If that's the case it will cost me an additional £300 to watch Charlton.
Well done sadiq and some people quired why I have an opinion of him living where I do.
I think if you read the piece it’s pretty clear that it’s not Sadiq Khan instigating this but the government insisting on cost savings as a requirement of the bail out to TfL of £3.6 billion during the pandemic.
I know whose behind it mate. It was muted from him months ago. He's the top man blame goes with the position.
Theres lots of ways to skin a cat and I will be utilising it.
But clearly TFL is in desperate need of funding, it's a separate argument of who is to blame for that but regardless it's in a hole. So if the answer is to raise ticket prices who should foot that? Should it be Londoners who use it day in day out to get to and from work or should tourists have their subsidy cut? I know what I prefer.
Or people out of town who come in and add millions to the economy... Some won't bother. I know what I prefer.... We shouldn't have to pay if TFL is so poorly run.
Well let's blame a worldwide pandemic and a national government holding TFL to ransom then. Any other city in the world if they said we're raising prices for people who don't live here we'd probably all say fair enough.
I do wonder how this sits with the anti ulez lot about the poorest in London being impacted the most? Don't you agree they should be protected first given their most likely to need to use the services to survive?
Apologies for adding to the derailment (pun intended) of this thread, it will be my last post on this particular point.
No lots of Londoners get free travel, reduced fares with the Oyster card system and lots of empty buses every 5 minutes, a night service that gets them around.
Dont know what it cost now but i recall about 6 years ago making a single tube journey on a Sunday afternoon from Kings Cross to Waterloo and it cost me £4.20. God know what it does now and this was pre pandemic bla bla days.
Lots of people outside of the city contribute to those profits. Its very inward thinking of those that support Khan that has led to this. I will probably drive now so they have lost my contribution but i will now add more smog to the city. Great thinking Sadiq some Londoners certainly deserve you.
End of story.
If only there was a way to get money from motorists.
You can't get a single tube from Kings Cross to Waterloo.
You can and i did..maybe not now...
Was that on the now defunct "Waterloo and Bullshit" line?
What ? You seem familiar with that line....Someone said you cant get a single ticket then someone said yes you can, Maybe all that smog from the tubes is effecting their judgement. There is a tube map for you to peruse should you wish too.
You can get a single ticket anywhere. But you can't get a single train from King's Cross to Waterloo, you have to change.
Hope that clears things up for you.
No it doesn't I clearly said several years ago... Hope that clears that up for you.
Mate, seriously, I have absolutely no idea what point it is you're trying to make.
Are you suggesting that you used to be able to get a tube directly from Kings Cross to Waterloo without changing , when you can't do that now?
No i was told by Charlton lifes travel experts (including you) that it wasn't possible for me to get the single ticket i stated,.. A few of lifes great posters waded in with some ridiculous childish comments later. Covered end clearly stated i was correct.
There was no mention of me going direct without changing think you got the wrong end of the stick.
I wasn't going to comment further as the smug smirk on my face knowing i was correct AGAIN was enough.
If that's the case it will cost me an additional £300 to watch Charlton.
Well done sadiq and some people quired why I have an opinion of him living where I do.
I think if you read the piece it’s pretty clear that it’s not Sadiq Khan instigating this but the government insisting on cost savings as a requirement of the bail out to TfL of £3.6 billion during the pandemic.
I know whose behind it mate. It was muted from him months ago. He's the top man blame goes with the position.
Theres lots of ways to skin a cat and I will be utilising it.
But clearly TFL is in desperate need of funding, it's a separate argument of who is to blame for that but regardless it's in a hole. So if the answer is to raise ticket prices who should foot that? Should it be Londoners who use it day in day out to get to and from work or should tourists have their subsidy cut? I know what I prefer.
Or people out of town who come in and add millions to the economy... Some won't bother. I know what I prefer.... We shouldn't have to pay if TFL is so poorly run.
Well let's blame a worldwide pandemic and a national government holding TFL to ransom then. Any other city in the world if they said we're raising prices for people who don't live here we'd probably all say fair enough.
I do wonder how this sits with the anti ulez lot about the poorest in London being impacted the most? Don't you agree they should be protected first given their most likely to need to use the services to survive?
Apologies for adding to the derailment (pun intended) of this thread, it will be my last post on this particular point.
