Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:22 pm  

cod'ead wrote: Alakhazam! As if by magic Worst Late Western Trains announce additional carriages Sounds like the passengers welcome the move but are wondering why it didn't happen sooner. My guess is that if Offrail (is that's what it's called) doesn't have the power to force them to do otherwise, then the train operators will obviously run cattle class but charge standard rates, thereby saving themselves the cost extra rolling stock.

cod'ead wrote: Alakhazam! As if by magic Worst Late Western Trains announce additional carriages Sounds like the passengers welcome the move but are wondering why it didn't happen sooner. My guess is that if Offrail (is that's what it's called) doesn't have the power to force them to do otherwise, then the train operators will obviously run cattle class but charge standard rates, thereby saving themselves the cost extra rolling stock.

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:41 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

My Dad, who had worked on the footplate years before, always said that what they used to do was stick some more carriages on the end.
Could we do that now? Would the locos cope with it? I don't know.
If so, then some longer trains would help as well.

I do know some stations couldn't cope with it.

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:08 pm  

Big Graeme wrote:

I do know some stations couldn't cope with it.

They could do what they used to do on some Inverness bound services when you sat in carriage A to get off at B station and C carriage to get off at D station to allow the carriages needed to open doors at the stations. They also dropped two carriages off at Perth to go onwards to Aberdeen and picked up another two that had come from elsewhere. Quite organised really for Scotrail.

It does rely on everyone to listen and read though. The numpties heading in the wrong direction having just went into any carriage whatsoever (and ignored the "If you are going to X get off this train NOW" messages) weren't best pleased.

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:29 pm  

Glasgow Gal wrote:

It does rely on everyone to listen and read though.

See that's where it all falls down.

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:34 pm  

Big Graeme wrote:

See that's where it all falls down.

I'd bet they'd only make that mistake once though. I'd lay money that the guy on the train when I was visiting Fi who ended up in Inver instead of Aberdeen has never done it since

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:09 pm  

Can't you two get a room?

Oh hang on.........

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:44 am  

Big Graeme wrote:

See that's where it all falls down.

Works fine on the Waterloo to Poole service.
If you want to get off at, say, Farnborough, you need to board one of the first eight (yes, eight, there are actually twelve, count 'em) coaches.

The train guard/ticket bloke/conductor/whatevertheycallem advises people if they are in the wrong coach.

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:55 am  

Back to the topic.
Why is Osborne doing this?

It's a lame attempt at stimulating the economy.
Maybe it's his Plan B.
If it is, it's pretty pathetic.

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:01 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

Back to the topic.
Why is Osborne doing this?

Because he likes rich people? Because he'd like to create a two-tier society where the 'haves' have everything as easy as possible and the 'have nots' can go and screw themselves? Because he's an oily, chinless twat with all the appeal of a bag of dog turds? All of the above?

Re: Chancellor proposes motorways for the rich. : Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:05 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

Back to the topic.
Why is Osborne doing this?

It's a lame attempt at stimulating the economy.
Maybe it's his Plan B.
If it is, it's pretty pathetic.

I think its much simpler than that, I think its an idea to float in the media to see if there is a positive or negative reaction to it, I think its all been generated by one or more of the large road construction companies lobbying for any desperate way to find some future projects because at the moment there is nothing at all on the horizon for them except for maintenance.

You can imagine the CEO of one of those companies planting the seed of an idea that they will pay for the roads if they can benefit from the tolls, no hard facts or figures yet just some wishful thinking that will probably result in those companies requiring a subsidy or underwriting of such a mammoth project so that they themselves are not exposed to ruin, and then the whole thing will quietly fade from memory.