On 24 Dec, 18:04, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, MIG wrote:
On 23 Dec, 16:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line..

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Maybe if they did, they could stop referring to North London as East
London at the same time.

As someone who actually lives in the bit of North London that risks being
referred to as East London, i am strongly behind this as well!

tom

A typical one, which may be what you mean, is Walthamstow. I mean,
just look on a map and tell me how that's East London and why
Beckenham isn't East London by the same definition.