No lots of Londoners get free travel, reduced fares with the Oyster card system and lots of empty buses every 5 minutes, a night service that gets them around.
Dont know what it cost now but i recall about 6 years ago making a single tube journey on a Sunday afternoon from Kings Cross to Waterloo and it cost me £4.20. God know what it does now and this was pre pandemic bla bla days.
Lots of people outside of the city contribute to those profits. Its very inward thinking of those that support Khan that has led to this. I will probably drive now so they have lost my contribution but i will now add more smog to the city. Great thinking Sadiq some Londoners certainly deserve you.
End of story.
If only there was a way to get money from motorists.
You can't get a single tube from Kings Cross to Waterloo.
You can and i did..maybe not now...
Was that on the now defunct "Waterloo and Bullshit" line?
What ? You seem familiar with that line....Someone said you cant get a single ticket then someone said yes you can, Maybe all that smog from the tubes is effecting their judgement. There is a tube map for you to peruse should you wish too.
You can get a single ticket anywhere. But you can't get a single train from King's Cross to Waterloo, you have to change.
Hope that clears things up for you.
No it doesn't I clearly said several years ago... Hope that clears that up for you.
Mate, seriously, I have absolutely no idea what point it is you're trying to make.
Are you suggesting that you used to be able to get a tube directly from Kings Cross to Waterloo without changing , when you can't do that now?
No i was told by Charlton lifes travel experts (including you) that it wasn't possible for me to get the single ticket i stated,.. A few of lifes great posters waded in with some ridiculous childish comments later. Covered end clearly stated i was correct.
There was no mention of me going direct without changing think you got the wrong end of the stick.
I wasn't going to comment further as the smug smirk on my face knowing i was correct AGAIN was enough.
LOL, if you say so mate, if you say so.
To be honest, you speak in complete riddles most of the time so it's very difficult to understand exactly what it is you're trying to say. And then when people try to clarify what you're saying you answer with more opaque and vague statements.
If you'd care to read it back I clearly said you can get a single ticket anywhere, just not a direct train. But seriously, whatever floats your boat and makes you happy is fine with me.
There’s no room at either for proper border controls if I remember right
Well, that's not the excuse the Border Force have given. My version is based on exactly what the outgoing CEO of Eurostar told a Parliamentary Committee in Septenber last year. His written statement is here and the key sentences, the significance of which was picked up by only a few people, are:
Re-opening the intermediate stations (where demand and yields are much lower) would make things even worse as it would take away from London vital border police resources. The reality of traffic numbers is such that a police officer controls 5 to 10 times more passengers in our large terminals than in intermediate stations
If you used Eurostar you may recall that until a few years ago a UK guard stood in a fixed booth checking passports, even though he didn't need to, before the next booth staffed by a French guard. Relatively recently, they equipped the UK guards with hand-held passport scanners, and took the booth away, together with the twat who saw fit to interrogate me on why I (a UK citizen with a UK passport, leaving the UK) was travelling to Prague. I started a thread on here about it . As I understand it, you'd need the restoration of the booth, or a newer machine, and the whole thing would be a bit slower and less pleasant, but the volume of passengers would still make it manageable I'd have thought. As for inbound trains, do they need anyone? Surely that's all done at the "UK Border" in Paris/Brussels/Lille?
He knows that he won't be in the job this time next year and is deliberately queering the pitch for whoever his successor is. The man is a despicable wrecker.
He knows that he won't be in the job this time next year and is deliberately queering the pitch for whoever is successor is. The man is a despicable wrecker.
Yep, and I do not understand the politics of such behaviour. Labour is in a bind anyway regarding committing to it without having full sight of the nation’s finances. Now he’s given the chance to Starmer to say “of course we were going to do it, but Sunak sold off the land”. And the voters in Manchester will never forget it.
The entire pro- HS2 rail community is seething about this. The shrinking of Euston is also permananet, so there will never now be the capacity increase that the whole project was about.
Like I said, putting aside political tribalism, this seems like just childish spite and I do not see where the votes are in such behaviour. Who wins because of this?
He knows that he won't be in the job this time next year and is deliberately queering the pitch for whoever is successor is. The man is a despicable wrecker.
Yep, and I do not understand the politics of such behaviour. Labour is in a bind anyway regarding committing to it without having full sight of the nation’s finances. Now he’s given the chance to Starmer to say “of course we were going to do it, but Sunak sold off the land”. And the voters in Manchester will never forget it.
The entire pro- HS2 rail community is seething about this. The shrinking of Euston is also permananet, so there will never now be the capacity increase that the whole project was about.
Like I said, putting aside political tribalism, this seems like just childish spite and I do not see where the votes are in such behaviour. Who wins because of this?
If I was a cynic which of course I’m not, I might suggest that those to whom the land designated for HS2 is being sold to at a loss are large conservative donors or old school chums, mates on the board or convoluted ownership family shareholders. I realise none of that is likely.
Like the granting of a 9 year franchise renewal for the dreadful Avanti West Coast last month, this rush to sell off the HS2 land smacks to me of a dog in the manger action against the next government.
I don't doubt the sale will also be to the benefit of some major Tory supporters, rather than returning it to those who were dispossessed when it was compulsorily purchased. New party leader - same old boys network, as seen with the PPE contracts?
Big expose on how HS2 Ltd hid the escalating costs and the Government misled Parliament. I knew about some of this already but it's pretty shocking. Behind a paywall I'm afraid.
It looks like this Tweet, from a guy I follow, might open the Times article for you, it still does for me. I have some things to say about that article, though
The problem with this summary is that it is suggesting the entire project was fundamentally flawed from the start, and, sadly, suggests an editorial agenda at work, which for me undermines the undoubtedly diligent work of the two journos who are credited. One of the big reasons why costs have risen is the need to dig tunnels in the Chilterns because the government caved in to local and very well-connected NIMBYs. And yes, all HS lines need to be more straight and level than conventional lines to facilitate the highest speeds, but all HS lines have curves, of course they do, FFS. Take a look at how HS1 approaches Ebbsfleet.
That said I'm always here for exposes of massive public sector waste,so long as we learn lessons from them. One of the most difficult aspects of the current debate re HS2 is that there is no definitive account of what the cost budget has been at various times and what the components were. Even the pro-HS2 guys who are pushing back cannot seem to agree, which is making my work more difficult. But one example is that the cost of the trains themselves is part of the Govt. "narrative" figure. This is a nonsense, unless the Government is planning to both build and operate the trains itself. Even if the railway were fully nationalised the trains would not go into that budget. It's amateur hour public budgetting, and I'm being kind by assuming it's just an error. But one lesson is, the country needs to up its game in costing, assessing and controlling major infrastructure budgets.
"Super-fast" sounds like something a child might say about a toy car.
What exactly does it mean?
Perhaps it would have been wiser to publish reasonable cost estimates for different levels of capacity and speed. Together with a summary of similar projects throughout the world.
300 km / hr seems to be the normal speed for new railway lines and about 100 km /hr for roads.
All modern rail and road projects should have tunnels and bridges. Not just because they a going through hilly and/or beautiful areas, but because we need to allow animals freedom of movement too.
"Super-fast" sounds like something a child might say about a toy car.
What exactly does it mean?
Perhaps it would have been wiser to publish reasonable cost estimates for different levels of capacity and speed. Together with a summary of similar projects throughout the world.
300 km / hr seems to be the normal speed for new railway lines and about 100 km /hr for roads.
I agree with you. In fact it is difficult to even pin down what the costs are,and what elements have pushed the headline bill up. Even pro- HS2 professionals cannot agree on that. That’s a general lesson for all big projects.. On speed I agree too. In most European countries, capacity is the big issue. You see in Germany more and more speed restrictions on the autobahns because they find it shifts more vehicles if they all move at steady 120km/h on narrower six lanes than typical wide four lanes. On the rails, as I’ve learnt, you need new separate tracks for high-speed trains, because on normal shared track you need to clear the slower moving stuff away to give them a clear run. This often fails if some other train is late, which is why your Pendolino inexplicably grinds to a halt in the middle of nowhere.
In terms of fast, how much does it matter? They have recently lowered the speed limit of the TFL owned Eltham Road (double red lines) from Sutcliffe Park athletics track corner to Lee Green, from 30mph to 20mph. I can’t see how that change has a negative effect on anybody.
Capacity is going to be one of the major problems going forward. There is definitely and rightly so a move to get people out of cars and onto public transport. It’s so short sighted to cancel a project that significantly relieves capacity issues. At present it’s the unreliability and cost of train travel keeping people in cars and as a person that now lives a four hour drive from my London roots with a need to make the journey fairly often I’ve looked at going by train and it’s not quicker and certainly not cheaper than sitting in the comfort of my car. “They” won’t reduce fares to make rail travel attractive and if by some miracle they do then there is not the capacity to make it work. The whole rail service and infrastructure needs a complete rethink. At the moment it’s hard to see a way of squaring the circle.
Capacity is going to be one of the major problems going forward. There is definitely and rightly so a move to get people out of cars and onto public transport. It’s so short sighted to cancel a project that significantly relieves capacity issues. At present it’s the unreliability and cost of train travel keeping people in cars and as a person that now lives a four hour drive from my London roots with a need to make the journey fairly often I’ve looked at going by train and it’s not quicker and certainly not cheaper than sitting in the comfort of my car. “They” won’t reduce fares to make rail travel attractive and if by some miracle they do then there is not the capacity to make it work. The whole rail service and infrastructure needs a complete rethink. At the moment it’s hard to see a way of squaring the circle.
That's interesting to hear about the relative costs. I recently went from Prague to Graz in South East Austria for the weekend. I was able to demonstrate that even first class it was cheaper by rail, compared to my new PHEV car. The first class ticket had no discount, anyone could buy it, and the train was a Railjet, one of the best types in Europe, with at-seat service including draught Pilsner Urquell The balance was tilted a bit by road tolls, both national payable in Austria and specific, through a mountain tunnel. But 2nd class would have been cheaper just based on the fuel cost. And there were the epic views as the train takes the legendary Semmering line. The journey took 6hours45, and was on time in both directions.
So that seems to be evidence of another specific British problem for the rail sector
By way of example I thought I’d do a Trainline ticket search for this coming Friday 27th October which for me would be a realistic scenario as I would try and go to London and take in a game before returning on Sunday seeing friends and family in the process. Booking much further ahead might result in a saving but that’s not always or even often an option. The train times are something I would look to book. It takes me on average just under four hours by car to Greenwich and the fuel cost return is I suppose around £50. By the time I build into the journey travel to departing station and onward travel from Kings X to Greenwich and return the cost increases as does the time,to something closer to the journey time by car. It is of course for me anyway a nicer journey in my car. If we want to do the trip as a family you can see the cost is just ridiculous by train.
By way of example I thought I’d do a Trainline ticket search for this coming Friday 27th October which for me would be a realistic scenario as I would try and go to London and take in a game before returning on Sunday seeing friends and family in the process. Booking much further ahead might result in a saving but that’s not always or even often an option. The train times are something I would look to book. It takes me on average just under four hours by car to Greenwich and the fuel cost return is I suppose around £50. By the time I build into the journey travel to departing station and onward travel from Kings X to Greenwich and return the cost increases as does the time,to something closer to the journey time by car. It is of course for me anyway a nicer journey in my car. If we want to do the trip as a family you can see the cost is just ridiculous by train.
A railcard would knock a third off the price.
Types of Railcard
To find out more about a Railcard – including prices, eligibility, restrictions and more – click on the individual links below:
The problem with this summary is that it is suggesting the entire project was fundamentally flawed from the start, and, sadly, suggests an editorial agenda at work, which for me undermines the undoubtedly diligent work of the two journos who are credited. One of the big reasons why costs have risen is the need to dig tunnels in the Chilterns because the government caved in to local and very well-connected NIMBYs. And yes, all HS lines need to be more straight and level than conventional lines to facilitate the highest speeds, but all HS lines have curves, of course they do, FFS. Take a look at how HS1 approaches Ebbsfleet.
The NIMBYs causing increased costs argument is often rolled out but it's not backed up by the facts at all. The Chiltern Tunnel was always planned. It's within an area of outstanding natural beauty after all with statutory protection as such. HS2 originally planning for a 13.4 km tunnel. Local objectors and presssure groups argued for a 24km long tunnel instead. HS2 opposed this on the grounds of an increased costof £412m.
The Select Committee agreed with HS2 but did agree that a shorter extension of 2.6km would be appropriate at a cost of £47m, a trivial sum in the context of the scheme. This has been known about since 2016.
