We're getting tired of closures

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

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

"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...

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?

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.

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

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.