>What WAS the assessment of what was wrong with the November '96
>timetable....
The long and sort of it was that it managed to annoy a lot more people
off than it managed to benefit, which equates to a political timebomb!
>Today's report says that Hill is to replace the November '96 timetable
>with the February (?) '96 timetable, with the addition of the Y-link
>services. Shades of 1975. Is THIS true? (never throw away your old
>WTT's, I always say).
AFAIK, there weren't many complaints about the Feb' 96 timetable, so
that would seem to be a smart move to buy some breathing space to look
at the real problems (IMO adequate rolling stock numbers and track
capacity).
>Is Brian Langton to blame (Mr Carr obviously thinks so)?
Being rail CEO is basically a political appointment. Whether or not
the CEO is to blame for any problems in public perception really has
nothing to do with it as it's in the government's interest (no matter
which party hold power) to make sure th buck stops with the CEO.
Cheers,
Bill
Bill Bolton billbolton@onaustralia.com.au
Sydney, Australia