Discussion:
Northern Line goes south
Add Reply
Recliner
2019-09-04 09:06:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The whole Northern Line has been suspended since just before 6am this
morning, because of 'signal systems failure at the main control centre'.

<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49576740>
tim...
2019-09-04 14:17:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
The whole Northern Line has been suspended since just before 6am this
morning, because of 'signal systems failure at the main control centre'.
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49576740>
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"

yep all trains are running 7 hours late

how will anyone notice?

tim
Basil Jet
2019-09-04 14:24:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
The whole Northern Line has been suspended since just before 6am this
morning, because of 'signal systems failure at the main control centre'.
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49576740>
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
140000% PiXC?
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Simple Kid - 2003 - SK1
Recliner
2019-09-04 14:27:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
The whole Northern Line has been suspended since just before 6am this
morning, because of 'signal systems failure at the main control centre'.
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49576740>
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
Yes, that's something I often wonder with LU disruptions. Probably
what they really mean is that they're running a reduced service, with
extended intervals between trains.
Clive D.W. Feather
2019-09-06 06:26:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by tim...
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
Yes, that's something I often wonder with LU disruptions. Probably
what they really mean is that they're running a reduced service, with
extended intervals between trains.
No, the trains do run to a timetable. This may mean that train 123 is 20
minutes behind time or, more likely, that trains are taking longer
between stations than they should.
--
Clive D.W. Feather
tim...
2019-09-06 07:44:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by Recliner
Post by tim...
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
Yes, that's something I often wonder with LU disruptions. Probably
what they really mean is that they're running a reduced service, with
extended intervals between trains.
No, the trains do run to a timetable.
Most of us know that

It used to be possible to get a physical copy (I'm beginning to wish that I
had kept my "collection")

And very possible an online variant, as for busses until they took those
away (or hid them very well) in favour of just informing people using the
journey planner.
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
This may mean that train 123 is 20
minutes behind time or,
but if everything is running 20 minutes (or 2 hours, or 4 hours, or 6 hours)
behind time, because all trains were stuck in the depot for that length of
time, who will notice other than the dispatcher (whatever his job title is).

It's all very well TfL telling us that trains are running with severe
delays, meaning that individual trains are running behind their nominal
timetable, but if there still a service frequency of one trains every 3-4
minutes, in the real world, who cares?

OTOH if they mean something else, such as extended intervals because fewer
trains are running, or because of extended dwell times at stations caused by
congested platforms, they should use a more appropriate terminology.

tim
David Walters
2019-09-06 08:50:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by Recliner
Post by tim...
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
Yes, that's something I often wonder with LU disruptions. Probably
what they really mean is that they're running a reduced service, with
extended intervals between trains.
No, the trains do run to a timetable.
Most of us know that
It used to be possible to get a physical copy (I'm beginning to wish that I
had kept my "collection")
And very possible an online variant, as for busses until they took those
away (or hid them very well) in favour of just informing people using the
journey planner.
The Underground Working Timetables are available online:
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
Post by tim...
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
This may mean that train 123 is 20
minutes behind time or,
but if everything is running 20 minutes (or 2 hours, or 4 hours, or 6 hours)
behind time, because all trains were stuck in the depot for that length of
time, who will notice other than the dispatcher (whatever his job title is).
It's all very well TfL telling us that trains are running with severe
delays, meaning that individual trains are running behind their nominal
timetable, but if there still a service frequency of one trains every 3-4
minutes, in the real world, who cares?
OTOH if they mean something else, such as extended intervals because fewer
trains are running, or because of extended dwell times at stations caused by
congested platforms, they should use a more appropriate terminology.
The definition for Severe Delays is based on how the trains are perceived
to be running, not on if they are running according to the WTT. For
example on the Jubilee line during peak times gaps in service of more
than 10 minutes are a severe delay.

See
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-1233-1718
for some examples.
tim...
2019-09-06 09:56:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Walters
Post by tim...
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by Recliner
Post by tim...
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
Yes, that's something I often wonder with LU disruptions. Probably
what they really mean is that they're running a reduced service, with
extended intervals between trains.
No, the trains do run to a timetable.
Most of us know that
It used to be possible to get a physical copy (I'm beginning to wish that I
had kept my "collection")
And very possible an online variant, as for busses until they took those
away (or hid them very well) in favour of just informing people using the
journey planner.
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format

East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make sense in
printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form

tim
Basil Jet
2019-09-06 10:18:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
Post by tim...
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
No, the trains do run to a timetable.
Most of us know that
It used to be possible to get a physical copy (I'm beginning to wish that I
had kept my "collection")
And very possible an online variant, as for busses until they took those
away (or hid them very well) in favour of just informing people using
the journey planner.
Hid them so well that I had to type "london underground working
timetables" into Mr Google's Information Emporium to get them to come up
as the first result.
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make sense
in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters. Normies never see them. Why are
you channelling Boltar?

The other fact not mentioned is that when the service restarts all of
the drivers will be in the wrong places, which means they'll be hitting
their legal working hours limit in odd places unless the controllers
turn various trains in various places for the next few hours. This won't
affect the central area much, but you will probably get unusually long
intervals at Barnet and Edgware sporadically for the rest of the day.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Radiohead - 2001 - Pyramid Song
tim...
2019-09-06 15:13:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
Post by tim...
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
No, the trains do run to a timetable.
Most of us know that
It used to be possible to get a physical copy (I'm beginning to wish that I
had kept my "collection")
And very possible an online variant, as for busses until they took those
away (or hid them very well) in favour of just informing people using
the journey planner.
Hid them so well that I had to type "london underground working
would never have occurred to me to add "working timetable"
Post by Basil Jet
timetables" into Mr Google's Information Emporium to get them to come up
as the first result.
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make sense
in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters.
Not a spotter, just a customer who's interested in the nominal frequency for
each service

As an example, I caught a Wimbleware train yesterday which was changed en
route to early terminating at HSK, because we were "running late"

I looked at the board when I got off and the next Wimbleware train was in 10
minutes and I thought "if it's a 10 minute frequency then that's late as
well!)
Post by Basil Jet
Normies never see them.
Yesterday I was a normal - I was going shopping to a specific shop.

