|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
PeteSig wrote:
"Theo Bekkers" wrote: Huh? I don't own a ute. I drive a company ute OK. But your family company? Be straight about it. If this is the case you still 'own' it. I drive a company ute. It belongs to a pty. ltd. company owned by various family members. That doesn't make it 'my ute' (seriously). If I took it I'd still be just as guilty of theft as if someone else took it. So yes I am being straight and no I don't own it. G-S |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
Theo Bekkers wrote:
Zebee Johnstone wrote: EuanB wrote: Theo Bekkers Wrote: Melbourne trains need to be re-fit with bench seats along the sides, and wide open standing spaces. That's all there is to it. Until there is a major accident, and then we will have the seatbelt brigade out in full cry. That doesn't seem to be a problem in London, Paris, Rome, Japan etc etc. Neither are bicycle head injuries apparently. But you will note that doesn't stop the Oz Govt... ROTFL. Seat-belts on school buses are a hot item here in the West ATM. Current situation is that the Gov't wont allow them to be fitted by the operators (at the operator's cost) because it will set a precedent and all parents will expect school buses to be fitted with them. They aren't actually stopping operators in vic fitting belts to school buses but they tried to a while back. The fact that they were attempting to do so reached the media and they back pedalled. Might be worth a letter to the papers or a call to a TV show... G-S |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
"G-S" wrote: I drive a company ute. It belongs to a pty. ltd. company owned by various family members. That doesn't make it 'my ute' (seriously). If I took it I'd still be just as guilty of theft as if someone else took it. You get the benefits from it's use (in your company's profits) and the rest of us are subsidising your tax concession, if it's a 4WD. -- Cheers Peter ~~~ ~ _@ ~~ ~ _- \, ~~ (*)/ (*) |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
PeteSig wrote:
"G-S" wrote: I drive a company ute. It belongs to a pty. ltd. company owned by various family members. That doesn't make it 'my ute' (seriously). If I took it I'd still be just as guilty of theft as if someone else took it. You get the benefits from it's use (in your company's profits) and the rest of us are subsidising your tax concession, if it's a 4WD. It's my families company, it's not my company... I don't get the benefits of the company's profits (not unless/until I inherit shares anyway), all I get is wages. Never the less it is 'a family company'. So again... how is it 'my ute'? G-S |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
You are so hypocritical you have storage lockers in the loop stations at
all.You have not addressed or made transaprent your method of gaining data that appers to besed on your own view point experincees and observations. You consider a bike to be a car, locked at a station, and returned to, I bike is far more flexible than a car and can be used outstandingly with a reilable and friendly train service to service many mulitpse locations frequemtlu with no parking /congestion hassles throuh the greater area of zone one. you have not faced the securing and redelegation of the two or three drivers compartments on each train, the praxctise of carrrying the cycles in the rear compartment. All bikes too the back carriage, the greta in crease in the no of bicycle being used for and relied on for transport the long term short sitedness in of your outlook in terms of the environment. Iam sure you will get grease on your suit from your next obsticle. Verify and demonstrate the with proof that any passanger that has been refused or unable to get tranport adequately directly because of a bicycle and not the packing of the train, or anyone of a number of factors. I can tell "what you enjoy" from our phone call: "Its my decision and I am right and everyone else can just suffer, get your greasy bike away from my suit. I only ride on the weekends for fun" What on earth did you do to Bicycle Victoria to get them to advocate your ....? The people of Victoria know what is right and how far down in quality, desirability and safety the sububan rail network has gone over the past 15 years. No feeling of well being, no toilets, no customer information so travellers have to ask other travellrer how to do things. Gestapo style ticket enforcement and fining.only the beginning. We will have our day and not the companies. Vintage wrote: Well great to see the cut and past job from Connex that didn't address any of the concerns I raised with them over the bike ban on trains in peak hour. Lets me just say that if its dark in the arvo, the rain hits hard, the roads are REAL nasty I'm telling the wife to get the train still home with her bike instead of riding home that night. We will cop any fine they want to throw at us or action taking as its still better than the worst case scenario of her on the roads in those conditions. And I trust her skills on the road, its just all the other nuts I don't trust and see daily. I take it when the new trains are here we are allowed back on? Here is the response about the bike scapegoat issue we are facing. "Thank you for your feedback to Metlink regarding bikes on trains. During the last two years, patronage has increased by 23% on Connex train services. Patronage is expected to continue to increase and a number of steps are being taken to increase the capacity of the train network to enable more passengers to be carried. The Victorian government has recently announced an order for 18 new suburban trains and 22 new V/Locity carriages. However, growing patronage has meant that a number of difficult operational decisions were required to maximise the number of passengers that can be carried on peak hour services. It is expected that the removal of bikes from the most congested parts of the network during peak hours will enable more passengers to be carried, providing significant environmental and community benefits. The restrictions for bikes are highly targeted and only apply to bikes travelling in the peak direction during peak times. For Connex trains, the ban only applies to services within Zone 1. Customers will continue to be able to travel at off-peak times and in the counter peak direction without restrictions. Similar rules exist in other Australian suburban train networks, including Brisbane and Perth. The Victorian Government and the public transport industry strongly support the use of public transport in conjunction with cycling and regret the need to restrict bikes from peak hour trains. Public transport users are encouraged to continue to use bikes in conjunction with public transport by leaving their bikes at the station at peak times and taking their bikes on trains during off-peak times. (who wants to leave a good bike at a station all day, day in day out at the same time each day in most areas?) Lockers are provided at many Connex and V/Line stations.