One of the things I find strange about the tube is that they hardly
ever (i.e. everywhere except holborn) seem to attempt to correct the
lack of interchange between lines which cross each other (e.g. West
Ruislip), so that you don't need to make ridiculous journeys to get
between them. I have constructed a list of these, and wonder whether
any plans are in the pipeline to correct the problem, or ever have
been.


Acton and Ealing - this whole area is a mess, with multiple lines
crossing each other, but never interchanging - e.g. you could cut out
either the central line, or the district line, if you had an
interchange to the picadilly from the central just before ealing
broadway. Likewise, acton main line and west acton are very close yet
without interchange.

Aldgate - The trains from Tower Hill to Aldgate East, and from
Liverpool Street to Aldgate East, both pass extremely closely to the
south and north ends of the Aldgate platforms (respectively). Why
didn't they just add platforms in for these so that you don't need to
make awkward changes at this triangle.

Aldwych - The southern end of the platforms are close enough to Temple
for an escalator to join them together. As they were forever trying to
make Aldwych more useful, I am surprised they never considered this, as
a short cut from Holborn to the circle line would be very useful.

Bank - The Waterloo & City line is quite far from the other lines (the
platforms are actually half way to Mansion House), so why didn't they
just extend it, moving the platforms to somewhere like Princes Street,
so that it is a very brief walk to the other lines.


Blackfriars - The Waterloo & City line passes directly beneath here, a
connection to it would alleviate travel from Bank to Blackfriars (thus
rendered 1 stop rather than 4) and from Blackfriars to Waterloo
(currently 4 stops including interchange), assuming the frequency of
the line was changed to something more similar to the other tube lines,
so that it could cope with the number of passengers. A connection here
would be amazingly significant to journey times from this area, and
routes from more north that involve using thameslink, as well as
connecting the area up much better.

Earls Court - The station appears to have been placed in one of the
most awkward of locations - had it been placed to the east in the
triangle where the lines diverge, there wouldn't be so much trouble
getting to high street kensington or gloucester road. More
significantly, had the station been placed to the west, it would have
enabled a direct connection to the West London Line, allowing the
branch to Kensington Olympia to be scrapped (and resolve similar issues
with having to get a branch to West Brompton first) - in fact, if the
Kings Line (Chelsea-Hackney line) went ahead, it would allow the Kings
line to take other the southern half of the Wimbledon Branch, and the
West London line to take over the northern half (and thus increase the
frequency of the West London Line significantly, as it would have
dedicated track rather than share it with freight).



Edgeware Road - The connection between the nearby bakerloo and circle
line stations is via an increadibly scary mugging friendly set of
underpasses. It could be much better done, more directly, via a simple
escalator between the bakerloo and circle line platforms.

Euston Square - The eastern end of this station is near Euston, and an
escalator link would connect the two, although there is a problem due
to a huge sewer right next to and parrallel with the eastern end of the
station, which obstructs the potential path quite a bit. The western
end is fairly close to Warren Street - the distance is about the same
as the length of the travelator at waterloo, and an escalator between
the levels of the lines would reduce that (going to the northern line
directly would be the shortest route, although you would probably need
to go through the old lift shafts. At the moment, if you want to go
south on the charing cross branch of the northern line, you either need
to walk the distance to euston or warren street, or change at both
kings cross, and euston, which is hardly convenient if you have lots of
heavy luggage, or difficulty walking far for some other reason.

Hampstead - The North London line passes to the south, and is a very
useful line as otherwise you need to go back into central london if you
want to go somewhere east or west. If they put an exit from the
southern end of the platforms, it would meet the North London line at
Rosslyn Hill. Although this is comparably quite far south from the
northern line platforms, Hampstead is the deepest tube station in
london, and so the escalator distance from it would be the longest (and
due the length, they would probably be split into stages, pushing the
exit even further to the south).

Mansion House - The Waterloo & City line runs directly under here, and
the platforms for bank are closer to here than they are to bank, so why
did they never build an escalator connection between the bank platforms
and Mansion House (admittedly this would make bank station somewhat
bizarre - if you went from the waterloo & city line platforms to
monument via the central line, and then took a circle/district line
train to mansion house, you would get back to the same waterloo & city
line platforms, even though you have gone through an intermediate
station (cannon street)).

Morden - Tramlink, and other lines, pass half way between morden and
south wimbledon, which is a reasonably large gap anyway. A station
where they meet would provide useful interchange, enabling a more
direct connection to the district line (via tramlink/foot/bus etc.) and
it is odd that one was not put in here originally.

Paddington - Currently, there is an extensive walk between the circle &
bakerloo platforms, and the hammersmith ones. This could have been
resolved by an escalator from the northern end of the bakerloo line
platforms which would connect fairly directly with the hammersmith
platforms. Also, the circle and bakerloo platforms could be brought
much closer together by a short passage from the eastern end of the
circle line platforms. I am very curious why neither of these things
were ever done.

