Friday, April 28, 2006

Fri 28 April - Good again...

No problems again this morning.

I need to come into the office on Saturday and would normally come in by train. But I see this on the Metlink website

Saturday, 29 April 2006:

Buses will depart Sandringham every half-hour from 4.34am until 6.34am, then every 20 minutes from 6.54am to 7.34pm and then at regular intervals from 7.52pm until 11.32pm.


So you turn up at Ripponlea and wait from zero to twenty minutes for a bus, with no idea when it might arrive. Then you'll alight at South Yarra and wait for some extra period of time to connect to a train that will be running to a completely independent timetable.

It's not hard to see this trip taking an hour door-to-door. Compared to 15 minutes in the car, I think I'll drive thanks!

And if the works are at Middle Brighton, why not shuttle trains between the city and North Brighton?

Home on the 18:24 and it scrapes in for a green.

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

As there is nowhere to turn trains around (switch tracks) between North Brighton and South Yarra, they would only be able to have one train is this section at any time.
This would not allow for any type of reasonable service so they run the buses to South Yarra where you can catch trains entering the City from three other lines and the wait for a train would not be more than 10 minutes.
They are also running extra shuttles between Flinders Street and South Yarra which then turn around at Caulfield.

28 April, 2006 09:11  
Blogger Connex Whinger said...

Thanks Daniel, I figured they had to be able to do so because in the old days they had a regular service between Elsternwick and Flinders Street.

As for the Anon post, if you've waited up to 20 minutes for a bus then taken another 20 minutes to get to South Yarra, the last thing you want is to hang around for another ten minutes for a train. Anyway, my opinion is it's not for me and I think Connex could do more to provide a service to their customers you apparently disagree. So be it.

28 April, 2006 21:35  
Blogger Tagle said...

No need for me comment, what was said has been said.

28 April, 2006 22:11  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, that's a first. Chris(the met) managed to type one sentence without a spelling error! ( And refrained himself from a usual ridiculous response )

28 April, 2006 23:37  
Blogger Tagle said...

anonymous,

whoop-ti-doo!

A mere spelling error, on this webpage causes more uproar than the real problems itself.

Tut-tut, i suppose there a lack of maturity by other posters.

29 April, 2006 10:40  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Met you are such a tool

29 April, 2006 22:16  
Blogger Tagle said...

yes and your a knob

30 April, 2006 10:29  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your just so mature the Met.

30 April, 2006 13:30  
Blogger Tagle said...

well, as mature as you.

30 April, 2006 14:30  
Blogger Tagle said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

30 April, 2006 14:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's what I said, I am a 6 year old and so are you! Good that you agree!

30 April, 2006 18:00  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Met's post may not have had a spelling error, but it made no sense whatsoever.

I'm sure what he meant to say was

"No need for me to comment, what needed to be said has been said."

Or something.

Please also remember that The Met, according to toher posts on this blog, is a fifteen year old kid, so if you are looking for a mature debate then it may not be forthcoming.

01 May, 2006 14:50  
Blogger Tagle said...

No need for my comment, what was said, has been said.

An Y for an E and a comma, again big-whoop.

Or do you need me to expand.

- "No need for my comment"
Straight forward? Well, im saying that I don't need to comment!

- "What was said,"
Indicates comments that 'have' been made, or comments made in the 'past'

- "has been said"
Reinforces that comments HAVE been made, and common form of repetition to prove a strong point. It's also informing the blasted obvious.

01 May, 2006 17:19  
Blogger Tagle said...

alas mr "the met" has returned...

02 May, 2006 19:44  

Post a Comment

<< Home