Re: derailment and train management

["Jane Campbell" <janecampbell@optusnet.com.au>]

Uhm Brendan, I think that you'll find Bill's comment was said with his
tongue firmly lodged in his cheek.  Isn't that right Bill?


nobody <dweebken@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote in message
386042e1@pink.one.net.au">news:386042e1@pink.one.net.au...
> Yes Bill, I do happen to be a "bloody customer", and like any "bloody
> customer", I would like to travel on a product that is safe, reliable, and
> efficient. Not only that, but im sure most "bloody taxpayers" would prefer
> money spent on more gainful things. If a brand new point at Chatswood
which
> cost god knows what doesnt work, what is the point of having it?
> Yes I am a beancounter, and I am a customer. I DO NOT APOLOGISE FOR
> COMPLAINING ABOUT THE SYSTEM. I believe something can be changed for the
> better in the rail system and make it better for the consumer and the
> operator. Win win situation. I believe the railway SHOULD be run for me
and
> every other paying customer who travels on it - isnt that what it's there
> for? Complaints are made for improvement - if no complaints were accepted,
> think of the poor quality of the service that would result.
> I think that it would be hard enough for me to stuff things up - looking
at
> the state of Sydney's rail system today I dont think you could complain
that
> changing it would "stuff it up" The tracks are on alignments over a
century
> old, the signals appear to be problematic, training appears to be shoddy,
> there are kilometres of dangerous or unsafe track and the whole thing is
> gathering cobwebs.
> So if the system isnt changed, if I cant get a reliable and safe service
for
> my travel, then I will no longer be a "bloody customer" of the railways.
And
> nor will anyone else. I made a simple suggestion and I dont think that
makes
> me a criminal.
>
> Brendan
>
>
> "Bill" <billguest@the.net.nz> wrote in message
> 385F4E9F.C483ADE5@the.net.nz">news:385F4E9F.C483ADE5@the.net.nz...
> > Yeah, "nobody", whodoyathinkyouare? Just a bloody customer, that's all,
> and your
> > old man too........ You seem to think the railway should run for you,
> don't
> > you?????............I bet CityRail runs optimally for the purposes of
the
> staff
> > ----   so why should you wanna stuff things up! Economically?
> "Properly"??? What
> > are ya, some kind of beancounter????
> >
> > nobody wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not entering the debate about safeworking and all that, but
couldnt
> > > Cityrail at least think economically and properly?
> > > I caught a train from Pennant Hills with the news ringing in my ear
that
> > > there might be delays due to a derailment. On arrival at hornsby,
where
> I
> > > changed to get to st Leonards, I found out the trains were being
> replaced by
> > > busses between Gordon and North Sydney.
> > >
> > > I question the logic of CityRail (Dad calls it Sh..y Snail and I'm
> beginning
> > > to see why) in this move. The RSA recently replaced the crossover at
> > > Chatswood so trains on the up line could travel over to the down line
> > > platform.
> > >
> > > Could CityRail have operated trains to Chatswood and Hornsby on a
Point
> to
> > > Point operation, therefore requiring fewer busses on a shorter route @
> less
> > > cost and time waste? On arrival at Chatswood a train could be directed
> into
> > > the down platform, then go back the other way. Excess trains could be
> held
> > > at Gordon or Lindfield or Hornsby. They have the infrastructure to do
> it -
> > > why did they congest traffic and increase delays by stopping trains at
> > > gordon?
> > >
> > > Can someone inform me as to whether this can be done?
> > >
> > > Brendan
> >
>
>