On 30/11/2015 15:32, Recliner wrote:
There's also the length (ie, rise) of the escalator to consider. If it's
very high, fewer people will choose to walk up, so the walking lane will be
under-used, with long gaps. In such cases, having two standing lanes will
maximise throughput. But with short escalators, lots of people will prefer
to walk, so it's better to have a walking lane.

I think this was the reason given for trying it first at Holborn as it
has rather long escalators, but surely not the longest (Angel?).

Just to comment on the capacity arguments: it might be true (though I'd
like to see the figures in a peer-reviewed publication) that the
throughput is higher with standing on both sides. But as a libertarian
at heart I think this reduces passenger choice in a rather serious way.
I nearly always walk up escalators, even long ones, unless I have
heavy luggage or am very tired. But the current system gives me a
choice - I can get there sooner if I walk up, or wait, usually a short
time, to queue at the foot of the escalator to get into the standing
lane. This new TfL proposal denies me that choice and seems regrettable
on those grounds.

It will also probably have the side-effect of encouraging more
anti-social or gormless folk to stand on the left-hand side of *all*
escalators, when it isn't desirable at all.

--
Clive Page