|
|
Post by stapler on Dec 29, 2015 22:08:28 GMT
Thanks NF
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2016 16:40:12 GMT
Am I the only one who cannot see Night Tube ever happening. Perhaps in the distant future when trains are unmanned and stations are no longer staffed by hardworking human beings.
|
|
|
|
Post by patrickb on Jan 2, 2016 19:49:59 GMT
No, not the only one.
There are other factors as well such as lack of trains, clashes with engineering work, noise/disruption in suburban areas, antisocial behavior, and probably other things too.
There are some benefits too but it just doesn't seem worth it.
N2 to Brixton
N5 to Edgware
N7 to Northolt
N8 to Hainault
N9 to Heathrow Terminal 5
N11 to Ealing Broadway
N18 to Harrow & Wealdstone
N20 to High Barnet
N22 to Richmond
N55 to Woodford
N73 to Walthamstow Central
N87 to Wimbledon
N91 to Cockfosters
N98 to Stanmore
N155 to Morden
N207 to Uxbridge
108 to Stratford
Hardly a 3rd World Service (except areas outside Greater London)
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 10, 2016 13:54:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesb on Jan 10, 2016 20:00:35 GMT
I saw that too. Scrap the whole thing! Why can't TfL phrase it 'this is an opportunity for tube drivers to earn more money by doing more hours, voluntarily?' and see how many tube drivers voluntarily sign up. and then see if the service would be feasible based on how many drivers / staff agree to do it? And they could make the terms more generous, to encourage more drivers / staff to sign up. To outwit the union! Those who don't want , won't earn extra money, and those who did would earn it. Then design the service based on the staff available. If they had done it like this, any extra money could have been spent on enhancing bus services to the un-tubed routes. Bottom up, rather then top down, as it were. |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jan 10, 2016 20:34:02 GMT
I saw that too. Scrap the whole thing! Why can't TfL phrase it 'this is an opportunity for tube drivers to earn more money by doing more hours, voluntarily?' and see how many tube drivers voluntarily sign up. and then see if the service would be feasible based on how many drivers / staff agree to do it? And they could make the terms more generous, to encourage more drivers / staff to sign up. To outwit the union! Those who don't want , won't earn extra money, and those who did would earn it. Then design the service based on the staff available. If they had done it like this, any extra money could have been spent on enhancing bus services to the un-tubed routes. Bottom up, rather then top down, as it were. "We're in charge so do it our way.!  |
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jan 10, 2016 23:17:06 GMT
The only problem with that, is when train ops stop volunteering. London Midland had (have?) this problem with their Sunday service, the drivers stopped volunteering and the service rapidly became a shambles.
|
|
|
|
Post by trt on Jan 11, 2016 1:05:44 GMT
I wonder where the money for this is coming from? It won't be from revenue earned during night hours, that"s for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jan 11, 2016 15:55:10 GMT
The only problem with that, is when train ops stop volunteering. London Midland had (have?) this problem with their Sunday service, the drivers stopped volunteering and the service rapidly became a shambles. Perhaps it could be done as o/t initially and then when they judge demand recruit the staff. Although I believe that LU are prohibited from paying drivers o/t? I'm concerned about the impact on early morning services on weekends - arguably more important than getting drunks home - New Years Day this year had 15/20 minute gaps in the service, yet still somebody was describing this as a "good service". I wonder where the money for this is coming from? It won't be from revenue earned during night hours, that"s for sure. Especially since many of the persons travelling will have already capped their Oyster or be using travelcards! |
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jan 11, 2016 16:02:07 GMT
I still can't get my thoughts away from the notion this is one person's idea and the suits have now created an emperor's new clothes situation for that person.
And nobody has ever provided a remotely convincing argument about who needs this service and who is therefore, presumably, demanding it?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jan 11, 2016 19:40:09 GMT
I still can't get my thoughts away from the notion this is one person's idea and the suits have now created an emperor's new clothes situation for that person. And nobody has ever provided a remotely convincing argument about who needs this service and who is therefore, presumably, demanding it? It has all the hallmarks of a concept someone picked off a proverbial shelf thinking it would be their glory project. In reality, as well as not being delivered, it's caused big disruption in the form of several days of strikes, and wasted money in the form of enabling works carried out to stations (for example new gates and signage), changes to access processes, signalling software etc. Not to mention extra station staff recruited. The whole thing doesn't really reflect well on LU, certainly not world class. |
|
|
|
Post by patrickb on Jan 11, 2016 19:53:19 GMT
It's a vanity project like with all other vanity projects from Bonkers Boris. If LU won't listen to Unions, then it won't happen. Outsourcing Drivers externally won't be easy, NOR CHEAP!
If people in LU HQ want a Night Tube, they can go down and run it themselves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 14:49:47 GMT
Hi all,

I am a Human Geography Student at the University of Durham, currently conducting research for my dissertation into the different perceptions, views and opinions of the Night Tube from a variety of different stake holders, and into how these stake holders interact. I have introduced myself in the members forum, but hopefully this is the correct thread to pursue this discussion. I would be really interested in talking to any LU employees about their opinions of the night tube, and how the process of discussing its feasibility has taken place. If anyone would be interested in sharing their opinions with me I would be very grateful, please send me a personal message!
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 19, 2016 18:03:43 GMT
My views: whilst the idea sounds wonderful I think that it will be divisive, splitting London into areas which are served and benefit and areas which are left behind / not served.
Its going to affect the viability of night buses.
People who see their regular night buses being withdrawn will (in many cases) find themselves being financially out of pocket if they then have to travel by trains. This is because for many journeys the fares are so much higher for identical journeys by train than by bus, and if the person lives a distance from the station they may still need to pay a bus fare as well. (unlike many major cities single journey fares here in London do not include free transfer between buses and trains).
The night tube might be good for businesses in Central London, I do not know. I wonder how much of the promotional info is real and how much is hype.
Even if only at weekends, 24/7 operation certainly has the potential to change how the infrastructure is maintained (tracks etc). Maybe we will reach a stage whereby there will be more line closures at other times in order to carry out regular maintenance.
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by trt on Jan 20, 2016 11:15:12 GMT
My views: whilst the idea sounds wonderful I think that it will be divisive, splitting London into areas which are served and benefit and areas which are left behind / not served. Its going to affect the viability of night buses. People who see their regular night buses being withdrawn will (in many cases) find themselves being financially out of pocket if they then have to travel by trains. This is because for many journeys the fares are so much higher for identical journeys by train than by bus, and if the person lives a distance from the station they may still need to pay a bus fare as well. (unlike many major cities single journey fares here in London do not include free transfer between buses and trains). The night tube might be good for businesses in Central London, I do not know. I wonder how much of the promotional info is real and how much is hype. Even if only at weekends, 24/7 operation certainly has the potential to change how the infrastructure is maintained (tracks etc). Maybe we will reach a stage whereby there will be more line closures at other times in order to carry out regular maintenance. Simon I can't see it paying for itself. The economic benefits quoted (though I expect they've been massaged) show a net financial gain over the cost, but the cost is borne by TfL and the gain is made by not TfL. Will businesses that operate during night tube hours contribute to the costs through a higher tax payment? Well, yes through increased turnover, but the taxation from income is paid to central government which is cutting the grants. 40% of TfL income comes from fares. So we have the situation where night bus fare income will decrease, more expensive tube fare income will increase, but presuming that they move from a 4am to 4am model for calculating daily caps to a 24 hour long model, how many fares will be capped anyway, so it makes no odds if they make the return (or outward!) journey (the zero cost to passenger part as they've reached a cap) on night tube or standard tube. We might see a shift from taxi to tube as well, but that's just going to cause hardship in the black cabs and mini cabs (and Uber?) sector. 23% of TfL income is from granting, mainly if not wholly Business Rate Retention, which is a fixed annual amount based on the rateable value of the property not turnover, thus if this portion is to increase, businesses that don't generate revenue by being open during night tube hours, which is the vast majority, will face the prospect of rate increases without benefit. 20% is from borrowing - so there's no change there unless it increases by, perhaps, selling bonds in night tube which I can't see anyone buying. 9% from advertising, rent and CC. Will advertisers pay more for an extra 12 hours of exposure at the weekends? Doubt it. 8% from Crossrail funding which is earmarked and thus irrelevant to night tube, unless Crossrail / Crossrail 2 is going to run 24 hours. So, all-in-all, I can't see where the money's coming from for the running costs. They've already spent God knows how much on extra gates and signage - that's a capital outlay... and then there will be training the part-timers / extras which is partly capital, partly ongoing HR cost. Presumably there will be a downshift in maintenance crews during night tube, though obviously the off-peak spare sets will be rotated through maintenance as happens during the daytime off-peak at present. And then there's all the stuff on the generation side and the signalling side and line controllers, security, cleaners etc. No, the sums don't add up in my mind unless a lot more businesses shift to 24 hour operation and that will be their own cost/benefit decision, not one forced on them by the Mare of London. Compete or die. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 20, 2016 12:35:43 GMT
My views: whilst the idea sounds wonderful I think that it will be divisive, splitting London into areas which are served and benefit and areas which are left behind / not served. Its going to affect the viability of night buses. People who see their regular night buses being withdrawn will (in many cases) find themselves being financially out of pocket if they then have to travel by trains. This is because for many journeys the fares are so much higher for identical journeys by train than by bus, and if the person lives a distance from the station they may still need to pay a bus fare as well. (unlike many major cities single journey fares here in London do not include free transfer between buses and trains). The night tube might be good for businesses in Central London, I do not know. I wonder how much of the promotional info is real and how much is hype. Even if only at weekends, 24/7 operation certainly has the potential to change how the infrastructure is maintained (tracks etc). Maybe we will reach a stage whereby there will be more line closures at other times in order to carry out regular maintenance. Simon While I am not terribly fussed about the Night Tube and don't care if it doesn't happen I think any debate needs to have the facts right. Let's be completely clear - no night bus routes are slated for complete withdrawal. One or two have harsh reductions on weekends - certainly one paralleling the Northern Line does. However most do not and lose 1 bus per hour at most. That's negligible really. The other aspect is that TfL have *added* two new nightly routes - 222 and 238 and already several weekend only night routes have been added in South London. More are slated for introduction when / if the Night Tube starts. I am deeply sceptical that TfL would withdraw any of the major trunk night bus routes entirely because there is still a demand for night time travel Su-Thurs nights. It is worth saying that the night bus network is really the only part of London's bus service that has seen any continued expansion under Boris's tenure and that's because demand levels were such that people were being left behind (and still are in some places - e.g. the N35 south of Old St / Shoreditch). TfL have consulted on improving that route and the Night Tube has little bearing on it as the City branch won't be served. By all means express some concern but let's not overreach ourselves with statements that are not correct. With the introduction of weekend night services on routes like the 114, 34, 296, H37 more places are linked together and people will gain additional travel options. Hopefully some of these routes will prove popular enough to grow into nightly services. On the maintenance point I'm not sure I agree. I understand the theoretical point but I can't see LU being so pig headed as to breach its own engineering and safety processes and to not maintain and inspect tracks / signals / tunnels etc properly. The one line selected for the Night Tube where I have some concerns is the Piccadilly simply because it has not been upgraded and we know the assets are under stress. Clearly, though, it serves a lot of the West End plus Heathrow which is why it's been selected for this first phase but I think it's the one most likely to manifest problems. Victoria, Jubilee and Northern much less so because they are post upgrade barring works to increase to 36 tph plus the Battersea extension. I expect the main issue on the Central will be whether the extra mileage places too much stress on the rolling stock fleet. |
|
|
|
Post by trt on Jan 20, 2016 13:15:57 GMT
The one line selected for the Night Tube where I have some concerns is the Piccadilly simply because it has not been upgraded and we know the assets are under stress. Clearly, though, it serves a lot of the West End plus Heathrow which is why it's been selected for this first phase but I think it's the one most likely to manifest problems. Victoria, Jubilee and Northern much less so because they are post upgrade barring works to increase to 36 tph plus the Battersea extension. I expect the main issue on the Central will be whether the extra mileage places too much stress on the rolling stock fleet. To quote the greatest engineer in the universe... "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain." |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jan 20, 2016 13:34:55 GMT
My views: whilst the idea sounds wonderful I think that it will be divisive, splitting London into areas which are served and benefit and areas which are left behind / not served. Its going to affect the viability of night buses. People who see their regular night buses being withdrawn will (in many cases) find themselves being financially out of pocket if they then have to travel by trains. This is because for many journeys the fares are so much higher for identical journeys by train than by bus, and if the person lives a distance from the station they may still need to pay a bus fare as well. (unlike many major cities single journey fares here in London do not include free transfer between buses and trains). The night tube might be good for businesses in Central London, I do not know. I wonder how much of the promotional info is real and how much is hype. Even if only at weekends, 24/7 operation certainly has the potential to change how the infrastructure is maintained (tracks etc). Maybe we will reach a stage whereby there will be more line closures at other times in order to carry out regular maintenance. Simon While I am not terribly fussed about the Night Tube and don't care if it doesn't happen I think any debate needs to have the facts right. Let's be completely clear - no night bus routes are slated for complete withdrawal. One or two have harsh reductions on weekends - certainly one paralleling the Northern Line does. However most do not and lose 1 bus per hour at most. That's negligible really. The other aspect is that TfL have *added* two new nightly routes - 222 and 238 and already several weekend only night routes have been added in South London. More are slated for introduction when / if the Night Tube starts. I am deeply sceptical that TfL would withdraw any of the major trunk night bus routes entirely because there is still a demand for night time travel Su-Thurs nights. It is worth saying that the night bus network is really the only part of London's bus service that has seen any continued expansion under Boris's tenure and that's because demand levels were such that people were being left behind (and still are in some places - e.g. the N35 south of Old St / Shoreditch). TfL have consulted on improving that route and the Night Tube has little bearing on it as the City branch won't be served. By all means express some concern but let's not overreach ourselves with statements that are not correct. With the introduction of weekend night services on routes like the 114, 34, 296, H37 more places are linked together and people will gain additional travel options. Hopefully some of these routes will prove popular enough to grow into nightly services. On the maintenance point I'm not sure I agree. I understand the theoretical point but I can't see LU being so pig headed as to breach its own engineering and safety processes and to not maintain and inspect tracks / signals / tunnels etc properly. The one line selected for the Night Tube where I have some concerns is the Piccadilly simply because it has not been upgraded and we know the assets are under stress. Clearly, though, it serves a lot of the West End plus Heathrow which is why it's been selected for this first phase but I think it's the one most likely to manifest problems. Victoria, Jubilee and Northern much less so because they are post upgrade barring works to increase to 36 tph plus the Battersea extension. I expect the main issue on the Central will be whether the extra mileage places too much stress on the rolling stock fleet. Personally I don't think planned maintenance will suffer, as it's simply a case of moving it to the other five nights, and in any case comparatively little work tended to happen on Friday and Saturday nights. There will certainly be an issue if unplanned work is required, for example to repair an asset which has given problems during the traffic day. Weekend daytime passengers will definitely notice this I think. Monday morning could get affected if too much work ends up being left to Sunday nights. The biggest issue will always be passenger behaviour, and whether the Night Tube is really necessary and/or a good use of funds and resources. My personal view is a resounding No to that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 18:26:29 GMT
Most of the maintenance staff are currently rostered to work Monday to Friday not the weekends.
A lot of the bigger work which can't be completed during the week is usually done on a Saturday night due to the later start on a Sunday we usually get 1 sometimes 2 hours extra engineering hours and believe me it does help. For a example Acton Town Traction is usually off at 01:45 and we must be off the track by 04:10 (Mon - Fri) but with walking to the actual site of work then doing the actual work then clearing everything away and testing we would be lucky to get 1hr 40mins of any real work and it does go quickly.
If a asset needs replacing a quick fix is usually applied until the next available engineering hours takes place if it so urgent that this can't happen then a normal service suspension will take place like it does now.
|
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Jan 21, 2016 12:02:25 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 18:12:02 GMT
Only the RMT left apparently, ASLEF now suspended strike action according to the ITV London News.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jan 23, 2016 10:26:26 GMT
A lot of the bigger work which can't be completed during the week is usually done on a Saturday night due to the later start on a Sunday we usually get 1 sometimes 2 hours extra engineering hours and believe me it does help. For a example Acton Town Traction is usually off at 01:45 and we must be off the track by 04:10 (Mon - Fri) but with walking to the actual site of work then doing the actual work then clearing everything away and testing we would be lucky to get 1hr 40mins of any real work and it does go quickly. If a asset needs replacing a quick fix is usually applied until the next available engineering hours takes place if it so urgent that this can't happen then a normal service suspension will take place like it does now. This could become problematic if this window on a Saturday night is removed, surely... will we end up with more suspensions on Sunday morning whilst an emergency repair happens? It is especially galling when services are suspended at weekend when alternative routes are often already suspended for engineering. |
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Jan 23, 2016 10:43:39 GMT
Only the RMT left apparently, ASLEF now suspended strike action according to the ITV London News. RMT reps are meeting on Monday to talk about the New Offer on Pay and the Night tube from London Underground. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2016 15:55:47 GMT
RMT has now suspended tomorrow's industrial action
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 25, 2016 16:47:32 GMT
On a related matter TfL have today launched some new consultations about adding or changing stopping spaces near Seven Sisters, Colliers Wood and Clapham South. The stated purpose for each change is to provide a rank for night time taxis to use. The creation of new taxi ranks was a key demand of the London Assembly when they looked into the Night Tube plans. I believe TfL said they would add new ranks for suburban taxi connections. The timing is quite interesting - must mean TfL are hopeful of a go ahead date soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by sawb on Jan 25, 2016 17:07:22 GMT
Is it just tomorrow's action, or the two dates in February as well that are off? As usual, the media are creating confusion!
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 25, 2016 17:56:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by theblackferret on Jan 27, 2016 10:12:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by patrickb on Jan 27, 2016 16:39:40 GMT
We are indeed at the precipice of having a Night Tube, but it seems that the doors are slowly closing ahead of it. I imagine that with these kind of findings, the next mayor may suspend the introduction if he or she chooses to make an inquiry to look into various challenges ie: safety and maintenance. |
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Feb 3, 2016 13:04:27 GMT
|
|
