On 2 Jun, 23:18, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

(snip)

That's more an economic issue, because if they asked for a ticket
to Rome, and it cost a couple of Euros, I'd agree with you that
they shouldn't expect to on a trip to Italy. But if you are
Stansted Airport with a £20 ticket and two almost identical trains
to choose from "does this one go to Liverpool" is quite a sensible
question.

Problem solved. There are no longer any trains to Liverpool from
Stansted.


That was easy.

Although the problem (in as much as it is a problem) still exists at
Norwich, for example.

How comes the yanks developed this nomenclature anyway?

In message .uk, at
23:18:00 on Mon, 2 Jun 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
But if you are Stansted Airport with a £20 ticket and two almost
identical trains to choose from "does this one go to Liverpool" is
quite a sensible question.

Problem solved. There are no longer any trains to Liverpool from
Stansted.

That's been the case for quite a while now, ever since they split the
"service" at Birmingham to make it "more reliable".

However, "is this the train for Liverpool" is still true, if somewhat
less plausible.
--
Roland Perry

In message
, at
15:41:21 on Mon, 2 Jun 2008, Mizter T remarked:
Problem solved. There are no longer any trains to Liverpool from
Stansted.

That was easy.

Although the problem (in as much as it is a problem) still exists at
Norwich, for example.

And Ely and Peterborough.

How comes the yanks developed this nomenclature anyway?

I've been thinking about this, and it's probably because they give more
directions by "block", identified by the names of the road either side,
than by name of road junction.

So the Empire State Building is at 5th and 34th. "5th *Avenue* and 34th
*Street*" is such a mouthful that the "avenue/street" gets dropped.
--
Roland Perry

In article
,
(Mizter T) wrote:

On 2 Jun, 23:18, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

(snip)

That's more an economic issue, because if they asked for a ticket
to Rome, and it cost a couple of Euros, I'd agree with you that
they shouldn't expect to on a trip to Italy. But if you are
Stansted Airport with a £20 ticket and two almost identical trains
to choose from "does this one go to Liverpool" is quite a sensible
question.

Problem solved. There are no longer any trains to Liverpool from
Stansted.

That was easy.

Although the problem (in as much as it is a problem) still exists at
Norwich, for example.

How comes the yanks developed this nomenclature anyway?

Fewer Yanks at Norwich (and Ely), luckily.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message
,
at 15:41:21 on Mon, 2 Jun 2008, Mizter T
remarked:
Problem solved. There are no longer any trains to Liverpool from
Stansted.

That was easy.

Although the problem (in as much as it is a problem) still exists at
Norwich, for example.

And Ely and Peterborough.

Last time I was there trains which run from Peterborough to Liverpool St
were not advertised beyond Colchester at Peterborough.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Jun 1, 7:43 pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 31 May, 20:08, D7666 wrote:

On May 31, 8:46 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

How about just rebuiding Euston Square in front of Euston and making
it into a proper interchange.

If I'm getting my bearings right, the entrance is all that would need
rebuilding - the other end of the platforms are damn near Euston
station compared with where the entrance currently is.

Yep - its a blindingly obvious thing to do.

But not perhaps as blindingly simple as one might like it to be!

There were some recent murmurs of a significant redevelopment at
Euston, replete with an air rights development in place of the parcel
deck, and I'm sure I recall some vague notion that this would also
entail linking up Euston Square with Euston.

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

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

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

[1] Among other things this is to provide retail space off the
concourse so the shops in the middle of it can be removed to create
more circulating space. Finally!

Neil

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.

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.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:54:21
on Mon, 2 Jun 2008, David Cantrell remarked:
What's so confusing about Liverpool St? Is it just because trains from
there don't go to Liverpool? Cos if it is, I fear there's an awful lot
of renaming to do! eg, London Road in Brighton doesn't have any
services to London.

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.

It used to be great fun at Cambridge a few years ago. From the same
platform services ran to, "London Kings Cross", "Kings Lynn", "London
Liverpool Street" and "Liverpool Lime Street". Good game, good game...

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 12:13:19PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
on Mon, 2 Jun 2008, David Cantrell remarked:
What's so confusing about Liverpool St? Is it just because trains from
there don't go to Liverpool? Cos if it is, I fear there's an awful lot
of renaming to do! eg, London Road in Brighton doesn't have any
services to London.
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.

--
David Cantrell | Hero of the Information Age

I don't do .INI, .BAT, or .SYS files. I don't assign apps to files.
I don't configure peripherals or networks before using them. I have
a computer to do all that. I have a Macintosh, not a hobby.
-- Fritz Anderson