We're getting tired of closures

[Chris M]

May 25, 2009 18:40:14 GMT Colin said:

May 25, 2009 18:24:37 GMT Ben said:

Seriously though, how many weekend shutdowns were there in the 80's? How many new trains were introduced between 1983 and 1992? How much was the system used in the 80's (when service levels were seriously reduced) compared to now?

Point is there has been an explosion in use of the network (ie, number of customers), and investment in assets (maintenance & renewals) such that there is most certainly a blindingly obvious difference between the 80's/early 90's and the situation today.

Bottom line is (and this is not personally aimed at Ben but is to everyone) times change and you'll either have to adapt and get used to it or live in the past!

I don't think Ben's point was that the current closures were not justified. I took his message to be that once the current round of catchup and new trains are done with, that the routine maintenance shouldn't (or should not be allowed to) require frequent weekend closures because the routine maintenance happening in the 1980s didn't require them.

[metman]

May 25, 2009 18:40:14 GMT Colin said:

May 25, 2009 18:24:37 GMT Ben said:

I'm sure someone mentioned that in Madrid they managed to install and test a new signalling system whilst the trains ran? Can't remember where that was said or if it was indeed Madrid, but it was done, and recently. And someone said it on this very forum. Not sure who though...

What, in tunnel sections? I know nothing about Madrid, but I can assure you people and trains don't fit together in the same space on LU!

Whilst some limited work can be done on LU, in the open sections, whilst trains run, the protection methods available and the type of work permitted mean you can certainly rule out installing anything whilst trains are running. The only type of work permitted is inspection (or possibly minor remedial work between trains).

The one sole exception is emergency work - and that's where protection will involve holding trains.

May 25, 2009 18:24:37 GMT Ben said:

The OP asked "is this the shape of things to come for ever and ever?".

It shouldn't be for ever; people should rightly remember the fact the tube ran near enough well enough with just normal engineering hours before the PPP. The engineers would love a tube closed for maintenence on the weekends ( , the public dont want this though! However, as time wears on and people become accustomed to weekend closures the risk is run of it seeming 'normal' to have these shutdowns. Certainly the more frequently it happens the more acceptable a practice it becomes. I think this is wrong.

Of course it shouldn't be forever - I certainly hope not anyway as the current number of temporary timetables stacking up at home is getting silly!

Seriously though, how many weekend shutdowns were there in the 80's? How many new trains were introduced between 1983 and 1992? How much was the system used in the 80's (when service levels were seriously reduced) compared to now?

Point is there has been an explosion in use of the network (ie, number of customers), and investment in assets (maintenance & renewals) such that there is most certainly a blindingly obvious difference between the 80's/early 90's and the situation today.

Bottom line is (and this is not personally aimed at Ben but is to everyone) times change and you'll either have to adapt and get used to it or live in the past!

16 1/2 1983 stock trains were delivered in 1988! ;D

[Deleted]

May 25, 2009 18:40:14 GMT Colin said:

May 25, 2009 18:24:37 GMT Ben said:

Point is there has been an explosion in use of the network (ie, number of customers), and investment in assets (maintenance & renewals) such that there is most certainly a blindingly obvious difference between the 80's/early 90's and the situation today.

Bottom line is (and this is not personally aimed at Ben but is to everyone) times change and you'll either have to adapt and get used to it or live in the past!

Agreed. Actually, once as there isn't a problem on the Jub, which could be passenger taken ill, signal failure or otherwise, it's a very quick line. I am looking forward to seeing how rapid it will be once ATO is finally in operation! If LU's stats are correct we could be in store for a transport revolution in the next few years:

Jub, Vic, Northern signalling upgrades, DLR 3 car operation, ELLX, SLL, new stock for all of the Overground, New 2009 Stock, new S stock for some of the SSL, Thameslink upgrade Output 1.

That's quite a list and one that should it all be completed before the Summer of 2012, should allow London to be proud of itself.

[Deleted]

I think a big help in public perception (and allaying exasperation) would be to communicate what in the hell is being done where. IE - This weekend we installed 3 miles of new cabling or the track between station X and Station Y was 50% replaced.

We see these closures but see nothing tangible and get no feedback.

[Deleted]

That might be nice for those of us who use sites like this. But I have a suspicion that the majority of LU users wouldn't give a stuff so long as the project is to time and to budget.


For example, suppose the following statement, as suggested, was released, 'we replaced 3 miles of caballing this weekend'. Questions may then be asked about how many miles of caballing need to be replaced? What else needs to be done? And these questions are likely to be levied at staff who are neither responsible for the upgrades nor directly involved with the PPP contractors but are the public face of the lines themselves. That would be counter-productive!

[Colin]

Well if those at the East end of the District haven't noticed the improved ride quality, I'd be seriously astounded.

That said, and to be fair, you are not going see any change on a Monday morning where drainage work has been done or new cable/signal equipment has been installed and tested, etc.

I shall lesson my stance a little as that is a matter for TfL's marketing people and is not something I or any other TfL employee on this forum can influence.

All I can do is assure you that there really is a massive amount of stuff going on, and when it all comes together (pretty much as surmised above by cityboy), it really will be worth the pain. Believe it or not I do appreciate the frustration - our duty start & finish times are being changed every single weekend such that it's not always possible to plan something too concrete too far in advance - but I'd also like to think that it's fairly obvious to even a humble weekend traveler that LU is in dire need of modernisation and that the current closures are the result of that need.

Surely also common sense ought to suggest that as trains & humans clearly won't fit in the tunnel together, and there are only 4 hours available at night, that the weekend closures are necessary to achieve greater value for money in terms of maintenance or renewals? Surely even a hardened commuter must have enough common sense to see that?

[stanmorek]

May 24, 2009 1:32:33 GMT Ben said:

Well Tim O'Toole didn't like having weekend closures, but thats what the PPP agreement recommended. A cynic would suggest in a few years time, when the major overhauls have been finished and London have become grudgingly used to them, the question of their temporary need will be forgotten, and they will become the norm.

They should go away eventually, because there is only a finite amount of work that needs them (epic backlog, but still finite).

Ben if you're interested the infracos were allowed in PPP contract a limited number of line closures free of charge. Anything additional the infracos were required to pay for themselves and was calculated in the same way as the PPP penalties on the basis of lost customer hours. I believe the cost of blockades would be calculated the same way and as an indication the charge for loss of service in morning peak hours on the Piccadilly line at Acton would be in the region of £100k per hour. However, I imagine the issue of line blockades would require a political decision

For comparison the original plan for the escalator works at Bank/Monument station was to replace 10 escalators in pairs one after the other by 2010. The notional charge to Metronet for closure of the escalator shafts for 2 years was over £20 million.

The current focus is on the line upgrades for 2012 and the Olympics. But should Crossrail take off then there'll be the congestion relief works to the LU stations at Tottenham Court Road and Bond Street (at least 2 escalator replacements required). At the moment LU are looking at replacing three escalators at Oxford Circus which have a less than perfect reliability record before Crossrail. With all the work that will be going on at the other two stations a prolonged escalator breakdown at OXO wouldn't be too good for Oxford Street shoppers.

[Deleted]

May 25, 2009 21:27:43 GMT @cityboy said:

That might be nice for those of us who use sites like this. But I have a suspicion that the majority of LU users wouldn't give a stuff so long as the project is to time and to budget.


For example, suppose the following statement, as suggested, was released, 'we replaced 3 miles of caballing this weekend'. Questions may then be asked about how many miles of caballing need to be replaced? What else needs to be done? And these questions are likely to be levied at staff who are neither responsible for the upgrades nor directly involved with the PPP contractors but are the public face of the lines themselves. That would be counter-productive!

Oh I agree. BUT - Maybe it's something put onto the posters or weekly closure emails indicating basic things. ie - We aim to replace 3 miles of cabling this weekend in connection with our effort to improve the tube (insert boilerplate here) for more info see tfl.gov.uk/whyweclose/2325MAY09 or something to that effect. Not necessarily to the level of what we, as members of this forum, would like to know but just something to give the passengers a tangible reason for closing (especially when it's something like replacing piping and ballast to keep the tube from flooding as stated before that isn't readily visible but is of vital importance!)

I think there would be a lot higher level of buy-in from the travelling public if this were the case. You are always going to have people who gripe but it will be a lot less in quantity and volume if people can feel like the companies are being communicative with them! We, on this forum, know why it's being closed but Joe Public doesn't. It's not enough to put in the "We're improving the Tube" standard copy. It has to be something like "We are introducing new signalling that lets us safely run more trains closer together which means a better service to YOU. To that end, we will be closing the Jubilee Line from Stanmore to Finchley Road this weekend" As it stands now, and has been mentioned, all people hear and see is closures for the weekends to come.

To touch on another commenters post. I think offering reduced price fares on closure weekends is a very good thing to do. Simply from a public goodwill/sorry for the inconvenience perspective.

It is the marketing manager in me that's driving these comments but I think we can all agree that they would be nice initiatives to be seen implemented.

[Colin]

With regard to the reduced fares suggestion; IMO it's unworkable.

For starters I wonder how many bother to buy tickets when they know their entire journey is by rail replacement bus. And as for those with prepay or a Travelcard (particularly a season job), how will the system know they've used a bus as the ticket machines, if fitted, are not live. In fact in the case of those using prepay, I wouldn't betting they don't register a journey for the bus portion either.

Then the system has to updated every Saturday for the start of traffic and then again on the Monday as each weekend is different.

And the "Gold card brigade" (annual season ticket holders) would be up in arms as they would see such a reduction as unfairly biased against them, as the most loyal and long suffering users of the service. Of course most of them would have had their tickets paid for by their employers*, but don't let such a small detail get in the way

I like the principle behind the suggestion, but I wouldn't hold yer breath on seeing it implemented.

_{* Comment based on fact as I used to work in the ticket office}

[Deleted]

May 26, 2009 0:24:18 GMT Colin said:

With regard to the reduced fares suggestion; IMO it's unworkable.

For starters I wonder how many bother to buy tickets when they know their entire journey is by rail replacement bus. And as for those with prepay or a Travelcard (particularly a season job), how will the system know they've used a bus as the ticket machines, if fitted, are not live. In fact in the case of those using prepay, I wouldn't betting they don't register a journey for the bus portion either.

Then the system has to updated every Saturday for the start of traffic and then again on the Monday as each weekend is different.

And the "Gold card brigade" (annual season ticket holders) would be up in arms as they would see such a reduction as unfairly biased against them, as the most loyal and long suffering users of the service. Of course most of them would have had their tickets paid for by their employers*, but don't let such a small detail get in the way

I like the principle behind the suggestion, but I wouldn't hold yer breath on seeing it implemented.

_{* Comment based on fact as I used to work in the ticket office}

I see what you mean Colin, hadn't thought of all those things but it makes sense It's just that I've thought of this a few times while travelling home, which on what should be a 34 mile journey has taken nearly four hours before on engineering works

[ducatisti]

I wonder if anyone has asked the Great Travelling Public if the upgrades are what they want. Obviously, if you get asked "Do you want more frequent trains?" with no context, then the answer will be yes, but what would the answer to "do you want more frequent trains at some point (which will be quite a long way away), and have to spend the next year being seriously inconvenienced every time you try to travel on your days off? Oh, and by the way, the improvements we are quoting are maximum improvements, which for various reasons you'll probably only see about 75% of on a day-to-day basis" be? possibly less in favour I should warrant.

More information would certainly help - but please not over the flamin' PA...

[norbitonflyer]

May 26, 2009 0:24:18 GMT Colin said:

. Of course most of them would have had their (annual season) tickets paid for by their employers*, but don't let such a small detail get in the way

_{* Comment based on fact as I used to work in the ticket office}

Things ain't always what they seem. I know of no employers that pay for season tickets outright (there are no tax advantages to doing so). Many offer season ticket LOANS, paid back through deductions from salary over the subsequent year. So in the ticket office you may indeed see a company cheque, but the actual traveller will be paying for it in the end.

[Deleted]

May 26, 2009 8:37:24 GMT ducatisti said:

I wonder if anyone has asked the Great Travelling Public if the upgrades are what they want. Obviously, if you get asked "Do you want more frequent trains?" with no context, then the answer will be yes, but what would the answer to "do you want more frequent trains at some point (which will be quite a long way away), and have to spend the next year being seriously inconvenienced every time you try to travel on your days off? Oh, and by the way, the improvements we are quoting are maximum improvements, which for various reasons you'll probably only see about 75% of on a day-to-day basis" be? possibly less in favour I should warrant.

More information would certainly help - but please not over the flamin' PA...

The travelling public aren't always in the best position to answer the question, as I'm sure that they'll want improvements that don't affect them.

I'm sure if you ask the Metropolitan Line customers if they want the S stock and the weekend closures associated with the introduction they'll say no. But the A stock is getting old and getting unreliable. So ask the Metropolitan Line customer do you want your train to turn up in the morning/ afternoon and you'll get a different answer.

