DOCSLIB.ORG

Profit-Function of Two Similar Warm Standby System Subject To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Profit-Function of Two Similar Warm Standby System Subject To International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Profit-Function of Two Similar Warm Standby System subject to Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks and failed to follow good industry practice with different repair facilities Ashok Kumar Saini BLJS COLLEGE, TOSHAM (BHIWANI) HARYANA, INDIA White City, for failing to implement sufficient safety Abstract : "The Metronet PPP contracts to upgrade the Tube left the DfT without effective means of protecting the checks despite being ordered to do so by TfL. taxpayer. Metronet’s failure led to a direct loss to the In April 2005 the Commissioner of Transport for taxpayer of between £170 million and £410 million. The London, Bob Kiley, pressed for an urgent review of the DfT’s work with the Mayor of London, TfL and London PPP, describing its performance as "bordering on Underground on a long term solution will need to improve governance and risk management in the new arrangements disaster". A week later the chief executive of Metronet they are intending to put in place to protect the was sacked, after complaints that it had made £50m taxpayer."The Comptroller and Auditor General, 5 June profit despite being behind on all its major works. By 2009 April 2005, it had started work on only 13 station refurbishments (instead of 32 as scheduled), and was In this paper we have taken failure of Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks and failed more than a year behind on the refurbishment of 78 to follow good industry practice. When the main unit fails District line trains. It was also behind on its track then warm standby system becomes operative. Failure of replacement programme, having completed 28 km Metronet’s caused by failed to follow good industry instead of the anticipated 48 km. practice cannot occur simultaneously in both the units and after failure the unit undergoes Type-I or Type-II or Type- In March 2005 the House of Commons Transport Select III repair facility immediately. Applying the regenerative Committee noted that "Availability is the most point technique with renewal process theory the various important factor for Tube travellers. All the infracos reliability parameters MTSF, Availability, Busy period, needed to do to meet their availability benchmarks was Benefit-Function analysis have been evaluated. to perform only a little worse than in the past. On most Keywords: Warm Standby, failure of Metronet’s failure lines, they did not even manage that." for failing to implement sufficient safety checks and failed In November 2006, Metronet were heavily criticised by to follow good industry practice, first come first serve, the PPP arbiter, Chris Bolt, over their performance from MTSF, Availability, Busy period, Benefit -Function. 2003 to 2006. His analysis included criticism that INTRODUCTION Metronet had not performed in an economic or efficient manner, and had failed to follow good industry practice. Metronet Rail was one of two infrastructure companies (the other being Tube Lines Ltd) in a public-private In this paper we have taken failure of Metronet’s failure partnership with London Underground. for failing to implement sufficient safety checks and failed to follow good industry practice with different Metronet was responsible for the maintenance, renewal, repair facilities. When the main operative unit fails then and upgrade of the infrastructure on nine London warm standby system becomes operative. Failure of Underground lines from 2003 to 2008. This included Metronet’s caused by failed to follow good industry track, trains, signals, civil work and stations. From 18 practice can’t occur simultaneously in both the units and July 2007 to 26 May 2008, the company was in after failure the unit undergoes repair facility of Type- II administration and on 27 May 2008, the company by ordinary repairman or Type III, Type IV by responsibilities were transferred back into public multispecialty repairman immediately when failure of ownership under the authority of Transport for London. Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient In June 2009 the National Audit Office estimated that safety checks and failed to follow good industry the failure of the Metronet PPP contract cost the practice. The repair is done on the basis of first fail first taxpayer up to £410m adding that "most of the blame for repaired. Metronet's collapse lay with the consortium itself." Metronet was declared at fault by an accident investigators' report into a May 2004 derailment at ________________________________________________________________________________________________ ISSN (Online): 2347 - 2812, Volume-3, Issue -7, 2015 41 International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Assumptions Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks 1, 2 3 are constant failure rates when failure due warm standby, failure of Metronet’s