In message , at 15:07:19 on
Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner remarked:

People also complain about the earlier Victoria-Picc connection. There
must be something in the way to stop it dropping down halfway along.

http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/at.../ltgreenpk.gif

I think the 'thing' is the expensive buildings north of Piccadilly.
It's much easier, cheaper and safer to build station tunnels under a
(literally) green park than large buildings.

The Piccadilly Line platforms will be under the road, so the "thing" is
also under the road, towards the western end of the platforms.

No, the issue is that the current station building is linked by single
long escalators to Piccadilly line platforms that used to be under a
different surface building directly above the line, linked by lifts.

** see below

So the Picc platforms are under the road, but well to the east of the
current station building.

The Victoria line came next, at approximately right angles to the
east-west Piccadilly line, and the platforms were placed just south of
the road, for ease of construction. The escalators link to the
platforms about a third of the way along (which is better than
connecting to the extreme ends of the platforms, which is what happens
with the Piccadilly line).

The subsequent Jubilee line platforms are below and just to the east
of the Victoria platforms. Of course, if they'd known then about the
later change of route, with the new line not needing to swing so far
east, the Jubilee line might have had a very different configuration
at Green Park, with the platforms parallel to the Victoria line. They
might even have delivered cross-platform interchange with the Victoria
line, as at, say Baker Street.

But the Picc platforms are so far to the east of the station, that
there's no good way of connecting new north-south platforms to both
the station building and the Piccadilly platforms to the east.

None of that explains why...

But they could nevertheless have started the passage between them
further to the western end of the Piccadilly line platforms.

....the passages from the two new stations don't head for the bottom of
the Piccadilly escalators, rather than the eastern ends of the platforms
which is what creates the excessively long walks.

But... ** the "thing" might be the old lift shafts, the space taken up
by which, for some reason, they declined to re-use.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:07:19 on
Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner remarked:

People also complain about the earlier Victoria-Picc connection. There
must be something in the way to stop it dropping down halfway along.

http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/at.../ltgreenpk.gif

I think the 'thing' is the expensive buildings north of Piccadilly.
It's much easier, cheaper and safer to build station tunnels under a
(literally) green park than large buildings.

The Piccadilly Line platforms will be under the road, so the "thing" is
also under the road, towards the western end of the platforms.

No, the issue is that the current station building is linked by single
long escalators to Piccadilly line platforms that used to be under a
different surface building directly above the line, linked by lifts.

** see below

So the Picc platforms are under the road, but well to the east of the
current station building.

The Victoria line came next, at approximately right angles to the
east-west Piccadilly line, and the platforms were placed just south of
the road, for ease of construction. The escalators link to the
platforms about a third of the way along (which is better than
connecting to the extreme ends of the platforms, which is what happens
with the Piccadilly line).

The subsequent Jubilee line platforms are below and just to the east
of the Victoria platforms. Of course, if they'd known then about the
later change of route, with the new line not needing to swing so far
east, the Jubilee line might have had a very different configuration
at Green Park, with the platforms parallel to the Victoria line. They
might even have delivered cross-platform interchange with the Victoria
line, as at, say Baker Street.

But the Picc platforms are so far to the east of the station, that
there's no good way of connecting new north-south platforms to both
the station building and the Piccadilly platforms to the east.

None of that explains why...

But they could nevertheless have started the passage between them
further to the western end of the Piccadilly line platforms.

...the passages from the two new stations don't head for the bottom of
the Piccadilly escalators, rather than the eastern ends of the platforms
which is what creates the excessively long walks.

I wonder if that was to avoid congestion on the platforms, which also have
to act as the route to the escalators? This way, people heading to the
passage to the Victoria line aren't mixed in with people heading for the
exit.


But... ** the "thing" might be the old lift shafts, the space taken up
by which, for some reason, they declined to re-use.

No, the old Dover Street station lift shafts will be over the Piccadilly
platforms -- you can work out where they must be from the location of the
old station at Dover St. But I presume that the Piccadilly line escalator
motor rooms must be below the line, so the Victoria line needed to run
further to the west, to be well clear of the escalators and their
equipment. It was probably easier to build the new line to run almost
directly under the existing station building. That minimised the length of
escalators, and meant that the station construction activity wasn't
directly under someone else's property.

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 16:05:51 on Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:07:19 on
Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner remarked:

People also complain about the earlier Victoria-Picc connection. There
must be something in the way to stop it dropping down halfway along.

http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/at.../ltgreenpk.gif

I think the 'thing' is the expensive buildings north of Piccadilly.
It's much easier, cheaper and safer to build station tunnels under a
(literally) green park than large buildings.

The Piccadilly Line platforms will be under the road, so the "thing" is
also under the road, towards the western end of the platforms.

