|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 25, 2022 12:38:15 GMT
Explain why I am a hypocrite to believe Shapps. Because Shapps is more of a liar than Khan is
|
|
|
Post by rugbyref on Jun 25, 2022 15:39:29 GMT
Explain why I am a hypocrite to believe Shapps. Because Shapps is more of a liar than Khan is Do you offer proof that he does? And in any event that would not make me a hypocrite (go and check a dictionary definition, if you own a dictionary!)
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 25, 2022 15:45:11 GMT
Because Shapps is more of a liar than Khan is Do you offer proof that he does? And in any event that would not make me a hypocrite (go and check a dictionary definition, if you own a dictionary!) Do you have proof that Khan is lying?
|
|
|
Post by rugbyref on Jun 25, 2022 15:47:50 GMT
Whether I have or not, I repeat my question. How does my believing Shapps make me a hypocrite?
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Jun 25, 2022 16:47:58 GMT
Do you offer proof that he does? And in any event that would not make me a hypocrite (go and check a dictionary definition, if you own a dictionary!) Do you have proof that Khan is lying? They are both telling a version of a story they believe to be true. It is impossible to say if either one is telling the truth. However from a purely subjective point of view what reason would Shapps have to lie? It gains him nothing, other than a one up over a mayor who nobody will remember favourably in a decade.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 25, 2022 17:06:46 GMT
Whether I have or not, I repeat my question. How does my believing Shapps make me a hypocrite? Seeing as it's me who made the original point in which you could of simply quoted my post, I explicitly said, "it's laughable and hypocritical of people" because it was a general point. I did not outright say rugbyref is a hypocrite and if I ever wanted to in which I didn't, I'd of explicitly quoted your original post and said it. I believe your view is hypocritical - whether you are or not as a person, I've no idea and I'm not going to guess either way. Next time if your unsure, just ask.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jun 25, 2022 17:23:22 GMT
Do you offer proof that he does? And in any event that would not make me a hypocrite (go and check a dictionary definition, if you own a dictionary!) Do you have proof that Khan is lying? I don’t think Shapps lies, but like all politicians is rather selective on what he says Khan promises loads, but then doesn’t deliver or renages on what he has said If you are charitable it is misleading, most people would call it lying
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jun 25, 2022 23:27:12 GMT
Meanwhile, Sian Berry has posted on her Twitter account a table that shows the proposed peak frequencies. It rather seems the London Assembly had to drag this out of TfL. I thought it was notable that a small decrease is planned on the 35.
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Jun 26, 2022 0:25:44 GMT
Going to quickly jot it down to save members the trip to twitter!
Buses per hour:
3, 6, 13, 15, 17, 23, 26, 27, 43, 47, 49, 53, 56, 59, 77, 88, 91, 98, 100, 113, 133, 139, 148, 171, 189, 211, 236, 254, 277, 279, 283, 319, 328, 345, 388, 430, 476, C10= unchanged
Increases: 19 (6 > 7) 22 (6 > 7.5) 259 (6 > 7.5) 272 (4 > 5) 414 (7.5 > 8) C1 (4 > 5)
Decreases: 35 (8 > 7.5) 135 (6 > 5) 205 (6.7 > 6) 214 (8 > 6) 507 (7.5 > 6) D3 (5 > 4)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 26, 2022 2:22:31 GMT
I thought it was notable that a small decrease is planned on the 35. I welcome that which might sound weird coming from a pro bus user but the frequency increase it got when the 40 was diverted over the 45's northern section was unnecessary south of Elephant and has left the route with buses constantly bunching, something that was very rare before the increase. In fact, I witnessed 3 35's running together yesterday which is practically unheard of only a few years back
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jun 26, 2022 5:00:22 GMT
It’s interesting reading the response from the government regarding the cuts! They even suggested some of the most used routes are up for cuts and saving won’t be that great. It’s even implied no further cuts are needed to make savings. So it will be interesting if Khan does proceed with the cuts as this will only cause more friction. Playing straight into the governments hands. It isn’t chance that TfL have selected low numbered , iconic routes, three of which pass Downing Street for withdrawal. ( four if you include the 3’s diversion ) If Khan presses ahead, the government will call him out on it, the letter is the opening shot.The labour mayor who cancelled the pensioners bus , poke fun at him about his “son of a bus driver” routine. Khans response shows how pointless their consultation is. Another waste of money right there. I cant help but think buses are caught in the middle. The easiest option to fiddle with, involves no directly employed TfL people. If Khan said we will be opening up the tube lines for tender , or close the Metropolitan line north of Rickmansworth, Piccadilly Line west of Rayners Lane, Central Line north of Loughton, close the Waterloo and City Line, close Bakerloo line north of Stonebridge Park.... what would happen then ? Khan has been rinsing Londoners for years, latest wheeze is a fine if a motorist veers into a cycle lane, anything to get more money into the coffers, yet there is duplication such as on the Bakerloo line and Overground towards Harrow and Wealdstone, Picadilly Line and