failure for failing to 2(FGIPFfgipf, urII , Onsscf) The operative unit failed to implement sufficient safety checks and failed to follow follow good industry practice and undergoes repair of good industry practice respectively. The CDF of repair type II and the standby unit becomes operative with no time distribution of Type I, Type II and multispecialty failure of Metronet’s failure for failing to implement repairmen Type-III, IV are G1(t), G2(t) and G3(t) G4(t). sufficient safety checks 1. The failure of Metronet’s failure for failing to 3(FGIPFfgipf, urIII , Onsscf) The first unit failed to follow implement sufficient safety checks and failed to good industry practice and under Type-III multispecialty follow good industry practice is non- repairman and the other unit is operative with no failure instantaneous and it cannot come simultaneously of Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient in both the units. safety checks 2. The repair starts immediately after failure of 4(SSCF sscf,uR1 , SSCF sscf,wrI) The unit failed due to Metronet’s failure for failing to implement SSCF resulting from failure of Metronet’s failure for sufficient safety checks and failed to follow good failing to implement sufficient safety checks under industry practice and works on the principle of repair of Type- I continued from state 1and the other first fail first repaired basis. The repair facility unit failed due to SSCF resulting from failure of does no damage to the units and after repair units Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient are as good as new. safety checks is waiting for repair of Type-I. 3. The switches are perfect and instantaneous. 5(SSCFsscf,uR1 , FGIPFfgipf,wrII) The unit failed due to SSCF resulting from failure of Metronet’s failure for 4. All random variables are mutually independent. failing to implement sufficient safety checks is under 5. When both the units fail, we give priority to repair of Type- I continued from state 1and the other operative unit for repair. unit failed to follow good industry practice is waiting for repair of Type- II. 6. Repairs are perfect and failure of a unit is detected immediately and perfectly. 6(FGIPFfgipf, uRII , SSCFsscf ,wrI) The operative unit failed to follow good industry practice is under repair 7. The system is down when both the units are non- continues from state 2 of Type –II and the other unit operative. failed due to SSCF resulting from failure of Metronet’s Symbols for states of the System failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks is waiting under repair of Type-I. Superscripts O, WS, SSCF, FGIPF, 7(FGIPFfgipf,uRII , SSCFsscf,wrII) The one unit failure due Operative, Warm Standby, failure of Metronet’s failure to failed to follow good industry practice is continued to for failing to implement sufficient safety checks and be under repair of Type II and the other unit failed due failed to follow good industry practice respectively to SSCF resulting from failure of Metronet’s failure for Subscripts nsscf, sscf, fgipf, ur, wr, uR failing to implement sufficient safety checks is waiting for repair of Type-II. No failure of Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks, failure of Metronet’s failure for 8(SSCFsscf,urIII , FGIPFfgipf, wrII) The one unit failure of failing to implement sufficient safety checks, and failed Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient to follow good industry practice, under repair, waiting safety checks is under multispecialty repair of Type-III for repair, under repair continued from previous state and the other unit failed to follow good industry practice respectively is waiting for repair of Type-II. Up states– 0, 1, 2, 3, 10 ; Down states – 4, 5, 6, 7,8,9,11 9(SSCFsscf,urIII, FGIPFfgipf, wrI) The one unit failure of Metronet’s failure for failing to implement sufficient regeneration point – 0,1,2, 3, 8, 9,10 safety checks is under multispecialty repair of Type-III States of the System and the other unit failed to follow good industry practice waiting for repair of Type-I 0(Onsscf, WSnsscf) One unit is operative and the other unit is warm standby and there is no failure of Metronet’s 10(Onsscf , FGIPFfgipf, urIV ) failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks The one unit is operative with no failure of Metronet’s of both the units. failure for failing to implement sufficient safety checks
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Operator's Story Appendix
