....now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent criticism
here is a good sign?

Paul S

In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

...now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent
criticism here is a good sign?

I've not had cause to try it. I noticed one report claiming cross-platform
interchange for "round the corner" passengers. That must be a lie of
course.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

...now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent
criticism here is a good sign?

I've not had cause to try it. I noticed one report claiming cross-platform
interchange for "round the corner" passengers. That must be a lie of
course.

I just knew you would be first 'anti' to speak up. Give it a rest FFS...

Paul S

In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

...now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent
criticism here is a good sign?

I've not had cause to try it. I noticed one report claiming
cross-platform interchange for "round the corner" passengers. That
must be a lie of course.

I just knew you would be first 'anti' to speak up. Give it a rest FFS...

Why? I and anyone making a similar journey have lost any assurance of a
step-free route between King's Cross and Earl's Court with the added
nightmare of the dire departures indicators at Edgware Road.

You've obviously missed the Standard reports of it being even less
reliable than before, as well as less frequent.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Paul Corfield wrote:

A hunch on my part suggests service
recovery times are a bit shorter than before but that's not based on
anything scientific.

Sorry Paul, does that mean that you think the service is recovering more
quickly?

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.

On Jan 9, 11:58*pm, wrote:

Why? I and anyone making a similar journey have lost any assurance of a
step-free route between King's Cross and Earl's Court with the added
nightmare of the dire departures indicators at Edgware Road.

However, you have now gained the possibility of doing the same
journey, step-free, using the Piccadilly Line.

On Jan 9, 8:37*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
...now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent criticism
here is a good sign?

I was starting to wonder if LU had forgotten its existence -
announcements at White City this weekend pointed out that there was no
H&C line from Wood Lane, but no mention of the Circle Line...

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

...now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent
criticism here is a good sign?

I've not had cause to try it. I noticed one report claiming
cross-platform interchange for "round the corner" passengers. That
must be a lie of course.

I just knew you would be first 'anti' to speak up. Give it a rest FFS...

Why? I and anyone making a similar journey have lost any assurance of a
step-free route between King's Cross and Earl's Court with the added
nightmare of the dire departures indicators at Edgware Road.

So you keep saying, and it 's getting tedious in the extreme. As Paul C
suggests, once a long period of statistics is available, no doubt they'll be
able to prove whether platform allocation at Edgware Rd is reliably
happening as shown on the signs. In which case your assurance of a step free
route will be there if you get a Circle train. If that means you have to
change twice on a journey between Putney and Kings Cross, we know that.
We've been hearing about it for about two years now...

You've obviously missed the Standard reports of it being even less
reliable than before, as well as less frequent.

We all know it is less frequent, and we know the reasons.

Paul

In article
,
(martin) wrote:

On Jan 9, 11:58*pm, wrote:

Why? I and anyone making a similar journey have lost any assurance
of a step-free route between King's Cross and Earl's Court with the
added nightmare of the dire departures indicators at Edgware Road.

However, you have now gained the possibility of doing the same
journey, step-free, using the Piccadilly Line.

Not if the reason for wanting it step free is because I have my bicycle
with me!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

...now that it's been in action a few weeks. I suppose no recent
criticism here is a good sign?

I've not had cause to try it. I noticed one report claiming
cross-platform interchange for "round the corner" passengers. That
must be a lie of course.

I just knew you would be first 'anti' to speak up. Give it a rest
FFS...

Why? I and anyone making a similar journey have lost any assurance
of a step-free route between King's Cross and Earl's Court with the
added nightmare of the dire departures indicators at Edgware Road.

So you keep saying, and it 's getting tedious in the extreme. As
Paul C suggests, once a long period of statistics is available, no
doubt they'll be able to prove whether platform allocation at
Edgware Rd is reliably happening as shown on the signs. In which
case your assurance of a step free route will be there if you get a
Circle train. If that means you have to change twice on a journey
between Putney and Kings Cross, we know that. We've been hearing
about it for about two years now...

I only read they were promising step free on the Outer Rail, from Earls
Court to King's Cross. I read the other direction as no promises at all.
An have you ever tried to work out which the next train to High St is
going from at Edgware Road? I even got off a train I should have stayed on
because I believed a "Next Train to High St" sign on that bloody station!

You've obviously missed the Standard reports of it being even less
reliable than before, as well as less frequent.

We all know it is less frequent, and we know the reasons.

I don't know if you've seen the reports in the Standard but what I saw led
on reliability falling.

--
Colin Rosenstiel