• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Parliamentary trains

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Parliamentary trains

    Learn summat new every day.

    It's only money.

    #2
    They probably saved a lot of taxpayer money by effectively slowing those railway routes and avoiding expensive consultation. Logically it makes sense but still does not feel right...

    Comment


      #3
      There was a good radio documentary on them a few months back. One bit involved getting a ticket and phoning a number and they'd send a taxi.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by AtW View Post
        They probably saved a lot of taxpayer money by effectively slowing those railway routes and avoiding expensive consultation. Logically it makes sense but still does not feel right...
        <whispers>Agreed</whispers>

        Comment


          #5
          The train operating companies (TOCs) also have a track record (geddit?) of deliberately stopping popular services in favour of unused ones so they can later claim that, as the services are unused, they shouldn't be required to run them anymore.

          When I was living in Cheltenham back in 2000 I had a gig in Bromsgrove. This involved getting the 8:30 train from Cheltenham to Worcester Shrub Hill, then joining a train to Bromsgrove, but the 8:30 was also used by a lot of people who worked in Worcester. The train company then announced that it was going to drop the always-full 8:30 service, but meet its current obligation to run early morning services between the two stations by retaining the 7:00 service. I took the 7:00 service once for other reasons, and it was used by about three people.

          The regulars organised a petition and so on, but the TOC still killed the 8:30. Of course, the 7:00 was no good to all the people who would arrive at Worcester at 7:25 rather than 8:55; the offices they worked in wouldn't have been open for a start, so they were left with no option but to switch to travelling by car.

          Then the TOC could use the fact that the 7:00 service was almost unused as an excuse to cancel that too, thereby saving money on running both services without going against any of the Service Level Requirements of their franchise, which of course allowed for such shenanigans.

          I've said it before and I'll say it again: capitalists are a bunch of greedy self-serving bastards, which is why public infrastructure and services such as mass transportation shouldn't be handed over to them to exploit and abuse for profit.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
            I've said it before and I'll say it again: capitalists are a bunch of greedy self-serving bastards, which is why public infrastructure and services such as mass transportation shouldn't be handed over to them to exploit and abuse for profit.
            You have obviously never got on a train in a communist country.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by minestrone View Post
              You have obviously never got on a train in a communist country.
              And you're obviously a moron, but just like your comment, that has absolutely no relevance to what I said.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
                And you're obviously a moron, but just like your comment, that has absolutely no relevance to what I said.
                And here was me trying to be nice to you for months and this is what I get, Ad hominem attacks.

                You referenced capatilism and their ability to get trains running, I think it is fair game that I reference communism and goverments that are that way inclined to run train services.

                Last time I was on a communist state train the toilet was a hole in the floor with the 'push brush' next to it in case your aim was not so good.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
                  I've said it before and I'll say it again: capitalists are a bunch of greedy self-serving bastards, which is why public infrastructure and services such as mass transportation shouldn't be handed over to them to exploit and abuse for profit.
                  Though it's hard to see from your example what the greedy capitalists really gained by cutting the always full service, unless their intention was not to run any trains and not have any passengers. Seems like they shot themselves in the foot.

                  I grew up in Droitwich, and if I remember correctly, there were only about 2 trains a day that went to Bromsgrove; all the regular services went to Kiddiminster.

                  With all the global warming talk, surely the new thing should be cutting all train services except the ones that are full?
                  Will work inside IR35. Or for food.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
                    Though it's hard to see from your example what the greedy capitalists really gained by cutting the always full service, unless their intention was not to run any trains and not have any passengers. Seems like they shot themselves in the foot.

                    I grew up in Droitwich, and if I remember correctly, there were only about 2 trains a day that went to Bromsgrove; all the regular services went to Kiddiminster.

                    With all the global warming talk, surely the new thing should be cutting all train services except the ones that are full?
                    Can't be arsed to check a map, but I can think of one reason why a full service might not want to stop at a station, assuming full means the train was full and not the platform of eager customers. Trains are quite efficient unless they stop often. Slowing down and speeding up takes a lot of energy and also uses up rail capacity. They should build railway stops on little hills, which would help with acceleration and deceleration times and efficiency.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X