TfL Press release:

'London Overground has marked its first anniversary with both increased
passenger satisfaction and improved performance across the entire network.

'A recent survey shows that 68 per cent of frequent passengers have seen the
improvements on the network and its services.

'Fifty-six per cent of passengers said that staff visibility had 'got
better' within the last twelve months, and 53 per cent said station
cleanliness was better too.

'Performance figures show that overall train reliability on the network has
increased from 87 per cent under the previous operator Silverlink to 94 per
cent when run by London Overground.

'Transport for London (TfL) took over management responsibility for the
network in November 2007 with a promise to deliver a step change in
passengers' travel experience.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/10597.aspx

As it happens, I've used the North London less than usual over the past
year - but when I have, I've impressed by it's ability to arrive and leave
pretty much on time.

Roll on the 378 ...
--

Andrew

"She plays the tuba.
It is the only instrument capable
of imitating a distress call."

TfL Press Release, via the Fish-Barrel newswi

'A recent survey shows that 32 per cent of frequent passengers have
seen no
improvements on the network and its services, or seen services get
worse.

'Forty-four per cent of passengers did not say staff visibility had
improved
within the last twelve months, and 47 per cent said station
cleanliness had not get better.

'Performance figures show that overall train reliability on the
network has
increased such that now only 6 per cent of London Overground trains
are
cancelled or more than 10 minutes late by the time they reach their
terminus.

(And so on)

U

On Nov 27, 7:04 pm, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
As it happens, I've used the North London less than usual over the past
year - but when I have, I've impressed by it's ability to arrive and leave
pretty much on time.

I've only used it once this year. Waited 20 mins for a train at
willesdon. My local NR station has a more frequent service. If they
want the NLL to be taken seriously as a metro line they've got some
work to do.

B2003

Boltar wrote:
On Nov 27, 7:04 pm, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
As it happens, I've used the North London less than usual over the past
year - but when I have, I've impressed by it's ability to arrive and leave
pretty much on time.

I've only used it once this year. Waited 20 mins for a train at
willesdon. My local NR station has a more frequent service. If they
want the NLL to be taken seriously as a metro line they've got some
work to do.

B2003


I've used it a number of times and found it cheap and reliable (so much
so that it's replaced going via town for visits to a mate in Haringey).
Mr. Whinge needs to get out more.

My local NR station has the same service frequency, except on Sundays
when the NLL is much better. Both need more late-night trains.

Tom

On Nov 28, 10:47 am, Tom Barry wrote:
Boltar wrote:
I've used it a number of times and found it cheap and reliable (so much
so that it's replaced going via town for visits to a mate in Haringey).
Mr. Whinge needs to get out more.

The less I have to get out in the **** poor excuse we have for public
transport in london the better. Thank god for cars.

B2003

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 04:31:50 -0800 (PST), Boltar
wrote:

The less I have to get out in the **** poor excuse we have for public
transport in london the better. Thank god for cars.

Cars in London? You must be mad.

Neil

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

On Nov 29, 9:13 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 04:31:50 -0800 (PST), Boltar

wrote:
The less I have to get out in the **** poor excuse we have for public
transport in london the better. Thank god for cars.

Cars in London? You must be mad.

Apart from driving into the centre they're faster than PT. And you
don't have to put up with patronising recorded message ******** about
there being a good service when you've been waiting 10 mins for a tube
along with 300 other people.

B2003

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:21:40 -0800 (PST), Boltar
wrote:

Apart from driving into the centre they're faster than PT. And you
don't have to put up with patronising recorded message ******** about
there being a good service when you've been waiting 10 mins for a tube
along with 300 other people.

I must admit that one does grate. "Normal" service might be better
(give or take smart-alec comments about the fact that a normal service
isn't a good one), or "full" service.

Neil

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

In message
,
Boltar writes

On Nov 29, 9:13 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

Cars in London? You must be mad.

Apart from driving into the centre they're faster than PT.

Not round here. I write as a car driver, but buses are almost invariably
faster for many local journeys because (a) they have dedicated bus lanes
that avoid the horrendous jams, and (b) no time or money is wasted
trying to find parking places at the destination.
--
Paul Terry

On Nov 29, 7:08 pm, Paul Terry wrote:
In message
,
Boltar writes

On Nov 29, 9:13 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
Cars in London? You must be mad.
Apart from driving into the centre they're faster than PT.

Not round here. I write as a car driver, but buses are almost invariably
faster for many local journeys because (a) they have dedicated bus lanes
that avoid the horrendous jams, and (b) no time or money is wasted
trying to find parking places at the destination.

Ok , there will be exceptions. But if you get the bus you still have
to walk to the bus stop and then wait for it to turn up. Which on the
routes near where I live could be anything up to 20 mins on a w/e.

B2003