Admittedly, on the way back I detoured via the West London line as I hadn't
done it since before there were intermediate stations.
Post by Basil Jet
Why are you channelling Boltar?
I didn't realise that I was (whatever channelling means)
Post by Basil Jet
The other fact not mentioned is that when the service restarts all of the
drivers will be in the wrong places, which means they'll be hitting their
legal working hours limit
Yeah I got that.

tim
Basil Jet
2019-09-06 15:26:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make
sense in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters.
Not a spotter, just a customer who's interested in the nominal frequency
for each service
There's a frequency table in each WTT preceding the actual times.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Radiohead - 1997 - No Surprises
tim...
2019-09-06 16:45:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make
sense in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters.
Not a spotter, just a customer who's interested in the nominal frequency
for each service
There's a frequency table in each WTT preceding the actual times.
yeah, I got that

It also tells me how many train diagrams there are, and what time they leave
the depot.

my point was it contained more than I actually needed.

tim
Post by Basil Jet
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Radiohead - 1997 - No Surprises
tim...
2019-09-25 13:21:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make
sense in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters.
Not a spotter, just a customer who's interested in the nominal frequency
for each service
There's a frequency table in each WTT preceding the actual times.
yeah, I got that
It also tells me how many train diagrams there are, and what time they
leave the depot.
my point was it contained more than I actually needed.
and it doesn't tell me why the 23:32 at Earls Court went to Olympia last
night

As there are no trains scheduled to do this on a weekday except "seven early
morning trips originating from Lillie Bridge depot and two early evening
training trips"
Recliner
2019-09-25 14:55:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make
sense in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters.
Not a spotter, just a customer who's interested in the nominal frequency
for each service
There's a frequency table in each WTT preceding the actual times.
yeah, I got that
It also tells me how many train diagrams there are, and what time they
leave the depot.
my point was it contained more than I actually needed.
and it doesn't tell me why the 23:32 at Earls Court went to Olympia last
night
As there are no trains scheduled to do this on a weekday except "seven early
morning trips originating from Lillie Bridge depot and two early evening
training trips"
Presumably it would then go on up to the depot?
tim...
2019-09-25 16:49:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by tim...
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by Basil Jet
Post by tim...
Post by David Walters
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/working-timetables
what a confusing format
East and westbound on alternative pages - might very possibly make
sense in printed form, absolutely useless in PDF form
They're for drivers, not for spotters.
Not a spotter, just a customer who's interested in the nominal frequency
for each service
There's a frequency table in each WTT preceding the actual times.
yeah, I got that
It also tells me how many train diagrams there are, and what time they
leave the depot.
my point was it contained more than I actually needed.
and it doesn't tell me why the 23:32 at Earls Court went to Olympia last
night
As there are no trains scheduled to do this on a weekday except "seven early
morning trips originating from Lillie Bridge depot and two early evening
training trips"
Presumably it would then go on up to the depot?
perhaps

but the southbound ones are in the WTT - shown as "Empty"

this Northbound one, isn't -

and no attempt was made to run it empty. The driver made several
announcements that he was going to Olympia to be sure that everybody who
don't want that destination go off. But no attempt was made to stop people
using it if they did

tim

b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
2019-09-07 15:19:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 16:13:53 +0100
Post by tim...
Yesterday I was a normal - I was going shopping to a specific shop.
Admittedly, on the way back I detoured via the West London line as I hadn't
done it since before there were intermediate stations.
Post by Basil Jet
Why are you channelling Boltar?
I didn't realise that I was (whatever channelling means)
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-07 17:00:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
tim...
2019-09-07 19:51:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables

tim
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-07 22:00:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-09-07 22:54:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
Lineside signals are disappearing altogether. So colour light signals will
soon seem as quaint as semaphores. You already don't see signals on HS1, or
the DLR, or several Tube lines. Presumably the same will soon be true of
the Glasgow Subway, or Merseyside.
Marland
2019-09-07 23:04:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.


GH
Recliner
2019-09-07 23:33:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
Haven't those on five lines already gone? And, of course, the DLR never
had them.
Marland
2019-09-08 12:17:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
Haven't those on five lines already gone? And, of course, the DLR never
had them.
Quite possibly, I don’t get to London as much as I used to and to quote
some lines from my album collection

Nothing seems the same.
Still you never see the change
From day to day.
No one notices the customs slip away.

GH
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2019-09-08 19:35:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 23:33:20 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
Haven't those on five lines already gone? And, of course, the DLR never
had them.
And in typical TfL fashion the systems are all incompatible with each other.
I bet the signalling engineers have been paid overtime trying to get the new
Met system to play nice with the jubilee system. And of course the piccadilly
will be redone in the next decade which no doubt TfL will make sure bears no
resemblence to anything on the district or met just to make the shared track
sections are an unreliable nightmare.
Clive D.W. Feather
2019-09-16 18:53:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
Haven't those on five lines already gone? And, of course, the DLR never
had them.
And in typical TfL fashion the systems are all incompatible with each other.
That's not TfL's fault. That's because of the idiot privatisation
attempt - Metronet and Tube Lines chose different suppliers.
--
Clive D.W. Feather
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2019-09-17 07:22:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:53:11 +0100
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
Haven't those on five lines already gone? And, of course, the DLR never
had them.
And in typical TfL fashion the systems are all incompatible with each other.
That's not TfL's fault. That's because of the idiot privatisation
attempt - Metronet and Tube Lines chose different suppliers.
Metronet went into administration in 2008. The new signalling system for the
met line has only just gone in.
Recliner
2019-09-17 18:25:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:53:11 +0100
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
Haven't those on five lines already gone? And, of course, the DLR never
had them.
And in typical TfL fashion the systems are all incompatible with each other.
That's not TfL's fault. That's because of the idiot privatisation
attempt - Metronet and Tube Lines chose different suppliers.
Metronet went into administration in 2008. The new signalling system for the
met line has only just gone in.
It's the third attempt, and this time the supplier is the same as for the
Jubilee and Northern lines.
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2019-09-08 19:32:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 7 Sep 2019 23:04:09 GMT
Post by Marland
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
With the Underground gradually being reequipped with new signalling systems
and trains with in cab displays
are there going to be signals with LEDs to worry about in a few years.
And what a success they've been last week. Northern line completely dead on
monday due to total signalling failure and constant delays and cancellations
on the Met while they bed in the new system.
Basil Jet
2019-09-07 23:49:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
Right... because peering into the fog hoping to see a light every 100
yards that hasn't been obscured by a branch or stolen by scrotes is so
much better than having a monitor in the cab with the message
"Clear for 6.7km, 50kph TSR in 3.4km" written on it.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Bibio - 2001 - K Is For Kelson
Trolleybus
2019-09-08 10:45:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
Right... because peering into the fog hoping to see a light every 100
yards that hasn't been obscured by a branch or stolen by scrotes is so
much better than having a monitor in the cab with the message
"Clear for 6.7km, 50kph TSR in 3.4km" written on it.
There are times when I wish Usenet allowed upvotes.

I've just come back from a rail rover. I loved seeing remote token
exchange platforms, drivers getting out of the cab to request tokens
at other places, and distant signals sharing the post with the section
signal. I find the appearance of semaphores reassuring in a nostalgic
way but also deepy archaic. They really should no longer be there. The
same will become increasingly true of all lineside signals.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-08 13:58:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
Right... because peering into the fog hoping to see a light every 100
yards that hasn't been obscured by a branch or stolen by scrotes is so
much better than having a monitor in the cab with the message
"Clear for 6.7km, 50kph TSR in 3.4km" written on it.
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!

And stop talking in metric, last time I checked we used MILES in this
country. At least that's what's on the dial of every car speedometer
I've seen lately.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-09-08 14:38:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by b***@2vgi0mj7.gov.uk
Didnt you know you can't criticise TfL or any of its subsidiaries on this
group since they're absolutely beyond reproach and any issues are the fault of
the passenger.
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
Indeed. And proper signals (semaphore would be nice, but colour light
signals with actual light bulbs would be ok.) LED signals are like LED
street lights, in other words HORRIBLE.
Right... because peering into the fog hoping to see a light every 100
yards that hasn't been obscured by a branch or stolen by scrotes is so
much better than having a monitor in the cab with the message
"Clear for 6.7km, 50kph TSR in 3.4km" written on it.
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
Post by MissRiaElaine
And stop talking in metric, last time I checked we used MILES in this
country. At least that's what's on the dial of every car speedometer
I've seen lately.
So when did you last buy fuel in gallons?

Most UK trams and light railways use km. For example, this is a
speedo on a Nottingham NET tram:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/47935957238/in/album-72157708767150101/lightbox/>

Engineering went metric many decades ago. Nobody would dream of
engineering a new British car using imperial measurements. In fact, no
engineers still working would have any experience of anything but SI
units.

And why do you think car acceleration timings in the UK are quoted for
the 0-62.5mph range? They gave up on 0-60 long ago.
Basil Jet
2019-09-08 15:12:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
And why do you think car acceleration timings in the UK are quoted for
the 0-62.5mph range? They gave up on 0-60 long ago.
What's so special about 28 m/s?
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Bibio - 2016 - A Mineral Love
Recliner
2019-09-08 15:33:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
And why do you think car acceleration timings in the UK are quoted for
the 0-62.5mph range? They gave up on 0-60 long ago.
What's so special about 28 m/s?
100 km/h.
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-08 16:35:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
I disagree. How is someone working trackside supposed to know whether a
train is signalled or not..?
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
And stop talking in metric, last time I checked we used MILES in this
country. At least that's what's on the dial of every car speedometer
I've seen lately.
So when did you last buy fuel in gallons?
Most people, myself included, fill the tank regardless of the actual
quantity. Or I might put 20 quid in if I'm a bit short. But distances
are signposted in miles and fuel economy is still measured in miles per
gallon.

