"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

You cite Covent Garden - well it is very heavily used but it is at the
point where such huge sums need to be spent on it to make it cope
adequately and safely that a valid scenario could well be closure. At
some points the lifts will require replacement and that will cost an
awful lot of money and I would doubt the station could safely work with
2 out of 4 lifts in operation. Therefore it would shut during the work
but a perfectly rational option would be to shut permanently, speed up
journeys and divert the passengers elsewhere. There are only two big
arguments against this - Leicester Square is not overflowing with spare
capacity so almost certainly could not cope with diverted traffic (nor
could Holborn) and the stakeholder / political fall out would be huge.



How feasible would it be to simply construct a walkway/escalator from the
Eastern end of the Picadilly platforms at Leicester square to the surface
building at Covent Garden, then closing the existing Covent Garden
platforms?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything obvious in the way, and if
tourists took the 'exit to Covent Garden' from platform they wouldn't get
lost trying to find it from Leicester Square station at street level.

BTN

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...

How feasible would it be to simply construct a walkway/escalator from the
Eastern end of the Picadilly platforms at Leicester square to the surface
building at Covent Garden, then closing the existing Covent Garden
platforms?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of anything obvious in the way, and
if
tourists took the 'exit to Covent Garden' from platform they wouldn't get
lost trying to find it from Leicester Square station at street level.

I really have no idea how far the building basements / foundations go
down in that area. My other main observation would be that Leicester
Square's platforms are horribly narrow and below capacity. At peak times
(i.e. evenings and late) you barely move due to lack of space for people
waiting *and* those alighting from trains. The stairs and corridors also
jam up very badly - it's not unknown to have to wait on the stairs to
let trains go to be able to reach the platforms. Shoving another 16m pax
p.a. into that would not helpful. Leicester Square badly needs
reconstruction but that's another scheme shoved off into the ether due
to no money for big station schemes. If you were to add in Covent
Garden's flows you need a much bigger scheme.



It could potentially alleviate both flows, if there was a substantial (e.g.
JLex-scale) open area immediately off the eastern end of the Picc platforms
that widened out as it sloped surfacewards, then maybe a bank of four
escalators plus a modern accessibilty lift.


All this shows is that there are rarely simple answers to the Tube's
capacity problems.


The biggest single problem is the lack of lines.

There is way too much unnecessary bureaucracy overhead during the planning
and consulation phases to try and ensure an optimal route, when the reality
is that any half-decent route will be well-patronised to the point of
near-overcrowding, and will relieve pressure on existing routes, so better
to just build the ****ers rather than waste decades discussing them.

Anybody with half a brain could come up with new line ideas just by looking
at a map.

Example:

Albert Line:

Arnos Grove
Alexandra Palace
Hornsey Central
Archway
Gospel Oak
Belsize Park
St. Johns Wood
Edgware Road
Lancaster Gate
Royal Albert Hall
South Kensington
Albert Bridge
Battersea
Clapham Junction
Wandsworth Common
Tooting Broadway
Tooting Junction
Mitcham



And if they just started building this, rather than wasting time and money
talking about things like it, it could be delivered sooner and more cheaply.
Probably.

BTN

On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 17:48:38 +0100, "Sir Benjamin Nunn"
wrote:

Anybody with half a brain could come up with new line ideas just by looking
at a map.

Example:

Albert Line:

Arnos Grove
Alexandra Palace
Hornsey Central
Archway
Gospel Oak
Belsize Park
St. Johns Wood
Edgware Road
Lancaster Gate
Royal Albert Hall
South Kensington
Albert Bridge
Battersea
Clapham Junction
Wandsworth Common
Tooting Broadway
Tooting Junction
Mitcham

Ooh, we haven't had a Scheme on UTL in yonks. Duly mapped:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...820a7d99caba8f

Let me know if it doesn't match your vision.

An interesting alignment - not one I would have dreamed up.

No. It mostly seems to be an exercise in getting people from the suburbs
to places they don't want to go. The only stations you could describe as
being central are Edgware Road, Lancaster Gate and Royal Albert Hall -
none of which are significant commuter destinations. The Edgware Road stop
could serve Paddington Basin, of course. The RAH and South Ken stops would
be great for Albertopolis, including all the museums, plus Imperial
College, the RCA and various other educational institutions, and the RAH
itself, but i'm highly skeptical that there are enough jobs round there to
fill a tube line. The Battersea stop is too far west to serve the
developments round there. The line could serve as a feeder from the
suburbs to other tube lines that it crosses, but all the suburban stations
area already on lines which do that, or are useful lines in their own
right.

So, it serves Paddington Basin, a major cultural complex, and gives access
to other lines. That's not useless, but it can't justify a tube line.

