top | item 22625199

TfL closes 40 tube stations, suspends Night Tube, fewer trains, buses next week

50 points| edward | 6 years ago |ianvisits.co.uk | reply

72 comments

order
[+] emdowling|6 years ago|reply
This seems like the right response. For Americans who are used to driving everywhere, it is hard to state just how critical the tube is for all people to get to work. Very few people in London have cars, so shutting down the tube entirely would prevent critical workers from getting to work. Looking at the stations to be closed, it seems like a reasonable list; buses will still offer a reduced timetable to connect affected areas.
[+] j4yav|6 years ago|reply
Won't this just guarantee that every bus or tram is as full as possible?
[+] aliswe|6 years ago|reply
Neither any of the comments nor the article explains what TfL stands for; it is "Transport For London", basically their public transport authority.
[+] lordnacho|6 years ago|reply
London is already a ghost town. I went in for the last time a few days ago to ensure some colleagues could work from home. Normally the City (financial district) is packed with people, no seats to be had, streets full. Monday felt like a Sunday afternoon. I think people are starting to get the message.
[+] lokedhs|6 years ago|reply
With fewer trains, wouldn't that lead to more overcrowding?
[+] Svip|6 years ago|reply
In Copenhagen, the metro took the reverse action, running more trains, even outside rush hours (basically all their trains all the time). Well, that happened two weeks ago, and now no one is actually taking the metro, so maybe they have cut down since then.

I think bus companies and train companies in general took the same action, but they are also reporting an 80% drop in passengers.

[+] kylec|6 years ago|reply
My thoughts exactly. My local Safeway has decided to close at 9pm instead of midnight due to the health issues, which means that now everyone that would have gone later is now crowding in right before closing.
[+] tobylane|6 years ago|reply
The peak tube is usually crowded to the point of you can’t get on, this week there’s photos of spare seats as they leave zone 1.

This image is from six days ago, I’d usually expect to see ~25 people in this space https://imgur.com/lUC9hO4

[+] ace32229|6 years ago|reply
The tube is incredibly empty at the moment. I imagine it's not much of a concern
[+] mrtksn|6 years ago|reply
I wonder if this can be a solution to the heating problems on the older lines. I haven't done the math but a few weeks of closure or reduced service can be an opportunity for some heat exchange.
[+] foota|6 years ago|reply
It sounds like it took many decades for the surrounding soil to heat up, so without 100xing the rate of cooling from the soil relative to the existing rate of heating I'm skeptical, given that the heating resulted from a temperature differential of likely a few dozen degrees, you would need a substantially cooler environment to cool the soil. Maybe with a massive investment you could do it by cooling the tunnels to substantially sub zero temperatures.
[+] sapphire_tomb|6 years ago|reply
I can't find an online source to document this - but on a recent tour of Chislehurst Caves in SE London - the tour guide mentioned that during the second world war, when it was used as a bomb shelter for some 15,000 local residents, the heat built up inside to over 30°C very quickly. When the war ended he said, it took about 10 years for the temperature to return to it's now rather chilly 10°C.
[+] nnq|6 years ago|reply
Please don't fuel this bad reasoning - decreasing the number of trains or lowering their speed is a dangerous measure that will increase transmission!

It's the same brand of broken-mindedness that brought us the "only sick people should wear masks" and other wrong-think measures that increase transmission and make everything worse!

[+] OwnsE|6 years ago|reply
Even though this is the right response I feel this is a bit late.
[+] nnq|6 years ago|reply
It's the opposite of the right response!
[+] HatchedLake721|6 years ago|reply

[deleted]

[+] viraptor|6 years ago|reply
You REALLY need more details or evidence with posts like that. Otherwise that may just be panic trolling.
[+] mattlondon|6 years ago|reply
Please don't spread FUD - people are already panic-buying enough as it is.
[+] switch007|6 years ago|reply
Is your source for this a random video on Facebook?
[+] benmmurphy|6 years ago|reply
I overheard an army acquaintance talking about what would happen and he said something along the lines of soldiers deployed would have limited kit to be less intimidating.
[+] nnq|6 years ago|reply

[deleted]

[+] Reason077|6 years ago|reply
London simply can’t fully shut down it’s transit. People who can’t work from home (like, y’know, hospital workers) need it to get to work.

But likewise, it doesn’t make sense to run empty trains every 90 seconds that nobody is using, especially when losing vast sums of money due to vastly reduced ticket revenue. And there won’t be as many staff available (self isolation, parents looking after kids due to school closures, etc).

Demand will probably be down by 90% or more next week, so even if you reduce service by 50% you still have far less crowded trains than usual.

[+] thinkingemote|6 years ago|reply
Please look after yourself. Your many comments on this thread makes it seem to me that you are panicking

Please take a step back and a deep breath. It's going to get more tough in the next few weeks, please don't burn out now.

[+] cameronh90|6 years ago|reply
The trains are only still running for healthcare and other essential workers, and almost nobody is on them. London is like a ghost town right now.
[+] ctz|6 years ago|reply
Have you considered that they are taking this action to manage their diminishing staff levels? That's what the article says, after all.
[+] madaxe_again|6 years ago|reply
You know, you can make a (perfectly valid) point without being ableist.