Search results

How are the works proceeding?

Thanks, I was surprised at the lack of detail on this particular topic elsewhere online, so I came here!

Victoria to/from Jubilee is fairly rapid

I saw this said about the CLIP '92 Stock, though it would not be surprising if this were a norm for all new PIS systems.

If they were going to manipulate journey behaviour to increase farebox revenue, they could do it far, far more effectively than a tiny minority of obscure late-evening flows that just happen to affect you in particular. Also, it's unclear why you even think you need to change at Highbury rather...

Don't be silly.

Tapping in to the tube without passing through a NR gateline.

Ah yes, make it take even longer, with even more units out of service, and more shed space required for the additional workline.

Point of order: pen testing (penetration testing) is a legitimate commercial service. Those who might use the term to describe their own amateur activities are doing so incorrectly. A good comparison would be using "locksmith" to incorrectly describe a jewel thief.

None of which answers the question I asked.

As far as I am aware, Underground runs at a profit, but roads are a big loss-maker that TfL as a whole remain responsible for. Do comparable cities operate the same model, or are we comparing Metro operators with TfL's entire estate?

I don't think you're convincing anyone with all these snide digs, poorly disguised as innocent questions.

The signalling & pointwork theoretically allowed it, not sure whether it ever happened in practice. But the 'compromise' rail height was maintained until the changes.

You seem to mean "bona fide".

4LM signalling required the Piccadilly and District to lose their track-sharing capability in the area, so along with points removal, the opportunity was used to raise the Piccadilly trackbed.

LEDs, especially bright ones meant for illumination rather than just indication, do require a decent amount of cooling. A poorly designed case might be plausible to explain premature failures.

That's unacceptable, and I think it presents a strong case against TfL.

Why?

It's best to set aside this sort of thinking. If the railway thought you were a fare-dodger, they would be investigating for prosecution. But instead they issued the Penalty Fare, which is designed for genuine mistakes like the one you made — even if it feels too harsh. This means they already...

The passage regarding NR barcode tickets would seem to imply a short-term loophole whereby misuse or forgery of such tickets is not something LU are able to enforce against. Nor would it even be detected at stations not participating in the trial scheme!