New Holborn standing escalator trial
 

wrote in message ...
On Thu, 10 Mar 2016 16:59:13 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:40:44 on Thu, 10 Mar
2016, d remarked:
Sorry matey, but it depends who you're talking about. People who would
have
stood anyway will probably get up quicker. Those who would have walked
up
will
inevitably be delayed.

Sadly not, because they would have been delayed in the bigger queue for
the escalator.

Not as much as they'll have been delayed standing all the way up the long
escalator at Holborn.

TfL's stats would claim otherwise.

I'm sure they would, but I wouldn't believe them. The *average* speed of
everyone going up no doubt will be faster. But for those of us who arn't
bone idle lard butts it'll almost certainly be slower. Holborn is a long
escalator and there's no way the wait at the bottom can ever be long
enough
to make up for standing all the way to the top.

TfL aren't interested in how long it takes *you* to get to the top

or even how much opportunity for exercise it gives you

what they are interested in is, making sure that the crush at the bottom of
the escalator has gone by the time the next train pulls into the platform

tim



--
Spud

New Holborn standing escalator trial
 

On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:28:39 -0000
"tim..." wrote:
TfL aren't interested in how long it takes *you* to get to the top

Yes I know. But what irks me is the mendacious spin. "you'll get to the top
quicker". No I won't. Why can't they just for once be honest and say "its
to reduce station crushing, for some people it might be slightly slower"?

Its like the pointless automated announcements of "There is a good service
on all lines" when you're standing on a platform with 500 other people in the
rush hour and the next train is an indicated 5 mins away. Which is in LU
mins. In real minutes that means anything from 5-10.

--
Spud

New Holborn standing escalator trial
 

In message , at 12:28:39 on Fri, 11 Mar
2016, tim... remarked:

TfL aren't interested in how long it takes *you* to get to the top

or even how much opportunity for exercise it gives you

what they are interested in is, making sure that the crush at the
bottom of the escalator has gone by the time the next train pulls into
the platform

Which when I was at Baker St last week (which has a fairly short
escalator) it wasn't [the crush disappearing before the next train
arrived].
--
Roland Perry

New Holborn standing escalator trial
 

In message , at 12:34:49 on Fri, 11 Mar
2016, d remarked:

TfL aren't interested in how long it takes *you* to get to the top

Yes I know. But what irks me is the mendacious spin. "you'll get to the top
quicker". No I won't. Why can't they just for once be honest and say "its
to reduce station crushing, for some people it might be slightly slower"?

If you are starting at the back of the crush for the escalator, you
will. Because the crush will be much smaller.
--
Roland Perry

New Holborn standing escalator trial
 

On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:49:58 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:34:49 on Fri, 11 Mar
2016, d remarked:

TfL aren't interested in how long it takes *you* to get to the top

Yes I know. But what irks me is the mendacious spin. "you'll get to the top
quicker". No I won't. Why can't they just for once be honest and say "its
to reduce station crushing, for some people it might be slightly slower"?

If you are starting at the back of the crush for the escalator, you
will. Because the crush will be much smaller.

If you're going to walk up you don't generally wait right at the back.

--
Spud