Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Waiting for an email from Mr. Blair

13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    migpilot wrote: »
    You do the math.
    Exactly. You cannot argue general statistics as a reason why someone should use the train, when for them personally, it is going to take twice as long or cost twice as much. And despite the statistics that are constantly banded around, there seem to be an awful lot of people who's personal experiences go against what the people using the statistics claim.
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    And that's the problem. Less than ten minutes late is still late. I'd be interested to know what percentage of trains were more than two minutes late (and I'd also be interested to know whether if one train is delayed getting out of the station, the train it is blocking is also considered late if it is on time but waiting).

    To time it within 2 minutes is just daft, and to be brutally honest all sorts of things can cause a 2 minute delay. I went for a train home from Leeds today (12:25 service to Manchester) it arrived at 12:20 - at 12:24 a disabled couple turned up wanting to travel - do you refuse to let them travel because it takes too long for them to board and would cause a two minute delay? They were rightly allowed to board and the train left at 12:27 - this is just one of many many hundreds of things that can cause an odd minute or two to be added to a journey.
    I'd also be interested to know whether if one train is delayed getting out of the station, the train it is blocking is also considered late if it is on time but waiting).
    Every single minute of delay is calculated - irrelevant of the cause.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    To time it within 2 minutes is just daft, and to be brutally honest all sorts of things can cause a 2 minute delay. I went for a train home from Leeds today (12:25 service to Manchester) it arrived at 12:20 - at 12:24 a disabled couple turned up wanting to travel - do you refuse to let them travel because it takes too long for them to board and would cause a two minute delay? They were rightly allowed to board and the train left at 12:27 - this is just one of many many hundreds of things that can cause an odd minute or two to be added to a journey.
    The reason I mentioned it, is that I can honestly say that I have never been on a train that hasn't been at least two minutes late.
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    The reason I mentioned it, is that I can honestly say that I have never been on a train that hasn't been at least two minutes late.
    You must have terrible luck then!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not only are not all trains late, but I've even been on ones which are early:shocking:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    You must have terrible luck then!

    About 10 train journeys a year to and from uni, with three trains on each journey? I don't think luck had anything to do with it. I just think they are constistantly at least a few minutes late. I can't count the times I'm stood by the door with my bag and the clock is already at the time it's supposed to be in, and there's another five minutes while it crawls into the station, and you're getting ready to run across 12 platforms with a massive bag. It did always involve Manchester Piccadily and Brimingham New Street though, so maybe that was the reason. As for the train being early, that should theoretically never happen, because it's not supposed to leave the previous station until the time on the timetable, so it'd have to burn it the rest of the way. So I can understand why it would never be early.
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    About 10 train journeys a year to and from uni, with three trains on each journey? I don't think luck had anything to do with it. I just think they are constistantly at least a few minutes late. I can't count the times I'm stood by the door with my bag and the clock is already at the time it's supposed to be in, and there's another five minutes while it crawls into the station, and you're getting ready to run across 12 platforms with a massive bag. It did always involve Manchester Piccadily and Brimingham New Street though, so maybe that was the reason. As for the train being early, that should theoretically never happen, because it's not supposed to leave the previous station until the time on the timetable, so it'd have to burn it the rest of the way. So I can understand why it would never be early.
    I dont know then. I know I've been on 4 trains today and 3 have been absolutely to the second almost, and the other one a little late.

    Trains can run early if there is cancelled track work or slack in the timetables, or on lines with request stops.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Trains are alright, generally.

    TransPennine Express are pretty good, and usually on time. Even better if you get the ones that don't stop at Dewsbury. The trains are nice and new, too (and fucking quick).

    I've not really had any good experiences with Southwest Trains.

    Virgin Cross Country are a windup. I think maybe the scrotes that travel on them (the express reading old buggers as much as the special brew swilling scuffers) are half the problem. The other half of the problem is the fact that they're too short, squished and smelly (and have to call at Birmingham :sour:).
    Last time I went from Leeds to Southampton, going via London and faffing about with the tube was preferable to travelling across country. The GNER was great, but SWT were as shite as usual.

    For long journeys I'd be happer with a car (first class on a train would be OK, too), especially if I had more than one item of luggage.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Virgin Voyagers are a joke. At Christmas I had to stand for 3 hours in the vestibule despite booking a seat because it was so crowded I couldn't get out of the vestibule! At Christmas they should have had the foresight to use a train with a higher capacity than their usual 4 carriages - I see plenty of doubled up VVs, I'm sure it would have been possible to do that. Or at least scrap the first class, it takes up a lot of room compared with the space that standard class get. First class on short distance commuter trains should also be scrapped, for example on the Transpennine Express trains.

    If they didn't call at Birmingham they'd be SO much faster :D

    So, a lot of people don't like using trains. Migpilot and IWS have given lots of reasons why, such as it not being convenient to get to the station, or it not being cost effective compared to using their cars in that instance. That it's too costly.

    What then, can be done to improve the railways? I remember Kermit saying that there is a black hole where money goes because the railway operators have to rent their rolling stock. Perhaps the government could make franchises last long enough to make it worthwhile for companies to OWN their rolling stock. Maybe that would make tickets cheaper. (and get better rolling stock too. GO 185s!)

    I don't think expensive maglev trains are the answer, seems a bit of a gimmick really. Also, you can only have one on a track at one time, so not that good really.

    Oh yeah, and would using trams rather than buses in city centres be a better idea? I know they are more expensive to set up, but the long term cost is probably better than buses...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Virgin train derails

    Spooky that you were just dissing the Virgin trains!
    No deaths thankfully.

