In message , Phil Cook
writes

On 03/12/2012 17:40, allantracy wrote:

For those of us, not London based, and whose world view of London owes
mostly (or even only) to the scale afforded by the Tube map, what was
the extent of the inconvenience (if any) that was caused by the
station closing.

In other words, how close is the nearest alternative?

Temple on the District/Circle is only 200m away.

Covent Garden and Holborn on the Picadilly are no more than 700m away.

It's also important to note that Holborn to Aldwych was operated as a
shuttle service (there were no through trains after 1917, and precious
few before then). Passengers therefore often found it quicker to walk
the short distance from Holborn than to change and wait for the shuttle.

The origin of this seeming anomaly lies in the fact that the Piccadilly
line was formed from two separate schemes - the Great Northern and
Strand, which terminated at what later became Aldwych - and the Brompton
and Piccadilly Circus, which terminated at Piccadilly Circus. Both ended
up under the control of Charles Yerkes whose genius lay in realising
that the operational difficulties of two tiny terminii deep under
central London could be avoided by driving a short connecting line from
Piccadilly Circus to Holborn, thus providing a through route. This was
not Yerkes' first plan for extending beyond Piccadilly, but after it was
carried through, it left the Holborn-Aldwych section as a not very
useful appendage.

--
Paul Terry