No, the issue is that the current station building is linked by single
long escalators to Piccadilly line platforms that used to be under a
different surface building directly above the line, linked by lifts.

** see below

So the Picc platforms are under the road, but well to the east of the
current station building.

The Victoria line came next, at approximately right angles to the
east-west Piccadilly line, and the platforms were placed just south of
the road, for ease of construction. The escalators link to the
platforms about a third of the way along (which is better than
connecting to the extreme ends of the platforms, which is what happens
with the Piccadilly line).

The subsequent Jubilee line platforms are below and just to the east
of the Victoria platforms. Of course, if they'd known then about the
later change of route, with the new line not needing to swing so far
east, the Jubilee line might have had a very different configuration
at Green Park, with the platforms parallel to the Victoria line. They
might even have delivered cross-platform interchange with the Victoria
line, as at, say Baker Street.

But the Picc platforms are so far to the east of the station, that
there's no good way of connecting new north-south platforms to both
the station building and the Piccadilly platforms to the east.

None of that explains why...

But they could nevertheless have started the passage between them
further to the western end of the Piccadilly line platforms.

...the passages from the two new stations don't head for the bottom of
the Piccadilly escalators, rather than the eastern ends of the platforms
which is what creates the excessively long walks.

I wonder if that was to avoid congestion on the platforms, which also have
to act as the route to the escalators? This way, people heading to the
passage to the Victoria line aren't mixed in with people heading for the
exit.

Such matters don't appear to bother the designers of other stations.

But... ** the "thing" might be the old lift shafts, the space taken up
by which, for some reason, they declined to re-use.

No, the old Dover Street station lift shafts will be over the Piccadilly
platforms

The "thing" I'm trying to identify is also above the Piccadilly
platforms.

-- you can work out where they must be from the location of the
old station at Dover St.

The space occupied by the "thing" is very likely under the junction
between Dover St and Piccadilly (which makes a lift shaft less likely).

But I presume that the Piccadilly line escalator
motor rooms must be below the line, so the Victoria line needed to run
further to the west, to be well clear of the escalators and their
equipment. It was probably easier to build the new line to run almost
directly under the existing station building. That minimised the length of
escalators, and meant that the station construction activity wasn't
directly under someone else's property.

You are still fixated upon the position of the Victoria Line. What I'm
interested in is why the passageway from the Victoria to Piccadilly
doesn't emerge at the western end of the latter's platforms. And later,
the same for the Jubilee.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 16:05:51 on Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:07:19 on
Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner remarked:

People also complain about the earlier Victoria-Picc connection. There
must be something in the way to stop it dropping down halfway along.

http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/at.../ltgreenpk.gif

I think the 'thing' is the expensive buildings north of Piccadilly.
It's much easier, cheaper and safer to build station tunnels under a
(literally) green park than large buildings.

The Piccadilly Line platforms will be under the road, so the "thing" is
also under the road, towards the western end of the platforms.

No, the issue is that the current station building is linked by single
long escalators to Piccadilly line platforms that used to be under a
different surface building directly above the line, linked by lifts.

** see below

So the Picc platforms are under the road, but well to the east of the
current station building.

The Victoria line came next, at approximately right angles to the
east-west Piccadilly line, and the platforms were placed just south of
the road, for ease of construction. The escalators link to the
platforms about a third of the way along (which is better than
connecting to the extreme ends of the platforms, which is what happens
with the Piccadilly line).

The subsequent Jubilee line platforms are below and just to the east
of the Victoria platforms. Of course, if they'd known then about the
later change of route, with the new line not needing to swing so far
east, the Jubilee line might have had a very different configuration
at Green Park, with the platforms parallel to the Victoria line. They
might even have delivered cross-platform interchange with the Victoria
line, as at, say Baker Street.

But the Picc platforms are so far to the east of the station, that
there's no good way of connecting new north-south platforms to both
the station building and the Piccadilly platforms to the east.

None of that explains why...

But they could nevertheless have started the passage between them
further to the western end of the Piccadilly line platforms.

...the passages from the two new stations don't head for the bottom of
the Piccadilly escalators, rather than the eastern ends of the platforms
which is what creates the excessively long walks.

I wonder if that was to avoid congestion on the platforms, which also have
to act as the route to the escalators? This way, people heading to the
passage to the Victoria line aren't mixed in with people heading for the
exit.

Such matters don't appear to bother the designers of other stations.

But... ** the "thing" might be the old lift shafts, the space taken up
by which, for some reason, they declined to re-use.

No, the old Dover Street station lift shafts will be over the Piccadilly
platforms

The "thing" I'm trying to identify is also above the Piccadilly
platforms.

-- you can work out where they must be from the location of the
old station at Dover St.

The space occupied by the "thing" is very likely under the junction
between Dover St and Piccadilly (which makes a lift shaft less likely).

But I presume that the Piccadilly line escalator
motor rooms must be below the line, so the Victoria line needed to run
further to the west, to be well clear of the escalators and their
equipment. It was probably easier to build the new line to run almost
directly under the existing station building. That minimised the length of
escalators, and meant that the station construction activity wasn't
directly under someone else's property.

You are still fixated upon the position of the Victoria Line. What I'm
interested in is why the passageway from the Victoria to Piccadilly
doesn't emerge at the western end of the latter's platforms. And later,
the same for the Jubilee.

As I said upthread, they were almost certainly trying to avoid congestion
at the western end of the platforms as you already get queues backing up
from the escalators on to the platforms, even without mixing in all the
people heading to and from the other lines. This way, even though it
increases the walking distance for those at the western end of the trains,
is safer. And it doesn't increase the walking distance for the pax at the
eastern end of the trains. If you're at the western end of the Piccadilly
line train, just take the escalator up, and then the Victoria line
escalator down.

On 2016\03\03 17:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 16:05:51 on Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:07:19 on
Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner remarked:

People also complain about the earlier Victoria-Picc connection.
There
must be something in the way to stop it dropping down halfway along.

http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/at.../ltgreenpk.gif


I think the 'thing' is the expensive buildings north of Piccadilly.
It's much easier, cheaper and safer to build station tunnels under a
(literally) green park than large buildings.

The Piccadilly Line platforms will be under the road, so the
"thing" is
also under the road, towards the western end of the platforms.

No, the issue is that the current station building is linked by single
long escalators to Piccadilly line platforms that used to be under a
different surface building directly above the line, linked by lifts.

** see below

So the Picc platforms are under the road, but well to the east of the
current station building.

The Victoria line came next, at approximately right angles to the
east-west Piccadilly line, and the platforms were placed just south of
the road, for ease of construction. The escalators link to the
platforms about a third of the way along (which is better than
connecting to the extreme ends of the platforms, which is what happens
with the Piccadilly line).

The subsequent Jubilee line platforms are below and just to the east
of the Victoria platforms. Of course, if they'd known then about the
later change of route, with the new line not needing to swing so far
east, the Jubilee line might have had a very different configuration
at Green Park, with the platforms parallel to the Victoria line. They
might even have delivered cross-platform interchange with the Victoria
line, as at, say Baker Street.

But the Picc platforms are so far to the east of the station, that
there's no good way of connecting new north-south platforms to both
the station building and the Piccadilly platforms to the east.

None of that explains why...

But they could nevertheless have started the passage between them
further to the western end of the Piccadilly line platforms.

...the passages from the two new stations don't head for the bottom of
the Piccadilly escalators, rather than the eastern ends of the platforms
which is what creates the excessively long walks.

I wonder if that was to avoid congestion on the platforms, which also
have
to act as the route to the escalators? This way, people heading to the
passage to the Victoria line aren't mixed in with people heading for the
exit.

Such matters don't appear to bother the designers of other stations.

But... ** the "thing" might be the old lift shafts, the space taken up
by which, for some reason, they declined to re-use.

No, the old Dover Street station lift shafts will be over the Piccadilly
platforms

The "thing" I'm trying to identify is also above the Piccadilly platforms.

-- you can work out where they must be from the location of the
old station at Dover St.

The space occupied by the "thing" is very likely under the junction
between Dover St and Piccadilly (which makes a lift shaft less likely).

But I presume that the Piccadilly line escalator
motor rooms must be below the line, so the Victoria line needed to run
further to the west, to be well clear of the escalators and their
equipment. It was probably easier to build the new line to run almost
directly under the existing station building. That minimised the
length of
escalators, and meant that the station construction activity wasn't
directly under someone else's property.

You are still fixated upon the position of the Victoria Line. What I'm
interested in is why the passageway from the Victoria to Piccadilly
doesn't emerge at the western end of the latter's platforms. And later,
the same for the Jubilee.

I imagine that the western end of the Piccadilly trains was more
crowded. But I agree that forcing longer walks is not the answer.
Telling people on the platform to move along is a better idea.

Actually we must be at the point where it would be almost trivially easy
for carriages to weigh their cargo and communicate it to the railway so
that LED displays on the tunnel wall at the next station can tell
passengers where the most space is available on the approaching train.
You could even monitor how many passengers were waiting on the platform
alongside each carriage before deciding whether it's worth telling
people to move along the platform.

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\03\03 17:05, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 16:05:51 on Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:07:19 on
Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Recliner remarked:

People also complain about the earlier Victoria-Picc connection.
There
must be something in the way to stop it dropping down halfway along.

http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/at.../ltgreenpk.gif


I think the 'thing' is the expensive buildings north of Piccadilly.
It's much easier, cheaper and safer to build station tunnels under a
(literally) green park than large buildings.

The Piccadilly Line platforms will be under the road, so the
"thing" is
also under the road, towards the western end of the platforms.

No, the issue is that the current station building is linked by single
long escalators to Piccadilly line platforms that used to be under a
different surface building directly above the line, linked by lifts.

** see below

So the Picc platforms are under the road, but well to the east of the
current station building.

The Victoria line came next, at approximately right angles to the
east-west Piccadilly line, and the platforms were placed just south of
the road, for ease of construction. The escalators link to the
platforms about a third of the way along (which is better than
connecting to the extreme ends of the platforms, which is what happens
with the Piccadilly line).

The subsequent Jubilee line platforms are below and just to the east
of the Victoria platforms. Of course, if they'd known then about the
later change of route, with the new line not needing to swing so far
east, the Jubilee line might have had a very different configuration
at Green Park, with the platforms parallel to the Victoria line. They
might even have delivered cross-platform interchange with the Victoria
line, as at, say Baker Street.

But the Picc platforms are so far to the east of the station, that
there's no good way of connecting new north-south platforms to both
the station building and the Piccadilly platforms to the east.

None of that explains why...

But they could nevertheless have started the passage between them
further to the western end of the Piccadilly line platforms.

...the passages from the two new stations don't head for the bottom of
the Piccadilly escalators, rather than the eastern ends of the platforms
which is what creates the excessively long walks.

I wonder if that was to avoid congestion on the platforms, which also
have
to act as the route to the escalators? This way, people heading to the
passage to the Victoria line aren't mixed in with people heading for the
exit.

Such matters don't appear to bother the designers of other stations.

But... ** the "thing" might be the old lift shafts, the space taken up
by which, for some reason, they declined to re-use.

No, the old Dover Street station lift shafts will be over the Piccadilly
platforms

The "thing" I'm trying to identify is also above the Piccadilly platforms.

-- you can work out where they must be from the location of the
old station at Dover St.

The space occupied by the "thing" is very likely under the junction
between Dover St and Piccadilly (which makes a lift shaft less likely).

But I presume that the Piccadilly line escalator
motor rooms must be below the line, so the Victoria line needed to run
further to the west, to be well clear of the escalators and their
equipment. It was probably easier to build the new line to run almost
directly under the existing station building. That minimised the
length of
escalators, and meant that the station construction activity wasn't
directly under someone else's property.

You are still fixated upon the position of the Victoria Line. What I'm
interested in is why the passageway from the Victoria to Piccadilly
doesn't emerge at the western end of the latter's platforms. And later,
the same for the Jubilee.

I imagine that the western end of the Piccadilly trains was more
crowded. But I agree that forcing longer walks is not the answer.
Telling people on the platform to move along is a better idea.

It's not the crowds on the trains that's the problem. It's the crowds at
the western end of the Green Park Picc platforms queueing for the
escalators.


Actually we must be at the point where it would be almost trivially easy
for carriages to weigh their cargo and communicate it to the railway so
that LED displays on the tunnel wall at the next station can tell
passengers where the most space is available on the approaching train.
You could even monitor how many passengers were waiting on the platform
alongside each carriage before deciding whether it's worth telling
people to move along the platform.

That may help solve the problem of unevenly loaded trains, but it's got
nothing to do with the Green Park question.

On 03/03/2016 08:17, Roland Perry wrote:
[...]
Incidentally, the 12-carriage platforms at St Pancras Thameslink etc are
something like 240m long I believe.

Pah, the Eurostar platforms are 400m long, and if you arrive in a high
numbered carriage you have to walk almost that full length just to leave
the platform. It's probably another 100m+ to get to a Tube platform.

In your dreams. Especially if you want the step-free access to the
Victoria Line it's getting on for a ten minute walk (via the Northern
ticket hall).


You obviously have nightmares about walking any distance!

There is nothing misleading in giving a distance between two
separate stations. What is misleading is suggesting that there
is no real distance and that the connection is feasible for all
people.

The same principle would apply with step free access. It would
be quite wrong to suggest step free access at a station with no
step free access. The rule should be quite simple. Give accurate
information and don't mislead people.

I suggest you are approaching this from the wrong angle.
The key requirement is not to mislead people who are physically
disadvantaged. Therefore any connection can be shown as long
as the map makes clear the distances involved.

As an example, a middle-aged woman with heavy luggage
travelling from Bedford to Walthamstow needs to know that
trudging from St. Pancras International to the Victoria Line
platforms is quite a hike. Does this mean that a map should
not show a connection at St. Pancras? Of course not. It means
that additional information needs to be given. (It also means
that a travelator should have been installed when they re-built
that station)

If a misleading map has lured people into making an inappropriate
choice of route, then when those people discover their mistake
they either have to make the best of it or plan an entirely new journey.