Shepherd's Bush - There already seems to be a staff exit at the east
end of the platforms (over a bridge), so are they considering a public
exit at the east end to connect to the new station planned for the West
London Line.

Shoreditch High Street - The new East London Line station will be
directly above the central line, near some half built WWII bunker
tunnels. I have always been puzzled why they never built a station here
in the first place on the central line, and now it would make a useful
interchange as well.

St Pauls - The west end of the platforms is quite close to the City
Thameslink station, so I am surprised that no link was made, especially
when there are already partly constructed WWII bunker tunnels from the
west end of one of the platforms. Alternately, I am also surprised that
they never considered a station at Holborn Viaduct on the original
central line, which would also have provided such a connection, since
this is quite a busy area, and the gap between St Pauls and Chancery
Lane is quite large.

Walthamstow - With a small extension to the victoria line, it would
meet the central line near woodford, making the journey to/from
Walthamstow from/to the east much simpler, rather than needing to go
via oxford circus (ignoring buses/private transport), which is a bit
silly.

West Ruislip - Connecting this station up to a new station on the
metropolitan would mean that you could make the connection to Uxbridge
quite easily, rather than needing to use local transport instead, or
having to go via acton, which is ridiculous.

White City - They are building a new station on the Hammersmith & City
line nearby, which could be connected up if they slightly extended the
platforms a bit south, and replaced the (very) ugly station building
with (a more useful) one towards the southern end of the site.

On 20 May 2005 01:34:22 -0700, lonelytraveller wrote:

One of the things I find strange about the tube is that they hardly
ever (i.e. everywhere except holborn) seem to attempt to correct the
lack of interchange between lines which cross each other

That's hardly fair. In the case of the last two lines built, Jubilee and
Victoria, it seems like a case of joining up the dots.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p12028744.html
(TDB 975025 - the SR General Manager's Saloon at Weymouth in 1985)

On Fri, 20 May 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:

On 20 May 2005 01:34:22 -0700, lonelytraveller wrote:

One of the things I find strange about the tube is that they hardly
ever (i.e. everywhere except holborn) seem to attempt to correct the
lack of interchange between lines which cross each other

That's hardly fair. In the case of the last two lines built, Jubilee and
Victoria, it seems like a case of joining up the dots.

That's true, but Dr No Context is talking about improving connectivity
between existing lines, and he's right about that. The answer, of course,
is that the cost of the improvements would sadly be disproportionate to
the benefit they would bring. Except at Park Royal, apparently. The
ELL/Central opportunity at Shoreditch High Street is an example of this -
it was considered, and not found to be worth it, given that the extra stop
would delay travellers from the east as well.

I'd take issue with some of the suggestions, though, like Aldgate; the
current layout is like this:

---+-\
| \ # AE
A #| +---
| /
---+-/

Where lines are, er, lines, pluses are junctions, and # is a station; A is
Aldgate, AE is Aldgate East. Lonelytraveller doesn't like the A to AE
change, so he'd rather have:

---+-\
# | \
A #| +---
# | /
---+-/

Or something, so you can do it all at Aldgate. This, however, would be
awful for anyone who just wanted to head east - you'd have to choose
between two platforms and hope you picked the one with the first train,
whereas at present, you just have one. I'm not really sure who it would
make life easier for; the stations on either side provide easier changes
from the District and H&C to the Circle.

I don't think there's any way to arrange this so that everyone is happy.
Not just by building new platforms, at least; i did at one point work out
how to arrange a station at the junction of three lines so that there's
one platform per destination direction, but it was a bit complicated.

What i'd do, if we were going to dig up bits of the City, is rearrange
Tower Hill - possibly with an extra bit of track from Minories junction -
so that Metropolitan trains could terminate there instead of Aldgate. Oh,
and link the station up with Fenchurch Street and Tower Gateway properly
while i'm down there.

Many of the other suggestions are sound, though. I share his frustration
over Earl's Court - it (or the WLL, depending on how you look at it) is
just in the wrong place for interchange with the WLL (and concomitant
extermination of the Kenny O stub, which i find really irritating).

tom

--
20 Minutes into the Future

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:

On 20 May 2005 01:34:22 -0700, lonelytraveller wrote:

One of the things I find strange about the tube is that they hardly
ever (i.e. everywhere except holborn) seem to attempt to correct the
lack of interchange between lines which cross each other

(snip)

Many of the other suggestions are sound, though. I share his frustration
over Earl's Court - it (or the WLL, depending on how you look at it) is
just in the wrong place for interchange with the WLL (and concomitant
extermination of the Kenny O stub, which i find really irritating).

