WookieD
Didier Zokora
Doors can be dangerous MB, the staff will need a LOT of training and a salary and holiday package which reflects this... So says Bob anyway, bet'cha
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Driverless tubes in 10 years? WE MUST STOP THIS
- Thread starter monkeybarry
- Start date
Doors can be dangerous MB, the staff will need a LOT of training and a salary and holiday package which reflects this... So says Bob anyway, bet'cha
Same union, same problem.
It needs to be as automated as possible. Any humans involved need to be replaceable at short notice to avoid being held over a barrel.
monkeybarry
Ian Walker
Sheikh Ma Nuggets
Tony Parks
Automation should've been introduced donkies years ago; the notion of 'safety' is a complete red herring.
However, I think people make a false assumption if they think removing tube drivers will drive down the cost of the service. We'd all like it to, of course we would - but the costs would remain the same, as TfL would simply say that the 'saved' costs have been re-invested into the network, namely in the procurement of said automated trains.
Strikes have risen under Boris Johnson, but it's hardly any wonder when you consider Ken's 'negotiating' comprises of...okay then Bob, you win. That's why: i) Bob and his cronies developed such a degree of self-importance, and ii) Tube drivers are 'earning' in excess of ?ú50k a year. It's a manual job, one which requires very little skill = negligible justification for their wage.
As for putting people out of jobs: well, it's the chickens coming home to roost. Were they on afforable salaries, then the decision wouldn't be so easy, and neither would great swaythes of London commuters be against them. Years and year of self-serving ignorance is about to be their ultimate demise.
However, I think people make a false assumption if they think removing tube drivers will drive down the cost of the service. We'd all like it to, of course we would - but the costs would remain the same, as TfL would simply say that the 'saved' costs have been re-invested into the network, namely in the procurement of said automated trains.
Strikes have risen under Boris Johnson, but it's hardly any wonder when you consider Ken's 'negotiating' comprises of...okay then Bob, you win. That's why: i) Bob and his cronies developed such a degree of self-importance, and ii) Tube drivers are 'earning' in excess of ?ú50k a year. It's a manual job, one which requires very little skill = negligible justification for their wage.
As for putting people out of jobs: well, it's the chickens coming home to roost. Were they on afforable salaries, then the decision wouldn't be so easy, and neither would great swaythes of London commuters be against them. Years and year of self-serving ignorance is about to be their ultimate demise.
WookieD
Didier Zokora
I think most people simply want a reliable service for their money, and that's the real kicker in automation.
Steed Train
Clive Wilson
Was speaking to one of the "drivers" you get on the DLR once and she said that alot of the tube lines are already automated. They basically get paid to sit there and do fudge all
Sheikh Ma Nuggets
Tony Parks
Automation isn't going to make it reliable, merely available. I don't believe the tube workers go out of their way to sabotage the network; the network is riddled with old technology, and it's liable to failure, as is often the case.
If you're talking about 'reliability' in terms of it being out of service, when the staff are on strike - then I don't really follow that one mate. How many days of a year, on average, is it knocked-out by a strike? Let's be generous and say 4 - that's still only 1.1%. I think it's hard to striking workers makes it an unreliable service.
My case for automation, is that the new trains already are, so TfL are paying 'drivers' to do nothing. Therefore, strip that redundancy out of the business. My problem with TfL though, is that efficiencies are not passed onto the passengers: Oyster has given rise to the opportunity to save a fortune in overheads, and yet fares are constantly rising. I don't see where the 'reinvestment' of those real-term savings are either, other than being passed on to the already inflated and unjustifiable wage of Tube workers. My fear, is that passengers would also see removing Tube drivers as being a good way to save money - yet, true as it may be, it's money that they'll never see.
Co-incidentally, I was on a platform this evening waiting for my Tube to arrive and I observed a Tube worker, no doubt 'station staff' as they're referred to in glowing terms by Bob Crow. This chap was removing a a bill poster. No problem with that, right? Yup - accept for the fact that you could visibly tell that he was dragging this very simple task out, for as long as he could. I've never seen someone move so, so slowly. I just laughed to myself, because then you'd get on the Tube, open the Standard, and read that **** Bob Crow bleating on about how we need pricks like him. We don't - they're lazy wasters, just like the ones you see gathered in threes, chewing the fat over X-Factor. Apparently they're priceless to the Tube, yet whenever I see these people, they all seem to be doing sweet fudge all.
Getting a tad bored of the rude drivers whose voice comes over the PA on the train, talking to the passengers like they're little school children too. It isn't funny, especially when: i) you've paid a handsome sum to use the 'service', and ii) you're paying his fudging wage, so should so some respect for your decision. But then again, that just goes to show the level of arrogance which has been allowed to propagate amongst them. Unacceptable to show such rudeness in a customer-facing job - absolutely unacceptable. I'd sack the lot of them tomorrow; bring um back down to earth with a bump, and see how they like being spoken to like a piece of brick, when they're cleaning the tables in McDonalds.
the new signaling system is the problem, that and mongs pulling the emergency lever (which has happened to me twice this week), if you're not dying then leave it alone!
I've started claiming money back for delays, I get ?ú2.70 back every time the jubilee line delays me by more than 15 min's, which happens at least once a week
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/tickets/refunds/tuberefund/
I've started claiming money back for delays, I get ?ú2.70 back every time the jubilee line delays me by more than 15 min's, which happens at least once a week
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/tickets/refunds/tuberefund/
WookieD
Didier Zokora
Sheikh Ma Nuggets
Tony Parks
I meant the reliability of not going on strike
Should've read the second paragraph.
As I've outlined, you're only talking 1.1% - it's a false drum you're banging there mate.
WookieD
Didier Zokora
fudge me Shiekh, accept the joke and move on! I'm really not interested :lol:
Edit: I don't work in London so have never been affected by a strike, I just take exception to anything Bob Crow does
Sheikh Ma Nuggets
Tony Parks
No, you're right - it isn't all old technology, but the signalling system they've used is absolutely brick. They have to power-down the entire line, carry out safety checks and then reboot the whole system before it can come back online again. It's a classic over-engineered 'solution' which isn't actually fit for purpose at all. A system like that should have parallel cross-over, and yet it doesn't.
I think they should be using different means to control the signalling; the current sensors are prone to failure due to the soot build-up and the resonance along the rails. A far more robust means of control would be to use laser technology.