Underline?
 

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.

I've not seen, however, anything like this.

Underline?
 

In article , () wrote:

This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...-abandoned-tub
e-tunnels-london-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.

I've not seen, however, anything like this.

Stark staring, surely? Only Holborn-Aldwych is truly abandoned for a start.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Underline?
 

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

Underline?
 

In article you write:
I know that Seattle converted at least one tunnel, which was originally
to be for a light rail line, into a dedicated bus lane.

Nope. They put in rails when the tunnel was built in anticipation of
rail service, but only ran buses for about a decade. Then when they
were ready to build the long delayed light rail line, they found that
the rails in the tunnel were no good and spent a lot of money to tear
them out and put the current rails in. If you take the light rail
from SEA airport into Seattle, it ends up in the tunnel. If you get
off at the Westlake station, you can go upstairs and take the Monorail
("it's the transportation of the future and always will be!") to the
Space Needle.

Underline?
 

In message , at 18:45:25
on Thu, 5 Feb 2015, remarked:

Only Holborn-Aldwych is truly abandoned for a start.

And Borough to King William St. via London Bridge
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 18:45:25 -0600
wrote:
In article , () wrote:

This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...-abandoned-tub
e-tunnels-london-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.

I've not seen, however, anything like this.

Stark staring, surely? Only Holborn-Aldwych is truly abandoned for a start.

Just another "design firm" (AKA a bunch of 2nd rate architects) wanting to
get noticed and touting for contracts.

By the time someone has manhandled their bike down to the old platform at
holborn they could have almost cycled to aldwych at street level. As for
the idiotic kinetic paving idea - someone should really send some of these
designers back to school to learn about conservation of energy.

--
Spud

Underline?
 

On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ndon-underline

Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."

Ian

Underline?
 

On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:23:17 +0000, The Real Doctor wrote:

On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ndon-underline

Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."

Ian

Are the disused Mail Rail tunnels suitable for this, or are they too small?

Underline?
 

On 06/02/2015 09:23, The Real Doctor wrote:
On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ndon-underline


Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."


Nothing like getting the facts totally mangled.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Underline?
 

On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:46:48 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/02/2015 09:23, The Real Doctor wrote:
On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.


http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...d-tube-tunnels
london-underline


Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."


Nothing like getting the facts totally mangled.

Well it is The Guardian. If you want facts rather than guesswork and uneducated
opinion then its the wrong paper.

--
Spud

Underline?
 

On 06.02.15 9:39, Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:23:17 +0000, The Real Doctor wrote:

On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ndon-underline

Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."

Ian

Are the disused Mail Rail tunnels suitable for this, or are they too small?

Too small, I would think.

And isn't there talk of reactivating Mail Rail for some other purpose?

Underline?
 

wrote in message ...
On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:46:48 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/02/2015 09:23, The Real Doctor wrote:
On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.


http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...d-tube-tunnels
london-underline


Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."


Nothing like getting the facts totally mangled.

Well it is The Guardian. If you want facts rather than guesswork and uneducated
opinion then its the wrong paper.

Looks like Subterranea Britannica

"The Bombings of 1940 forced a reappraisal of deep-shelter policy and at
the end of October the Government decided to construct a system of deep
shelters linked to existing tube stations. London Transport was consulted
about the sites and required to build the tunnels at the public expense
with the understanding that they were to have the option of taking them
over for railway use after the war. With the latter point in mind,
positions were chosen on routes of possible north-south and east-west
express tube railways"

http://www.subbrit.org.uk/rsg/featur...ers/index.html

and Wiki must be talking out of their arses as well then

"London deep-level shelters

Background[edit]

Each shelter consists of a pair of parallel tunnels 16 feet 6 inches (5.03 m)
in diameter and 1,200 feet (370 m) long. Each tunnel is subdivided into two
decks, and each shelter was designed to hold up to 8,000 people. It was planned
that after the war the shelters would be used as part of new express tube
lines paralleling parts of the existing Northern and Central lines. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_deep-level_shelters


Maybe its just as well that there are experts like you around with
the facts at your fingertips, to put everybody right


michael adams

....




--
Spud

Underline?
 

On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 14:23:32 -0000
"michael adams" wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:46:48 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/02/2015 09:23, The Real Doctor wrote:
On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.


http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ned-tube-tunne
s
london-underline


Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."