However it's lovely to stick new tube lines in to the network but all
that happens if you push overall ridership up and up and up thereby
exacerbating your existing pinch points.

Ah, but this wouldn't be a problem with Sir Benjamin's line, seeing as how
no bugger would use it.

tom

--
Give the future a chance!

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
rth.li...
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 17:48:38 +0100, "Sir Benjamin Nunn"
wrote:

Anybody with half a brain could come up with new line ideas just by
looking
at a map.

Example:

Albert Line:

Arnos Grove
Alexandra Palace
Hornsey Central
Archway
Gospel Oak
Belsize Park
St. Johns Wood
Edgware Road
Lancaster Gate
Royal Albert Hall
South Kensington
Albert Bridge
Battersea
Clapham Junction
Wandsworth Common
Tooting Broadway
Tooting Junction
Mitcham

Ooh, we haven't had a Scheme on UTL in yonks. Duly mapped:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...820a7d99caba8f

Let me know if it doesn't match your vision.


Heh. I'd actually already done one on google maps:


http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en...d8fb6aa53&z=11

Your version is slightly more direct.


An interesting alignment - not one I would have dreamed up.

No. It mostly seems to be an exercise in getting people from the suburbs
to places they don't want to go. The only stations you could describe as
being central are Edgware Road, Lancaster Gate and Royal Albert Hall -
none of which are significant commuter destinations. The Edgware Road stop
could serve Paddington Basin, of course. The RAH and South Ken stops would
be great for Albertopolis, including all the museums, plus Imperial
College, the RCA and various other educational institutions, and the RAH
itself, but i'm highly skeptical that there are enough jobs round there to
fill a tube line. The Battersea stop is too far west to serve the
developments round there. The line could serve as a feeder from the
suburbs to other tube lines that it crosses, but all the suburban stations
area already on lines which do that, or are useful lines in their own
right.

So, it serves Paddington Basin, a major cultural complex, and gives access
to other lines. That's not useless, but it can't justify a tube line.

However it's lovely to stick new tube lines in to the network but all
that happens if you push overall ridership up and up and up thereby
exacerbating your existing pinch points.

Ah, but this wouldn't be a problem with Sir Benjamin's line, seeing as how
no bugger would use it.



I'd use it!

Getting from Tooting/Mitcham to Central London takes ages. Getting to North
London (or indeed West or East London) is something you don't even want to
think about.

Clapham Junction doesn't have an LU service.

Tramlink only has one LU interchange, at the far end.

The walk from South Ken to the Albert Hall through the foot tunnel is
unpleasant.

All the radial limbs of the underground in North London lack lateral routes
providing interchanges.

The spacing of the stations would make this line a quick, direct
Victoria-style experience, as opposed to the
sluggishness of the Northern Line.



Here's another one I came up with that takes over bits and pieces of
existing infrastructure.

(see if you can spot which bits!)

Mill Hill East
Finchley Central
Muswell Hill
Hornsey Central
Crouch Hill
Finsbury Park
Drayton Park
Highbury & Islington
Essex Road
Old Street
Moorgate
Bank
Blackfriars
Waterloo
Vauxhall
Battersea Park
Clapham Junction
Wandsworth Town
East Putney
Roehampton

BTN

Sir Benjamin Nunn wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
rth.li...
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 17:48:38 +0100, "Sir Benjamin Nunn"
wrote:

Anybody with half a brain could come up with new line ideas just by
looking
at a map.

Example:

Albert Line:

Arnos Grove
Alexandra Palace
Hornsey Central
Archway
Gospel Oak
Belsize Park
St. Johns Wood
Edgware Road
Lancaster Gate
Royal Albert Hall
South Kensington
Albert Bridge
Battersea
Clapham Junction
Wandsworth Common
Tooting Broadway
Tooting Junction
Mitcham

Ooh, we haven't had a Scheme on UTL in yonks. Duly mapped:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...820a7d99caba8f

Let me know if it doesn't match your vision.


Heh. I'd actually already done one on google maps:


http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en...d8fb6aa53&z=11

Your version is slightly more direct.


An interesting alignment - not one I would have dreamed up.

No. It mostly seems to be an exercise in getting people from the suburbs
to places they don't want to go. The only stations you could describe as
being central are Edgware Road, Lancaster Gate and Royal Albert Hall -
none of which are significant commuter destinations. The Edgware Road stop
could serve Paddington Basin, of course. The RAH and South Ken stops would
be great for Albertopolis, including all the museums, plus Imperial
College, the RCA and various other educational institutions, and the RAH
itself, but i'm highly skeptical that there are enough jobs round there to
fill a tube line. The Battersea stop is too far west to serve the
developments round there. The line could serve as a feeder from the
suburbs to other tube lines that it crosses, but all the suburban stations
area already on lines which do that, or are useful lines in their own
right.

So, it serves Paddington Basin, a major cultural complex, and gives access
to other lines. That's not useless, but it can't justify a tube line.

However it's lovely to stick new tube lines in to the network but all
that happens if you push overall ridership up and up and up thereby
exacerbating your existing pinch points.

Ah, but this wouldn't be a problem with Sir Benjamin's line, seeing as how
no bugger would use it.



I'd use it!

Getting from Tooting/Mitcham to Central London takes ages. Getting to North
London (or indeed West or East London) is something you don't even want to
think about.

Clapham Junction doesn't have an LU service.

Tramlink only has one LU interchange, at the far end.

The walk from South Ken to the Albert Hall through the foot tunnel is
unpleasant.

All the radial limbs of the underground in North London lack lateral routes
providing interchanges.

The spacing of the stations would make this line a quick, direct
Victoria-style experience, as opposed to the
sluggishness of the Northern Line.



Interesting points. But what colour should this line be?


Here's another one I came up with that takes over bits and pieces of
existing infrastructure.

(see if you can spot which bits!)

Mill Hill East
Finchley Central
Muswell Hill
Hornsey Central
Crouch Hill
Finsbury Park
Drayton Park
Highbury & Islington
Essex Road
Old Street
Moorgate
Bank
Blackfriars
Waterloo
Vauxhall
Battersea Park
Clapham Junction
Wandsworth Town
East Putney
Roehampton


And again, what colour? (After all, TfL must be running out of clearly
distinct colours for the map. That's got to limit the number of
possible new lines.)

In uk.transport.london message f4e51a1c-3d0c-4c3d-8c66-a96f232af378@w10
g2000yqf.googlegroups.com, Sun, 6 Sep 2009 02:02:18, solar penguin
posted:

...
Crouch Hill
Finsbury Park
Drayton Park
Highbury & Islington
Essex Road
Old Street
Moorgate
Bank
...

And again, what colour? (After all, TfL must be running out of clearly
distinct colours for the map. That's got to limit the number of
possible new lines.)

Route it through Caledonian Road, and colour it tartan.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

In message , Paul Corfield
writes
I think we need some lessons from Spaniards who seem to be able to
build new tram, Metro, rail and High Speed lines in about 3 years from
start to finish - even where they had to be driven through existing
city centres and link to existing lines. Progress in Madrid and
Barcelona seems very impressive - one day I'll get to see for myself.

Hmmmm

Having just spent 4 days in Madrid, the place is like a building site -
and a very unpleasant one at that.

Arrival at Barcelona this afternoon just reinforces my assertion that
they are currently rebuilding Spain.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 19:28:26 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes
I think we need some lessons from Spaniards who seem to be able to
build new tram, Metro, rail and High Speed lines in about 3 years from
start to finish - even where they had to be driven through existing
city centres and link to existing lines. Progress in Madrid and
Barcelona seems very impressive - one day I'll get to see for myself.

Hmmmm

Having just spent 4 days in Madrid, the place is like a building site -
and a very unpleasant one at that.

Arrival at Barcelona this afternoon just reinforces my assertion that
they are currently rebuilding Spain.

It's all to do with the recession. The bottom has dropped out of the
domestic housing market (especially that catering mainly for foreigners)
and so the building industry has a surfeit of workers of all skill
levels desperate for jobs at any salary; hence the civic projects can be
carried out more cheaply, and are being pushed ahead whilst the
situation lasts.

There are some Spanish practices the rest of Europe could learn from
(but then I'm biased, as Spain is my adopted country).






--
Bill Hayles

http://billnot.com

On Sep 10, 7:40*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:53:05 +0200, Bill Hayles
wrote:

On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 19:28:26 +0100, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:
Arrival at Barcelona this afternoon just reinforces my assertion that
they are currently rebuilding Spain.

It's all to do with the recession. The bottom has dropped out of the
domestic housing market (especially that catering mainly for foreigners)
and so the building industry has a surfeit of workers of all skill
levels desperate for jobs at any salary; hence the civic projects can be
carried out more cheaply, and are being pushed ahead whilst the
situation lasts.

There are some Spanish practices the rest of Europe could learn from
(but then I'm biased, as Spain is my adopted country).

Care to elaborate as their ability to construct metro, tram and train
lines in next to no time (relatively speaking) is something I would
dearly love to understand? *There must be something in the planning,
regulatory or construction methodologies that allows them to make such
quick progress.

Not an expert, but: empty country, cheap land, cheap labour?

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org