I will resist metrication till my dying day. Which given the state of
the country right now may not be far off.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Basil Jet
2019-09-08 16:55:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
I disagree. How is someone working trackside supposed to know whether a
train is signalled or not..?
An app on their phone or iPad tells them. Various platforms have
signalling diagram monitors which provide this info to platform staff,
and no tungsten filaments were electrocuted in the making of this image.
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
I'm a Ukip member, and I'm laughing at you.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Bibio - 2016 - A Mineral Love
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-08 17:59:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
I'm a Ukip member, and I'm laughing at you.
Laugh away, why should that bother me..?
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-09-08 19:14:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
I disagree. How is someone working trackside supposed to know whether a
train is signalled or not..?
An app on their phone or iPad tells them. Various platforms have
signalling diagram monitors which provide this info to platform staff,
and no tungsten filaments were electrocuted in the making of this image.
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
I'm a Ukip member, and I'm laughing at you.
Ah, you're the member?
Basil Jet
2019-09-08 19:58:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
I disagree. How is someone working trackside supposed to know whether a
train is signalled or not..?
An app on their phone or iPad tells them. Various platforms have
signalling diagram monitors which provide this info to platform staff,
and no tungsten filaments were electrocuted in the making of this image.
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
I'm a Ukip member, and I'm laughing at you.
Ah, you're the member?
People called me that even before I joined.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
His Clancyness - 2010 - Always Mist Revisited
tim...
2019-09-09 11:27:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
I disagree. How is someone working trackside supposed to know whether a
train is signalled or not..?
An app on their phone or iPad tells them. Various platforms have
signalling diagram monitors which provide this info to platform staff,
and no tungsten filaments were electrocuted in the making of this image.
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
I'm a Ukip member, and I'm laughing at you.
Ah, you're the member?
People called me that even before I joined.
around 26,000 apparently

only slightly fewer than those who still tell the pollsters they are going
to vote for them :-)

tim
Post by Basil Jet
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
His Clancyness - 2010 - Always Mist Revisited
Recliner
2019-09-17 20:53:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by Basil Jet
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:58:02 +0100, MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Always assuming the tech works. A light bulb is about as simple as you
can get. Imagine if they tried the same on the roads..!
Incandescent light bulbs have a short life and need frequent
replacement. The light is also not consistent, dimming and getting
more yellow over time. LED arrays are far better. But in railway
terms, no lineside signals at all is better still.
I disagree. How is someone working trackside supposed to know whether a
train is signalled or not..?
An app on their phone or iPad tells them. Various platforms have
signalling diagram monitors which provide this info to platform staff,
and no tungsten filaments were electrocuted in the making of this image.
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
I'm a Ukip member, and I'm laughing at you.
Ah, you're the member?
People called me that even before I joined.
I trust you're showing your support in Telford:
<https://order-order.com/2019/09/17/ukip-leader-boycotting-party-conference/>
Clive D.W. Feather
2019-09-16 18:52:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
Oh? What's the definition of an inch?

Answer: 25.4 mm.
--
Clive D.W. Feather
Sammi Gray-Jones
2019-09-18 15:28:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
Oh? What's the definition of an inch?
Answer: 25.4 mm.
We still say give them an inch and they'll take a mile.

Saying Give them 2.54cm and they'll take 1.6 kilometers just doesn't
sound the same...
Recliner
2019-09-18 18:29:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
Post by Clive D.W. Feather
Post by MissRiaElaine
I will resist metrication till my dying day.
Oh? What's the definition of an inch?
Answer: 25.4 mm.
We still say give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Saying Give them 2.54cm and they'll take 1.6 kilometers just doesn't
sound the same...
The metric version would be, "give them a cm and they'll take a km".
n***@moo.uklinux.net
2019-09-19 09:47:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
We still say give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Saying Give them 2.54cm and they'll take 1.6 kilometers just doesn't
sound the same...
The metric version would be, "give them a cm and they'll take a km".
Which unfortunately doesn't scan very well, "inch" and "mile" not
only sound different, but are only one syllable each, as opposed
to four syllables each. You might try

"give them a metre and they'll take a million",

which has a nice bit of alliteration, but on everyday scales an inch
is small, but a metre is not-small. I suppose you might shift to
weights, and say

"give them a gram and they'll take a tonne";

or perhaps volume, with

"give them a mil (ie millilitre) and they'll take a lakeful",

which trades the lack of a big volume unit for an extra "l"
from "lakeful".


#Paul
Sammi Gray-Jones
2019-09-10 18:39:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Engineering went metric many decades ago. Nobody would dream of
engineering a new British car using imperial measurements. In fact, no
engineers still working would have any experience of anything but SI
units.
And why do you think car acceleration timings in the UK are quoted for
the 0-62.5mph range? They gave up on 0-60 long ago.
Engineering in my experience still used imperial measurements where I
was working in 2005, sometimes we got orders in for plate steel in feet
and inches, yet a metric thickness and I also saw them in metric sizes
but a specific gauge. They *have* to understand the difference between
the two to prevent any misunderstandings with American companies who
still use feet and inches on a regular basis.

And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
Recliner
2019-09-10 19:21:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
Post by Recliner
Engineering went metric many decades ago. Nobody would dream of
engineering a new British car using imperial measurements. In fact, no
engineers still working would have any experience of anything but SI
units.
And why do you think car acceleration timings in the UK are quoted for
the 0-62.5mph range? They gave up on 0-60 long ago.
Engineering in my experience still used imperial measurements where I
was working in 2005, sometimes we got orders in for plate steel in feet
and inches, yet a metric thickness and I also saw them in metric sizes
but a specific gauge. They *have* to understand the difference between
the two to prevent any misunderstandings with American companies who
still use feet and inches on a regular basis.
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.

I know the length of my British car in metres, and its weight in kg,
because that's how it was quoted when I bought it. And I'm sure the British
engineers who designed it also used metric.
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-10 22:03:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-09-10 22:51:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago. Temperatures, whether body or
atmospheric, need only be quoted in ºC. Water boils at 100º, not 212º, and
freezes at zero, not -32º. It's hot, not cold, when the temperature hits
30º. We use metric tonnes, not short or long tons. Our car engine sizes are
quoted in litres, not cubic inches. Races are run over hundred(s) of
metres, not yards.

Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.

Our neighbours in Ireland had no trouble adapting, so why do some Brit[on]s
(if you insist) still think we're in the 1970?
tim...
2019-09-11 11:13:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago.
but not when it came to measuring roads

tim
Graeme Wall
2019-09-11 11:27:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago.
but not when it came to measuring roads
A case of pragmatism winning out, very little gain for a lot of expense.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2019-09-11 15:00:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago.
but not when it came to measuring roads
A case of pragmatism winning out, very little gain for a lot of expense.
All the road standards are metric, but it's apparently too expensive to
replace all the road signs. But it didn't stop Australia, Canada, India,
Ireland, South Africa, etc doing so.
Recliner
2019-09-11 14:53:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago.
but not when it came to measuring roads
Of course they're metric. Try finding any imperial measurements in this
typical document:

<http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/mchw/vol1/pdfs/MCHW%20700.pdf>
tim...
2019-09-11 16:19:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago.
but not when it came to measuring roads
Of course they're metric. Try finding any imperial measurements in this
<http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/mchw/vol1/pdfs/MCHW%20700.pdf>
I was talking about distance along them

as well you knew
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-11 12:46:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Recliner
2019-09-11 15:00:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?

You can't live in the last century forever.
Basil Jet
2019-09-11 15:07:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
https://www.amazon.com/ANKOVO-Medical-Thermometer-Waterproof-Indicator/dp/B07J6BR6X8
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
Will you tell the Americans or should I?
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Villagers - 2010 - Becoming A Jackal
Recliner
2019-09-11 15:20:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
https://www.amazon.com/ANKOVO-Medical-Thermometer-Waterproof-Indicator/dp/B07J6BR6X8
That's Amazon US. But I agree, it's probably possible to set digital
thermometers to have a retro display.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
Will you tell the Americans or should I?
They can live in the last century if they like, but it's not an option
anywhere else.
Basil Jet
2019-09-11 15:30:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
https://www.amazon.com/ANKOVO-Medical-Thermometer-Waterproof-Indicator/dp/B07J6BR6X8
That's Amazon US. But I agree, it's probably possible to set digital
thermometers to have a retro display.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
Will you tell the Americans or should I?
They can live in the last century if they like, but it's not an option
anywhere else.
So long as we can buy their products or products made for them, it is.
(I'm a metric fan BTW, I'm just saying people don't have to be.)
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Villagers - 2010 - Becoming A Jackal
Graeme Wall
2019-09-11 15:42:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
https://www.amazon.com/ANKOVO-Medical-Thermometer-Waterproof-Indicator/dp/B07J6BR6X8
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
Will you tell the Americans or should I?
Never mind the Americans, someone tell Rees-Mogg.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2019-09-11 21:32:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
https://www.amazon.com/ANKOVO-Medical-Thermometer-Waterproof-Indicator/dp/B07J6BR6X8
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
Will you tell the Americans or should I?
Never mind the Americans, someone tell Rees-Mogg.
I don't have a time machine to the 18th century…
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-12 16:27:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
https://www.amazon.com/ANKOVO-Medical-Thermometer-Waterproof-Indicator/dp/B07J6BR6X8
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
Will you tell the Americans or should I?
Never mind the Americans, someone tell Rees-Mogg.
Good on him, I say.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-12 16:25:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
It may be easy to adapt for you, but please do not be so arrogant as to
assume it is the same for everyone. I simply cannot do it, and quite
honestly I do not see why I should. Why can't both systems be used..?
Have you seen or used a medical thermometer any time recently?
I still have an old mercury thermometer, which has both F and C marked
on it. I've been using it for 40 years and I haven't died of mercury
poisoning yet.
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
I can have a damned good try. I refuse to be dictated to.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Roland Perry
2019-09-12 16:31:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
I can have a damned good try. I refuse to be dictated to.
Not a shorthand typist by trade, then?
--
Roland Perry
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-12 16:57:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
I can have a damned good try. I refuse to be dictated to.
Not a shorthand typist by trade, then?
No, but my mother was. I never managed to learn it, though.
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Graeme Wall
2019-09-12 19:21:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
I can have a damned good try. I refuse to be dictated to.
Not a shorthand typist by trade, then?
Bang goes the coffee!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
MissRiaElaine
2019-09-12 23:52:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
I can have a damned good try. I refuse to be dictated to.
Not a shorthand typist by trade, then?
Bang goes the coffee!
You can make your own..!
--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]
Graeme Wall
2019-09-13 07:24:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Roland Perry
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
You can't live in the last century forever.
I can have a damned good try. I refuse to be dictated to.
Not a shorthand typist by trade, then?
Bang goes the coffee!
You can make your own..!
Ah, wrong interpretation! Hadn't thought of that one, good response. I
meant I was drinking coffee when I read the line and choked through
laughing.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Sammi Gray-Jones
2019-09-11 13:02:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by Recliner
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
And as you rightly point out it's now 0-62.5mph, still in miles per
hour. Not 0-100 kph.
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
Excuse me, but I take exception to that. I'm British (not "a Brit"
please, I'm not American either) and I use imperial measurements. I do
so because I was brought up with them and I'm used to them. I fail to
see why I should be forced to use the metric system. Why can't both be
used..? I still struggle to understand the weather forecasts when
temperatures are only quoted in degrees C.
The country went metric decades ago. Temperatures, whether body or
atmospheric, need only be quoted in ºC. Water boils at 100º, not 212º, and
freezes at zero, not -32º. It's hot, not cold, when the temperature hits
30º. We use metric tonnes, not short or long tons. Our car engine sizes are
quoted in litres, not cubic inches. Races are run over hundred(s) of
metres, not yards.
Yes, many of us were brought up with quaint imperial measures, but it's
easy to adapt. I still remember my height in ft and inches, as that's what
we used when it was last measured (when I was a teenager), but I know my
weight in kg.
Our neighbours in Ireland had no trouble adapting, so why do some Brit[on]s
(if you insist) still think we're in the 1970?
As I said before I spent three years in Germany using the metric
measurements, which I had to convert in my head into miles so that I
could understand them. I couldn't wait to get back to the UK and use
miles again. As to my weight I could probably tell you what it is in kg,
but to me that's a meaningless number and I need to change into stones
and pounds. When cooking I use imperial measurements throughout. As to
the fact that the Irish have found it easy to adapt to metrication, have
you *asked* them all.? I'm sure that there are some like me who have to
convert metric to imperial before they understand it.
Arthur Conan Doyle
2019-09-11 14:25:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I know my weight in kg.
But quick, what about stone?
Recliner
2019-09-11 15:00:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Arthur Conan Doyle
I know my weight in kg.
But quick, what about stone?
I've no idea. In always thought stones were a silly unit of measure.
Sammi Gray-Jones
2019-09-10 22:10:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Recliner
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
I know the length of my British car in metres, and its weight in kg,
because that's how it was quoted when I bought it. And I'm sure the British
engineers who designed it also used metric.
I am not an ignorant *Brit* I think of myself as British, nor am I
ignorant. Using the term Brit is to me demeaning, and describing all of
us who still use miles as ignorant is very condescending. I lived in
Germany for three years when working as a contractor for the British
Army, and over there I used kilometres as the standard measurement for
distance, but in this country we still use miles, and long may it continue.
Recliner
2019-09-10 22:54:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
Post by Recliner
It's quoted that way for the benefit of ignorant Brits, but what they
actually measure is 0-100 km/h. Many cars are limited to 250 km/h,
described as '155 mph' for ignorant Brits.
I know the length of my British car in metres, and its weight in kg,
because that's how it was quoted when I bought it. And I'm sure the British
engineers who designed it also used metric.
I am not an ignorant *Brit* I think of myself as British, nor am I
ignorant.
'British' is an adjective; what noun do you prefer?
Post by Sammi Gray-Jones
Using the term Brit is to me demeaning, and describing all of
us who still use miles as ignorant is very condescending. I lived in
Germany for three years when working as a contractor for the British
Army, and over there I used kilometres as the standard measurement for
distance, but in this country we still use miles, and long may it continue.
Why? To what benefit?
Marland
2019-09-08 21:58:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
And stop talking in metric, last time I checked we used MILES in this
country. At least that's what's on the dial of every car speedometer
I've seen lately.
Many vehicles have a dial that shows both or a display that can be
switched.

It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum which means their measurements
start on a line that was closed
and is now no longer theirs

The old measurements as miles and chains sometimes had oddities due to the
different paths of ownership some sections had passed through over the
years , eg Richmond to site of Studland Road junction were measured from
Waterloo due to the former LSWR then Southern Railway ownership of that
section.

You will be pleased that the Underground still use mph for speed
indications though and even the S stock speed indication is in MPH.
Hopefully they won’t change it or they will be wanting to tow the whole
lot back to Derby again to change it.

GH
Roland Perry
2019-09-09 05:49:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by MissRiaElaine
Post by MissRiaElaine
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
And stop talking in metric, last time I checked we used MILES in this
country. At least that's what's on the dial of every car speedometer
I've seen lately.
Many vehicles have a dial that shows both or a display that can be
switched.
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.

The site is now occupied by a merchant bank, and the A1 no longer goes
to the door, but has only been truncated by a few hundred yards.
Post by Marland
The old measurements as miles and chains sometimes had oddities due to the
different paths of ownership some sections had passed through over the
years , eg Richmond to site of Studland Road junction were measured from
Waterloo due to the former LSWR then Southern Railway ownership of that
section.
You will be pleased that the Underground still use mph for speed
indications though and even the S stock speed indication is in MPH.
Hopefully they won’t change it or they will be wanting to tow the whole
lot back to Derby again to change it.
GH
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2019-09-09 08:25:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.

I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for postage from
its own main London premises for its own purposes but the Post Office
premises you mention were not constructed until the early 19th Century and
many milestones would have been put in place before that by the Turnpike
Trusts who were required to do so.

Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.


GH
Basil Jet
2019-09-09 09:06:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for postage from
its own main London premises for its own purposes but the Post Office
premises you mention were not constructed until the early 19th Century and
many milestones would have been put in place before that by the Turnpike
Trusts who were required to do so.
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive

https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/

Maybe distances to "City" are measured to St Paul's Post Office?
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Bogshed - Demo's And Rarities 1985-87
Roland Perry
2019-09-10 18:45:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".

And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.

If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.

Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2019-09-10 21:41:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".
And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.
If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.
Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
So the real answer is that nobody seems to know which one it should be and
one claim is no better or worse than the other.

GH
Basil Jet
2019-09-10 22:09:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".
And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.
If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.
Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
So the real answer is that nobody seems to know which one it should be and
one claim is no better or worse than the other.
The Milestone Hotel in Kensington has a "1.5 Miles to London" milestone
outside it. This seems to be the distance to Hyde Park Corner. It is
definitely *not* the distance to CHX, St Pauls or Westminster.

The Sainsburys in North Finchley has a milestone with "8 miles to
London" outside it. This seems to be the distance to either CHX or St
Pauls, but probably not Westminster or Hyde Park Corner.

