Paddington barriers again
 

On Jul 13, 12:02*am, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 18:15:29 +0100, "John C"
wrote:

If I am heading from Paddington to King's Cross or Liverpool St I normally
take a southbound Bakerloo train to Baker Street and then the Met line from
there. If there is a long wait for the Met I have the option of using the
Circle instead but normally I wait for the Met because it is less crowded.

Tried the 18 bus this morning, and it seemed a good choice - not much
slower (even though I had to wander round a bit before I found the
back entrance) and not overcrowded - I think that will now be the
default.

Aha, great stuff Neil - I'm glad someone's up for trying out my
unorthodox suggestions! More to the point, I'm glad to hear it
actually worked out alright! I've done it myself of course (wouldn't
have been quite so keen to suggest it if I hadn't!), but not during
the morning rush.


Don't know about going home, though, as the Marylebone / Euston Road
seems a lot busier in the evening peak going east than it is around
0800 going west.

I can imagine the buses could be fairly busy too - well, almost
certainly busier that an 8am-ish westbound bus. Still, if you do give
it a try then do pls report back.

Paddington barriers again
 

"D7666" wrote in message
...
I've only picked up this tread today so and quickly skimmed through it
and apologies if what I am about to write has been said already in
this thread.


In the Sheffield footbridge thread it was stated that EMT as part of
the franchise specification set by DfT had to barrier the station, and
its this that has led to the unwanted effect of bloking the direct
foot bridge - tram stop route.

Does not a similar sort of argument apply at Paddington - ISTR
barriering Paddington was set in a franchise spec because for a long
tie it went without any. Was it not just after the current fGW period
that Padd gained barriers. So when talking about ''common barrier
areas'' etc i.e. common with LU is it perhaps the DfT or forerunners
who are responsible for this in the first place. If so, its bound up
in franchise terms and not easy to undo.

Sorry, missed this Nick.

Yes, barriers for the suburban platforms was a fairly recent franchise
requirement, the drawings first came to light and were discussed in u.t.l
towards the end of 2008 IIRC. I think what they ended up with is the best
of a bad job, because it was impossible to have separate accesses to the LU
and NR platforms due to the bridge constraints. You probably remember the
'LU only' gateline was further along the bridge, between the stairs to
13/14 and 15/16.

The normal situation at a major terminus seems to be not to allow a 'short
circuit' from mainline to underground, perhaps Paul C could comment on that?
I'm thinking of places such as Waterloo, Liverpool St, Kings Cross.

But as we now know the current work reverts it to separate paid areas for NR
and LU - I expect (in hindsight) this is a basic requirement for revenue
protection...

By the way, Crossrail have produced a flyer on the demolition and its impact
on the H&C station - it is easy to see why the line is closed...

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/ny/pdf/CR...ank_050710.pdf

Paul S