"Matthew Dickinson" wrote in message
...

destination than a £1.50 Oyster fare would have got me from East
Putney.

Zonal fares will be rolled out before Oyster, potentially next year
(according to previous DfT murmurings). However, having read the SWT
invitation to tender more carefully, Oyster PAYG wouldn't be introduced
on
SWT until at least January 2009, when ticket gates are expected to be
installed at Waterloo.

That'll be fun in the morning rush

tim


What would be logical is to move the LUL gate line so that interchange
via the underpass would not need passing through any gatelines, while
providing validators for PAYG.

I'd though of this, but it won't work because the majority of pax arriving
at Waterloo arrive from somewhere outside Ken's area of influence.

tim

"David" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 19:31:31 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

Indeed. Victoria just about manages gates, but has a different design
that lends itself to them. Similarly Liverpool Street has natural
places.
But where would one put the fare gates in the concourse/platforms at
Waterloo? The entrances to most of the platforms are too narrow.

Could there not be a gateline a few metres back from the platforms?

It's probably where it would have to be, but if it's going to work at all
then the concourse needs some rearrangement to move the shops, monitors,
steps to the Underground and everything! Waterloo gets very crowded at
peak
hours and removing several metres near the platforms will only exaserbate
the congestion.



There's a plan to completely re-develop Waterloo.
The tracks and platforms will be extended across the concourse to
allow for longer trains. A new concourse will be built below them at
street level with escalators up to the platforms.

and all by 2009!

I don't think they can achieve this date.

tim





Dave

On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 19:31:31 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:

It's probably where it would have to be, but if it's going to work at all
then the concourse needs some rearrangement to move the shops, monitors,
steps to the Underground and everything! Waterloo gets very crowded at peak
hours and removing several metres near the platforms will only exaserbate
the congestion.

Easy. Just remove all the shops that are currently in the gateline
and replace them with a wide expanse of gates - think Canary Wharf
LUL.

In message , David
writes

There's a plan to completely re-develop Waterloo.
The tracks and platforms will be extended across the concourse to
allow for longer trains. A new concourse will be built below them at
street level with escalators up to the platforms.

Mmm ... but that's not even due to start for up to eight years (2014),
so something else will be needed in the interim.

--
Paul Terry

Phil Clark wrote:

It's probably where it would have to be, but if it's going to work at all
then the concourse needs some rearrangement to move the shops, monitors,
steps to the Underground and everything! Waterloo gets very crowded at
peak
hours and removing several metres near the platforms will only exaserbate
the congestion.

Easy. Just remove all the shops that are currently in the gateline
and replace them with a wide expanse of gates

Then move W.H. Smith and all the other stuff in the middle of the concourse
back - not so easy, especially with the steps to the Underground. Plus find
somewhere to put the displaced shops from the front, as some are pretty
essential.

- think Canary Wharf LUL.

Not the best example given how easy it is to come out of the wrong exit!

"tim \(back in SY\)" wrote:

Zonal fares will be rolled out before Oyster, potentially next year
(according to previous DfT murmurings). However, having read the SWT
invitation to tender more carefully, Oyster PAYG wouldn't be introduced on
SWT until at least January 2009, when ticket gates are expected to be
installed at Waterloo.

That'll be fun in the morning rush

Why? Plenty of other London terminals seem to be able to cope with
them.

Roy

Roy Stilling wrote:

That'll be fun in the morning rush

Why? Plenty of other London terminals seem to be able to cope with
them.

Some do but off the top of my head:

* Victoria and Liverpool Street both have a series of alcoves and clusters
of platforms that allow for bunches of gates to work.
* Fenchurch Street and Charing Cross are both a relatively small terminals
which again have natural gaps.
* Paddington has wide platforms and wide access points but still has some
gaps in provision.
* Marylebone has a natural point between the main concourse and the
platforms in which barriers are installed.
* London Bridge has the barriers at both entrances to the tunnel under the
high platforms and, from recollection, a strip beyond the barriers allowing
people to move between whichever of the low platforms they want.

From recollection both King's Cross and Euston generally don't have barriers
apart from a few on the individual platforms. I forget what Canon Street
has.

For barriers to work at Waterloo you need a much wider gap between the
current gate and the tracks so that crowds focused on individual platforms
can use the gates for several. At the moment that isn't there - indeed the
current entrances to the platforms are terrible for rush hour - and unlike a
lot of the other stations there aren't a lot of natural points one could put
the gates into, hence they haven't gone up yet.

In article ,
(Tim Roll-Pickering) wrote:

From recollection both King's Cross and Euston generally don't have
barriers apart from a few on the individual platforms. I forget what
Canon Street has.

Definitely nothing at the Cross (for now) and not noticed anything at
Euston.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

From recollection both King's Cross and Euston generally don't have
barriers apart from a few on the individual platforms. I forget what
Canon Street has.

Definitely nothing at the Cross (for now) and not noticed anything at
Euston.

Doesn't at least one of the local platforms have a set at the bottom of the
ramp?

Also I forgot St. Pancras (easy to do when it's been relocated so far
back) - what does that now have?

"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote:

Roy Stilling wrote:

That'll be fun in the morning rush

Why? Plenty of other London terminals seem to be able to cope with
them.

Some do but off the top of my head:

From recollection both King's Cross and Euston generally don't have barriers
apart from a few on the individual platforms. I forget what Canon Street
has.

Cannon St was what I was thinking of specifically, as (IIRC as I've
not been through Waterloo in a while) it has quite small portals onto
the platforms so the gate line is a few yards back into the concourse.
Having said that, there's nothing like so much retail foliage on the
concourse with most of the shops being downstairs so I suppose that's
a difference.

Roy