Vive Le Frogs (trains)

Nope. Then again, the addy in the header (particularly that one, sent
from a different machine) wouldn't get you anywhere anyway.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (b.rogers at ifrance.com)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

 

The problem is that the evidence is with the public service: French,
Italian and German trains arrive on time, charge reasonable fares, go
where people want to go and are faster than trains in the UK. It is
not `clear' that a public rail network is less efficient than a
privately run one.

 

twat.

 

I refer you to PC's words

 

Basic economics and I think we are agreeing anyway. A pricing mechanism is
being used to control demand in a system with limited capacity. If you
halved the price and doubled capacity it would most likely be filled to that
capacity. If you doubled the current peak prices everybody could get a seat
within the current capacity.

LOL you cheeky sod.. I have been well instructed on a multitude of matters
in UKRM

Well it is all part of the demand equation as I already said above.

 

What am I going to believe: you, or the evidence of my own eyes?

 

No believe PC, as I said. I take his words in these matters as Gospel you
know.

 

The UK rail system is massively subsidised. IIRC, by about five times
the amount received by BR pre-privatisation.

 

He's not always correct on matters of transport policy and application.
Tickets he's always bang on the money; economics and politics he's
sometimes shakey.

Ain't got time to oil the hinges

 

Unfortunately, it's broadly true.

 

Contracting out isn't a requirement - the French use a public sector
model. However, the vertical split (the accounting separation of track
and train) is a requirement.

Some have seen this as a requirement to liberalise but it's simply
accountancy. Nothing to stop BR (say) running both infrastructure
(track) and train (the services themselves).

Freight in the UK is on the verge of collapse. I (and my colleagues)
have been managing /driver/ redundancies (both within EWS and the 'guns
for hire' companies) for the last three years due to loss of work. The
only successful traffic are the block flows, everything else is going to
shit.

Steel and aggregates can't complain so aren't a priority in the world of
Whitehall.

Capacity issues are being dealt with by aggressive timetabling rather
than real infrastructure investments. Crossrail cripples freight as does
the South London and BML RUS etc etc.

The main thrust of the liberalisation legislation is 'interoperability'
and it centres on reduction of minimum requirements and standards;
primarily aimed at the freight markets not passenger. We will begin to
see a lowest common denominator 'flags of convenience' approach in the
near future followed by an unholy rush to the bottom.

What we need to remember when analysing the EU motives is the new global
capital requires cheap logistics.

Some of the emphasis is now shifting back to road with the EU trial of
LHVs.

The rail industry is fucked as the model proposed does not encourage long
term investment.

Where we were camped at Elefantentreffen was more level than the
transport playing field.

 

My partial irony is lost it seems.

 

How?

 

Electrocute the passengers - lots of space on the trains.