On Feb 12, 10:10 am, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Adrian" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Feb 10, 6:17 am, "Jack Taylor" wrote:

When the line was built there were connections with the national rail
network, for through running from the Great Western suburban stations.
The
four platforms in the suburban station were allocated slightly
differently.
In the 1960s the national rail connections were removed and the
opportunity
was taken to alter the platform allocations, so that the Underground
platforms were entirely separate from the suburban platforms. This was
effected by moving the Underground (which used to use the middle two
platforms) across by one track, so that it used the two faces of the
northernmost island platform - the present arrangement. Cutting back the
suburban bays slightly also allowed a walkway from the end of the
northernmost mainline platform onto the suburban platforms to be
created,
reducing movements on the footbridge.

- But destroying the convenience of crossplatform interchange with the
Underground.

The cross platform interchange was very limited - only from trains which
arrived at platform 16 for onward travel by Underground towards the City,
and from the City to trains which departed from platform 13. When the layout
was altered, WR trains still used GWR AWS. To get to Paddington Suburban
involved running over track equipped with LT 3rd/4th rail electrification,
so the AWS shoe had to be hitched up out of the way. There was equipment to
do this between Westbourne Park and Royal Oak, but on average two or three
times a week it didn't work (or couldn't be proved to have worked). The
train had to be stopped; the driver had to phone the signaller; and a route
had to be set into Paddington Main (and trains were only scheduled into
Paddington Suburban when there wasn't a platform available in Paddington
Main). This all caused quite a lot of delay, and getting rid of these delays
outweighed the inconvenience caused to a few passengers by the loss of
cross-platform interchange.

Peter- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A more elegant solution MAY have been to simply swap the platform
utilization. e.g. LT would have used the middle lines, platforms 14
and 15, whilst BR used the outer ones, 13 and 16. Had 16 been
connected using a long single track from west of Royal Oak there would
have been no crossing of LT on the flat and no problems with AWS.

Adrian