(Rubbish) Rental fees for lockers have been eliminated, with only a refundable deposit now required. Fees for the carriage of bikes on public transport have been eliminated. CCTV coverage at stations reduces the chances of theft. Six carriage trains are now operated on the majority of off-peak services, providing more room for bikes during the day, at night and on weekends. The Victorian Government recognises that there is more work to do in relation to bicycle storage at stations. The Department of Infrastructure is working with Connex and Bicycle Victoria to implement a bike cage storage facility at a suburban station as a trial. If successful(100 bikes NOT stolen) , more bike cages are likely to be implemented. Thank you for raising this matter with the Public Transport Division. Yours sincerely Adrian Webb Victorian Fare Policy Manager -- Posted at www.Usenet.com.au |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
On 2008-01-09, tim (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea: On Jan 9, 12:46 pm, "Theo Bekkers" wrote: I'm aware of that Peter. Melbourne train carriages have not yet reached the double-decker stage due to the good length of station platforms. By my understanding, it's more to do with clearance around the track. They had a couple of Sydney Tangara double-deckers on evaluation, but they could only run on a couple of lines because the other lines were designed for more "cylindrical" carriages, and didn't have the shoulder clearance required to run rectangular section carriages, as is required if two levels are to be used. Heh. The explanations you hear. I had heard it was because we are more limited by passenger movements in Melbourne. Sydney trains only have 2 doors, because otherwise you'd need to add a centre set of stairs. The 2 doors slow down the loading and offloading of passengers compared to the 3 doors on Melbourne trains. -- TimC Oooh, Look! Shiny New Thing! -- TimC |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
On 2008-01-10, G-S (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea: Theo Bekkers wrote: Zebee Johnstone wrote: EuanB wrote: Theo Bekkers Wrote: Melbourne trains need to be re-fit with bench seats along the sides, and wide open standing spaces. That's all there is to it. Until there is a major accident, and then we will have the seatbelt brigade out in full cry. That doesn't seem to be a problem in London, Paris, Rome, Japan etc etc. Neither are bicycle head injuries apparently. But you will note that doesn't stop the Oz Govt... ROTFL. Seat-belts on school buses are a hot item here in the West ATM. Current situation is that the Gov't wont allow them to be fitted by the operators (at the operator's cost) because it will set a precedent and all parents will expect school buses to be fitted with them. They aren't actually stopping operators in vic fitting belts to school buses but they tried to a while back. The fact that they were attempting to do so reached the media and they back pedalled. Might be worth a letter to the papers or a call to a TV show... Don't stir that hornets nest. The risk of injury in a bus crash is absolutely miniscule (smaller than injuries sustained from bike riding), and for the great cost of belting every seat in every bus, it is most certainly not worth it. -- TimC "The thing I love most about deadlines is the wonderful WHOOSHing sound they make as they go past" - DNA |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
G-S wrote:
PeteSig wrote: "G-S" wrote: I drive a company ute. It belongs to a pty. ltd. company owned by various family members. That doesn't make it 'my ute' (seriously). If I took it I'd still be just as guilty of theft as if someone else took it. You get the benefits from it's use (in your company's profits) and the rest of us are subsidising your tax concession, if it's a 4WD. It's my families company, it's not my company... I don't get the benefits of the company's profits (not unless/until I inherit shares anyway), all I get is wages. Never the less it is 'a family company'. So again... how is it 'my ute'? About the same as the one I drive is my ute. Theo |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
PeteSig wrote:
"Theo Bekkers" wrote: Huh? I don't own a ute. I drive a company ute OK. But your family company? Be straight about it. If this is the case you still 'own' it. and it's not 4WD. OK. Good on you for steering away from the prevailing trend. Why is a 4WD ute so much worse than a 2WD one? Theo Was thinking of trading it on a new 4WD diesel version of the same brand ute. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Crap respsonse from Connex about bikes on trains.
TimC wrote:
On 2008-01-10, G-S wrote Theo Bekkers wrote: ROTFL. Seat-belts on school buses are a hot item here in the West ATM. Current situation is that the Gov't wont allow them to be fitted by the operators (at the operator's cost) because it will set a precedent and all parents will expect school buses to be fitted with them. They aren't actually stopping operators in vic fitting belts to school buses but they tried to a while back. The fact that they were attempting to do so reached the media and they back pedalled. Might be worth a letter to the papers or a call to a TV show... Don't stir that hornets nest. Why not? The risk of injury in a bus crash is absolutely miniscule (smaller than injuries sustained from bike riding), and for the great cost of belting every seat in every bus, it is most certainly not worth it. Try this angle then. Aircraft travel is far safer than even a bus, and they have belts on every seat. In the event of a crash they are of no use at all. Theo |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bikes on trains | Don Whybrow | UK | 4 | May 2nd 07 07:12 PM |
Bikes on One trains | Tony Raven | UK | 12 | January 3rd 07 11:04 PM |
Bikes on trains and DRL | Alex Potter | UK | 9 | December 15th 06 11:27 PM |
Bikes on Trains | Tony Raven | UK | 4 | October 16th 05 10:15 AM |
Bikes on Trains | Simon Parker | UK | 3 | July 22nd 03 01:20 PM |