Similar to the Jubilee and Northern Lines. Yes the travelling public don't want to wait more than a minute for their trains and they'd love a seat, but lets be honest a space on the train would be great but we don't want weekend closures.

Colin mentioned about stopping all weekend closures and seeing how long before parts of the tube are under water or with 5mph speed restrictions due to track that is normally replaced. I'll add a different angle, how will the tube look in 5/ 10 years IF these improvements aren't undertaken. More people travelling on an older infrastructure. You'll be standing on the platform longer, standing on the train longer, station facilities not available.

[ducatisti]

Some interesting points, but surely it *is* the travelling public who need to be consulted. As has been said here before, it's one of the great things about the tube that it is run as a public service for the travelling public, not shareholders etc.

Are they being asked the right questions?
As for S-stock, I think there is reasonably clear evidence that a fair slice of users don't want many of the improvements that S-Stock brings about, and if offered would rather have another set of A-stock. Likewise, the new signalling on the Jubilee isn't simply routine mainenance is it? It's new works to improve the service (at a significant inconvenience cost).

How many of these closures relate to repair/replacement of existing kit (including like-for-like replacements) and how many relate to installation of different technologies?

I think everyone wants the best possible tube service, but I don't think there is a common view of what "best" is, and LU's relentless publicity about "improvements" doesn't give enough information to back up it's message and consequently generates resentment.

[Colin]

May 26, 2009 9:18:28 GMT norbitonflyer said:

Things ain't always what they seem. I know of no employers that pay for season tickets outright (there are no tax advantages to doing so). Many offer season ticket LOANS, paid back through deductions from salary over the subsequent year. So in the ticket office you may indeed see a company cheque, but the actual traveller will be paying for it in the end.

I very much understand what you are saying, but more often than not when there's been an issue with the price of the ticket coming out different to the cheque in the hand, they've simply said "don't worry mate, it ain't my money" - especially when the ticket is less! I also personally know people that work in the city and do have their travel paid for - so it does go on.

I would concede it's probably not as prevalent as it was, but it's something that is most certainly still available and used.

[Phil]

May 26, 2009 9:58:42 GMT ducatisti said:

Some interesting points, but surely it *is* the travelling public who need to be consulted.

Surely you don't actually mean that? Inform them yes, but consult?? Do you mean in the same way our politicians and local councillors 'consult' the electorate then have to explain (often truthfully) why every 'suggestion' by the public would not work and only their own solution is viable? That only leads to public contempt as we have all seen in our local areas.

Keep them informed, far more than now, but to expect any (more than 0.1%) of the travelling public to be sufficiently informed to make sensible and workable proposals is, IMHO, pie-in-the-sky.
We've all seen from posts by some of our LU staff forum members just how out-of-touch (euphemism) a lot of the 'customers' are.

[Colin]

May 26, 2009 9:58:42 GMT ducatisti said:

Some interesting points, but surely it *is* the travelling public who need to be consulted. As has been said here before, it's one of the great things about the tube that it is run as a public service for the travelling public, not shareholders etc.

But like this thread is proving, everyone is different, with a different viewpoint, a different way of thinking, different priorities, etc, etc....

You'd simply end up with "too many chiefs and not enough Indians".

Realistically, you also need to really understand the railway - you need to know what is or isn't possible and know why. The vast majority of the general public don't, in much the same way as I know nothing about how the financial markets work and wouldn't therefore tell a a city trader what he should or should not be doing.

May 26, 2009 9:58:42 GMT ducatisti said:

Are they being asked the right questions?
As for S-stock, I think there is reasonably clear evidence that a fair slice of users don't want many of the improvements that S-Stock brings about, and if offered would rather have another set of A-stock.

The only noise that's been made is regarding less seats. I bet they won't complain once they are travelling on new air conditioned trains - seats or no seats.

If I were a Met customer, Id more concerned about the poor frequency on the Amersham branch - particularly as it dosen't change for the peaks.

May 26, 2009 9:58:42 GMT ducatisti said:

How many of these closures relate to repair/replacement of existing kit (including like-for-like replacements) and how many relate to installation of different technologies?

Technology is always evolving, so if something newer and better is available, it's used. Like for like will obviously be used where something is specialist like a train stop, track circuit fuse, etc.

If I were to take an educated stab in the dark, I'd suggest it's something like 40% maintenance of existing assets (ie, drainage work), 40% installation of brand new assets (ie, new signalling system) and 20% renewals (ie, track replacement).

