Charter Plane down- breaking news

Also IM-twice-over-the-years-E the MD listens to the COO, the FD and the
Sales & Marketing wallah(s).
No other board members listen properly to the CTO, this isn't necessarily
because the CTO can't explain in human language how various IT strategies /
proposals can help the company to achieve its stated goals (though this can
be a problem in some cases), it's more a cultural thing wherein the other
board members or senior managers see someone who is 'something to do with
those pesky computer thingies' and immediately go into full on shutdown
mode; though sometimes they pretend that they're listening and come up with
'helpful' alternatives (i.e. 'This is how it will be done, we have
spoken!').
It's not like that everywhere, but when it is that way it is very
infuriating.

ZK

 

What I've noticed about the finance / accounting side of business is that
the accounting types (well the thick ones anyway) really enjoy dressing up
their needs with excessive waffle... they can spend hours rattling on about
various T accounts; accruals; control accounts; etc, all dressed up in the
most wildly frilly terms, when what they really mean is stuff like "I need
to capture the numbers"; "I need to know where the numbers came from"; "I
need to do sums with the numbers"; "I might wish to keep totals of certain
types of numbers". I know I haven't stated my case fully, but gimme a
break, it's nearly 04:00 FFS

ZK

 

Dear God.

 

It's a bit complicated, as you also have procedure qualifications.
Thanfully, I only have to do the NDT and not worry about all that.

Much better than an angle grinder when you want to get *serious*

 

After the news I 've had in the small hours this morning, I'd like to
see something similar fitted to cars too!

There again, on reflection I'm over-reacting.

 

spouted the following in

Well no. I was being flippant, I'm sorry if you lost your contract
position through it. I just think that if the publics money has to be
poured in to make the network viable and safe, then none of it should be
skimmed off as profit. I think the Govt has done the rightest possible
thing (tm) with a screwed up situation. The Tories should never have
privatised it in the first place IMO.

 

That's the problem here too isn't it. You just can't get the navvy's these
days.

 

[snip details]

Yes thank you for telling me stuff I already knew but opted not to add
into a long post. And dear Roger I was fully aware of the above
differences so references to "at last someone who knows" are not very
helpful.

 

[taking back railtrack]

really? - please explain your reasoning.

 

IIRC the Swiss force any lorry that is merely passing through their country
rather than delivering to it to travel by train, hence more goods wagons and
less lorries upon their roads which might be why they have so many goods
trains derailments? More goods trains see.

Not a bad idea that, railfreight is good stuff, when the infrastructure's
there for it anyway. Trouble in this country has been that even when a big
player comes along and wants to transfer a goodly wedge of their roadfreight
to the railways the rail mob basically suck their teeth and say "oooh no,
don't know about that, not in that colour mate, will next Tuesday do?" etc.

ZK

 

Even my buddy who is summat really very senior in the SRA privately doesn't
approve of rail privatisation one little bit, and he's an out and out dyed
in the wool tory voter. He reckons that privatising the trains was OK, but
not the track (I don't get it myself, but he doesn't half bang on and on
sometimes so I've never bothered to ask him why <g>).

ZK

 

Paul Corfield <> spouted the following in

Take it easy Paul.
SWK doesn't contain 'At last' as part of the acronym

Could I remind you of this part of our earlier conversation:

PC> Let's just say that I do all of those things so I reckon I know what
PC> I am talking about.

TB> You obviously do, and I'm only a concerned punter who keeps himself
TB> as well informed as he can.

Please don't fall out with me. I am allowed to have a POV even if I'm
not a qualified rail safety expert.

I regularly go hill walking with the Leeds Loco climbing club, so I get
the POV of engine drivers too. One of them got early retirement recently
because he'd been on suspension for misreading a warning signal. He
reckons additional warning and automated braking systems can't come soon
enough. He's 62 years old with 44 years service and says:
"If they have got the technology, why not use it?"
Voice of experience there I reckon.

 

NailHead <------------- Hammer

 

They're all in France, training to be teachers.

--
| ___ Salad Dodger
|/ \
_/_____\_ GL1500SEV/CBR1100XXX/KH500A8/TS250C
|_\_____/_| ..62661../..14297.../..3157./.19406
(>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 YTC#4 PM#5
|__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 two#11 WG*
\ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4
\|^|/ ANORAK#17
'^'

 

<snip stats>

Since privatisation in May '96, 60 dead, 678 injured

And in the 8 years before that, 61 dead, 702 injured

So the Privateers have it, just. Mined ewe, we have to consider the way
the tories wound down investment in infrastructure prior to the sell
off, so:

In the 8 years before 88 we get, 26 dead, 175 injured

Hmmm.

I don't know if the stats are complete, but there don't seem to be any
accidents between 1915 and 1952

 

He was prepared to listen to everyone, including the Unions and the
employers. The railwaymen if you like.

Through this he identified one of the industry's biggest problems was a
future skills shortage. The need for national standards and training.
He had in 2001 started to reintroduce the much needed structures and
standards for this. Now conspicuous by their absence.

Also that the structure was the root of the problem. The need to clear
the industry log jam was to call a halt and revisit the whole process,
which he'd started.

The SRA had been seriously empowered to act. Something it couldn't do
without his support and leadership. Since his departure the SRA has been
rudderless. Exacerbating an already unfocused and disorganised industry.

Although saddled with PPP as part of the Treasury's policy, he appeared
to be moving away from that as a wholesale solution for the transport
industry's ills. This, I suspect, had more to do with his 'resignation'
than the RT issue.

On a personal note, and what the Labour Gov't should have been doing from
day one, it was this quote (from memory) "We have the City arguing that
we should compensate the shareholders. We are not going to put more
taxpayers' money into compensating shareholders"

Unusual now, a *Labour* minister.

 

I understood what they did or the way they did it was actually illegal
(fraud) and that action may still be taken.

 

A physicist, an aerodynamasist and an accountant are ship wrecked on a
desert island. They are washed up with loads of tins of food but no tin
opener.

The physicist stands up. "We can build a fire put a tin of food on top
and I can calculate how hot the fire should be just to explode the tin
with out the food going everywhere."

The aerodynamasist stands up. "I can calculate the flight of the food
and where it will land. Then we can stand there to catch it."

The accountant stands up. "I can't see what your problem is. Lets just
assume we have a tin opener."

I

 

Thank you, thank you, I think that was my first "**** off" on this NG
ever.
I now feel accepted.
Ahhh!

 

IME they differ enough to warrant /not/ being described as "Not quite the
same as full ATP but close enough."

But I agree with your point on the second part.