View Single Post
  #33   Report Post  
Old August 9th 17, 09:15 PM posted to uk.transport.london,misc.transport.urban-transit,uk.railway
Graeme Wall Graeme Wall is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,715
Default London Waterloo international

On 09/08/2017 21:08, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\08\09 17:59, e27002 aurora wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2017 20:50:43 +0100, Graham Murray
wrote:

e27002 aurora writes:

The whole thing is pitiful. The Nine Elms flyover needs to be torn
down and replaced with a flyover to take the Windsor lines over the
fast-main pair. Bournemouth and Portsmouth passengers should be
arriving into the "International" platforms, not Staines and Windsor
passengers.

Why? Before the Waterloo International conversion, the Windsor line
services always used the high numbered platforms.


IMHO it makes more sense for the longer distance, higher fare paying
passengers, to come into the more modern, better appointed facility.
There may also be opportunities for further platform and train
lengthening. Clearly opinions vary.


I think that is the maddest suggestion I've ever seen here. Surely it
would be better value for money to leave the flyover alone and renovate
the low numbered platforms up to the quality of the international
platforms, so that all passengers would have a high quality terminal.


I doubt there's a lot of difference between the actual platforms.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.