|
|
Post by Red Dragon on May 30, 2018 11:57:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 30, 2018 12:29:15 GMT
I had to check that it wasn’t April 1st. TFL have enough issues with their own system without worrying about one on a different continent.
|
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on May 30, 2018 12:35:52 GMT
Of course, one of the major issues they are facing is a lack of cash, which this would help to fix!
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on May 30, 2018 12:52:51 GMT
Hmm, I have some concerns.
Many decades ago experts from the then London Transport went to Sydney, Australia to offer advice on urban transport within that great metropolis. The suggestions included replacing electric trams with diesel buses. This was duly done.
As I type this message Sydney is reinstalling trams through the centre of the city, as it realises that scrapping the trams was not a wise idea.
However, if this Buenos Aires project only applies to the metro then hopefully all will go well - for the long term. The metro system here is (if I understand correctly) the oldest in South America and for many years became run down through lack of investment - just like here in London.
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 30, 2018 13:08:22 GMT
I had to check that it wasn’t April 1st. TFL have enough issues with their own system without worrying about one on a different continent. Well I am afraid that's sort of my reaction and that comes from someone who was "sold" by LU to go and do work in Australia on Cityrail's ticketing system back in the late 80s. TfL has lost a lot of qualified staff and flattened its organisation. I can't really see where a team of experienced and qualified staff would come from in today's LU without weakening what was left behind. As a related aside I was looking at the new Customer Service & Ops Performance report this morning. The worrying thing, in the context of LU, is that asset and staff performance (measured in lost customer hours) has been getting worse since 2016. Being my usual cynical self I am not exactly shocked at this given the enormous financial pressures on the organisation, investment cuts and loss of experience. I struggle to see how this "achievement" is a saleable proposition. The other big concern is how any contractual risk is allocated - what will TfL be "on the hook" for if things go wrong. There will be cultural and political differences and Argentina is not exactly "round the corner". I felt the Mayor's demand to recreate a "LT International" was the wrong thing to do now and I don't think my view has changed. It looks an "obvious" thing to do but I really don't think it's right when you're throttling the organisation whose "skills" you are trying to sell on the open market. |
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on May 30, 2018 14:10:31 GMT
I worked in the office at London Transport International for a short while in the 70s.
A team worked on the Caracas Metro and there was an adviser in Sao Paulo plus others helped with the Hong Kong Metro.
|
|
|
|
Post by miff on May 30, 2018 15:13:33 GMT
When did LT International close, and why I wonder? The idea was the same I believe- selling consultancy services around the world backed up by the London resources and experience.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724 
|
Post by class411 on May 30, 2018 18:36:41 GMT
I can see problems here when they try and rosta White City drivers to do a shift on the Buenos Aires metro.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on May 30, 2018 18:54:55 GMT
When did LT International close, and why I wonder? The idea was the same I believe- selling consultancy services around the world backed up by the London resources and experience. Wound up in March 1992 |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 30, 2018 19:26:21 GMT
When did LT International close, and why I wonder? The idea was the same I believe- selling consultancy services around the world backed up by the London resources and experience. I believe the reason for closure was simply a view from government (as it was LRT then not LT under the GLC) that consultancy was not a "core activity" for a public sector organisation and that it was a drain on the organisation. This was after many years of "indifferent" (being kind) performance on the tube and a push to flog off the bus businesses and introduce more private sector involvement into what LRT did. There was no sense that anything about the Underground was worth selling to other people. It was only 5 years on from the Kings Cross fire and decades of neglect were still being rectified and would continue to be for many years to come. |
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on May 30, 2018 19:33:13 GMT
I had to check that it wasn’t April 1st. TFL have enough issues with their own system without worrying about one on a different continent. Well I am afraid that's sort of my reaction and that comes from someone who was "sold" by LU to go and do work in Australia on Cityrail's ticketing system back in the late 80s. TfL has lost a lot of qualified staff and flattened its organisation. I can't really see where a team of experienced and qualified staff would come from in today's LU without weakening what was left behind. As a related aside I was looking at the new Customer Service & Ops Performance report this morning. The worrying thing, in the context of LU, is that asset and staff performance (measured in lost customer hours) has been getting worse since 2016. Being my usual cynical self I am not exactly shocked at this given the enormous financial pressures on the organisation, investment cuts and loss of experience. I struggle to see how this "achievement" is a saleable proposition. The other big concern is how any contractual risk is allocated - what will TfL be "on the hook" for if things go wrong. There will be cultural and political differences and Argentina is not exactly "round the corner". I felt the Mayor's demand to recreate a "LT International" was the wrong thing to do now and I don't think my view has changed. It looks an "obvious" thing to do but I really don't think it's right when you're throttling the organisation whose "skills" you are trying to sell on the open market. This was fine when Holden & co helped influence the design of the Moscow Metro in the 1930's. But that was just one aspect of an exceedingly complicated operation. You can't safely or sensibly remotely manage train paths in Buenos Aries from London without intimate and immediate local knowledge at hand, for instance. How long, for instance, would our resident T/ops say it took them to learn 'the knowledge' involved in being able to drive a Tube train in any given area of LU? Must be months, I'd suggest, and the same learning curve, at least, would apply to running another Metro on another continent. |
|
|
|
Post by miff on May 30, 2018 22:01:00 GMT
I believe the reason for closure was simply a view from government (as it was LRT then not LT under the GLC) that consultancy was not a "core activity" for a public sector organisation and that it was a drain on the organisation. This was after many years of "indifferent" (being kind) performance on the tube and a push to flog off the bus businesses and introduce more private sector involvement into what LRT did. There was no sense that anything about the Underground was worth selling to other people. It was only 5 years on from the Kings Cross fire and decades of neglect were still being rectified and would continue to be for many years to come. Thanks. I wondered if LTI’s international credibility might have suffered, fairly or not, after the fire. And as you say there was a political steer away from public bodies doing commercial things. It’s now going the other way a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 30, 2018 22:46:12 GMT
I can see problems here when they try and rosta White City drivers to do a shift on the Buenos Aires metro. I think they’d prefer that to working on the W&C . . . |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on May 31, 2018 7:43:09 GMT
Typical Guardian doublespeak. Buenos Aires isn't 'turning to TfL' for anything. It has put its urban rail network out to tender, and TfL is looking at placing a bid.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on May 31, 2018 8:39:41 GMT
I believe the reason for closure was simply a view from government (as it was LRT then not LT under the GLC) that consultancy was not a "core activity" for a public sector organisation and that it was a drain on the organisation. This was after many years of "indifferent" (being kind) performance on the tube and a push to flog off the bus businesses and introduce more private sector involvement into what LRT did. There was no sense that anything about the Underground was worth selling to other people. It was only 5 years on from the Kings Cross fire and decades of neglect were still being rectified and would continue to be for many years to come. Thanks. I wondered if LTI’s international credibility might have suffered, fairly or not, after the fire. And as you say there was a political steer away from public bodies doing commercial things. It’s now going the other way a bit. If anything there was a better understanding of running an Underground electric railway and the potential for fire and how to reduce the risks. Standing at Canada Water this morning and looking up at the dust above the platform edge doors, I wonder if the current management understand that this could burn. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on May 31, 2018 9:30:12 GMT
I can see problems here when they try and rosta White City drivers to do a shift on the Buenos Aires metro. I think they’d prefer that to working on the W&C . . . White City don't do W&C |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 31, 2018 14:00:37 GMT
I think they’d prefer that to working on the W&C . . . White City don't do W&C Yep I know but was just trying to make the point about how much drivers seem to hate it! |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on May 31, 2018 14:23:27 GMT
Some drivers love the Drain and spend as much time down there as they can
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on May 31, 2018 16:19:46 GMT
Some drivers love the Drain and spend as much time down there as they can Do they get nicknamed 'sewer rats' by their colleagues? |
|
|
|
Post by holborncentral on Jun 1, 2018 16:24:56 GMT
I wonder if they'll be able to fit it onto the Tube map? Or are they planning a new extension of the Northern line all the way from Morden to Buenos Aires?
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon on Jun 1, 2018 16:34:30 GMT
I wonder if they'll be able to fit it onto the Tube map? Or are they planning a new extension of the Northern line all the way from Morden to Buenos Aires? Well, if the Trams and the dangleway qualify, I'm sure TfL would find a way to shoehorn it in somewhere  |
|
|
|
Post by holborncentral on Jun 1, 2018 16:38:12 GMT
I wonder if they'll be able to fit it onto the Tube map? Or are they planning a new extension of the Northern line all the way from Morden to Buenos Aires? Well, if the Trams and the dangleway qualify, I'm sure TfL would find a way to shoehorn it in somewhere They might, but it'll make the tube map more confusing for people |
|
