|
Underline?
"D A Stocks" wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 19:55:19 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked: Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant. The nearest station to Aldwych is Temple. But Temple doesn't substitute for Aldwych as far as passengers using the Piccadilly Line are concerned. However, there will be a fair number of passengers for whom using Temple and avoiding the central section of the Picadilly Line altogether is definitely an option; e.g. Thameslink commuters can change at Blackfriars rather than St Pancras and from 2018 their Great Northern brethren will be able to join them. Similarly from West London it's an easy change onto the District line and probably just as fast. Yes, both Temple and Covent Garden have catchment areas that overlap Aldwych, which makes the latter of limited benefit. When you also consider the sparse rural-branch type shuttle service that it had, it would nearly always be faster to use one of those very frequently served stations, even if the walking time was marginally longer. |
Underline?
On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 17:38:38 -0800, Nobody wrote:
On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 22:37:19 +0000, " wrote: This should be interesting. http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ndon-underline I know that Seattle converted at least one tunnel, which was originally to be for a light rail line, into a dedicated bus lane. Well no, it was sort of the reverse of that: it was built originally as a bus tunnel, but with tracks installed for future light-rail usage. But when the 'lectric trains came into view, things weren't going to work so it had to be modified http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Seattle_Transit_Tunnel OT, but more sleepless nights in Seattle: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/seattles-costly-plan-to-replace-viaduct-becomes-an-infrastructure-nightmare/article22851505/ |
Underline?
In message , at 23:15:42 on Sun, 8 Feb
2015, D A Stocks remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 19:55:19 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked: Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant. The nearest station to Aldwych is Temple. But Temple doesn't substitute for Aldwych as far as passengers using the Piccadilly Line are concerned. However, there will be a fair number of passengers for whom using Temple and avoiding the central section of the Picadilly Line altogether is definitely an option; e.g. Thameslink commuters can change at Blackfriars rather than St Pancras and from 2018 their Great Northern brethren will be able to join them. Quicker to take the Piccadilly to Holborn and walk. Similarly from West London it's an easy change onto the District line and probably just as fast. They wouldn't have doubled-back at Holborn anyway. Covent Garden and walk. -- Roland Perry |
Underline?
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:15:42 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015, D A Stocks remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 19:55:19 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked: Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant. The nearest station to Aldwych is Temple. But Temple doesn't substitute for Aldwych as far as passengers using the Piccadilly Line are concerned. However, there will be a fair number of passengers for whom using Temple and avoiding the central section of the Picadilly Line altogether is definitely an option; e.g. Thameslink commuters can change at Blackfriars rather than St Pancras and from 2018 their Great Northern brethren will be able to join them. Quicker to take the Piccadilly to Holborn and walk. Similarly from West London it's an easy change onto the District line and probably just as fast. They wouldn't have doubled-back at Holborn anyway. Covent Garden and walk. Actually, if I'm going to Somerset House, I'm more likely to use Temple than Covent Garden. That's partly to avoid the hordes of tourists in Covent Garden, and partly because it's a simpler route. I'm not sure which is technically shorter, but there's not much in it. Even if Aldwych was still open, walking from Temple or Covent Garden would be much quicker because of the sparse shuttle service. |
Underline?
On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 19:45:21 -0000
"michael adams" wrote: So which word or words in the 12 word sentence from your own link " These plans were shelved at the outset of the Second World War," are you having the biggest difficulty with ? Eh? So there were plans before the war. Err, yeess. slowly Which means that they weren't first envisaged as shelters and then to be converted into a tube tunnel but the other way around. Which is my point. /slowly Perhaps you should learn to follow a thread? -- Spud |
Underline?
On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:35:12 +0000
Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\02\06 09:57, d wrote: Well it is The Guardian. If you want facts rather than guesswork and uneducated opinion then its the wrong paper. The Guardian, uneducated? Miseducated maybe. Well quite possibly. Most of them seem to be idiot arts and politics graduates which in my mind is pushing the definition of education anyway. Upshot is they think they're a lot smarter than they actually are. -- Spud |
Underline?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 19:45:21 -0000 "michael adams" wrote: So which word or words in the 12 word sentence from your own link " These plans were shelved at the outset of the Second World War," are you having the biggest difficulty with ? Eh? So there were plans before the war. Err, yeess. But then what happened ? Can you remember ? Or do you need a clue ? Hint: " These plans were shelved at the outset of the Second World War," http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php slowly Which means that they weren't first envisaged as shelters and then to be converted into a tube tunnel but the other way around. No. The way they were first envisaged was shelved. " These plans were shelved at the outset of the Second World War," Otherwise there would have been nothing to shelve, would there ? And then you'd have been correct ! But they were shelved. And so you're wrong. (See above) Which is my point. /slowly Which is obviouly wrong as those plans were shelved. Perhaps you should learn to follow a thread? All I need do is follow your own links - " These plans were shelved at the outset of the Second World War," michael adams .... |
Underline?
In article , d
() wrote: On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:35:12 +0000 Basil Jet wrote: On 2015\02\06 09:57, d wrote: Well it is The Guardian. If you want facts rather than guesswork and uneducated opinion then its the wrong paper. The Guardian, uneducated? Miseducated maybe. Well quite possibly. Most of them seem to be idiot arts and politics graduates which in my mind is pushing the definition of education anyway. Upshot is they think they're a lot smarter than they actually are. Prejudice is such a terrible thing. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Underline?
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 23:15:42 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015, D A Stocks remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 19:55:19 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked: Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant. The nearest station to Aldwych is Temple. But Temple doesn't substitute for Aldwych as far as passengers using the Piccadilly Line are concerned. However, there will be a fair number of passengers for whom using Temple and avoiding the central section of the Picadilly Line altogether is definitely an option; e.g. Thameslink commuters can change at Blackfriars rather than St Pancras and from 2018 their Great Northern brethren will be able to join them. Quicker to take the Piccadilly to Holborn and walk. After the Thameslink Programme is completed? Similarly from West London it's an easy change onto the District line and probably just as fast. They wouldn't have doubled-back at Holborn anyway. Covent Garden and walk. Depends where in West London they are coming from. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk