Ian Jelf wrote in uk.transport.london on Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:27:06
+0000 :
(to utl only)

Non-Londoners will often go to extreme lengths to avoid the Tube. In
my experience, most prefer taxis, even where a simple bus transfer (or
sometimes even a walk, depending on luggage, would suffice.

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

But I've known people new to London not to trust either, in one case
walking from Kings Cross to Knightsbridge and back...

--
hike
- a walking tour or outing, esp. of the self-conscious kind
Chambers 20th Century Dictionary

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:28:58 -0000, Dave Hillam ]
wrote:

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

But I've known people new to London not to trust either, in one case
walking from Kings Cross to Knightsbridge and back...

I'm suprised a stranger could *find their way* from Kings Cross to
Knightsbridge and back!

--
Fig

Dave Hillam wrote:

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

Regarding point (b), the bus spider maps with an index do help
considerably so long as there is a direct bus from where you are to
where you want to go.

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home Page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Dave Hillam wrote:
IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

I'm a Londoner and have no problem using buses here - but if I'm in a
strange city I'll take the metro or a tram by preference. Something
psychlogical to do with the fact that metro or tram services can't
deviate from their tracks and (usually!) come back exactly the same way
they went, point (b) in Dave's post.

Harry G wrote:

I'm a Londoner and have no problem using buses here - but if I'm in a
strange city I'll take the metro or a tram by preference. Something
psychlogical to do with the fact that metro or tram services can't
deviate from their tracks and (usually!) come back exactly the same way
they went, point (b) in Dave's post.

Guess you've never been to New York!

Just yesterday we had:

Southbound 1 trains operated express from 137th Street to 96th Street
and again express from 34th Street to 14th Street, where they terminated
(running back north from the southbound express track). But 2 and 3
trains, which normally run express between 96th Street and Chambers
Street, ran local instead. Shuttle buses ran between Chambers Street
and South Ferry on the 1.

The 5 ran local in both directions in Manhattan, terminating at Brooklyn
Bridge instead of Bowling Green.

No C service at all. Instead, the A ran local. Except northbound from
Canal Street to 59th Street, where both the A and E ran express.
(Except that E train stopped at 50th Street itself.)

The southbound F train ran via the A line between West 4th Street and
Jay Street.

There was no G service south of Bedford-Nassau Avenues. Instead, there
was shuttle bus service to Jay Street.

There was no 6 service north of Parkchester. Instead, there was shuttle
bus service to Pelham Bay Park.

L trains ran in two segments, split at Broadway Junction. Also, the
brand new PA/CIS system on the L (essentially equivalent to the
next-train indicators that you've had for, oh, a century or so) was
undergoing testing, with sometimes humorous results.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 10:13:30 -0500, David of Broadway
wrote:

Harry G wrote:

I'm a Londoner and have no problem using buses here - but if I'm in a
strange city I'll take the metro or a tram by preference. Something
psychlogical to do with the fact that metro or tram services can't
deviate from their tracks and (usually!) come back exactly the same way
they went, point (b) in Dave's post.

Guess you've never been to New York!

Just yesterday we had:

Southbound 1 trains operated express from 137th Street to 96th Street
and again express from 34th Street to 14th Street, where they terminated
(running back north from the southbound express track). But 2 and 3
trains, which normally run express between 96th Street and Chambers
Street, ran local instead. Shuttle buses ran between Chambers Street
and South Ferry on the 1.

[snip other examples]

this temporary "chopping and changing" of routes and then the wholesale
re-ordering of the Subway service patterns every so often is something
that I struggle to comprehend.

How on earth do New Yorkers cope with this scale of change -
particularly to stopping patterns? Does it cause real problems or is it
just one of those things that people now accept?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Paul Corfield wrote:

this temporary "chopping and changing" of routes and then the wholesale
re-ordering of the Subway service patterns every so often is something
that I struggle to comprehend.

Join the club!

How on earth do New Yorkers cope with this scale of change -
particularly to stopping patterns? Does it cause real problems or is it
just one of those things that people now accept?