May 26, 2009 9:58:42 GMT ducatisti said:

I think everyone wants the best possible tube service, but I don't think there is a common view of what "best" is, and LU's relentless publicity about "improvements" doesn't give enough information to back up it's message and consequently generates resentment.

And like I said above, we all have different angles on the subject.

[Deleted]

May 24, 2009 1:23:36 GMT @paul said:

Is this the shape of things to come for ever and ever?

This is very much how I feel now. It would be one thing if we ever got to enjoy the benefits of all this constant work (on the whole system, not just the JL), but it just seems that as soon one long-term engineering project aproaches an end, another is announced.

Just when are we going to enjoy the fruits of all these closures - without there being further closures which obviate any gains from the original ones?

[Deleted]

May 24, 2009 1:32:33 GMT Ben said:

A cynic would suggest in a few years time, when the major overhauls have been finished and London have become grudgingly used to them, the question of their temporary need will be forgotten, and they will become the norm.

Again, this has long been my worry.

May 24, 2009 1:32:33 GMT Ben said:

They should go away eventually, because there is only a finite amount of work that needs them (epic backlog, but still finite).

Provided another load of work isn't conveniently thought of as we approach the end of the orginal batch. If all else fails, there's the "forth bridge" syndrome - simply starting all the work over again. Given how long it's taking, this strikes me as a very real possibility.

This could - literally - go on for ever.

[Colin]

"Rome wasn't built in a day"

LU's customers are rightly demanding a top quality service, and it is LU's desire to do just that, but it will take time to achieve.

Reading back through this thread ought to answer your questions in more detail...

[Deleted]

May 24, 2009 8:39:05 GMT @centralsimon said:

Also the question isn't limited to LU. Ask anybody who uses the West Coast Mainline the problems they've had over the past few years - but now have the hope of a better train service.

Trouble is, it's still subject to major closures over bank holidays.

[ducatisti]

Colin - With regards to the S-Stock, I wasn't thinking about active complaints, so much as all the extras - if the Great British Public were buying the stock in the showroom as an upgraded A-stock, how much of the new stuff would they buy?

I agree about too many chiefs, but surely if the trains are run for the public, then that is one voice that can't be ignored?
One might say that had more people asked questions of the city, it might have been a good thing for all concerned. - Visions of a moment based on Dilbert's omiscient garbage man... "this is Bank, please change here for the nothern and central lines, if you are thinking of making an interest rate swap today, please mind the Japanese Q2 figures coming out at lunchtime"...

On a serious note, nobody understands, and it seems that nobody at LU is helping those who might understand. I'm sure we've all explained seemingly illogical stuff to friends about the network.

Where's a new Edgar Anstey when you need him?

[Deleted]

May 25, 2009 20:51:55 GMT @drewpost said:

I think a big help in public perception (and allaying exasperation) would be to communicate what in the hell is being done where. IE - This weekend we installed 3 miles of new cabling or the track between station X and Station Y was 50% replaced.

We see these closures but see nothing tangible and get no feedback.

Spot on. We'd be more sympathetic if we were givena full breakdown of what was being done and what (and when) we could expect to see from it.

As it stands, vaguely-titled "improvement works" simply won't do as an explanation.

[Deleted]

Provided another load of work isn't conveniently thought of as we approach the end of the orginal batch. If all else fails, there's the "forth bridge" syndrome - simply starting
all the work over again. Given how long it's taking, this strikes me as a very real possibility.

This could - literally - go on for ever.[/quote]

Hmm, this is a possibility. But seeing as finite periods have been given too the PPP firms and for every day they run late, penalty fines can and may well be imposed, it seems rather unlikely.

Dates for completion:

Jub: completed Dec 2009
Northern Upgrade pt 1: completed Jan 2012
Vic: 2012 (presumably before the Olympics)
Pic: 2014
Northern SSL: 2016
Southern SSL: 2018
Bakerloo: 2020

Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but in terms of the overall LU infrastructure, 11 years doesn't sound too long.

I cast my mind back to my first memory of the Underground, some time in the early 80s. It was hot, crowded, tiles peeling off the wall, escalators not working, no staff to help, no information. This was all on a Saturday at London Bridge. Now when I compare to the current level of service, it's a different world. Yes, I want more for my money and that's being delivered, slowly but surely.

I can't wait til the end of the year so I can either write to Gordon Brown and my local MP and tell him/them that PPP seems to have failed with Metronet down the pan and Tubelines failing to meet clear targets or to take a ride on a newly and much improved service. Obviously I'm hoping for the latter! But 6 months is not a long time to wait. Until that date, I reserve my ultimate judgement.

[Deleted]

May 26, 2009 18:11:00 GMT @cityboy said:

Provided another load of work isn't conveniently thought of as we approach the end of the orginal batch. If all else fails, there's the "forth bridge" syndrome - simply starting
all the work over again. Given how long it's taking, this strikes me as a very real possibility.

This could - literally - go on for ever.

I put absolutely NO stock whatsoever in any timetables that have been issued. I moved to Maida Vale in Aug of 2006 and the ongoing renovations were to be done in Oct 2006. They finished in November of 2008. So ummm, yea.

[flippyff]

May 26, 2009 18:11:00 GMT @cityboy said:

Hmm, this is a possibility. But seeing as finite periods have been given too the PPP firms and for every day they run late, penalty fines can and may well be imposed, it seems rather unlikely.

Dates for completion:

Jub: completed Dec 2009
Northern Upgrade pt 1: completed Jan 2012
Vic: 2012 (presumably before the Olympics)
Pic: 2014
Northern SSL: 2016
Southern SSL: 2018
Bakerloo: 2020

Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but in terms of the overall LU infrastructure, 11 years doesn't sound too long.
<snip>

11 years? Doesn't sound a lot but what's that work out as, nearly a quarter of someone's working life? (start work at 20, retire at 65)

After 2020 it must then be the Central's time again (I think there's already been an OJ-S tender for proposals for Central rolling stock). Forth bridge is right.......

Simon

[Deleted]

I put absolutely NO stock whatsoever in any timetables that have been issued. I moved to Maida Vale in Aug of 2006 and the ongoing renovations were to be done in Oct 2006. They finished in November of 2008. So ummm, yea.[/quote]

I am forced to use either Blackfrairs beofre it closed or Bank every day. The escalator renovations at Bank are overdue but I can see lots of progress at Blackfrairs! Some projects are run to time, others like recent DLR projects are finished ahead of schedule, others as you mention run behind.

[mrfs42]

May 26, 2009 18:11:00 GMT @cityboy said:

Yes, I want more for my money and that's being delivered, slowly but surely.

So you've got a little tick box that says 'I want my taxes to go to LU'?

Any chance of telling the rest of us how you've managed this feat, so we can avoid paying our taxes to HM Forces (an example plucked at random, just in case anyone started getting really wiggy) or other quarters of the public purse that some find offensive?

Or have you invested in the private side of the PPP? In which case you would understand the separation of operational risk from credit risk as propounded by Basel II?

In the first case your money will have gone into the public purse, and you can exercise no control over its allocation apart from exercising your franchise as you see fit (I've made the assumption that you can vote, rather than being an illegal or otherwise alien). My apologies for using what might be construed as a slightly inflammatory tone, but anyone using the phrase 'my money' in reference to how the Exchequer, HM Treasury (under instruction) and Comptroller & Auditor General allocate the taxation revenues needs to be disabused of the illusion that it is 'their' money. (It is an old hobbyhorse of mine)

In the second case, then as a shareholder, you can also exercise your franchise at the appropriate company AGMs - if you don't like the policy of the Board of Directors, elect a fresh set.

[Deleted]

Well, I can and do read on occasion DfT, Tfl and Treasury reports. So, while not having the exact figures to hand, I have a rough idea of how much money is being spent on public transport. True, I don't know what proportion of my tax is spent on LU or on wider public transport projects. But I do feel that London has by far the best transport network in the country and that I am seeing further improvements made to that. Based upon my reading, personal experience and forecast improvements, I wrote that I am happy with how my money - yes, my money - is being spent (if only on public transport). I earned it, I paid my taxes, I voted for a government that didn't win the general election and for a London Mayoral candidate that doesn't sit in City Hall but I am engaged in politics to a degree with which I'm satisfied. Democracy - you don't always get what you want but you normally get something of what you deserve! Enough political philosophy for one day....

[Deleted]

[/quote]
11 years? Doesn't sound a lot but what's that work out as, nearly a quarter of someone's working life? (start work at 20, retire at 65)
[/quote]

A lot of people on this forum use all the LU lines or at least a lot of them on a regular basis.