Earl's Court is in exactly the right place - between Earl's Court Road
and Warwick Road, with the former exit serving the busy shopping area
and the latter exit serving the exhibition centre. There's no better
location of Earl's Court station.

To provide a comprehensive interchange to the WLL without greatly
inconveniencing the people who travel to the Earl's Court area would
require new platforms underneath the exhibition centre, with a
passageway linking them to the existing station. But these platforms
would be tens of metres away from West Brompton! So, why not just
signpost and allow out-of-station interchange between Earl's Court and
West Brompton? It would have much the same effect.

You may find the Olympia stub irritating, but many others find it useful
- it has good interchange at Earl's Court across the platform to
services towards Victoria or Edgware Road, and is relatively reliable
compared to the WLL.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Fri, 20 May 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2005, Chris Tolley wrote:

On 20 May 2005 01:34:22 -0700, lonelytraveller wrote:

the lack of interchange between lines which cross each other

I share his frustration over Earl's Court - it (or the WLL, depending
on how you look at it) is just in the wrong place for interchange with
the WLL (and concomitant extermination of the Kenny O stub, which i
find really irritating).

Earl's Court is in exactly the right place - between Earl's Court Road
and Warwick Road, with the former exit serving the busy shopping area
and the latter exit serving the exhibition centre. There's no better
location of Earl's Court station.

That is one conclusion. The other is that the shops and the exhibition
centre are in the wrong place.

That isn't an entirely facetious comment - the location of the station
probably had a lot to do with the structure of development in the area.

It is a mostly facetious comment, though.

To provide a comprehensive interchange to the WLL without greatly
inconveniencing the people who travel to the Earl's Court area would require
new platforms underneath the exhibition centre, with a passageway linking
them to the existing station. But these platforms would be tens of metres
away from West Brompton! So, why not just signpost and allow out-of-station
interchange between Earl's Court and West Brompton? It would have much the
same effect.

I think that's a great idea. I'm not suggesting a new WLL station on the
existing line; that would clearly be madness. I'm just a little irked that
they didn't build the stuff in that area a bit more smoothly when they had
the chance (with the WLL further to the east, for example). I'm not too
hot on my history, though; the WLL probably predates the District line.
Still, if Earl's Court is a good place for a tube station, it's also a
good place for a railway station.

That said, perhaps the fact that the Wimbledon branch follows the WLL
alignment means Earl's Court has to be well to the east of it.

You may find the Olympia stub irritating, but many others find it useful

DESTROY KENSINGTON OLYMPIA.

tom

--
Sometimes it takes a madman like Iggy Pop before you can SEE the logic really working.

In message , Tom
Anderson writes

That is one conclusion. The other is that the shops and the exhibition
centre are in the wrong place.

That isn't an entirely facetious comment - the location of the station
probably had a lot to do with the structure of development in the area.

When the line was built through Earls Court in 1869, no station was
thought necessary as the area was still mostly market gardens.

Housing rapidly followed the railway and, after petitioning by residents
a small wooden station was built to the EAST of Earl's Court Road in
1871 (where lonelytraveller suggests it should be now).

This burned down in 1875 and was replaced by the present station, a
larger site being deemed necessary as the area was rapidly becoming
built-up. What is now the Earl's Court Exhibition Centre was just waste
ground (but used for various shows) on the triangle created by the
railway lines to the west of the new station - the exhibition hall was
not completed until 1937.

So the area actually developed around the railway, rather than
vice-versa.

--
Paul Terry

In article , Tom
Anderson writes
I'm just a little irked that they didn't build the stuff in that area a
bit more smoothly when they had the chance (with the WLL further to the
east, for example). I'm not too hot on my history, though; the WLL
probably predates the District line.

It does: the original District Line came west from Gloucester Road and
HSK (converging routes) then diverged to meet the WLL facing both north
and south.

Initially there was no station on the middle section. Earl's Court was
built later, and was initially on the *east* side of the road; it got
moved west later.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Kensington olympia must be the most random station in the world

Many of the other suggestions are sound, though. I share his frustration
over Earl's Court

Me too - it's really inconvenient that there's no proper interchange
between the WLL and the Picc.

- it (or the WLL, depending on how you look at it) is
just in the wrong place for interchange with the WLL (and concomitant
extermination of the Kenny O stub, which i find really irritating).

You may find the Olympia stub irritating, but many others find it useful
- it has good interchange at Earl's Court across the platform to
services towards Victoria or Edgware Road, and is relatively reliable
compared to the WLL.

What I'd really like to see done with the Olympia branch, is
restoration of the through services from Earl's Court to Willesden
Junction. (OK so it's totally unrealistic. But maybe one day the WLL
will be quadrupled or something - it is supposed to have major
capacity problems after all - and it'll become possible

Maybe the WLL will just take over the Olympia branch, and use the track
to increase its own capacity.