From: (CJG Now Thankfully Living In The North)

Goodbye!

These high fares give them, without doubt an awful service (a fact the
mayor and most tube users would agree with).

But still a better public transport service than anywhere else in the
country

You don't know if your next tube service will be your last.

Significantly lower rishk is involved than in driving, crossing the
road, walking down a flight of stairs, etc., etc., etc.

It makes me wish and hope my next visit to London is as soon as
possible so I can once again enjoy the near death experince that is
London Underground

How about leaving out the "near"?

--
James Farrar |
London, SE13 |

chris wrote in
:

I now do not use the underground unless it is an imperative, I have a
bus pass. I would object strongly if one pound is given to the
underground private companies at the moment, immediately they were
privatised they took 40p of every pound to pay the directors and
shareholders with scant regard for safety and repair of the
infrastructure.
For the record they have reduced track walking to once every 48 hours,
this not like the over ground where one train passes maybe four times
an hour, the underground has 5 in ten minutes, the track is under a
lot of strain. Saving 50% of the inspection cost two derailments -
unskilled walkers?
Give the Mayor full control and responsibility he has shown what can
be done with congestion and the buses. BK has already proved what can
be done with a metro system.





For the record, LUL changed the track inspection schedule in 1996 from
24 hours to 48 hours. The track walkers are the same people, just
working for a different company. The mayor already has full control of
Transport for London, who manage LU, and LU ensures that safety levels
are maintained.

In article , CJG Now
Thankfully Living In The North writes
You don't know if your next tube service will be your last.

It makes me wish and hope my next visit to London is as soon as
possible so I can once again enjoy the near death experince that is
London Underground (this could possibly contain some scarcasm)

And when was the last time somebody was killed on an Underground train
(ignoring suicides)? I can't think of any since Moorgate.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article , CJG Now
Thankfully Living In The North writes

You don't know if your next tube service will be your last.

It makes me wish and hope my next visit to London is as soon as
possible so I can once again enjoy the near death experince that is
London Underground (this could possibly contain some scarcasm)


And when was the last time somebody was killed on an Underground train
(ignoring suicides)? I can't think of any since Moorgate.


There was a child who was killed a few years ago. He got his coat
caught in a train door whilst still outside the train.

I'm sure there must be other cases. However, our ailing tube system is
probably a lot safer than often made out to be.

So why this government introduces a system shown not to work on the
national rail system is a mystery.

Can't even get rid of Tory government by electing the Layour party :-(

--
Nick H (UK)

In message , "Nick H (UK)"
writes
Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article , CJG
Now Thankfully Living In The North writes

You don't know if your next tube service will be your last.

It makes me wish and hope my next visit to London is as soon as
possible so I can once again enjoy the near death experince that is
London Underground (this could possibly contain some scarcasm)
And when was the last time somebody was killed on an Underground
train (ignoring suicides)? I can't think of any since Moorgate.


There was a child who was killed a few years ago. He got his coat
caught in a train door whilst still outside the train.

There was also the guy who got stuck on board after the train had
terminated and was heading off to the depot. He ran frantically through
the inter-car connecting doors, slipped and got dragged down under the
car.
--
Spyke
Address is valid, but messages are treated as junk. The opinions I express do
not necessarily reflect those of the educational institution from which I post.

"chris" wrote in message

I am sorry to inform Nigel that fares do go to the Contractors running
the rail infrastructure, travel card income is split between the
organisations of bus underground and NR, this forms part of the
scheme paying for the services these render, the fares received at
underground stations for UG fares go directly into the underground
pot. The internal payment is scheme is a complex web as decoding the
original contracts and the basis of complaints and legal challenge of
the Mayor. The payments out is greater than the income, if I remember
correctly some £50 million.

Are you saying that the maintenance companies are paid a percentage of the
fare income? I'm sure that isn't the case above ground, where maintenance
contracts with NR have nothing to do with fare income, which goes to TOCs --
is it the case with the even-more-complex UG PPP scheme?