Nothing like getting the facts totally mangled.

Well it is The Guardian. If you want facts rather than guesswork and
uneducated
opinion then its the wrong paper.

Looks like Subterranea Britannica

and Wiki must be talking out of their arses as well then

Or got the wrong end of the stick.

http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

"As congestion on the Northern Line increased in the '30s, a plan was developed
to build a second pair of tunnels in parallel with the Charing Cross branch of
the Northern Line that would act as an express route through London"

Maybe its just as well that there are experts like you around with
the facts at your fingertips, to put everybody right

It would seem someone who can use google a bit better than you would be a start.

--
Spud

Underline?
 

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.

Underline?
 

wrote in message ...
On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 14:23:32 -0000
"michael adams" wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:46:48 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 06/02/2015 09:23, The Real Doctor wrote:
On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.


http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ned-tube-tunne
s
london-underline


Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."


Nothing like getting the facts totally mangled.

Well it is The Guardian. If you want facts rather than guesswork and
uneducated
opinion then its the wrong paper.

Looks like Subterranea Britannica

and Wiki must be talking out of their arses as well then

Or got the wrong end of the stick.

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 ?


http://underground-history.co.uk/shelters.php

"As congestion on the Northern Line increased in the '30s, a plan was developed
to build a second pair of tunnels in parallel with the Charing Cross branch of
the Northern Line that would act as an express route through London"

Maybe its just as well that there are experts like you around with
the facts at your fingertips, to put everybody right

It would seem someone who can use google a bit better than you would be a start.

Reading the material you actually link to might help ease your obvious
confusion.

" It was hoped that when their wartime use had come to an end, tunneling
would re-start to allow the already constructed tunnel sections to be
interconnected, providing the express Northern Line route. For this reason,
most shelters were constructed with ease of access to the existing
Northern Line in mind.

So there were plans before the war.

These were shelved.

" These plans were shelved at the outset of the Second World War,"

Then with the start of the war, as the Guardian and SB says, it was decided
to build deep shelters.

At the time, as the Guardian and SB say, the possibility was left open
that these could form part of an express line running parallel
to the existing Northern Line. Similar to that proposed pre-war
but shelved. Hence their siting.

HTH


michael adams

....






--
Spud

Underline?
 

In message , at 22:37:19 on Thu, 5 Feb 2015,
" remarked:
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...bandoned-tube-
tunnels-london-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.

I've not seen, however, anything like this.

The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive to
repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of Boris-bikes -
what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to the other end so
that more than a couple of dozen people can use the route each morning
or evening?
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
18:45:25 on Thu, 5 Feb 2015, remarked:

Only Holborn-Aldwych is truly abandoned for a start.

And Borough to King William St. via London Bridge

Does that have any surface access though?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Underline?
 

Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 22:37:19 on Thu, 5 Feb
2015, " remarked:

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...bandoned-tube-
tunnels-london-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.

I've not seen, however, anything like this.

The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Peter Smyth

Underline?
 

In message , at 16:59:15
on Fri, 6 Feb 2015, remarked:
Only Holborn-Aldwych is truly abandoned for a start.

And Borough to King William St. via London Bridge

Does that have any surface access though?

At London Bridge, of sorts. But isn't lack of access one of the
'features' of something that's truly abandoned?

It's also been bisected by the JLE, but if it was important that could
be fixed with an up-and-over (a dip underneath would end up in the
Northern Line station!)
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

In message , at 23:17:16 on Fri, 6 Feb 2015,
Peter Smyth remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

On 2015\02\07 07:43, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:17:16 on Fri, 6 Feb 2015,
Peter Smyth remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

Underline?
 

On 06/02/2015 21:15, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 22:37:19 on Thu, 5 Feb 2015,
" remarked:
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...bandoned-tube-
tunnels-london-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.

I've not seen, however, anything like this.

The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive to
repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of Boris-bikes -
what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to the other end so
that more than a couple of dozen people can use the route each morning
or evening?

FWIW there are tooth fairies that do an amount of Boris Bike redistribution:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/twic/4887369973

I'm not going to pass comment on how this would apply to a subterranean
Holborn-Aldwych cycle route because that would involve taking the idea
seriously!