Metropolitan Line past Rayners Lane... but it's stuff like the Cable Car, the riverbus, the botched handling of Hammersmith Bridge, moving from City Hall to Stratford at great cost under the cover of lockdown... those kind of things all add up. Buses around Croxley and Rickmansworth are as rare as West Ham United's trips to Europe, the 724 may be hourly at best. So the tube reaching out to the area and beyond is some sort of reliable transport. Even though it may be an area of higher car use due to affluence, it's not like the duplicated bus routes, or now routes that don't make sense or are spoiled like the 279's new destination and the 4 disappearing. Khan leaves his minions to run everything whilst he is at high profile football matches or other events, I can’t remember the last time I saw him on the news like Boris or Ken used to be. All politicians are terrible but Khan has been the worst Mayor by far. As for cutting the Central Line, it's not worth it. The issues are with the ever complex bus network. I think services should be reduced when less demand in the daytime once people are at work (have seen lines of empty 73s in Oxford Street) and increased when people need them for rush hour. Return speeds to 30 and cut roadworks and things will pick up...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2022 6:55:58 GMT
Going to quickly jot it down to save members the trip to twitter! Buses per hour: 3, 6, 13, 15, 17, 23, 26, 27, 43, 47, 49, 53, 56, 59, 77, 88, 91, 98, 100, 113, 133, 139, 148, 171, 189, 211, 236, 254, 277, 279, 283, 319, 328, 345, 388, 430, 476, C10= unchanged Increases: 19 (6 > 7) 22 (6 > 7.5) 259 (6 > 7.5) 272 (4 > 5) 414 (7.5 > 8) C1 (4 > 5) Decreases: 35 (8 > 7.5) 135 (6 > 5) 205 (6.7 > 6) 214 (8 > 6) 507 (7.5 > 6) D3 (5 > 4) Well this is even more mad. The 148 can’t cope as it is, and is unreliable because of how busy it gets since it’s own frequency reduction and slow running time. The idea it will reliably run to Dulwich at current frequency is crazy. The only way to do that is to add recovery time so at least buses will leave on time and for RATP controllers or whoever runs it , to be very strict with spacing.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jun 26, 2022 8:00:28 GMT
It’s interesting reading the response from the government regarding the cuts! They even suggested some of the most used routes are up for cuts and saving won’t be that great. It’s even implied no further cuts are needed to make savings. So it will be interesting if Khan does proceed with the cuts as this will only cause more friction. Playing straight into the governments hands. It isn’t chance that TfL have selected low numbered , iconic routes, three of which pass Downing Street for withdrawal. ( four if you include the 3’s diversion ) If Khan presses ahead, the government will call him out on it, the letter is the opening shot.The labour mayor who cancelled the pensioners bus , poke fun at him about his “son of a bus driver” routine. Khans response shows how pointless their consultation is. Another waste of money right there. I cant help but think buses are caught in the middle. The easiest option to fiddle with, involves no directly employed TfL people. If Khan said we will be opening up the tube lines for tender , or close the Metropolitan line north of Rickmansworth, Piccadilly Line west of Rayners Lane, Central Line north of Loughton, close the Waterloo and City Line, close Bakerloo line north of Stonebridge Park.... what would happen then ? There have been selective reductions on the Underground. There are fewer trains to High Barnet now as the revived through services to Mill Hill East take paths that were previously allocated to High Barnet services. The Bakerloo Line has had a frequency reduction throughout, and the Harrow & Wealdstone services is now 4tph, timetabled to interwork with the London Overground service. There could be scope for further frequency reductions, although it is worth noting that off-peak Underground use has recovered far better than peak-time use. Withdrawing whole sections of line won't happen, it's too politically sensitive. London Transport only got away with withdrawing the Bakerloo Line north of Queen's Park in 1982 as there was a British Rail alternative, and the last total closure was Epping-Ongar in 1994 which had become hopelessly uneconomic to operate and which Essex County Council was no longer prepared to support (they preferred to subsidise the replacement bus route instead).
|
|
|
Post by VMH2452 on Jun 26, 2022 9:05:59 GMT
There have been selective reductions on the Underground. There are fewer trains to High Barnet now as the revived through services to Mill Hill East take paths that were previously allocated to High Barnet services. I believe this isn’t a frequency reduction to reduce resources but to reallocate them to allow trains for the Battersea extension without buying new sets. On another note, single deck 214 is going to suffer taking the loads of what used to be two DD routes (probably decreased by now) at the same frequency as one DD route.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Jun 26, 2022 9:36:52 GMT
Going to quickly jot it down to save members the trip to twitter! Buses per hour: 3, 6, 13, 15, 17, 23, 26, 27, 43, 47, 49, 53, 56, 59, 77, 88, 91, 98, 100, 113, 133, 139, 148, 171, 189, 211, 236, 254, 277, 279, 283, 319, 328, 345, 388, 430, 476, C10= unchanged Increases: 19 (6 > 7) 22 (6 > 7.5) 259 (6 > 7.5) 272 (4 > 5) 414 (7.5 > 8) C1 (4 > 5) Decreases: 35 (8 > 7.5) 135 (6 > 5) 205 (6.7 > 6) 214 (8 > 6) 507 (7.5 > 6) D3 (5 > 4) The 205 and C1 already operate at the proposed frequencies
|
|