In article , (Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:

And when was the last time somebody was killed on an Underground train
(ignoring suicides)? I can't think of any since Moorgate.

A few years later, and that would have been down to BR(E).

--
Peter Beale

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:56:39 +0100, "Nigel Pendse"
wrote:

"chris" wrote in message

I am sorry to inform Nigel that fares do go to the Contractors running
the rail infrastructure, travel card income is split between the
organisations of bus underground and NR, this forms part of the
scheme paying for the services these render, the fares received at
underground stations for UG fares go directly into the underground
pot. The internal payment is scheme is a complex web as decoding the
original contracts and the basis of complaints and legal challenge of
the Mayor. The payments out is greater than the income, if I remember
correctly some £50 million.

Are you saying that the maintenance companies are paid a percentage of the
fare income? I'm sure that isn't the case above ground, where maintenance
contracts with NR have nothing to do with fare income, which goes to TOCs --
is it the case with the even-more-complex UG PPP scheme?

passengers pay for LUL singles or returns - money goes to LUL
passengers pay for Travelcards / LT Cards - money goes to Travelcard pot
but LUL gets a share plus commission for sales.
passengers pay for through tickets to NR - LUL gets an apportioned share
plus commission for sales.
there are reverse flows where other parties sell tickets for LUL.
Finally there is a share of concessionary fare payments made by the
London Boroughs.

The above constitutes fare revenue. Some other income from property and
secondary revenue also accrues to LUL.

in terms of PPP there is a 4 weekly payment to the Infracos for the full
service provided. This is adjusted up or down subject to their
performance. The 4 weekly payment in effect covers their costs of
operation, costs of investment (projects) and payments to the Banks for
the privately sourced finance that they have secured to fund the works.
In essence it is a very complex mortgage that pays from maintaining and
upgrading the Tube but over a 30 year period. There is fixed rate of
return for each 7½ period - the way the Infracos make more profit is to
become more efficient. PFI Contracts operate in a similar manner.

The PPP payments have no relationship whatsoever to the fare revenue in
terms of a percentage take or rake off. I think what the OP was
referring to was the well publicised analyses that suggest that the
total outward payments by LUL to PPP and PFI contractors and also for
LUL's own staff and operating costs in a year might exceed revenue thus
necessitating government grant. The last annual report stated LUL made a
loss so we are already in the position of requiring a level of grant.
The starting proposition for PPP a very long time ago was that it was
envisaged that LUL could get to a position of operating without
government grant. An awful lot has changed since then.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:31:13 +0100, "Clive D. W. Feather"
wrote:

In article , CJG Now
Thankfully Living In The North writes
You don't know if your next tube service will be your last.

It makes me wish and hope my next visit to London is as soon as
possible so I can once again enjoy the near death experince that is
London Underground (this could possibly contain some scarcasm)

And when was the last time somebody was killed on an Underground train
(ignoring suicides)? I can't think of any since Moorgate.

there have been deaths resulting from slips, trips, falls and dragging
incidents near the platform edge (e.g. Holborn, Eastcote (I think),
Hounslow East, Chalk Farm).

This explains the emphasis on "stand behind the yellow line", stand
clear, DMI messages about trains approaching, more mind the gap messages
etc. All to do with the risk of accidents on the platform / train
interface.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Nick H (UK)" wrote:

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article , CJG Now
Thankfully Living In The North writes

You don't know if your next tube service will be your last.

It makes me wish and hope my next visit to London is as soon as
possible so I can once again enjoy the near death experince that is
London Underground (this could possibly contain some scarcasm)


And when was the last time somebody was killed on an Underground train
(ignoring suicides)? I can't think of any since Moorgate.


There was a child who was killed a few years ago. He got his coat
caught in a train door whilst still outside the train.

Holborn (Picc) in about 1998, IIRC...

--
James Farrar |
London, SE13 |