Hang on, the answers are here. There are lots of different origins.
http://www.metadyne.co.uk/n-milestones.html
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Pearls Before Swine - 1971 - Beautiful Lies You Could Live In
Roland Perry
2019-09-11 08:36:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
The Milestone Hotel in Kensington has a "1.5 Miles to London" milestone
outside it. This seems to be the distance to Hyde Park Corner.
That's in the mould of the early AA distances - to a gateway on the edge
of London.
Post by Basil Jet
It is definitely *not* the distance to CHX, St Pauls or Westminster.
The Sainsburys in North Finchley has a milestone with "8 miles to
London" outside it. This seems to be the distance to either CHX or St
Pauls,
Holborn Bar, perhaps.
Post by Basil Jet
but probably not Westminster
Westminster (or Big Ben) is a red herring.
Post by Basil Jet
or Hyde Park Corner.
Hang on, the answers are here. There are lots of different origins.
http://www.metadyne.co.uk/n-milestones.html
Lots of different routes, doing their own thing. But the only distance
which had to be standardised (cf "Railway time") was for postage.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
2019-09-11 08:18:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".
And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.
If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.
Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
So the real answer is that nobody seems to know which one it should be and
one claim is no better or worse than the other.
You are making the assumption that one or other is "correct" and the
other must therefore be "wrong".

And "people" do *know* things, like the Eleanor Cross was the
penultimate not final destination (and a village outside London, not
remotely the centre of London), and that the structure some distance
away outside Charing Cross station is a replica.

We also know that the General Post Office (which had a need to
understand distances) predates the majority of Turnpike Trusts by a
century.

And that the Romans (but only the Romans) used a stone near what's now
Cannon St station, and that the nearby Monument is a red herring.

Major "A" roads out of London converge towards St Paul's (even if some
have been de-trunked in recent times), not Trafalgar Square.

We also know that no-one has been able to find any records explaining
what traditional mappers regarded as the datum - some observers saying
that it was because "everyone knew", so no-one wrote it down.

But the consensus is that the AA *did* chose to consolidate on Trafalgar
Square (having previously used a bunch of gateway locations such as
Marble Arch), and hence I suggest the current meme arises from that.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2019-09-11 14:44:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".
And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.
If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.
Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
So the real answer is that nobody seems to know which one it should be and
one claim is no better or worse than the other.
You are making the assumption that one or other is "correct" and the
other must therefore be "wrong".
Where did I say that one or the other is is correct and the other wrong ?

All I asked for was an answer and it appears that there are several all
which of which could be correct for one purpose but not another.

Its almost as if you are wanting me to argue that your suggestion was wrong
so you you can start one of your long winded arguments to bolster your
ego even though I haven’t actually disagreed with you, just not accepted
that the one you put forward has any more merit to be the main one than any
other.

GH
Roland Perry
2019-09-11 15:42:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".
And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.
If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.
Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
So the real answer is that nobody seems to know which one it should be and
one claim is no better or worse than the other.
You are making the assumption that one or other is "correct" and the
other must therefore be "wrong".
Where did I say that one or the other is is correct and the other wrong ?
You are implying that you are clinging to the Trafalgar Square meme,
which I don't think there's any evidence for other than the AA deciding
to use it.
Post by Marland
All I asked for was an answer and it appears that there are several all
which of which could be correct for one purpose but not another.
We can agree about that. So no "main one", not even Trafalgar Square
(unless we count it being the main old wife's tale on the subject).
Post by Marland
Its almost as if you are wanting me to argue that your suggestion was wrong
so you you can start one of your long winded arguments to bolster your
ego even though I haven’t actually disagreed with you, just not accepted
that the one you put forward has any more merit
Only precedence over Turnpikes and Trafalgar Square, and I wouldn't
accuse you of ego over the mention of Ongar for the tube distances, so
I'm not sure why that comes into it. I'm trying to write about some
serious historical research here.
Post by Marland
to be the main one than any other.
See earlier.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2019-09-11 18:25:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Post by Marland
which means their measurements start on a line that was closed and is
now no longer theirs
It's not the only disappeared datum. Road miles from London were
measured from the Post Office near St Pauls (the tube station used to be
called "Post Office") because postage was originally calculated by the
mile.
Hmm, I always thought it was where the original Charing Cross was located.
I could see the Post Office might have used its own datum for
postage from its own main London premises for its own purposes but
the Post Office premises you mention were not constructed until the
early 19th Century and many milestones would have been put in place
before that by the Turnpike Trusts who were required to do so.
The date of the building on that site today isn't relevant. Some say the
datum is actually a little further north, at the site now occupied by
Mount Pleasant sorting office; but that doesn't change the basic
principle.
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Marland
Perhaps someone else can adjudicate.
The wording on this plaque seems pretty definitive
https://ads9rca.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/point-zero-a-starting-point/
Unfortunately, the plaque doesn't say 'Measured by... whom".
And the elephant in the room is that Charing Cross was the *penultimate*
stop on the trip in question ("a little village near Westminster" in
longer versions of the story), the final destination being Westminster.
If there had been a "final" cross at Westminster (and many people think
Big Ben is where distances are measured from) then it would be far more
compelling.
Quite a few people say that the Charing Cross (or Trafalgar Square in
fact) was chosen as a datum by the AA, as more central of a place in
London bearing in mind how it had developed by the time they started
publishing their own maps.
So the real answer is that nobody seems to know which one it should be and
one claim is no better or worse than the other.
You are making the assumption that one or other is "correct" and the
other must therefore be "wrong".
Where did I say that one or the other is is correct and the other wrong ?
You are implying that you are clinging to the Trafalgar Square meme,
which I don't think there's any evidence for other than the AA deciding
to use it.
I never even mentioned Trafalgar Square or the AA the only location I
mentioned was the original Charing Cross and even then asked for other
opinions on that rather saying it must be so.
Even for you this a new technique to justify turning a discussion into an
argument, by implying something from words somebody hasn’t said.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
All I asked for was an answer and it appears that there are several all
which of which could be correct for one purpose but not another.
We can agree about that. So no "main one", not even Trafalgar Square
(unless we count it being the main old wife's tale on the subject).
Post by Marland
Its almost as if you are wanting me to argue that your suggestion was wrong
so you you can start one of your long winded arguments to bolster your
ego even though I haven’t actually disagreed with you, just not accepted
that the one you put forward has any more merit
Only precedence over Turnpikes and Trafalgar Square, and I wouldn't
accuse you of ego over the mention of Ongar for the tube distances, so
I'm not sure why that comes into it. I'm trying to write about some
serious historical research here.
My mention of Ongar was done because it is an interesting Railway factoid
and also an example to our Aberdeen correspondent that the London Transport
they remember as an example tradition of the good old days initiated a
major Metrication exercise 40 years ago, it was from that you seem to have
decided that you want to hold a point scoring debate ,an activity you are
renowned for by mentioning the Post office datum which turns not to be the
only candidate for distances too and from London .

At least the Ongar one can be verified

GH
Roland Perry
2019-09-12 14:16:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Marland
I never even mentioned Trafalgar Square or the AA the only location I
mentioned was the original Charing Cross
The original Charing Cross was located at what's now one of the corners
of Trafalgar Square.
Post by Marland
and even then asked for other opinions on that rather saying it must
be so.
My opinion, based on quite a lot of research, being: having earlier
specified mileages to various gateways like Marble Arch, the AA decided
for its maps to consolidate on Trafalgar Square. This has become a meme
about "Charing Cross" (the original one only having a plaque) and an
unspoken implication that it has always been the case (long before the
AA)
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
Its almost as if you are wanting me to argue that your suggestion was wrong
so you you can start one of your long winded arguments to bolster your
ego even though I haven’t actually disagreed with you, just not accepted
that the one you put forward has any more merit
Only precedence over Turnpikes and Trafalgar Square, and I wouldn't
accuse you of ego over the mention of Ongar for the tube distances, so
I'm not sure why that comes into it. I'm trying to write about some
serious historical research here.
My mention of Ongar was done because it is an interesting Railway factoid
and also an example to our Aberdeen correspondent that the London Transport
they remember as an example tradition of the good old days initiated a
major Metrication exercise 40 years ago, it was from that you seem to have
decided that you want to hold a point scoring debate ,an activity you are
renowned for by mentioning the Post office datum which turns not to be the
only candidate
It's the original one, though (if you ignore the Romans). And the
Turnpikes used a range of gateways (not unlike the AA did originally,
perhaps they modelled themselves on those).
Post by Marland
for distances too and from London .
At least the Ongar one can be verified
The Post Office one can be as well. The mystery about the Charing
Cross/AA one is that as far as I can tell no-one has ever been able to
expand on what it says on that fairly recent and vague plaque.

I think I'll do a FOI on Westminster City Council, and see what they
have to say.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2019-09-12 15:10:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
My opinion, based on quite a lot of research, being: having earlier
specified mileages to various gateways like Marble Arch, the AA decided
for its maps to consolidate on Trafalgar Square. This has become a meme
about "Charing Cross" (the original one only having a plaque) and an
unspoken implication that it has always been the case (long before the
AA)
Post by Marland
My mention of Ongar was done because it is an interesting Railway factoid
and also an example to our Aberdeen correspondent that the London Transport
they remember as an example tradition of the good old days initiated a
major Metrication exercise 40 years ago, it was from that you seem to have
decided that you want to hold a point scoring debate ,an activity you are
renowned for by mentioning the Post office datum which turns not to be the
only candidate
It's the original one, though (if you ignore the Romans). And the
Turnpikes used a range of gateways (not unlike the AA did originally,
perhaps they modelled themselves on those).
Post by Marland
for distances too and from London .
At least the Ongar one can be verified
The Post Office one can be as well. The mystery about the Charing
Cross/AA one is that as far as I can tell no-one has ever been able to
expand on what it says on that fairly recent and vague plaque.
I think I'll do a FOI on Westminster City Council, and see what they
have to say.
That would be interesting, I wonder if the Ordnance survey has any
information anywhere.



GH
Clive D.W. Feather
2019-09-16 19:01:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Marland
It was London Transport which recalculated its route measurements to
Kilometres back in 1972 .
Ironically they chose Ongar as the 0 datum
I think they chose Ongar because it was the furthest east.
Actually Upminster is slightly further east (5561xx versus 5550xx on the
OS grid), but it's further by rail from the first common point (Mile
End).

I was recently explaining the Ongar system to someone and thought about
this. There were other possible zeros, such as Mantles Wood Junction,
High Barnet, or Morden, but Ongar has the advantage of being a terminus
with clear buffer stops on a line that had no plausible likelihood of
being extended.
--
Clive D.W. Feather
Arthur Conan Doyle
2019-09-08 14:51:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by MissRiaElaine
Bring back London Transport (and British Rail for that matter).
bring back paper timetables
And staffed switch boxes!
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2019-09-04 19:31:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 15:17:59 +0100
Post by tim...
Post by Recliner
The whole Northern Line has been suspended since just before 6am this
morning, because of 'signal systems failure at the main control centre'.
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49576740>
"The service had reopened by 13:00, but is now running with severe delays"
yep all trains are running 7 hours late
how will anyone notice?
If they tried to get in on the Met with its signalling also not playing
ball they wouldn't have. Seems that these modern systems have quite a few
single points of failure instead of being distributed with failover backups.
Loading...