So (a) it wasn't the Government who "caved in", it was the Select Committee of MPs (form various parties) who ordered a modest change (b) the NIMBYs (if you can really call them that) did not get want they want at all (c) the costs were a tiny pecentage of the overall increased costs (d) they were already known about before the massive budget increases.
The Select Committee report can be found at the link below and contains a full discussion of the Chiltern Tunnel options including costs.
By way of example I thought I’d do a Trainline ticket search for this coming Friday 27th October which for me would be a realistic scenario as I would try and go to London and take in a game before returning on Sunday seeing friends and family in the process. Booking much further ahead might result in a saving but that’s not always or even often an option. The train times are something I would look to book. It takes me on average just under four hours by car to Greenwich and the fuel cost return is I suppose around £50. By the time I build into the journey travel to departing station and onward travel from Kings X to Greenwich and return the cost increases as does the time,to something closer to the journey time by car. It is of course for me anyway a nicer journey in my car. If we want to do the trip as a family you can see the cost is just ridiculous by train.
A railcard would knock a third off the price.
Types of Railcard
To find out more about a Railcard – including prices, eligibility, restrictions and more – click on the individual links below:
Thank you and I appreciate those options but frankly there shouldn’t be a need to or for a complicated system of discounts for your average infrequent rail user. Yes there should be a system for concessionary fares but but a rail fare of £90 for a return journey of two hours each way is ludicrous. Budget airlines could fly me to a European destination and back for less. The bottom line is our ticketing is too complicated and too expensive and puts off people like me from getting out of my car. I’m not alone. The whole thing is a monstrously over complicated and geared towards the rail companies and not the user or the environment.
The problem with this summary is that it is suggesting the entire project was fundamentally flawed from the start, and, sadly, suggests an editorial agenda at work, which for me undermines the undoubtedly diligent work of the two journos who are credited. One of the big reasons why costs have risen is the need to dig tunnels in the Chilterns because the government caved in to local and very well-connected NIMBYs. And yes, all HS lines need to be more straight and level than conventional lines to facilitate the highest speeds, but all HS lines have curves, of course they do, FFS. Take a look at how HS1 approaches Ebbsfleet.
The NIMBYs causing increased costs argument is often rolled out but it's not backed up by the facts at all. The Chiltern Tunnel was always planned. It's within an area of outstanding natural beauty after all with statutory protection as such. HS2 originally planning for a 13.4 km tunnel. Local objectors and presssure groups argued for a 24km long tunnel instead. HS2 opposed this on the grounds of an increased costof £412m.
The Select Committee agreed with HS2 but did agree that a shorter extension of 2.6km would be appropriate at a cost of £47m, a trivial sum in the context of the scheme. This has been known about since 2016.
So (a) it wasn't the Government who "caved in", it was the Select Committee of MPs (form various parties) who ordered a modest change (b) the NIMBYs (if you can really call them that) did not get want they want at all (c) the costs were a tiny pecentage of the overall increased costs (d) they were already known about before the massive budget increases.
The Select Committee report can be found at the link below and contains a full discussion of the Chiltern Tunnel options including costs.
So maybe the extent of the Nimby effect on costs depends on the start date for the calculation. Every year of delay adds to cost, so delays caused by local disputes have a cumulative effect on the budget beyond the one-off increase due to a specific alteration to a tunnel ( or anything else which is changed.
Gareth Dennis (whom I lean on a lot for knowledge of these issues) has done a podcast on that article which I haven’t had a chance to listen to, once I have I will return to this. Although it is striking that nobody- neither media nor publicly commissioned report - can really nail down the costs (not even the starting cost) and explain each subsequent increase with sufficient authority that all other interested qualified people accept it.
"Transport Secretary Mark Harper said the government had asked train operators to withdraw their proposals because they failed to meet high passenger standards."
Comments
There was no mention of me going direct without changing think you got the wrong end of the stick.
I wasn't going to comment further as the smug smirk on my face knowing i was correct AGAIN was enough.
To be honest, you speak in complete riddles most of the time so it's very difficult to understand exactly what it is you're trying to say. And then when people try to clarify what you're saying you answer with more opaque and vague statements.
If you'd care to read it back I clearly said you can get a single ticket anywhere, just not a direct train. But seriously, whatever floats your boat and makes you happy is fine with me.
