people do. If you know the network the buses are a far
more comfortable and practical way of getting around central London then
the Tube is, especially in the peaks.

The exact opposite of my experience, but there you go.

tom

--
Destroy! DESTROY! DEEEEEEE-STROY 2000 YEARS OF CULTCHAH!! -- Andrew

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Paul Weaver wrote:

On Jun 30, 11:58 am, Tom Anderson wrote:

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument
to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on, lots of roads
in central London.

If you think that would stop someone causing an explosion in London,
you'd be crazy.

I don't. But i think unscrupulous politicians, such as Ken [1] might use
that as an argument if it suited them.

tom

[1] Don't get me wrong, i think Ken's a Good Thing, but you have to admit
he's unscrupulous.

--
Destroy! DESTROY! DEEEEEEE-STROY 2000 YEARS OF CULTCHAH!! -- Andrew

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 19:48:53 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, Neil Williams wrote:

On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 02:40:57 -0700, Paul Weaver
wrote:

That don't like the tube? Nobody in their right mind uses a bus for a
car replacement.

Funny but Stagecoach are claiming exactly that is happening on a number
of their city networks outside of London.

In London many people do. If you know the network the buses are a far
more comfortable and practical way of getting around central London then
the Tube is, especially in the peaks.

The exact opposite of my experience, but there you go.

I think you are both correct but it really depends where you are
travelling. Some journeys (e.g. Leicester Sq - Victoria) I would much
rather do by 24 bus than the Tube. There are other journeys where the
Tube is far more sensible - e.g. Green Park - Russell Square. There is
no convenient way of doing that trip by bus without a long slow journey
and a change of buses. What still puzzles me is that even now there are
certain key links in the bus network that are missing (e.g London Bridge
- West End) or Upper St in Islington into Oxford Street (yes I know the
30 just scrapes in by Selfridges but it's not the same coverage as the
73 from Essex Road).
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Bomb fallout thought
 

In article ,
(Colin McKenzie) wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an
argument to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on,
lots of roads in central London.

They'll probably use it as an excuse to perpetuate the pointless
ban on parking bicycles anywhere near Parliament.

[What few bike bombs there have been have been in bags attached to
the bikes, not hidden in the frame. Much bigger bombs can be
carried in cars.]

Indeed. The annoying bit is that MPs don't think there is a problem
because there is bike parking for them.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Bomb fallout thought
 

In article ,
(Stevie) wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
Hmm,

I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an
argument to pedestrianise, or at least get rid of all parking on,
lots of roads in central London.

One of the reasons why they keep looking at pedestrianising
Parliament Sq is that it'll protect the HOP better from car bombs.

But then, one of the reasons why they say they can't pedestrianise
the Square is because they say too many people will be able to
loiter in the area and that's also a security risk...

One of the other problems is that it's a rather vital link in the road
network. Because that bloody great palace thing stops there being an
embankment in that area.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 19:48:53 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

In London many people do. If you know the network the buses are a far
more comfortable and practical way of getting around central London then
the Tube is, especially in the peaks.

The exact opposite of my experience, but there you go.

In what way?

Going from Euston to Blackfriars in the morning peak I can use the
Northern Line, and stand with someone's head in my armpit and my back
arched due to the low ceiling for 10 minutes. Alternatively, I can
take a 73 or 390 to Kings Cross and change onto a 45 or 63 from the
same stop and enjoy the front seat upstairs. Slightly slower, but far
less walking through dank tunnels and a pretty much guaranteed seat.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Bomb fallout thought
 

Neil Williams wrote:

Going from Euston to Blackfriars in the morning peak I can use the
Northern Line, and stand with someone's head in my armpit and my back
arched due to the low ceiling for 10 minutes.

You've got my sympathy, Neil. I gave up using the deep tubes in the rush
hour because of the sheer miserable nature of the journey. I try to use the
sub-surface lines and on-foot as much as possible during the peaks.

Bomb fallout thought
 

On Jul 1, 2:05 pm, wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 02:40:57 -0700, Paul Weaver
I wonder if this carbomb business will end up being used as an argument to
pedestrianise,

That'd be nice, get rid of the menace of the buses.

So what are people supposed to do who can't afford to buy and run a
car and don't like the tube Paul ? .

That don't like the tube? Nobody in their right mind uses a bus for a
car replacement.

Car replacement did you say there are many people who do not even hold
a driving licence in this country and have never owned a car in their
lives .Perhaps these people should use their legs, or get a bike.

But cycling is not allowed in pedestrian areas Paul did you not know
that ?

In the context of the conversation, I took pedestrianisation as
removing large vehicular traffic (a bomb in a bike, motorbike would be
no worse than a bag). As you know, there are many areas where motor
vehicles are banned, but pedestrians and cyclists live in harmony.

and there are also people who can walk a little and ride a lot
on buses due to various arthritic illnesses and are unable to walk the
miles along the underground passages to use the tube.

There's no reason that passages need to be so long from ticket halls.

I have a car but when I know I am not going to be carrying a great
deal of weight I always use the bus, you see I was born into an age
when to have a car you needed to be rich and also be someone and the
peasants used the bus and nothing but the bus or of course the bike .
It isn't every one that is born with a silver spoon in their gobs and
a credit card in their pockets .

I use my car for long distance travel (much nicer using the train to
get to cornwall, but impossible to get arround), and for shopping
(bringing 20 bags back on the tube ain't much fun).