Tube Drivers get £50k Deal.

jc808

kabayiri wrote: »

There's probably a degree you can do at London Underground University or some such.

Covers a broad range of subjects :-

- the history of the Start button
- energy studies and the Stop button
- cap wearing, the right and wrong ways
- negotiating skills for wages #1
- negotiating skills for wages #2
- negotiating skills for wages #3
- negotiating skills for wages #4
- sports timetable studies

lol:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

jc808

shortchanged wrote: »

Well at least tube drivers MIGHT be able to afford a 1 bed flat in London now.

ah, the old 'you need to earn at least 50k to buy any property in london' myth. always propogated by people who do not really know the property market.

fyi 50k salary with 10% deposit would get you TWO repo HOUSES in thamesmead, and one decent house/ big flat in a good chunk of london

crazyguy

ILW wrote: »

If it is that much, but the wage bill is reduced by say £150 million per year. Payback should be around 5 -10 years and fromthen on it's all bunce. In addition the public would not be held to ransom with strike threats every other week.

1984 Docklands light Railway cost, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway

£77 Million ( Take note of the amount of track on this route and other systems that are in place it is a lot smaller )


1987 Dubai cost, http://urbanpeek.com/2011/06/07/dubai-metro/

$7.6 Billion Dollars


Combine the cost's as whole that are required as of today to replace tracks, points , signals and trains would run into a very high figure indeed, not to mention disruption.

More info here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground

http://www.railway-technology.com/

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/modalpages/2625.aspx

chewmylegoff

crazyguy wrote: »

Look it will cost far more than the figures you are quoting and also it is to do with safety as well primarily money.

To change the part of the system that is in place would cost huge amounts of money Billions in fact, do they just look down the back of the sofa for this ?

The figures I also quoted for the vacancies and the amount that got through are based on a number of factors and yes concentration is one of them but there are also a lot of other tests involved including apptitude amounngs other things.

its not impossible though is it, despite your made up claims that it is, because it has already been done (i) elsewhere and (ii) on the tube - see jubilee line upgrade.

in the context of your "impossible" argument, please explain how the jubilee line upgrade was implemented.

edit: for the avoidance of doubt, please don't explain the impossible cost of upgrading by citing the cost of building the whole of the dubai metro network from scratch.

crazyguy

I dont know why I am even bothering to respond to you as you clearly cannot understand the simple facts.

You are pretty much building it from scratch, hence why I posted the link.

I suggest before replying with yet another idiotic comment in the hopes of goading me try looking into this a bit more before claiming that you know the answers on a subject you oviously have no clue on at all.

Pennywise

crazyguy wrote: »

1984 Docklands light Railway cost, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Light_Railway

£77 Million ( Take note of the amount of tranck on this route and other systems that are in place it is a lot smaller )


1987 Dubai cost, http://urbanpeek.com/2011/06/07/dubai-metro/

$7.6 Billion Dollars


Combine the cost's as whole that are required as of today to replace tracks, points , signals and trains would run into a very high figure indeed, not to mention disruption.

More info here,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground

http://www.railway-technology.com/

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/modalpages/2625.aspx

Why do you think you have to replace tracks and points and signals?

Tracks, points and signals are already there and automated - control room sets the route, signals are integrated with points - train detection systems tell control room where the trains are and monitor its progress. In fact, if driverless, there'd be no need for signals anymore! You just need a new system to actually control the trains that's linked to the control room signals & points system. Yes, it will be millions, may even hit a billion, but can't see it being several billion. As long as there is a "trip" system to emergency stop the train, i.e. on failure of communications, or over-ride by control room, or train not cleared the block ahead, etc, that's your safety sorted.

There's plenty of technology used already. There's a major goods yard here in the UK where they've installed remote control into aged shunters so that instead of several drivers covering several shunters, there's a single "driver" controlling them all remotely. That's here and now. Also a few tourist attraction trains and monorails that run driverless - the attendant just presses the start button and off it goes and stops at the other station. As others have said, plenty of similar in other countries, particularly airport shuttles etc.

At the end of the day, the most a driver can do in case of emergency is hit the emergency stop - in fact it's probably just a matter of taking the foot/hand off the "dead-man's switch". You can't steer it and you can't do anything else either. Completely different to cars, boats, planes where you have other dimensions - a train on a train is literally nothing more than stop or start, the only discretion being speed (which can and is controlled by technology to stop a driver going too fast!). A plane can't just "stop" in an emergency - it needs real skills to land it. A driver of a car or boat has the ability to steer away from a hazard as well as braking - trains can't steer.

MGCP

These drivers are holding a gun to the head of London and demanding money with menaces!

I have no doubt that you could get plenty of people who would jump at the chance to do this relatively unskilled job (and do it just as well) for a hell of a lot less money. Perhaps while they are at it they could also employ some drivers who are articulate and able to deal with their passengers politely and respectfully (rather than indulge in the barely coherent shouting at them over the tannoy that so many of them seem to do).

No group should be that powerful and I would love to see them broken. Driverless trains must be the ideal solution and hopefully their greed will bring that day forward.

crazyguy

kabayiri

Pennywise wrote: »

Why do you think you have to replace tracks and points and signals?

Tracks, points and signals are already there and automated - control room sets the route, signals are integrated with points - train detection systems tell control room where the trains are and monitor its progress. In fact, if driverless, there'd be no need for signals anymore! You just need a new system to actually control the trains that's linked to the control room signals & points system. Yes, it will be millions, may even hit a billion, but can't see it being several billion. As long as there is a "trip" system to emergency stop the train, i.e. on failure of communications, or over-ride by control room, or train not cleared the block ahead, etc, that's your safety sorted.

There's plenty of technology used already. There's a major goods yard here in the UK where they've installed remote control into aged shunters so that instead of several drivers covering several shunters, there's a single "driver" controlling them all remotely. That's here and now. Also a few tourist attraction trains and monorails that run driverless - the attendant just presses the start button and off it goes and stops at the other station. As others have said, plenty of similar in other countries, particularly airport shuttles etc.

At the end of the day, the most a driver can do in case of emergency is hit the emergency stop - in fact it's probably just a matter of taking the foot/hand off the "dead-man's switch". You can't steer it and you can't do anything else either. Completely different to cars, boats, planes where you have other dimensions - a train on a train is literally nothing more than stop or start, the only discretion being speed (which can and is controlled by technology to stop a driver going too fast!). A plane can't just "stop" in an emergency - it needs real skills to land it. A driver of a car or boat has the ability to steer away from a hazard as well as braking - trains can't steer.

Absolutely right.

But, okay, what if we had to mock up a station to proof all the upgrades to networks, simulating for DR etc.

Well, I know of at least one which exists in NW England because I've seen it, at a well known Defence contractor site. A lot of work was done for the extensions for 2012.

There is no need to invent everything from scratch.

Dan:_4

MGCP wrote: »

These drivers are holding a gun to the head of London and demanding money with menaces!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:god i love this forum!