the supertrain delayed for ten years

On 22 May 2007 03:32:50 -0700, didier Meurgues <erdnisloed@voila.fr> wrote:


>So the Times deliberatly LIED at least... once in this single article
>by saying :

The Times is a Murdoch publication. His publications aren't supposed to be
factual.
--

Martin

On 23 mei, 14:22, d4g....uk (David Horne, _the_ chancellor
(*)) wrote:
> <jeremyrh....m> wrote:
> > On 23 mei, 14:13, d4g....uk (David Horne, _the_ chancellor
> > (*)) wrote:
> > > <jeremyrh....m> wrote:
> []
> > > > Is it worse than Durham-Newcastle - a 10 minute journey that always
> > > > seems to take at least an hour?
>
> > > Eh, it's just over 10 minutes whenever I've taken it, including
> > > recently. Maybe there were train problems that day?
>
> > > It's probably among the most frequent and highest speed services in the
> > > UK.
>
> > The actual traveling time is about 10 mins, but that doesn't take into
> > account the time you spend waiting for delayed or cancelled trains and
> > shuttling between platforms.
>
> It's usually running fine on that route though. Durham's station is
> tiny, and Newcastle isn't unusually large as stations go. I've never
> been unlucky enough to have a problem there recently, though most of my
> journeys have been Manchester to Newcastle, albeit usually with a stop
> at Durham.

Maybe I was unlucky this last weekend: 2 trips, 2 problems.

B;

On 23 May 2007 05:49:06 -0700, jeremyrh.geom wrote:

>On 23 mei, 14:22, d4g....uk (David Horne, _the_ chancellor
>(*)) wrote:
>> <jeremyrh....m> wrote:
>> > On 23 mei, 14:13, d4g....uk (David Horne, _the_ chancellor
>> > (*)) wrote:
>> > > <jeremyrh....m> wrote:
>> []
>> > > > Is it worse than Durham-Newcastle - a 10 minute journey that always
>> > > > seems to take at least an hour?
>>
>> > > Eh, it's just over 10 minutes whenever I've taken it, including
>> > > recently. Maybe there were train problems that day?
>>
>> > > It's probably among the most frequent and highest speed services in the
>> > > UK.
>>
>> > The actual traveling time is about 10 mins, but that doesn't take into
>> > account the time you spend waiting for delayed or cancelled trains and
>> > shuttling between platforms.
>>
>> It's usually running fine on that route though. Durham's station is
>> tiny, and Newcastle isn't unusually large as stations go. I've never
>> been unlucky enough to have a problem there recently, though most of my
>> journeys have been Manchester to Newcastle, albeit usually with a stop
>> at Durham.
>
>Maybe I was unlucky this last weekend: 2 trips, 2 problems.

Maybe we are always unlucky?
--

Martin

Hatunen a écrit :

> Ah. The "So's your old man" argument.
>
> Britsh rail does have problems, but I fail to see how that
> precludes Brit newspapers and magazines from discussing problems
> in other parts of the EU. Or the world, for that matter.

First it is a matter of prority. Second, it is a matter of questionning
rules that have prooved over years to allow both a reliable and secure
service to passenger trains, third it is a matter of trying to find
problems where there is none (preferentially as we say in the head of
others!), fourth a matter of technical competence. As a French person I
would not discuss the quality of the English language of native English
speakers.

Cheers,

YD

On Wed, 23 May 2007 18:14:23 +0200, Yves Dessaux <Yves.Dessaux@isv.cnrs-gif.fr>
wrote:

>Hatunen a écrit :
>
>> Ah. The "So's your old man" argument.
>>
>> Britsh rail does have problems, but I fail to see how that
>> precludes Brit newspapers and magazines from discussing problems
>> in other parts of the EU. Or the world, for that matter.
>
>First it is a matter of prority. Second, it is a matter of questionning
>rules that have prooved over years to allow both a reliable and secure
>service to passenger trains, third it is a matter of trying to find
>problems where there is none (preferentially as we say in the head of
>others!), fourth a matter of technical competence. As a French person I
>would not discuss the quality of the English language of native English
>speakers.