Re-opening the intermediate stations (where demand and yields are much lower) would make things even worse as it would take away from London vital border police resources. The reality of traffic numbers is such that a police officer controls 5 to 10 times more passengers in our large terminals than in intermediate stations
If you used Eurostar you may recall that until a few years ago a UK guard stood in a fixed booth checking passports, even though he didn't need to, before the next booth staffed by a French guard. Relatively recently, they equipped the UK guards with hand-held passport scanners, and took the booth away, together with the twat who saw fit to interrogate me on why I (a UK citizen with a UK passport, leaving the UK) was travelling to Prague. I started a thread on here about it
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67141579
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/govt-selling-off-hs2-land-at-a-loss-to-prevent-future-administrations-reversing-its-decision-361302/
The entire pro- HS2 rail community is seething about this. The shrinking of Euston is also permananet, so there will never now be the capacity increase that the whole project was about.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/halt-the-sale-of-all-land-purchased-for-hs2?source=rawlink&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=rawlink&share=3c0e4015-debe-41ec-9fa3-0946e8259d8e
Like the granting of a 9 year franchise renewal for the dreadful Avanti West Coast last month, this rush to sell off the HS2 land smacks to me of a dog in the manger action against the next government.
I don't doubt the sale will also be to the benefit of some major Tory supporters, rather than returning it to those who were dispossessed when it was compulsorily purchased. New party leader - same old boys network, as seen with the PPE contracts?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5d44eafa-6f4b-11ee-8275-e4bad3604bca?shareToken=f49a696776af35ac38a02f53ab2bc8e5
https://x.com/Ogilvie_CJ/status/1715990729476976894?s=20
That said I'm always here for exposes of massive public sector waste,so long as we learn lessons from them. One of the most difficult aspects of the current debate re HS2 is that there is no definitive account of what the cost budget has been at various times and what the components were. Even the pro-HS2 guys who are pushing back cannot seem to agree, which is making my work more difficult. But one example is that the cost of the trains themselves is part of the Govt. "narrative" figure. This is a nonsense, unless the Government is planning to both build and operate the trains itself. Even if the railway were fully nationalised the trains would not go into that budget. It's amateur hour public budgetting, and I'm being kind by assuming it's just an error. But one lesson is, the country needs to up its game in costing, assessing and controlling major infrastructure budgets.
What exactly does it mean?
Perhaps it would have been wiser to publish reasonable cost estimates for different levels of capacity and speed. Together with a summary of similar projects throughout the world.
300 km / hr seems to be the normal speed for new railway lines and about 100 km /hr for roads.
They have recently lowered the speed limit of the TFL owned Eltham Road (double red lines) from Sutcliffe Park athletics track corner to Lee Green, from 30mph to 20mph.
I can’t see how that change has a negative effect on anybody.
So that seems to be evidence of another specific British problem for the rail sector
Types of Railcard
To find out more about a Railcard – including prices, eligibility, restrictions and more – click on the individual links below:
16-17 Saver
16-25 Railcard (this is also available for Mature Students of any age)
26-30 Railcard
Disabled Persons Railcard
Family & Friends Railcard
Network Railcard
Senior Railcard
Two Together Railcard
Veterans Railcard
The Select Committee agreed with HS2 but did agree that a shorter extension of 2.6km would be appropriate at a cost of £47m, a trivial sum in the context of the scheme. This has been known about since 2016.
So (a) it wasn't the Government who "caved in", it was the Select Committee of MPs (form various parties) who ordered a modest change (b) the NIMBYs (if you can really call them that) did not get want they want at all (c) the costs were a tiny pecentage of the overall increased costs (d) they were already known about before the massive budget increases.
The Select Committee report can be found at the link below and contains a full discussion of the Chiltern Tunnel options including costs.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/7/notes/division/11/index.htm
https://www.vouchercloud.com/resources/train-prices-across-europe
This will help, again journey time is mentioned but the effects on over crowding are obvious!
This is not just spite, it's sabotage.
https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/sections/news/hs2-plans-leave-no-room-for-mistakes-11-01-2012/
Run one train a day and make sure it runs on time. Every day. Then bingo, reliability has just increased. Bonuses all round.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67263931
Shameless.