|
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , (John Rowland) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: There were other considerations at Euston. The original City & South London platform at Euston was an island in a wide tunnel. They were dangerous and have all now gone except at one of the Clapham stations. Errrr.... two of the Clapham stations, surely? Probably. I never go there and was writing from memory only. I do, and can tell you North and Common are both still narrow island platforms. South isn't. Don't know about anything south of there. tom -- The few survivors on ousfg's side ended up in a monastery of immortal monks who yearned for a life better than street-fighting social groups, learning to grow extra hands and feet on the way to immortality. -- Lyndsey Pickup |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
On 9 Sep, 15:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (John Rowland) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: There were other considerations at Euston. The original City & South London platform at Euston was an island in a wide tunnel. They were dangerous and have all now gone except at one of the Clapham stations. Errrr.... two of the Clapham stations, surely? Probably. I never go there and was writing from memory only. I do, and can tell you North and Common are both still narrow island platforms. South isn't. Don't know about anything south of there. tom Clapham North and Clapham Common are the only two surviving subterranean true island platforms on the whole Underground network. I'm not someone who gets disconcerted by such things normally, but I must admit I still find it a bit odd to be on those narrow platforms when both a northbound and southbound train hurtle in to the station at the same time. Probably something to do with the likely possibility of me having just imbibed a Piña Colada. I'm tempted to say they're worth a visit, though I'd think that some of you might want to do something else having gone as far as Clapham. You could always indulge in "a moment of madness" if that is your wont ;-) |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
On Sep 9, 4:22 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 9 Sep, 15:54, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (John Rowland) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: There were other considerations at Euston. The original City & South London platform at Euston was an island in a wide tunnel. They were dangerous and have all now gone except at one of the Clapham stations. Errrr.... two of the Clapham stations, surely? Probably. I never go there and was writing from memory only. I do, and can tell you North and Common are both still narrow island platforms. South isn't. Don't know about anything south of there. tom Clapham North and Clapham Common are the only two surviving subterranean true island platforms on the whole Underground network. I'm not someone who gets disconcerted by such things normally, but I must admit I still find it a bit odd to be on those narrow platforms when both a northbound and southbound train hurtle in to the station at the same time. Probably something to do with the likely possibility of me having just imbibed a Piña Colada. I'm tempted to say they're worth a visit, though I'd think that some of you might want to do something else having gone as far as Clapham. You could always indulge in "a moment of madness" if that is your wont ;-)- There are some on the "sub-surface" lines though, and plenty above ground. I don't really understand why it seems more dangerous underground than on the surface, given that the only additional escape route above ground is still the other side of the tracks. If it's just the narrowness of the platforms that matters, then that's fair enough. Has anyone got figures on the width of island platforms all around LU? |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article .com, John B writes In general, it seems to me that the Victoria line was a high point in terms of easy connexions - cross-platform interchange wherever possible, often created thanks to considerable ingenuity. But why didn't they go for x-platform at Green Park and Warren Street...? Green Park is due to simple geometry: get a map and remember that the Piccadilly is running under Piccadilly with the station under the intersection with Dover Street. Now try to construct a route with reasonable curvature that gives you cross-platform interchange. It's just not practical. Quite - having cross-platform interchange would have introduce a massive kink into the Victoria line, which would have gone against it's 'fast and straight' philosophy. Warren Street was deliberate. In the early 1960s there was much more traffic on the Charing Cross branch of the Northern than the Bank branch. Therefore the interchanges with the Victoria were deliberately arranged to encourage people on to the Bank branch and not to use the CX one, thus evening up the flows somewhat. In hindsight that may seem the wrong decision, but we have 40 years more data to work on. And has already been pointed out, cross-platform interchange at Oxford Circus with the Bakerloo means passengers for Charing Cross, Embankment and Waterloo can use that line to get to those destinations (though of course the Bakerloo station at Charing X is really underneath Trafalgar Square and is thus a short subterranean trek away from the mainline station). Warren Street (Vic) is very close to Goodge Street (Northern) - so most passengers can quite reasonably use that station instead. Which leaves Tottenham Court Road as the only central area destination with a more awkward interchange at Euston or Warren Street. Going south, for any destination from Stockwell southwards passengers should stay on the Victoria line, so that leaves Kennington and Oval as the only other two destinations where one must make a more awkward change. Of course a fundamental issue is that the Oxford Circus cross-platform goodness isn't at all apparent on the Tube map. |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
On 9 Sep, 16:33, MIG wrote:
On Sep 9, 4:22 pm, Mizter T wrote: On 9 Sep, 15:54, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (John Rowland) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: There were other considerations at Euston. The original City & South London platform at Euston was an island in a wide tunnel. They were dangerous and have all now gone except at one of the Clapham stations. Errrr.... two of the Clapham stations, surely? Probably. I never go there and was writing from memory only. I do, and can tell you North and Common are both still narrow island platforms. South isn't. Don't know about anything south of there. tom Clapham North and Clapham Common are the only two surviving subterranean true island platforms on the whole Underground network. I'm not someone who gets disconcerted by such things normally, but I must admit I still find it a bit odd to be on those narrow platforms when both a northbound and southbound train hurtle in to the station at the same time. Probably something to do with the likely possibility of me having just imbibed a Piña Colada. I'm tempted to say they're worth a visit, though I'd think that some of you might want to do something else having gone as far as Clapham. You could always indulge in "a moment of madness" if that is your wont ;-)- There are some on the "sub-surface" lines though, and plenty above ground. I don't really understand why it seems more dangerous underground than on the surface, given that the only additional escape route above ground is still the other side of the tracks. If it's just the narrowness of the platforms that matters, then that's fair enough. Has anyone got figures on the width of island platforms all around LU? I believe one of the problems at Angel (and presumably elsewhere) was that the platforms got quite crowded. I guess the passenger numbers at the Claphams aren't so severe - nonetheless I bet that the staff at both stations are very much on the ball when it comes to monitoring the situation. No figures for platform width, I can only offer links to some photos... Clapham Common http://www.flickr.com/photos/aderowbotham/87781920/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/hedgiecc/265147613/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/388308347/ Clapham North http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollycourtney/232075853/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/wetwebwork/150244846/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/wetwebwork/150245689/ And the other benefit of Clapham North is that it makes you wiser... http://www.flickr.com/photos/68521817@N00/865518114/ |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
On Sep 9, 4:53 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 9 Sep, 16:33, MIG wrote: On Sep 9, 4:22 pm, Mizter T wrote: On 9 Sep, 15:54, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (John Rowland) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: There were other considerations at Euston. The original City & South London platform at Euston was an island in a wide tunnel. They were dangerous and have all now gone except at one of the Clapham stations. Errrr.... two of the Clapham stations, surely? Probably. I never go there and was writing from memory only. I do, and can tell you North and Common are both still narrow island platforms. South isn't. Don't know about anything south of there. tom Clapham North and Clapham Common are the only two surviving subterranean true island platforms on the whole Underground network. I'm not someone who gets disconcerted by such things normally, but I must admit I still find it a bit odd to be on those narrow platforms when both a northbound and southbound train hurtle in to the station at the same time. Probably something to do with the likely possibility of me having just imbibed a Piña Colada. I'm tempted to say they're worth a visit, though I'd think that some of you might want to do something else having gone as far as Clapham. You could always indulge in "a moment of madness" if that is your wont ;-)- There are some on the "sub-surface" lines though, and plenty above ground. I don't really understand why it seems more dangerous underground than on the surface, given that the only additional escape route above ground is still the other side of the tracks. If it's just the narrowness of the platforms that matters, then that's fair enough. Has anyone got figures on the width of island platforms all around LU? I believe one of the problems at Angel (and presumably elsewhere) was that the platforms got quite crowded. I guess the passenger numbers at the Claphams aren't so severe - nonetheless I bet that the staff at both stations are very much on the ball when it comes to monitoring the situation. No figures for platform width, I can only offer links to some photos... Clapham Commonhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/aderowbotham/87781920/http://www.flickr.com/photos/hedgiecc/265147613/http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/388308347/ Clapham Northhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/ollycourtney/232075853/http://www.flickr.com/photos/wetwebwork/150244846/http://www.flickr.com/photos/wetwebwork/150245689/ And the other benefit of Clapham North is that it makes you wiser...http://www.flickr.com/photos/68521817@N00/865518114/ From those photos, they do seem to be narrower than, say, Edgware Road. Would be interesting to have figures though. |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
In article m,
(Mizter T) wrote: On Sep 9, 4:22 pm, Mizter T wrote: Clapham North and Clapham Common are the only two surviving subterranean true island platforms on the whole Underground network. Have the Glasgow island platforms gone now? No figures for platform width, I can only offer links to some photos... Clapham Common http://www.flickr.com/photos/aderowbotham/87781920/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/hedgiecc/265147613/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/nicohogg/388308347/ Clapham North http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollycourtney/232075853/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/wetwebwork/150244846/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/wetwebwork/150245689/ Hmm. The yellow lines seem much closer to the platform edge than usual. Is that because the platforms are so narrow? And the other benefit of Clapham North is that it makes you wiser... http://www.flickr.com/photos/68521817@N00/865518114/ chuckle -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
|
Easy interchanges in London (Waterloo vs St. Pancras International)
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article m, (Mizter T) wrote: On Sep 9, 4:22 pm, Mizter T wrote: Clapham North and Clapham Common are the only two surviving subterranean true island platforms on the whole Underground network. Have the Glasgow island platforms gone now? St Enoch has been rebuilt and IIRC one more station (Buchanan Street?), all other still have island platforms. -- Olof Lagerkvist ICQ: 724451 Web: http://here.is/olof |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk