In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message .uk,
at 09:52:00 on Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Last time I was there trains which run from Peterborough to Liverpool
St were not advertised beyond Colchester at Peterborough.

I've seen them advertised to Shenfield.

You could be right. I don't see one at Peterborough very often. The last
time I was there there were no such trains because of the bridge at Ely.

And I agree there won't be many people wanting "The Liverpool St
train", and pointing at a northbound DMU and asking "is that the
Liverpool train"; but if there were, then the advertised
destination of the other one isn't relevant. Indeed, failing to
advertise it to "Liverpool St" would actually make the situation
worse.

They don't advertise it to Liverpool St because any sane person (I used
to think that included you, Roland), would take the first train to King's
Cross and the tube to reach Liverpool St.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message .uk, at
12:47:00 on Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
They don't advertise it to Liverpool St because any sane person (I used
to think that included you, Roland), would take the first train to King's
Cross and the tube to reach Liverpool St.

Yes, that's the reason for obfuscating the destination.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 12:17:49
on Tue, 3 Jun 2008, David Cantrell remarked:
The confusion is quite simple: many tourists, especially from north
America, habitually leave off the "street" so a train to "Liverpool"
and a train to "Liverpool St", are synonymous.

Next you'll be telling me that the Washington Square station in New York
confuses tourists who expect to be able to get a train from there to
Washington!

Are these people too stupid to look at a map? I mean, last time I was
in Paris and wanted a train to Italy (Rome, to be specific) I didn't
just head for the Place d'Italie.

You are still looking at it backwards.

This is not about people who want to go to the *further away* place
thinking they've found a remarkably quick/cheap wormhole via a similarly
named local place.

It's about people who want the *nearer* place accidentally getting on a
train to the *further away* place, because both trains start from the
same station, and (in your example) they catch a train to Washington DC
in error, when they wanted Washington Square.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 3 Jun 2008, Neil Williams wrote:

wrote:

Maybe Euston Sq could have two entrances, the existing one renamed
Warren Street and a new Eastern one direct to Euston concourse?

Er, why have 2 names for the station? Just call it Euston, and have
it connected to the existing LUL station in some way (preferably
inside the barriers) at the Euston end and also have an exit onto the
Euston Road.

There is a bit of a rebuild going on at Euston[1] at the moment to
provide lifts to the LUL concourse (presumably with a later plan for
some to the platforms, else that's a bit pointless)

Where are these lifts going in? I've been through Euston quite a bit
lately, but was obviously too asleep to notice.

- could something not be done as part of that work, I wonder?

The subterranean space between the existing station and the Circle line
platforms is not exactly uncluttered, though - there are the foundations
of the two office blocks in front of the station slap bang in the way, and
an extensive underground car-park and taxi rank. You can get to the
car-park if you turn left instead of right at the bottom of the escalator
down to the tube station booking hall.

Thinking about it, the car-park must be underneath the tower blocks. That
means you could convert some of that space into a passageway to get as far
as Euston Square itself (the grassy bit along Euston Road), from where i
assume construction would be quite easy. You'd want to plonk another
entrance in there, so people could go from the corner of Gordon Street and
Euston Road to the Circle platform. The tunnel would, with the present
layout, be outside the gateline a la the Khyber Pass of yore - it could
perhaps similarly double as a pedestrian subway.

Would that cut off road access to the underground bits, though? At what
level is that? I have a vague idea that the floor level of the taxi rank
is higher than of the LU booking hall, so a passageway could go underneath
it. There is definitely car-park at that level, though, and i don't know
where the access to that is. Loss of some or all car-park would not be a
disaster, though; i can't think of any good reason for people to be
parking at Euston anyway.

How does the level of the Euston booking hall compare to the Circle
platforms, though? You'd need to build a new bridge over the platforms to
terminate this new passageway, which would thus be at the same height as
the existing Euston Square booking hall (such as it is). Would that be at
the same level as the Euston hall, or higher?

Also, exactly how far east do the Circle platforms go? The westernmost
point of the existing station is, i reckon, about level with the eastern
edge of the Network Rail tower block.

Perhaps when we have our utl meet, we can all pop down there and take some
measurements. It'd be interesting to see how much we could get before the
anti-terror squad turned up and shot us all.

tom

--
102 FX 6 (goblins)

In the meantime Euston Square is a useful is a little secret for those
in the know, far from the madding crowd.

The mass parade of commuters between it and Euston on a daily basis
(sometimes including me if I'm running a bit late) would suggest it's
far from a secret.

Yes, well, that *is* why they renamed it to Euston Square.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "I can't tell from this... whether you're
| a wise man or a wise guy." --Ted Schuerzinger