Underline?
 

In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote:

On 2015\02\07 07:43, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:17:16 on Fri, 6 Feb 2015,
Peter Smyth remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

That's the bore I was referring to when I said the others were in railway
use.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Underline?
 

In message , at 10:25:52
on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

That's the bore I was referring to when I said the others were in railway
use.

What I haven't been able to establish is whether the tunnel(s) between
the two stations [Holborn and Aldwych] are two bores, or a larger bore
with two tracks in. Traditionally it would be the former.

Perhaps boring experts could comment? (see: Yellow Pages).
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 13:44:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 06.02.15 9:39, Optimist wrote:
On Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:23:17 +0000, The Real Doctor wrote:

On 05/02/15 22:37, wrote:
This should be interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/20...ndon-underline

Only the Guardian ...

"Stretches of vacant tunnel remain at Goodge Street and Stockwell, for
example, remnants of a bizarre second world war plan to connect deep
bomb shelters into an express connection running parallel with the
Northern Line."

Ian

Are the disused Mail Rail tunnels suitable for this, or are they too small?

Too small, I would think.

Have to use recumbents.

And isn't there talk of reactivating Mail Rail for some other purpose?

A museum in one of the stops with a short theme ride in part of the
tunnel.

Underline?
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
10:25:52 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let
us forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too
expensive to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow
of Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them
back to the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people
can use the route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

That's the bore I was referring to when I said the others were in railway
use.

What I haven't been able to establish is whether the tunnel(s)
between the two stations [Holborn and Aldwych] are two bores, or a
larger bore with two tracks in. Traditionally it would be the former.

Perhaps boring experts could comment? (see: Yellow Pages).

Definitely two bores, like the rest of the Great Northern, Piccadilly &
Brompton Railway.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Underline?
 

On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 16:22:41 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

In terms of usual railway work it would IMU be more a case of
de-cluttering than major reconstruction although I'm not sure if the
Holborn end was ever actually "finished off" WRT connecting the twin
tunnels to the main line as the connection at Holborn only seems to
have led to the westbound line.
http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/...station_1.html
http://underground-history.co.uk/holborn.php

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Underline?
 

On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

Underline?
 

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

Underline?
 

On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

From the POV of running a trial of some sort, it is a section which
literally "couldn't get worse" and less staff than before would be
required but there is still the problem IIRC of not having a working
lift.

Underline?
 

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

From the POV of running a trial of some sort, it is a section which
literally "couldn't get worse" and less staff than before would be
required but there is still the problem IIRC of not having a working
lift.

There are probably better places on the network, or elsewhere, to test
driverless trains than the all-underground Aldwych line. In any case, what
is there to test? Driverless trains are well proven, in London and
elsewhere.

Underline?
 

On 08.02.15 0:01, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

From the POV of running a trial of some sort, it is a section which
literally "couldn't get worse" and less staff than before would be
required but there is still the problem IIRC of not having a working
lift.

There are probably better places on the network, or elsewhere, to test
driverless trains than the all-underground Aldwych line. In any case, what
is there to test? Driverless trains are well proven, in London and
elsewhere.


I just don't buy that any longer about Aldwych and Holborn being so
close. I've walked that distance a few times, and they are not that
close in relative terms.

Embankment to Charing Cross is walkable in under 5 minutes, whilst
Cannon Street and Monument are within plain sight of each other at
platform level.

Thus, I am hoping that they eventually reactivate Aldwych.

I suppose the lifts remain an issue, however.

Underline?
 

" wrote:
On 08.02.15 0:01, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

From the POV of running a trial of some sort, it is a section which
literally "couldn't get worse" and less staff than before would be
required but there is still the problem IIRC of not having a working
lift.

There are probably better places on the network, or elsewhere, to test
driverless trains than the all-underground Aldwych line. In any case, what
is there to test? Driverless trains are well proven, in London and
elsewhere.


I just don't buy that any longer about Aldwych and Holborn being so
close. I've walked that distance a few times, and they are not that close
in relative terms.

That's not what I said. It's Covent Garden and Aldwych that are very close
(5 mins walking time?). Temple is almost equally close.


Embankment to Charing Cross is walkable in under 5 minutes, whilst Cannon
Street and Monument are within plain sight of each other at platform level.

Thus, I am hoping that they eventually reactivate Aldwych.

Realistically, no chance.

Since the BBC World Service moved away, what massive transport demand is
there at Aldwych that isn't already served perfectly adequately by buses
and the other LU stations nearby?


I suppose the lifts remain an issue, however.

It was a basket case long before the lifts wore out.

Underline?
 

In article

rg, (Recliner) wrote:

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb
2015, Basil Jet remarked:

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

The nearest station to Aldwych is Temple.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Underline?
 

On Sun, 8 Feb 2015 00:36:55 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

" wrote:
On 08.02.15 0:01, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 7 Feb 2015 23:12:10 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

" wrote:
On 07.02.15 16:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:24:02 on Sat, 7 Feb 2015,
Basil Jet remarked:
The problem with a Holborn-Aldwych cycle route is that unless the
Holborn end is for Piccadilly Line passengers, the round trip
surface-tube-surface will take longer than walking. And don't let us
forget one the main reasons Aldwych closed was it was too expensive
to repair the lifts. Finally, what about the tidal flow of
Boris-bikes - what tooth fairy is going to be shuttling them back to
the other end so that more than a couple of dozen people can use the
route each morning or evening?

It's obvious - you run a train on the other track to take the bikes
back!

Although built for two tracks, there's only one, and also massive
restoration work would be required to bring the second platform at
either end back into use.

Then that's the one the cyclists go in, silly! ;-)

It's not just the platform, it's the whole station tunnel. Add to that
the "closed" platform-tunnel at the Holborn end is significantly less
accessible than the other (which was used until closure in the 90's)

Is there any chance of reactivating Holborn-Aldwych for revenue service?
Or are the lifts the main factor, killing that prospect?

They could, for example, run a crewless train in there.

You'd still have to staff Aldwych, to service minimal passenger demand.
Aldwych is near enough to Covent Garden to be redundant.

From the POV of running a trial of some sort, it is a section which
literally "couldn't get worse" and less staff than before would be
required but there is still the problem IIRC of not having a working
lift.

There are probably better places on the network, or elsewhere, to test
driverless trains than the all-underground Aldwych line. In any case, what
is there to test? Driverless trains are well proven, in London and
elsewhere.

There's more than one way of doing "driverless" and the current LU
test facilities don't involve the weak point of the Mk.1 passenger. If
anything goes wrong it doesn't screw up anywhere else. Trials could be
of various things not just driverless operation.


I just don't buy that any longer about Aldwych and Holborn being so
close. I've walked that distance a few times, and they are not that close
in relative terms.

That's not what I said. It's Covent Garden and Aldwych that are very close
(5 mins walking time?). Temple is almost equally close.

If they want to encourage volunteers, all they have to do is set the
Oyster fare to 0.00 for Aldwych to Holborn journeys.


Embankment to Charing Cross is walkable in under 5 minutes, whilst Cannon
Street and Monument are within plain sight of each other at platform level.

Thus, I am hoping that they eventually reactivate Aldwych.

Realistically, no chance.

Probably not as a permanent service.

Since the BBC World Service moved away, what massive transport demand is
there at Aldwych that isn't already served perfectly adequately by buses
and the other LU stations nearby?

That depends on what direction you're coming from and what else might
be closed for the day although the wrong combination might make it
unusable due to the risk of overcrowding. A particular grouping of
closures might make it a suitable substitute for Temple. If Euston can
operate with downward Victoria Line access being via a longer set of
spiral stairs then the less busy Aldwych ought to be able to manage.


I suppose the lifts remain an issue, however.

It was a basket case long before the lifts wore out.

Underline?
 

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.
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

In message , at 11:54:07
on Sat, 7 Feb 2015, remarked:
What I haven't been able to establish is whether the tunnel(s)
between the two stations [Holborn and Aldwych] are two bores, or a
larger bore with two tracks in. Traditionally it would be the former.

Definitely two bores, like the rest of the Great Northern, Piccadilly &
Brompton Railway.

Having spent a bit longer looking at websites yesterday, it's single
tunnels but there's a step-plate junction with X-overs at Holborn.
--
Roland Perry

Underline?
 

Roland Perry wrote:
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.

Which is why they'd use Covent Garden.

Underline?
 

"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.

--
DAS