When regular service is operating, stopping patterns stay relatively
constant during daytime hours. There are a few exceptions on weekdays
(mostly revolving around the use of three-track lines), and the N makes
four local stops on weekends that it bypasses on weekdays. There are
also some routes that only run on weekdays. Late nights are a different
ballgame, with quite a few routes either not running or reduced to
shuttle service and most express service curtailed.

Regular riders generally figure things out. One problem is that on
weekends, even regular riders tend to take different routes than they do
on an everyday basis, so they can get quite confused. As can, of
course, tourists. One big problem, in my experience, is that the
American Museum of Natural History, a major tourist attraction, is
adjacent to the 81st Street station on the B and C trains -- the B
serves 6th Avenue and the C serves 8th Avenue. However, the B only runs
on weekdays! So tourists bound for 6th Avenue who don't read the signs
carefully (and realize that they have to take the C and transfer to the
D) end up waiting and waiting and waiting for a train that won't come
until Monday morning. For this reason among others, I think that the D
should run local whenever the B isn't scheduled to run.

The bottom of the subway map
(http://www.mta.info/nyct/maps/subwaymap.pdf) has a detailed service
guide that answers most questions for those who can be bothered to read
it. It still leaves some questions open -- for instance, regarding the
precise transition times for each service change (which, of course, vary
from line to line and even from station to station along the line).

But what I listed in my previous post wasn't the standard weekend
service pattern. It was modifications to the standard pattern for this
past weekend. You have similar changes in London, too (such as the one
I encountered in August going to the airport), but since our tracks
provide greater flexibility, our changes tend to be more confusing. And
they indeed generate a /lot/ of confusion. Although conductors
generally make announcements, they don't always know the best
alternative routes, and the stations themselves are severely
understaffed to handle all of the people with questions. Signage of
service changes also tends to be very poor.

I'm not sure what the alternative is, though. Even if the system were
shut down at night, as in London, it's a lot easier (i.e., cheaper) to
do some sorts of work over a 55-hour weekend shutdown period. And most
of the work really needs to be done, although some items are arguable
(for instance, replacing the South Ferry loop with a stub terminal that
will have substantially lower turning capacity).
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

Paul Corfield wrote:

this temporary "chopping and changing" of routes and then the wholesale
re-ordering of the Subway service patterns every so often is something
that I struggle to comprehend.

How on earth do New Yorkers cope with this scale of change -
particularly to stopping patterns? Does it cause real problems or is it
just one of those things that people now accept?

From experience, it is annoying, but the benefits of having night
service and being able to route around problems are well worth it.
--
Michael Hoffman

David of Broadway wrote:
Harry G wrote:

I'm a Londoner and have no problem using buses here - but if I'm in a
strange city I'll take the metro or a tram by preference. Something
psychlogical to do with the fact that metro or tram services can't
deviate from their tracks and (usually!) come back exactly the same way
they went, point (b) in Dave's post.

Guess you've never been to New York!

Nope!

Just yesterday we had:

Southbound 1 trains operated express from 137th Street to 96th Street
and again express from 34th Street to 14th Street, where they terminated
(running back north from the southbound express track). But 2 and 3
trains, which normally run express between 96th Street and Chambers
Street, ran local instead. Shuttle buses ran between Chambers Street
and South Ferry on the 1.

I saw an interesting programme about the South Ferry 1 line terminal
reconstruction on a cable channel here the other night - amazed that
such a cramped and awkward operating layout has survived until now.

The 5 ran local in both directions in Manhattan, terminating at Brooklyn
Bridge instead of Bowling Green.

[snip various other mind-boggling subway re-routings]

From this I guess that the track layouts, connections and switches on
the NY Subway are more like a tramway (with many connections not used
for normal service) rather than the London Underground (with relative
rare non-service connections between lines) - I can't imagine LU being
able to operate anywhere near this sort of revised service.

The most unusual diversion I can think of is when Bakerloo line
(Stanmore branch) services were diverted over the Metropolitan line
south of Finchley Road into the terminal platforms at Baker Street -
this would have been around 1975/6, when the junctions for the future
Jubilee line were being constructed.

L trains ran in two segments, split at Broadway Junction. Also, the
brand new PA/CIS system on the L (essentially equivalent to the
next-train indicators that you've had for, oh, a century or so) was
undergoing testing, with sometimes humorous results.

Sounds something like the 06.66 to Hampton Court via Guildford with
Restaurant/Buffet that was reported on the London Waterloo indicator
board many years ago :-)

Incidentally, take a look at the TfL tube ETA online site for
interesting information - it's essentially giving signallers'
destinations (e.g. Northumberland Park Staff, Victoria Sidings etc for
the Victoria line) rather than what would be displayed to the public on
the platform:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tube/travelinf...tationCode=EUS

One that I just noticed for the Northern line, King's Cross southbound:
"Euston (To Picc.) Bank Branch" (which I am sure is not in public
service, and probably would just be described as 'Not in Service' on
the platform!)

Harry G wrote:

I saw an interesting programme about the South Ferry 1 line terminal
reconstruction on a cable channel here the other night - amazed that
such a cramped and awkward operating layout has survived until now.

It is somewhat cramped. But as far as train movements go, it's
incredibly efficient. It can easily handle 30 tph; the only reason
service only runs at 20 tph is that the north terminal, at the other end
of the line, can't handle anymore, and NYCT is generally highly allergic
to short turns (although there are two stations where alternate trains
could be easily turned). While the claim has been made that the new
terminal will support 24 tph, that's still substantially less than the
current 30 tph, and the documents released to the public justifying the
new terminal don't justify the 24 tph claim. In fact, based on the
track diagrams, it looks very much like the Jamaica Center terminal on
the E, which can only handle 12 tph, except that Jamaica Center has
longer tail tracks. So some of us are quite concerned with the possible
repercussions of this expensive reconstruction.

And before anyone suggests that reduced service will be adequate once
all ten cars can platform at South Ferry, it turns out that the busiest
part of the line is nowhere near South Ferry. This post from 2002 gives
1999 ridership counts (turnstile entries) along the 1 line, excluding
transfer points to other lines (but including several express stations
also served by the 2 and 3):
http://groups.google.com/group/nyc.t...23b9e388bd967b

Since 1999, ridership has increased at most stations, although South
Ferry is one of the few exceptions -- by 2004, ridership had dropped to
3,382,813.

As these numbers reveal, the most crowded part of the line is the
section between Times Square and 137th Street. And as a daily rider of
that section of the line, I can say that trains are already overcrowded;
we badly need more service, not less.

Also, bear in mind that the typical subway station in New York is a
modest affair. Typically, several sidewalk staircases lead either
directly to the platform or first to an intermediate mezzanine. Station
buildings are uncommon.

From this I guess that the track layouts, connections and switches on
the NY Subway are more like a tramway (with many connections not used
for normal service) rather than the London Underground (with relative
rare non-service connections between lines) - I can't imagine LU being
able to operate anywhere near this sort of revised service.

That's an interesting analogy, although London's subsurface lines are
quite similar. It's only the deep tube lines that are effectively
isolated from each other.

Here are some (slightly out-of-date) track maps for New York, incidentally:
http://www.nycsubway.org/maps/track.html

The most unusual diversion I can think of is when Bakerloo line
(Stanmore branch) services were diverted over the Metropolitan line
south of Finchley Road into the terminal platforms at Baker Street -
this would have been around 1975/6, when the junctions for the future
Jubilee line were being constructed.

Tube trains at the terminal platforms at Baker Street? I hope somebody
took pictures!

One that I just noticed for the Northern line, King's Cross southbound:
"Euston (To Picc.) Bank Branch" (which I am sure is not in public
service, and probably would just be described as 'Not in Service' on
the platform!)

I've caught that system claiming that the next southbound train at
Archway was 2 minutes away, between Golders Green and Hampstead.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA