Crossrail's disjointed introduction
 

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 13:07:57 -0600
wrote:
In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 07:00:38 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

If the objective is to please people getting off the Victoria Line at
Euston, and walking to the MML platforms from there, rather than getting
off the Victoria Line at Kings Cross for the MML platforms, then I think
we can discount them as a target audience of any relevance at all.

Not everyone is arriving at St Pancras from the Victoria Line. Other
methods of transport are available. You can't please all of them; you
take from one and give to another.

Anybody arriving at King's Cross St Pancras Underground station is equally
badly off, unless they arrive on the Metropolitan (etc) platforms.

Other cities do their best to make sure the interchange between lines is as
short as possible. In London we seem to deliberately do the opposite. The
new thameslink platform at St P, the jubilee line at waterloo which seems to be
half a mile from anything else and requires a travalator are good examples.

Crossrail's disjointed introduction
 

In message , at 09:57:53 on Thu, 14 Dec
2017, remarked:

Anybody arriving at King's Cross St Pancras Underground station is equally
badly off, unless they arrive on the Metropolitan (etc) platforms.

Other cities do their best to make sure the interchange between lines is as
short as possible. In London we seem to deliberately do the opposite. The
new thameslink platform at St P, the jubilee line at waterloo which seems to be
half a mile from anything else and requires a travalator are good examples.

The station at Waterloo is going to be under the Charing Cross Line
beneath Waterloo East; rather than under the old Eurostar platforms and
north end of the concourse. I don't know the specific reason for this.

--
Roland Perry

Crossrail's disjointed introduction
 

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 10:26:29 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:57:53 on Thu, 14 Dec
2017, remarked:

Anybody arriving at King's Cross St Pancras Underground station is equally
badly off, unless they arrive on the Metropolitan (etc) platforms.

Other cities do their best to make sure the interchange between lines is as
short as possible. In London we seem to deliberately do the opposite. The
new thameslink platform at St P, the jubilee line at waterloo which seems to
be
half a mile from anything else and requires a travalator are good examples.

The station at Waterloo is going to be under the Charing Cross Line
beneath Waterloo East; rather than under the old Eurostar platforms and
north end of the concourse. I don't know the specific reason for this.

As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east? They're at the same level and can't be more
than 50 metres apart at closest approach. It would have created a south river
line following the river (more or less) from richmond out to gravesend.

London's Elizabeth Line's disjointed introduction
 

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:14:31 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 10:26:29 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:57:53 on Thu, 14 Dec
2017, remarked:

Anybody arriving at King's Cross St Pancras Underground station is equally
badly off, unless they arrive on the Metropolitan (etc) platforms.

Other cities do their best to make sure the interchange between lines is as
short as possible. In London we seem to deliberately do the opposite. The
new thameslink platform at St P, the jubilee line at waterloo which seems to
be
half a mile from anything else and requires a travalator are good examples.

The station at Waterloo is going to be under the Charing Cross Line
beneath Waterloo East; rather than under the old Eurostar platforms and
north end of the concourse. I don't know the specific reason for this.

As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east? They're at the same level and can't be more
than 50 metres apart at closest approach. It would have created a south river
line following the river (more or less) from richmond out to gravesend.

Strangely LT/LRT/TfL have regressed. When they built the Victoria
Line back in the 1960s they made interchange so easy. Amid Beeching,
and the general decline during that period, the Victoria Line shines
as a real achievement.

Crossrail's disjointed introduction
 

In article ,
wrote:
As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east?

They were. The line was taken up in 1911, according to
https://www.londonreconnections.com/...waterloo-link/

--
Mike Bristow

Crossrail's disjointed introduction
 

In article , () wrote:

As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east? They're at the same level and can't be
more
than 50 metres apart at closest approach. It would have created a south
river line following the river (more or less) from richmond out to
gravesend.

They were linked, across the main concourse. The disused bridge across
Waterloo Road is still there.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Crossrail's disjointed introduction
 

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:56:31 +0000
Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east?

They were. The line was taken up in 1911, according to
https://www.londonreconnections.com/...waterloo-link/

A lost opportunity. Could have been the south london version of crossrail (ish).

London's Elizabeth Line's disjointed introduction
 

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:21:31 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:14:31 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 10:26:29 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:57:53 on Thu, 14 Dec
2017, remarked:

Anybody arriving at King's Cross St Pancras Underground station is equally
badly off, unless they arrive on the Metropolitan (etc) platforms.

Other cities do their best to make sure the interchange between lines is as
short as possible. In London we seem to deliberately do the opposite. The
new thameslink platform at St P, the jubilee line at waterloo which seems to
be
half a mile from anything else and requires a travalator are good examples.

The station at Waterloo is going to be under the Charing Cross Line
beneath Waterloo East; rather than under the old Eurostar platforms and
north end of the concourse. I don't know the specific reason for this.

As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east? They're at the same level and can't be more
than 50 metres apart at closest approach. It would have created a south river
line following the river (more or less) from richmond out to gravesend.

Strangely LT/LRT/TfL have regressed. When they built the Victoria
Line back in the 1960s they made interchange so easy. Amid Beeching,
and the general decline during that period, the Victoria Line shines
as a real achievement.

One can only assume that what makes construction easier for the engineers
and maybe saves a few weeks or months, takes priority over what will make life
easier for hundreds of millions of passengers over the next couple of centuries.

London's Elizabeth Line's disjointed introduction
 

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:46:51 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:21:31 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:14:31 +0000 (UTC), wrote:


As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east? They're at the same level and can't be more
than 50 metres apart at closest approach. It would have created a south river
line following the river (more or less) from richmond out to gravesend.

They were, once - until 1911, but it required a moveable bridge
section of the concourse to reach platforms in the main Waterloo
station that were East of the connection. It was taken out of service
because it was rarely used.

London's Elizabeth Line's disjointed introduction
 

wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:21:31 +0000
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 11:14:31 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 10:26:29 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:57:53 on Thu, 14 Dec
2017, remarked:

Anybody arriving at King's Cross St Pancras Underground station is equally
badly off, unless they arrive on the Metropolitan (etc) platforms.

Other cities do their best to make sure the interchange between lines is as
short as possible. In London we seem to deliberately do the opposite. The
new thameslink platform at St P, the jubilee line at waterloo which seems to
be
half a mile from anything else and requires a travalator are good examples.

The station at Waterloo is going to be under the Charing Cross Line
beneath Waterloo East; rather than under the old Eurostar platforms and
north end of the concourse. I don't know the specific reason for this.

As an aside - I wonder why the lines at waterloo were never linked to the
charing X line at waterloo east? They're at the same level and can't be more
than 50 metres apart at closest approach. It would have created a south river
line following the river (more or less) from richmond out to gravesend.

Strangely LT/LRT/TfL have regressed. When they built the Victoria
Line back in the 1960s they made interchange so easy. Amid Beeching,
and the general decline during that period, the Victoria Line shines
as a real achievement.

One can only assume that what makes construction easier for the engineers
and maybe saves a few weeks or months, takes priority over what will make life
easier for hundreds of millions of passengers over the next couple of centuries.

Apparently, the Victoria line was subsequently criticised for inadequate
capacity in the stations, so the JLE was designed to have large, high
capacity stations, even though this meant some platforms were well
separated from others in the station. Some were OK (Canada Water, Canning
Town, Stratford, Westminster, West Ham), others less so (Waterloo, London
Bridge, Canary Wharf).