Why don't you address the point Hatunen made instead of waffling?

Is nobody outside France allowed to criticise all things French?
--

Martin

On Wed, 23 May 2007 17:30:58 +0100, d4g4h4.uk (David Horne, _the_
chancellor (*)) wrote:


>It seems to me that as a French person, you've decided that no one else
>may criticise you. Still, your notion that UK newspapers love the idea
>of the "good German" gave me a laugh.

Yves never got past "The Madonna with the big boobies, Big Bertha" on page 3.
--

Martin

On Wed, 23 May 2007 22:11:27 +0200, in .europe, me2@ (Mister
Bartlett) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:

... Martin <me@address.invalid> wrote:
...
... > On Wed, 23 May 2007 19:01:04 +0200, Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
... >
... > >On Wed, 23 May 2007 18:51:48 +0200, in .europe, Martin
... > ><me@address.invalid> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
... > >
...
... > >Piccalilli. Must be German, it's Heinz - confirm, please.
... >
... > Isn't Piccalilli a British invention?
...
... I always assumed it was Belgian - no idea why ...

Because it's good. ;)

On Wed, 23 May 2007 22:28:41 +0200, Magda <magda@eu> wrote:

>On Wed, 23 May 2007 22:11:27 +0200, in .europe, me2@ (Mister
>Bartlett) arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ... Martin <me@address.invalid> wrote:
> ...
> ... > On Wed, 23 May 2007 19:01:04 +0200, Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
> ... >
> ... > >On Wed, 23 May 2007 18:51:48 +0200, in .europe, Martin
> ... > ><me@address.invalid> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ... > >
> ...
> ... > >Piccalilli. Must be German, it's Heinz - confirm, please.
> ... >
> ... > Isn't Piccalilli a British invention?
> ...
> ... I always assumed it was Belgian - no idea why ...
>
>Because it's good. ;)

It's British.
I found another thing that Unilever have taken over and suppressed. Calve Sate
sauce no longer seems to be on sale in NL, because Unilever also bought a
competitor that makes sate sauce. Odd that you can buy Calve sate sauce by mail
order in UK but that there is no sign of it in the country where it was made.
--

Martin

On Wed, 23 May 2007 22:11:27 +0200, me2@ (Mister Bartlett) wrote:

>Martin <me@address.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 23 May 2007 19:01:04 +0200, Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 23 May 2007 18:51:48 +0200, in .europe, Martin
>> ><me@address.invalid> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>> >
>
>> >Piccalilli. Must be German, it's Heinz - confirm, please.
>>
>> Isn't Piccalilli a British invention?
>
>I always assumed it was Belgian - no idea why ...

Compensation for lacking 50 famous people?
--

Martin

On Wed, 23 May 2007 23:57:21 +0100, d4g4h4.uk (David Horne, _the_
chancellor (*)) wrote:

>Martin <me@address.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 23 May 2007 22:11:27 +0200, me2@ (Mister Bartlett) wrote:
>>
>> >Martin <me@address.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 23 May 2007 19:01:04 +0200, Magda <magda@eu> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Wed, 23 May 2007 18:51:48 +0200, in .europe, Martin
>> >> ><me@address.invalid> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>> >> >
>> >
>> >> >Piccalilli. Must be German, it's Heinz - confirm, please.
>> >>
>> >> Isn't Piccalilli a British invention?
>> >
>> >I always assumed it was Belgian - no idea why ...
>>
>> Compensation for lacking 50 famous people?
>
>The only thing I like piccalili with is black pudding. Do you like it
>with anything else, assuming you like it at all?

I haven't eaten it since I was a kid. The acid used burns a hole in my stomach.
--

Martin