    Railway and Transport Strategy Centre The Operator’s Story Appendix: London’s Story © World Bank / Imperial College London Property of the World Bank and the RTSC at Imperial College London Community of Metros CoMET The Operator’s Story: Notes from London Case Study Interviews February 2017 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide a permanent record for the researchers of what was said by people interviewed for ‘The Operator’s Story’ in London. These notes are based upon 14 meetings between 6th-9th October 2015, plus one further meeting in January 2016. This document will ultimately form an appendix to the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’ piece Although the findings have been arranged and structured by Imperial College London, they remain a collation of thoughts and statements from interviewees, and continue to be the opinions of those interviewed, rather than of Imperial College London. Prefacing the notes is a summary of Imperial College’s key findings based on comments made, which will be drawn out further in the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’. Method This content is a collation in note form of views expressed in the interviews that were conducted for this study. Comments are not attributed to specific individuals, as agreed with the interviewees and TfL. However, in some cases it is noted that a comment was made by an individual external not employed by TfL (‘external commentator’), where it is appropriate to draw a distinction between views expressed by TfL themselves and those expressed about their organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Ungovernable'? Financialisation and the Governance Of
    Governing the ‘ungovernable’? Financialisation and the governance of transport infrastructure in the London ‘global city-region’ February 2018 Peter O’Briena* Andy Pikea and John Tomaneyb aCentre for Urban and Regional Development Studies (CURDS), Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU. Email: peter.o’[email protected]; [email protected] bBartlett School of Planning, University College London, Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, 620 Central House, 14 Upper Woburn Place, London, UK WC1H 0NN. Email: [email protected] *Corresponding author 1 Abstract The governance of infrastructure funding and financing at the city-region scale is a critical aspect of the continued search for mechanisms to channel investment into the urban landscape. In the context of the global financial crisis, austerity and uneven growth, national, sub-national and local state actors are being compelled to adopt the increasingly speculative activities of urban entrepreneurialism to attract new capital, develop ‘innovative’ financial instruments and models, and establish new or reform existing institutional arrangements for urban infrastructure governance. Amidst concerns about the claimed ‘ungovernability’ of ‘global’ cities and city-regions, governing urban infrastructure funding and financing has become an acute issue. Infrastructure renewal and development are interpreted as integral to urban growth, especially to underpin the size and scale of large cities and their significant contributions within national economies. Yet, oovercoming fragmented local jurisdictions to improve the governance and economic, social and environmental development of major metropolitan areas remains a challenge. The complex, and sometimes conflicting and contested inter-relationships at stake raise important questions about the role of the state in wrestling with entrepreneurial and managerialist governance imperatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Cure Alzheimer's Fund and Rotary Co-Fund Research on Women And
    QUARTERLY REPORT: 3RD QUARTER 2016 Q3 2016 INSIDE THIS REPORT Milestone Research Year Cure Alzheimer’s Fund and 3 Do You Remember? Rotary Co-Fund Research 3 on Women and Alzheimer’s CaringKind Support 3 Cure Alzheimer’s Fund and Rotary joined forces this fall to fund research Not Your Average Night into why women are more likely to get Alzheimer’s disease than men. at Yankee Stadium The two organizations granted a total of $375,000 to the lab of Rudy 4 Tanzi, Ph.D., at Massachusetts General Hospital. Tanzi, who serves as Women Against Alzheimer’s the Research Consortium chair for Cure Alzheimer’s Fund, will analyze 4 existing databases of Alzheimer’s family genomes to identify gene Remembering Bob Kiley variants that impact risk differently for women than for men. 4 The Alzheimer’s Women and Alzheimer’s Reading Room Of the 5.4 million Americans living with Alzheimer’s disease, nearly two-thirds are women. While researchers and clinicians have observed this phenomenon for some 4 time, the reasons why incidence among women is greater are unknown, and little Cure Alzheimer’s Fund research has been done to determine possible genetic underpinnings. Women do Heroes have a longer expected lifespan than men, but this difference alone does not explain the observed imbalance in incidence of the disease. At age 65, women face twice the 5 & 6 lifetime risk of developing Alzheimer’s than men. At 75, their risk is nearly threefold. State of the Mind Women also exhibit faster cognitive decline than do men. In one study, women with 8 mild cognitive impairment, a diagnosis that often precedes Alzheimer’s, increased their rate of cognitive errors faster than did their male counterparts when tested over several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Ppps Transport for London (Tfl) Originally Set up Nearly One Quarter of the UK’S Entire PPP Programme
