In message
, MIG
writes
On Jul 21, 1:29*am, "John Rowland"
wrote:
wrote:
On 20 Jul, 21:46, "Richard J." wrote:
If you think that a total of 4 tph from Amersham (including
Chiltern) is insufficient, are you suggesting that London council
tax payers should subsidise an improved service to that
Buckinghamshire town?

Its either the *london* underground or it isn't. All this
who-pays-for- what over county boundaries that only matter to failed
wannabe politicians in town halls is just petty and pathetic. Last
time I looked Epping wasn't in london either , perhaps the central
line should be cut back to a skeleton service too?

AFAIK Epping Forest Council subsidises the frequent service.

If they're going
to run a metro service they should run a metro service , not pretend
its some country branch line.

Maybe LU should run every Metro in the world, all paid for by London
ratepayers?

If it was physically possible for all those metros to deliver workers
and punters to central London, there might be an argument.

Have you not watched "Underground Ernie"?! There appear to be
connections to - at least - systems in Sydney, Paris and Moscow!

--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Frank Incense" gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

Just been reading on Wikipedia that Amersham might be going down to
having just two trains an hour? Is that not a really poor service?

According to a leaflet its to do with possibly stopping 2 Amersham
trains per hour to allow 2 trains to run to Chesham instead throughout
the day thereby giving Chesham an "all day" service to central London.

Chesham already has an "all day" service to central London, although the
last leg of it is a shuttle from Chalfont & Latimer. Will they be running
a shuttle to Amersham instead?



Should have typed a "direct" service to London without all the fussing at
Chalfont.

On Jul 21, 1:29 am, "John Rowland"
wrote:
Its either the *london* underground or it isn't. All this
who-pays-for- what over county boundaries that only matter to failed
wannabe politicians in town halls is just petty and pathetic. Last
time I looked Epping wasn't in london either , perhaps the central
line should be cut back to a skeleton service too?

AFAIK Epping Forest Council subsidises the frequent service.

Obviously the cheques for the Ongar branch subsidy got lost in the
post then.

Maybe LU should run every Metro in the world, all paid for by London
ratepayers?

What a dumb comment.

Presumably you'd be happy for national rail to be divied up over
county boundaries too? So for example if York decided to stop paying
subsidies to the ECML then tough , no trains from london to edinburgh!
Good idea? The tubes subsidy should come entirely from central
government just like NR and all these tin pot little town councillers
could just **** off and worry about lost cats or litter which is more
their level of expertise.

B2003

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 08:32:16PM +0100, wrote:

Just been reading on Wikipedia that Amersham might be going down to having
just two trains an hour? Is that not a really poor service?

Not really. It's a lot better than most places, and there's plenty of
places in London with that sort of service.

And in the area just outside London that is still covered by TfL (like
Amersham is), Epsom Downs has only one train an hour. Now *that's* poor
service.


--
David Cantrell | top google result for "topless karaoke murders"

Arbeit macht Alkoholiker

wrote:

AFAIK Epping Forest Council subsidises the frequent service.

Obviously the cheques for the Ongar branch subsidy got lost in the
post then.

I think the branch closed before the current subsidy scheme was agreed.
Until the late 1990s the line east of Loughton was all out of boundary and
not included on the standard travelcard.

Adrian wrote:

According to a leaflet its to do with possibly stopping 2 Amersham
trains per hour to allow 2 trains to run to Chesham instead throughout
the day thereby giving Chesham an "all day" service to central London.

Chesham already has an "all day" service to central London, although the
last leg of it is a shuttle from Chalfont & Latimer. Will they be running
a shuttle to Amersham instead?

Shuttle services are never popular with a public that like through services
and don't like spending ages on station platforms or relying on connections
that they don't information about until they reach the interchange. Since
they upped the Amersham service from 2 to 4 tph I guess they've had many
more passengers who don't know which is the Chesham train waiting for ages
who'd rather kill time further south (and not run up two hour limits on
Oyster).

David Cantrell wrote:

And in the area just outside London that is still covered by TfL (like
Amersham is), Epsom Downs has only one train an hour. Now *that's* poor
service.

What is there around Epsom Downs that's covered by TfL?

On Jul 21, 4:24 pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
wrote:
AFAIK Epping Forest Council subsidises the frequent service.
Obviously the cheques for the Ongar branch subsidy got lost in the
post then.

I think the branch closed before the current subsidy scheme was agreed.

So it wasn't subsidised then?

Until the late 1990s the line east of Loughton was all out of boundary and
not included on the standard travelcard.

I think you mean north of loughton.

B2003

On Jul 21, 4:49 pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
And in the area just outside London that is still covered by TfL (like
Amersham is), Epsom Downs has only one train an hour. Now *that's* poor
service.

What is there around Epsom Downs that's covered by TfL?

Buses, IIRC.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John Rowland wrote:
wrote:
On 20 Jul, 21:46, "Richard J." wrote:
If you think that a total of 4 tph from Amersham (including
Chiltern) is insufficient, are you suggesting that London council
tax payers should subsidise an improved service to that
Buckinghamshire town?
Its either the *london* underground or it isn't. All this
who-pays-for- what over county boundaries that only matter to failed
wannabe politicians in town halls is just petty and pathetic. Last
time I looked Epping wasn't in london either , perhaps the central
line should be cut back to a skeleton service too?

AFAIK Epping Forest Council subsidises the frequent service.

If they're going
to run a metro service they should run a metro service , not pretend
its some country branch line.

Maybe LU should run every Metro in the world, all paid for by London
ratepayers?

Paris has a department for running other transport systems:
http://www.ratp-developpement.fr


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK