|
|
Post by jukes on Jan 31, 2018 21:17:38 GMT
Have you never written the wrong year on anything in the first few weeks of the year? I wrote 2017 on a form only this morning. Indeed I have, as have everyone, however it's not the original typing mistake that I'm flagging.... it's the lack of proof reading / checking ! Proof reading and fact checking is an issue. I recently picked up a glossy leaflet at a certain TfL station. In it is listed hospitals along the route. The list contains severals errors of relevance to the service it advertises BUT the most glaring of all is it lists a hospital that closed in 1980! |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 31, 2018 22:22:36 GMT
Indeed I have, as have everyone, however it's not the original typing mistake that I'm flagging.... it's the lack of proof reading / checking ! Regrettably this has been the case with many TfL documents for several years including Board Papers and the Commissioner's Report where you would expect the very highest standards of checking and presentation. A sad decline from the days when I had to write Board Papers and was dragged over the coals at 1800 on a Friday for having too many leading spaces at the start of a sentence! And yes the checking against the template was that strict back then. |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Feb 1, 2018 3:32:51 GMT
I have some board papers and reports from the 1940s - there really is no comparison. But then again, the whole set up was far more formal. Education and presentation were serious businesses, and poor copy was considered ignorant and embarrassing. Not to mention the lack of automated ways to write, edit, dictate, and disseminate meant people were physically in contact with it every step of the way.
Is this sort of admin put on temps and apprentices now? Genuine question, nothing snarky.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Feb 1, 2018 10:55:38 GMT
I really hate the attitude that some people have towards standards of English and presentation. Sadly it’s a reflection of the general dumbing down of standards and respect in general. I agree that poor standards shows a lack of respect. Anyway, we digress . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 1, 2018 11:20:29 GMT
I have some board papers and reports from the 1940s - there really is no comparison. But then again, the whole set up was far more formal. Education and presentation were serious businesses, and poor copy was considered ignorant and embarrassing. Not to mention the lack of automated ways to write, edit, dictate, and disseminate meant people were physically in contact with it every step of the way. Is this sort of admin put on temps and apprentices now? Genuine question, nothing snarky. Admin staff? What are they? I never had any permanent admin staff to do stuff for me. There was a wider team but they all had defined roles and tasks. I was once provided with a temp admin person - the problem was she thought she was in charge of the department. She didn't last. I always had to do my own typing, filing, E Mailing etc. You can argue how sensible that was but I mananged perfectly well as did other colleagues in the same situation. I doubt apprentices would get actively involved in Board Paper drafting. Last time I saw the process it was tremendously convoluted now with so many "check points" and multi departmental checks it's a wonder anything gets done. It also makes the errors even more startling given how many sets of eyes are supposed to be cast over a paper and the arguments being put forward. The big difference between 1940 and now is that there would have been a typing pool back then so a hand written draft would be typed by a trained person. It would then be read and checked and corrected by the author. A revised version would be produced and then checked again. You can argue how efficient that was! The typing pool was still extant in the mid 80s when I joined LU full time but it was frustrating to use. I was responsible for the department getting its first PC - no such thing as one per desk then. We had to queue to use it! Anyway dangerously off topic now so I'll stop before the "Moderator tunnelling machine" appears and transitions this post away.  |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 9, 2018 21:46:31 GMT
Confirmation of the planned contingency plan for TfL Rail / Crossrail western (Heathrow) services from May this year. (via London Reconnections comments) Track access application to NRLot of detail on that link including service levels and the fall back arrangements for different types of rolling stock. Also confirms some of the technical / project issues that are hindering the planned service. Confirms what has been posted already here and elsewhere but interesting to see it all in print. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 8, 2018 23:46:15 GMT
Yep after weeks of zero activity and no meetings due to Easter and election purdah activity has now resumed at TfL towers. For next week's Programmes and Investment Cttee we have a new Crossrail update paper. Nothing hugely shocking as the juicy info is in the "private" section of the paper but reading between the lines I'll be astonished if services start in December. There does appear to be some progress with train testing between Abbey Wood and Stepney Green. The western stations rebuild is still out to tender - can't see how those works will be complete by Dec 2019 given it takes months to mobilise and get on site which means late Summer even if the contracts were awarded tomorrow. The scale of work at some locations will be considerable too. content.tfl.gov.uk/pic-20180516-item11-crossrail.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on May 9, 2018 9:01:44 GMT
Yep after weeks of zero activity and no meetings due to Easter and election purdah activity has now resumed at TfL towers. For next week's Programmes and Investment Cttee we have a new Crossrail update paper. Nothing hugely shocking as the juicy info is in the "private" section of the paper but reading between the lines I'll be astonished if services start in December. There does appear to be some progress with train testing between Abbey Wood and Stepney Green. The western stations rebuild is still out to tender - can't see how those works will be complete by Dec 2019 given it takes months to mobilise and get on site which means late Summer even if the contracts were awarded tomorrow. The scale of work at some locations will be considerable too. content.tfl.gov.uk/pic-20180516-item11-crossrail.pdfA bold statement because if services don’t start in December it will be terrible publicity for TFL. And we all know how much they hate that! |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 9, 2018 18:55:25 GMT
A bold statement because if services don’t start in December it will be terrible publicity for TFL. And we all know how much they hate that! Oh sure. It is a bold statement but we are barely six months away from public opening never mind any prior publicity or "open house" events. I'd expect all the surface buildings in Zone 1 to be structurally finished with evidence of finishes being applied and services installed. Moorgate didn't look remotely ready when I went past a week ago. Hanover Square is also late. I am sure that "down below" many places are in half decent shape but that's pointless if the surface access point isn't ready. The operators should have been getting their hands on stations around now but I've seen nothing to suggest that they are. Train service testing is months late. The transition paper says signalling and comms systems are still being installed - really??? I accept I am reading between the lines and I typically take a more pessimistic view of things but the amount of "real" information about Crossrail has diminished noticeably in recent months and there is a distinct absence of the "soothing noises" we've had for years about the project gracefully gliding to completion spot on time and under budget! I suspect some sort of "fudge" is likely. Yes there will be some level of train service come 9 December and people will be able to access the stations but perhaps not via every planned entrance initially. I remain extremely sceptical about Whitechapel's prospects of opening in December. I am sure there will be bunting and cheering and grinning politicians come December but it remains to be seen what the actual service is for fare paying passengers. I should just say that I sincerely hope I am wrong and that everything is ready on time. |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on May 9, 2018 19:19:21 GMT
A bold statement because if services don’t start in December it will be terrible publicity for TFL. And we all know how much they hate that! Oh sure. It is a bold statement but we are barely six months away from public opening never mind any prior publicity or "open house" events. I'd expect all the surface buildings in Zone 1 to be structurally finished with evidence of finishes being applied and services installed. Moorgate didn't look remotely ready when I went past a week ago. Hanover Square is also late. I am sure that "down below" many places are in half decent shape but that's pointless if the surface access point isn't ready. The operators should have been getting their hands on stations around now but I've seen nothing to suggest that they are. Train service testing is months late. The transition paper says signalling and comms systems are still being installed - really??? I accept I am reading between the lines and I typically take a more pessimistic view of things but the amount of "real" information about Crossrail has diminished noticeably in recent months and there is a distinct absence of the "soothing noises" we've had for years about the project gracefully gliding to completion spot on time and under budget! I suspect some sort of "fudge" is likely. Yes there will be some level of train service come 9 December and people will be able to access the stations but perhaps not via every planned entrance initially. I remain extremely sceptical about Whitechapel's prospects of opening in December. I am sure there will be bunting and cheering and grinning politicians come December but it remains to be seen what the actual service is for fare paying passengers. I should just say that I sincerely hope I am wrong and that everything is ready on time. I realise that we're in the clutches of the internet and the extended impatience of the viewing public who need to know the inside of a gnat's inner leg measurement as a result, but I've never understood the need to publicize opening dates in this way and make a rod for the company's own back. A service that's never existed before being put under this sort of pressure to open seems daft to me. Surely, what we've never had we can't complain about not having, as we've not as yet been inconvenienced. If it had never been built we'd all still be carrying on as usual. We had this on here with the (later) introduction of S Stock despite the fact that the existing trains provided the service they'd always done regardless. I can understand TfL getting irritated by overruns but that sort of thing is between their bean counters and the contractors, not us. In the meantime, everyone can continue to use the existing infrastructure provided and if they have to wait a few weeks or months more for the shiny stuff........oh well......  |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 9, 2018 21:11:54 GMT
I realise that we're in the clutches of the internet and the extended impatience of the viewing public who need to know the inside of a gnat's inner leg measurement as a result, but I've never understood the need to publicize opening dates in this way and make a rod for the company's own back. A service that's never existed before being put under this sort of pressure to open seems daft to me. Surely, what we've never had we can't complain about not having, as we've not as yet been inconvenienced. If it had never been built we'd all still be carrying on as usual. We had this on here with the (later) introduction of S Stock despite the fact that the existing trains provided the service they'd always done regardless. I can understand TfL getting irritated by overruns but that sort of thing is between their bean counters and the contractors, not us. In the meantime, everyone can continue to use the existing infrastructure provided and if they have to wait a few weeks or months more for the shiny stuff........oh well...... You are, of course, correct that with a brand new facility no one has missed anything if it is late. TfL do have an escape route this time in that the core service is pretty much self contained in terms of public service. The only real impact on the rest of the railway network will be ECS runs from the depots and if those train paths are not immediately utilised then no one loses out. Therefore if the core opens late it's no great loss to passengers. The politicians and senior people in NR, TfL, Crossrail, MTR Crossrail would be massively embarrassed though. This is why, if things really are late, that a fudge will be concocted to demonstrate that "targets have been met".  However this is such a huge project with an enormous public and political profile it was inevitable that deadlines would have to be declared. I am sure TfL would prefer to play their usual "give a season or a month or add in 5 weeks float" game for Crossrail's completion date but that chance went a long time ago. The next two phases in 2019 can't be moved because of the huge service impacts on existing lines - they have to happen or else people really will be inconvenienced. I'd argue the westwards extension is by far the most difficult and riskiest in terms of service reliability, signalling technology and the very delayed station rebuilding works. There is, at least, 19 months till that happens but it'll be here before we know it. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 9, 2018 21:57:10 GMT
You are, of course, correct that with a brand new facility no one has missed anything if it is late. How do you make that out? Every month that you delay a capital project costs a month's revenue, that you will never recover. If the new line brings benefits (and I assume it will) then that benefit will be lost to anyone who could have made use of it in the interval between the planned launch and the actual launch. For example, anyone who was hoping to benefit from Thameslink 2000 to improve their daily commute but retired some time in the last 18 years. At his retirement party several years ago, a colleague recounted how he had been persuaded, when he first took the job twenty years before, that Ealing was the place to move to because Crossrail would make his commute so easy. Unfortunately the project did not start in 1994 as planned. He definetely missed out. . |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 10, 2018 13:57:04 GMT
You are, of course, correct that with a brand new facility no one has missed anything if it is late. How do you make that out? Every month that you delay a capital project costs a month's revenue, that you will never recover. If the new line brings benefits (and I assume it will) then that benefit will be lost to anyone who could have made use of it in the interval between the planned launch and the actual launch. Go back and look at what Whistlekiller wrote and the context of his "won't be missed" remark. Then go and criticise what he said. No one mentioned revenue or benefits. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 10, 2018 15:12:01 GMT
Go back and look at what Whistlekiller wrote and the context of his "won't be missed" remark. . What whistlekiller said was "Surely, what we've never had we can't complain about not having, as we've not as yet been inconvenienced." There is a difference beytween something we were no expecting to have and something we were expecting that is going to be late (or not at all) What is being discussed is something that has been long-expected. In his example of late delivery of S stock, people certainly did complain that, as a result, they were sweltering in the summer sun in non-airconditioned stock for one more summer. People may even have made plans in anticipation of it coming to pass (e.g taking a job, or moving house, for which the commute depends on the new service). There are also situations where a service may actually be worse in the short term, for example if new rolling stock is late delivered but the trains it is to replace cannot be kept going any longer (or is already spoken for elsewhere: see the Scotrail's problems with Class 385s, and the gaps in the Thameslink timetable coming in later this month). (There may even be people who have already moved house or taken a job in anticipation of the Watford extension.............) |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on May 10, 2018 19:11:23 GMT
Just to explain what I meant, if no deadline dates had been given out in the first place we wouldn't be having all the moaning and nobody in their right mind would have jumped the gun and made a life changing decision based on second guessing. The S Stock thing on here got my goat because there was no actual dereliction of service and the hot temperatures had been part and parcel of the experience for years - and still are and continue to be on most of the lines. I'd much rather the new services are properly tested and as foolproof as possible before they start and if that means a bit of a delay, then once again, I won't be that concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 10, 2018 20:35:15 GMT
Don't get me wrong - I personally wouldn't trust anything to turn up on time on the railways until it has actually happened, whether its the opening of a new line, rollout of new rolling stock, or the 0848 to Cannon Street - but people do (Recent example of people turning up at Kenilworth station several weeks before it finally opened).
|
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on May 10, 2018 21:21:24 GMT
And most importantly (and unfortunately) politicians, especially when it is a huge infrastructure promise that has has vast sums spent on it by Local and National government and has been many years in the making. The fact that it has been as many years in the making as it has been should have probably made them give a little more leeway, but then again they aren't happy unless they are gurning in front of a camera! Of course they'll have had dates estimated to them during the necessary acts of parliament, and from there they are hardly going to give them up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 16:26:57 GMT
A bold statement because if services don’t start in December it will be terrible publicity for TFL. And we all know how much they hate that! Oh sure. It is a bold statement but we are barely six months away from public opening never mind any prior publicity or "open house" events. I'd expect all the surface buildings in Zone 1 to be structurally finished with evidence of finishes being applied and services installed. Moorgate didn't look remotely ready when I went past a week ago. Hanover Square is also late. I am sure that "down below" many places are in half decent shape but that's pointless if the surface access point isn't ready. The operators should have been getting their hands on stations around now but I've seen nothing to suggest that they are. Train service testing is months late. The transition paper says signalling and comms systems are still being installed - really??? I accept I am reading between the lines and I typically take a more pessimistic view of things but the amount of "real" information about Crossrail has diminished noticeably in recent months and there is a distinct absence of the "soothing noises" we've had for years about the project gracefully gliding to completion spot on time and under budget! I suspect some sort of "fudge" is likely. Yes there will be some level of train service come 9 December and people will be able to access the stations but perhaps not via every planned entrance initially. I remain extremely sceptical about Whitechapel's prospects of opening in December. I am sure there will be bunting and cheering and grinning politicians come December but it remains to be seen what the actual service is for fare paying passengers. I should just say that I sincerely hope I am wrong and that everything is ready on time. Very perceptive as always, Snoggle. To add to this there's an article in The Times and City AM today about a potential Crossrail cash shortfall. I've added the City AM link here because The Times will be behind a paywall. Here's a short section from The Times with the key info (I hope this is allowed): Transport secretary Chris Grayling is due to update MPs on the line’s progress next month, when he is expected to admit that the budget will need to increase. The Department for Transport said: “We continue to closely monitor costs and there will be an update on the financial position in June.” (Source Sunday Times 13/05/18) |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 14, 2018 13:26:30 GMT
Very perceptive as always, Snoggle. To add to this there's an article in The Times and City AM today about a potential Crossrail cash shortfall. I've added the City AM link here because The Times will be behind a paywall. Here's a short section from The Times with the key info (I hope this is allowed): Transport secretary Chris Grayling is due to update MPs on the line’s progress next month, when he is expected to admit that the budget will need to increase. The Department for Transport said: “We continue to closely monitor costs and there will be an update on the financial position in June.” (Source Sunday Times 13/05/18)Thank you. Moving on to the substance. As I've said elsewhere I'm a tiny bit sceptical about the Times article (which I have read). Firstly yes there are issues with Crossrail as it approaches its project end. However on what we know I can't see how signalling issues in the Heathrow tunnel and with the exploding kit at Pudding Mill Lane (PML) can account for £500m overspend. Clearly the PML electrical issues have impacted the project programme and testing so there are consequential impacts here. However wrongly designed / manufactured / installed (whichever it is) electrical kit should not be a drain on the public purse. I'd expect Crossrail to have lodged a "dispute" against the party(ies) that failed. The consequential element is harder to value / deal with but no one has yet said the completion date is imperiled by the delayed start to testing in the tunnels. I'd expect client and contractor to work through the issues and achieve a commercial settlement or else institute legal proceedings - nothing unusual in this on a big multi disciplinary contract. Similarly the Heathrow tunnel signalling issues can't possibly rack up into the hundreds of millions. There's no doubt extra costs are being incurred for more testing, equipment adjustments, software changes etc plus there will be some element of lost revenue for TfL by not running 4 tph into Heathrow. I just think the Times have picked on the two issues that are in the public domain to create a "headline" alongside whatever has been leaked by people in the DfT. One has to wonder quite what the motives are of those doing the leaking. As I said above I think stations and systems fit out are possibly a bigger drain on funding as there are known problems. The big unknown is the signalling in the core tunnels but the recent transition paper was relatively upbeat about progress there so let's assume CBTC signalling is not a big issue. The wider issue is what this £500m actually is. Is it a genuine "blow the budget completely by £500m" issue or is it "risks have materialised for which there is contingency funding already budgeted"? It is a matter of record that Crossrail has a pretty significant amount of contingency in the budget and that's precisely because risks and issues arise on such a large and complex project. We don't know how much contingency has been used to date but I doubt all of it has been. Therefore the next question is whether the emerging extra costs exceed the available contingency or not. The Telegraph has apparently said that the available contingency will be exceeded but that sounds like another convenient leak from the DfT to media that is not exactly pro rail and which is friendly to Mr Grayling's politics. That Telegraph article also mentions the Bakerloo link tunnel at Paddington as a source of cost increase. That's nonsense because the tunnel is a separately funded item IIRC and not part of Crossrail's budget. I have not yet seen anything that indicates that work is behind schedule or has encountered any problems. Sorry to drag the "P" word into this but I do find some of this a tad suspect and it looks like a thinly veiled attempt to make the DfT look good and to put City Hall / TfL a bit on the back foot. The financial consequences could be very difficult indeed if the DfT / Treasury say "sorry no money from us" given TfL are not flush with cash and have little borrowing flexibility. Being machevellian this looks like a further little piece of a wider game plan to make Khan's stewardship of TfL more difficult and to undermine policies like the fares freeze. |
|