    1. Case studies 1.1. Case study: London Transport – the economic advantages of re-municipalising PPPs Transport for London (TfL) originally set up nearly one quarter of the UK’s entire PPP programme. Nearly all of these PPPs have now been terminated. Between 1996 and 2005 ten PPPs were set up for various developments of the underground and light rail public transport systems in London. The three largest PPPs were set up in 2003, for the renovation and maintenance of the entire London underground railway system. These were awarded to two large private consortia, Metronet and Tubelines, under PPP contracts worth over £17 billion (USD $26 billion). TfL and the government guaranteed 95 per cent of all the debt raised by the consortia to finance the PPPs. These PPPs were set up despite strong opposition from the elected London mayor and assembly and their professional advisers, who wanted the work to be done by direct labour, financed by issuing bonds. The first terminations happened in 2007 following the collapse of Metronet, which held two of the PPP contracts. Metronet was unable to manage the work within the amount budgeted in the PPP, and ran up a deficit of over £1 billion. TfL refused to provide an extra subsidy to cover this loss, and Metronet went bankrupt, although its shareholders had already received generous dividends. The overall cost to the taxpayer of this collapse was estimated at between £170 million and £410 million. The final report on the PPP stated, “The legacy left by Metronet’s former shareholders was one of poor programme management and system integration, ineffective cost control, a lack of forward planning and inefficient fiscal management.”1 The UK parliament’s Transport Committee summarized the lessons in a series of damning statements: “It is difficult to lend any credence to the assertion that the Metronet PPP contracts were effective in transferring risk from the public to the private sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the 7 July Review Committee
    cover2.qxd 5/26/06 3:41 pm Page 1 Report of the 7 July Review Committee - Volume 2 Volume - Committee Report of the 7 July Review Report of the 7 July Review Committee Volume 2: Views and information from organisations Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk Enquiries 020 7983 4100 June 2006 Minicom 020 7983 4458 LA/May 06/SD D&P Volume 2: Views and information from organisations Contents Page Transcript of hearing on 3 November 2005 3 Transport for London, Metropolitan Police Service, City of London Police, British Transport Police, London Fire Brigade and London Ambulance Service Transcript of hearing on 1 December 2005 Telecommunications companies: BT, O2, Vodafone, Cable & Wireless 61 Communication with businesses: London Chamber of Commerce & Industry 90 and Metropolitan Police Service Transcript of hearing on 11 January 2006 Local authorities: Croydon Council (Local Authority Gold on 7 July), Camden 109 Council, Tower Hamlets Council and Westminster City Council Health Service: NHS London, Barts & the London NHS Trust, Great Ormond 122 Street Hospital, Royal London Hospital and Royal College of Nursing Media: Sky News, BBC News, BBC London, ITV News, LBC News & Heart 132 106.2, Capital Radio and London Media Emergency Forum, Evening Standard, The Times Transcript of hearing on 1 March 2006 147 Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London Sir Ian Blair, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Written submissions from organisations Metropolitan Police 167 City of London Police 175 London Fire Brigade
    [Show full text]
  • London Assembly (Plenary) – 13 June 2007
    Appendix 3 London Assembly (Plenary) – 13 June 2007 Consultancy Agreement between Transport for London and Bob Kiley – Question and Answer Session with the Chair of the Transport for London Board Sally Hamwee (Chair): We now move to questions to the Mayor in his capacity as Chair of Transport for London. The lead off question from me is to ask you if you can tell us the purpose of the consultancy agreement between TfL and Bob Kiley, and how it offers value for money? Ken Livingstone (Mayor of London/Chair of the Transport for London Board): When Bob Kiley decided that he intended to retire, I was determined that we should retain his advice. He has, I think, certainly in the English speaking world, a reputation as being the most successful transport operator over a period of some decades, and the record he had in terms of turning round a pretty dysfunctional transport system in London speaks for itself. We were also coming up to the negotiations for the second tranche of the PPP (Public Private Partnership) contracts, and I certainly wished to have him advising us on that. We particularly wanted his continuing advice on the issue of Crossrail, but also just on day-to-day other issues. I think I have told the Assembly before that when I was getting wholly conflicting advice about the level of cost overruns that should be budgeted for in the Olympics, I could have commissioned Parsons Brinckerhoff or KPMG, no doubt, for tens if not hundreds of thousands of pounds to give advice.
    [Show full text]
  • On the 24Th November, Mr
    A3 THE ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND PLANNING POLICY – 15 DECEMBER 2003 REPORT BY THE DEPUTY LEADER AND CABINET MEMBER FOR PLANNING POLICY AND TRANSPORTATION CABINET MEMBER REPORT ON CURRENT ISSUES The following are matters of current and future business. I will not be present at the Committee meeting but officers can provide additional information on the night. FOR INFORMATION Since the last meeting: 1. CONGESTION CHARGE ZONE – PROPOSED EXTENSION 1.1 On 24 th November Mr Swinburne and I gave evidence to a meeting of the Greater London Authority’s Transport Committee, which was considering the Mayor of London’s proposed extension of the Congestion Charging Scheme. The Committee was reminded of the Council’s view that proposals to extend the zone to the west were premature and that if the scheme were extended it should include the entire Royal Borough. The Council believes that any proposed extension should only be considered as part of the planned major review of the Transport Strategy, taking into account wider issues such as the London Plan and the Mayor of London’s Air Quality Strategy. 1.2 The following arguments were also presented to the Transport Committee: • TfL have published no empirical research on the scheme’s impact on businesses. To have any credibility this must include the vital Christmas and New Year sales data, which are unlikely to be available until after the consultation period. • The current option merely replicates the solution produced for central London by TfL, who have adopted a one size fits all model regardless of the different circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • The London Congestion Charge Scheme Dave Wetzel FCIT CEO ‐ Transforming Communities
    Dave Wetzel – Report on London’s Congestion Charge Scheme The London Congestion Charge Scheme Dave Wetzel FCIT CEO ‐ Transforming Communities 1. Acknowledgements 2. Executive Summary 3. Introduction – The Problem and Difficulties 4. The Theory of Marginal Cost Pricing 5. The History of Different Road Pricing Solutions 6. Road User Charging Studies in the UK 7. The First London Mayoral Election. May 2000. 8. London Congestion Charging – The Mayor’s First Steps 9. Monitoring 10. Consultation, Publicity and The Mayor’s Transport Strategy 11. Public Transport Improvements 12. Outline of the Scheme as First Introduced February 17th 2003 13. Traffic Engineering Improvements 14. Early Results 15. Major Changes 16. Mayor’s Re‐Election 2004 17. The financial effects of congestion charging 18. Election of Conservative Mayor 2008 19. Lessons Learnt from The Introduction of the London Congestion Charging 20. Conclusion 21. Appendix 1. Author’s cv 22. Appendix 2. Mayor’s Question Time 27th July 2000 1. Acknowledgements: I wish to thank the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation for commissioning this paper. I am also grateful to the following people with whom I have conducted interviews for this project and exchanged information (See Appendix One for copy of the questionnaire used): 1 Dave Wetzel – Report on London’s Congestion Charge Scheme Ken Livingstone: Leader ‐ Greater London Council 1981‐86 and the first Mayor of London 2000‐2008 Former Member of Parliament and Chair of Transport for London (TfL) 2000‐ 2008 (who introduced the London Congestion Charging scheme in 2003). Steve Norris: Executive Chairman Jarvis from 2003; Former Member of Parliament and Minister of Transport 1992‐1996 and former Vice‐Chairman of The Conservative Party ; Unsuccessful candidate for the Conservative Party in both the 2000 and 2004 London Mayoral elections; Transport for London Board Member 2000‐2001 and 2008 to date; Former Director General of the UK’s Road Haulage Association.
    [Show full text]
  • Board Meeting Agenda and Papers
    TRANSPORT FOR LONDON MEETING OF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD – OPEN SESSION MINUTES of the Board Meeting held in the Chamber, City Hall, The Queen’s Walk, London, SE1 2AA at 10.00 am on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 Present: Ken Livingstone Chair of the Board Dave Wetzel Vice Chair Kirsten Hearn Sir Mike Hodgkinson Paul Moore Patrick O’Keeffe Tony West In Bryan Heiser Special Adviser to the Board Attendance: Murziline Parchment Special Adviser to the Board Lynn Sloman Special Adviser to the Board Steve Allen Director of Corporate Finance Ian Brown Managing Director, London Rail Peter Brown Chief Operating Officer, Surface Stephen Critchley Chief Finance Officer Mary Hardy Director of Internal Audit Peter Hendy Commissioner Ellen Howard Public Law Team Leader Gareth John Director of Legal & Compliance Peter McGuirk Int. Director of Governance & Assurance Tim O’Toole Managing Director, London Underground Ben Plowden Managing Director, Group Comms. Tony Richardson Fares Analysis Manager Len Simkins Head of Business Services & Strategy Duncan Symonds Commissioner’s Chief of Staff Valerie Todd Act. Managing Dir, Group Services Jay Walder Managing Director, Finance & Planning Horatio Chishimba TfL Secretariat James Varley TfL Secretariat The Board welcomed Peter Hendy as the new Commissioner of Transport for London. 01/02/06 Apologies for Absence Apologies for absence were received from Honor Chapman, Stephen Glaister, John Ormerod and Lynn Sloman. The Board wished Honor Chapman a quick recovery following a motor vehicle accident. Minutes 01/02/06 – 12/02/06 Page 1 of 5 TRANSPORT FOR LONDON Declaration of Interests There were no interests declared. 02/02/06 Minutes of the Last Meeting held on 7 December 2005 The minutes of the last meeting were approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record subject to an amendment being made to correct the date of the last meeting to read Wednesday, 7 December 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Dc5m United States Sport in English Created at 2016-12-18
    Announcement DC5m United States sport in english 75 articles, created at 2016-12-18 18:08 articles set mostly positive rate 3.7 1 7.1 Ronaldo nets hat-trick as Real Madrid win Club World Cup (5.82/6) The Spanish giants needed extra-time to beat Kashima Antlers 4-2 in Yokohama. 2016-12-18 10:10 1KB www.dailymail.co.uk 2 1.9 Trump: Michelle Obama must not have meant loss of 'hope' comment (3.12/6) While many of his supporters are not necessarily fans of the current first lady, Donald Trump defended her controversial words over the weekend. 2016-12-18 09:21 2KB www.aol.com 3 5.6 Hirscher positioned to match Tomba with 4th GS win in Badia (1.28/6) Marcel Hirscher is positioned to match Alberto Tomba with a record fourth giant slalom win in Alta Badia. 2016-12-18 06:35 1KB www.charlotteobserver.com 4 4.0 Belgian championship results and standings Dec 18 (Gracenote) - Results and standings from the Belgian championship matches (1.08/6) on Sunday Sunday, December 18 Racing Genk 2 Standard Liege 2 Saturday, Decem... 2016-12-18 11:25 1KB www.dailymail.co.uk 5 3.6 Michael Phelps to receive BBC Sports Personality lifetime achievement award (1.06/6) Michael Phelps will receive the BBC Sports Personality lifetime achievement award on Sunday after capping his career with five Olympic golds in Rio. 2016-12-18 11:22 1KB www.dailymail.co.uk 6 5.9 Mourinho praises fans for reaction to Fellaini Some Man Utd supporters had booed the midfielder but reacted well against West (1.06/6) Brom.
    [Show full text]
  • Tfl Annual Report 2003
    0Annual report FINAL 19/10/04 9:42 am Page 1 3 Annual report 0MAYOR OF LONDON 4 Annual report FINAL 19/10/04 9:42 am Page 2 Annual report FINAL 19/10/04 9:42 am Page 3 Contents 1. Mayor’s message 1 2. 2003/04 review by Bob Kiley 3 London Underground 5 London Buses 7 Street Management 9 Docklands Light Railway 13 London Rail 15 Public Carriage Office 17 London Trams 19 London’s Transport Museum 21 London River Services 23 Victoria Coach Station 25 Accessible transport services 27 Policing and enforcement 31 Customer information 33 Employees 35 Business performance 37 The future of London’s transport 41 3. Financial review 43 4. Appendices 45 Appendix 1 - Transport for London 45 Appendix 2 - Summary of progress towards the implementation 46 of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy Appendix 3 - Membership of Boards/Panels/Committees/ Chief Officers 2003/04 68 Appendix 4 - Financial assistance 71 Appendix 5 - Guarantees, arrangements and indemnities 72 Appendix 6 - Operating statistics 73 Appendix 7 - Performance statistics 74 Appendix 8 - Employee numbers 75 Appendix 9 - Summary statement of accounts 76 Annual report FINAL 19/10/04 9:42 am Page 1 Mayor’s message In the last year, we have made significant progress and achieved some great successes in improving transport across London. The congestion charging scheme has London Underground has now been under continued to cut the traffic congestion my control for a year. I have put in place that previously crippled central London. a strong management team who are Congestion has reduced by 30 per cent in working hard to ensure we get the the zone and traffic emissions are down necessary improvements to track, trains 12 per cent.
    [Show full text]
  • Earls Court Village Development
    TRANSPORT FOR LONDON BOARD MEETING – OPEN SESSION TO BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY 28 SEPTEMBER 2005 IN THE CHAMBER, CITY HALL, THE QUEEN’S WALK, LONDON SE1 2AA COMMENCING AT 1500 HOURS AGENDA A Meeting of the Board will be held to deal with the following business: Procedural Matters 1.1 Apologies for Absence 1.2 Minutes of the Previous Meeting held on 13 July 2005 1.3 Any Matters Arising from the Minutes Business Items Sponsor 2. Proposed London Low Emission Zone Project Peter Hendy, Director of Surface - T(2005)06 Transport 3. The Commissioner’s Report – T(2005)01 Bob Kiley, Commissioner of TfL 4. 1st Quarter Finance and Performance Report - Jay Walder, Managing Director T(2005)02 Finance & Planning 5. Annual Report – T(2005)03 Ben Plowden, Managing Director Group Communications 6. Annual Workforce Composition Report - Valerie Todd, Director of Group T(2005)04 Equality and Inclusion 7. Door to Door Strategy – T(2005)05 Valerie Todd, Director of Group Equality and Inclusion & Peter Hendy, Director of Surface Transport Procedural Items 8. Mayoral Delegation and Direction Jay Walder, Managing Director re: Olympics – T(2005)07 Finance & Planning 9. Finance Committee Report – T(2005)08 Mike Hodgkinson, Chair of the - Meetings 23 June & 14 Sept 2005 Committee 10. Safety, Health & Environment Dave Wetzel, Chair of the Committee Report – T(2005)09 Committee - Meetings 22 June & 8 Sept 2005 Items for Noting 11. Documents Sealed on Behalf of TfL - Fiona Smith, General Counsel T(2005)10 12. Any Other Business TRANSPORT FOR LONDON Minutes 43/07/05 – 50/07/05
    [Show full text]