    And someone has got to sort Carrilion PLC out!!!!!
    And a couple of days after their ban has been lifted!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Virgin are shite. If it hit something (like witnesses are saying) it wasn't Virgin's fault that it derailed though :p
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Often the lateness isn't due to the train but because of the track. I was 3 hours late getting into York a few weeks back because some scrote had vandalised some of the lines - hard to hold GNER responsible for that and to be fair its also hard to blame network rail.
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    migpilot wrote: »
    Virgin train derails

    Spooky that you were just dissing the Virgin trains!
    No deaths thankfully.

    And someone has got to sort Carrilion PLC out!!!!!
    And a couple of days after their ban has been lifted!

    What has this to do with Carillion?! There is no idea what has happened here yet. Initial suggestions suggest an obstruction on the line. I suggest we hope that the passengers and crew are OK, rather than randomly speculating rubbish!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Maybe if they knew there were 200mph trains operating on the line, the little scrotes would stay away!!
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    migpilot wrote: »
    Maybe if they knew there were 200mph trains operating on the line, the little scrotes would stay away!!
    Again you are speculating - it could be a landslip, a farm animal or anything,

    Linespeed is around 100mph max in this area.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    What has this to do with Carillion?! There is no idea what has happened here yet. Initial suggestions suggest an obstruction on the line. I suggest we hope that the passengers and crew are OK, rather than randomly speculating rubbish!

    I'll admit that my having a go at Carillion PLC is unfounded at the moment, but since Carillion has built those lines, and their record with rail lines is so poor, and they've been banned on working on rail lines because of that... I thought I'd have a dig at them. And it's not just their rail section that's got a bad safety record.

    And I have also said that thankfully there are no deaths, and with all due respect I am not talking rubbish.
    Also, calm the fuck down.
    :thumb:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    Again you are speculating - it could be a landslip, a farm animal or anything,

    Linespeed is around 100mph max in this area.

    That response was to flashmans post, get your knickers untwisted if you want to have a discussion.
    And the 200mph is obviously hypothetical. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    migpilot wrote: »
    I'll admit that my having a go at Carillion PLC is unfounded at the moment, but since Carillion has built those lines, and their record with rail lines is so poor, and they've been banned on working on rail lines because of that... I thought I'd have a dig at them. And it's not just their rail section that's got a bad safety record.

    And I have also said that thankfully there are no deaths, and with all due respect I am not talking rubbish.
    Also, calm the fuck down.
    :thumb:

    No deaths yet - they have only cleared one carridge by all accounts.

    Carillion were poor but there is nothing to say they were even involved :p
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :yes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's good to see that migpilot is as pleasant as the BBC journalists who are milking a fatality for all its worth for political gain.

    Shame on you.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What the hell are you on about? Who the hell are you to accuse me of an idiotic thing like that? You don't know me.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blaming carillion plc as "unsafe" when you don't know what happened? It's pretty fucking obvious.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Your logic is astounding.
    I was having a dig at Carillion for other reasons, and have already said that there's no proof it was Carillion's fault for the crash. In fact it more than likely isn't. I was trying to point out Carillion's bad safety record ( I am sure you would agree if you were from Battersea) and in a roundbaout way suggest that the workmanship on our rail networks is less than satisfactory.

    But to accuse me of milking something would imply some personal gain.
    What would I gain by milking a crash like this?
    That's downright wrong and insulting.
    Again, you don't know me.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Having a dig in a thread about train safety 10 minutes after a crash, its great timing if nothing else.

    *shrug*
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    Having a dig in a thread about train safety 10 minutes after a crash, its great timing if nothing else.

    *shrug*

    First of all, this is not a thread about train safety, you've somehow got it in your head that is after I numerously said I wasn't talking about that. Stubborness or what!!
    Also, I posted the post after I read the news on yahoo mail, and you know what, I ain't gotta defend myself. You got things wrong, and you are not man enough to admit it so you are persisting in this fools errand.
    Never mind, eh!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Thinking about it as a whole, you could say it was a testament to the safety of a train. Travelling at over 100mph, derailing and turning over, 5 people were injured badly and one killed. As a percentage of the passengers, I wouldn't like to speculate, except to say if there was a similar accident involving a car travelling at high speed, unless there was some twist of fate, I'd expect all people travelling at 70/80mph in a crash to be killed unfortunately.

    I think it's really peculiar it happened in the midst of this thread though.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's interesting, though, isn't it. One person dies in a train accident and the whole world is watching.

    Three people die in a car crash on the same night and the BBC tuck the story away on page 1,756.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry I'm a bit unclear - your saying that Sky, ITN, FOx, YAhoo news, The Sun, The Guardian, The Star, The News of The World, Talk news and everyone else is using that car crash as their leading story?

    And lets not even get into the hypocracy of you using the death of someone to have a go at the BBC, whilst willfully ignoring how anyone else covers the story, and then having a barny of someone else for using the story in another context.

    Guess one rule for you, one rule for everyone else?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The link was from the BBC, so I was comparing the BBC's reporting of the car crash with the reporting of the rail crash. Using the story for political purposes? Hardly. I think the BBC are incompetent liars 99% of the time, but I actually wasn't criticising them in this case.

    It was more to compare how much people care about the various deaths, and to show that, actually, railways are pretty damn safe, its just that media reporting is always negative and that makes people feel unsafe. One death in a train accident is headline news, so much so they go and interview the deceased's neighbours, but three dead in a car accident is filed away as "news in brief" on page 999. Even the National Express coach crash wasn't reported to this extent. It's no wonder that people feel completely safe in their car, but feel unsafe in trains.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The same as that other thread where you criticised the "cunts" at the BBC for publishing pictures from inside the crash? Which Sky News were also doing, as I pointed out. I don't think you can criticise others for using the incident to make a political point, when you have done exactly the same thing.
Sign In or Register to comment.