London Bridge interchange
 

Does anybody know why - given that both Jubilee Line platforms were of
completely new build, and one of the Northern Line platforms was laterally
resited - the interchange was not made more convenient and accessible.

I've struggled to make the change every day for the last few weeks, walking
on crutches, and there must be about 70-80 stairs to traverse. Why?!?

The non-signposted change - going up an escalator to the Borough High Street
exit, then back down the other one - is more comfortable for those
struggling to walk, though still somewhat unwieldy and at the moment only
possible in one direction due to escalator replacement.

Couldn't they have put the Jubilee at a direct right angle to the Northern
Line, at a slightly lower level and with an equally generous 'island'
between the platforms, then just had a bank of escalators from platform
level to platform level?

And the Northern-Jubilee interchange at Waterloo is no better as an
alternative really.

BTN

London Bridge interchange
 

In message , at 13:36:35 on Sat, 19 Dec
2009, Sir Benjamin Nunn remarked:
Couldn't they have put the Jubilee at a direct right angle to the
Northern Line, at a slightly lower level and with an equally generous
'island' between the platforms, then just had a bank of escalators from
platform level to platform level?

As far as I know this is pretty much what happened. The only reason for
not making a 'direct' connection by a short flight of stairs (between
the two sets of platforms) must have been because it would have been
"too popular" and they wanted to create large circulating areas
connecting mainly to the street, instead.
--
Roland Perry

London Bridge interchange
 

In message , Sir Benjamin Nunn
wrote:
Does anybody know why - given that both Jubilee Line platforms were of
completely new build, and one of the Northern Line platforms was
laterally resited - the interchange was not made more convenient and
accessible.
[...]
Couldn't they have put the Jubilee at a direct right angle to the
Northern Line, at a slightly lower level and with an equally generous
'island' between the platforms, then just had a bank of escalators from
platform level to platform level?

I have an axonmetric diagram (it says) of the station. From it, it
appears that the Jubilee crosses the Northern well south of the latter's
platforms. I presume there's a good reason it was sent that way rather
than under the Northern Line - perhaps to reduce the curvature and the
length of the line, since I believe the Northern Line station is roughly
under the main line bridge across Borough High Street.

Once you accept there were good reasons for putting the line that far
south, the interchange arrangements become pretty obvious.

Similarly at Waterloo, the main purpose of the Jubilee station was to
interchange with the suburban lines, not with the other Underground
lines. Hence the station was put at the right place to have an escalator
link to the Colonnades.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

London Bridge interchange
 

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In message , Sir Benjamin Nunn
wrote:
Does anybody know why - given that both Jubilee Line platforms were of
completely new build, and one of the Northern Line platforms was laterally
resited - the interchange was not made more convenient and accessible.
[...]
Couldn't they have put the Jubilee at a direct right angle to the Northern
Line, at a slightly lower level and with an equally generous 'island'
between the platforms, then just had a bank of escalators from platform
level to platform level?

I have an axonmetric diagram (it says) of the station. From it, it appears
that the Jubilee crosses the Northern well south of the latter's
platforms. I presume there's a good reason it was sent that way rather
than under the Northern Line - perhaps to reduce the curvature and the
length of the line, since I believe the Northern Line station is roughly
under the main line bridge across Borough High Street.



I understand the building to the left of the bus in this picture

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie...1. 81,,0,5.53

is part of the original Northern Line station building at the head of the
lift shaft, now a ventilation shaft. If so, the south end of the tube
platforms will be slightly north of this location, probably the other side
of the main line bridge.

D A Stocks

London Bridge interchange
 

On 2 Jan, 23:58, "Clive D. W. Feather" wrote:
In message , Sir Benjamin Nunn

wrote:
Does anybody know why - given that both Jubilee Line platforms were of
completely new build, and one of the Northern Line platforms was
laterally resited - the interchange was not made more convenient and
accessible.
[...]
Couldn't they have put the Jubilee at a direct right angle to the
Northern Line, at a slightly lower level and with an equally generous
'island' between the platforms, then just had a bank of escalators from
platform level to platform level?

I have an axonmetric diagram (it says) of the station. From it, it
appears that the Jubilee crosses the Northern well south of the latter's
platforms. I presume there's a good reason it was sent that way rather
than under the Northern Line - perhaps to reduce the curvature and the
length of the line, since I believe the Northern Line station is roughly
under the main line bridge across Borough High Street.

Once you accept there were good reasons for putting the line that far
south, the interchange arrangements become pretty obvious.

Similarly at Waterloo, the main purpose of the Jubilee station was to
interchange with the suburban lines, not with the other Underground
lines. Hence the station was put at the right place to have an escalator
link to the Colonnades.

It must be very rare for tube platforms to be directly below each
other at interchanges. They nearly always cross somewhere beyond the
ends of the platforms, with the track height of the higher line below
the platform ceiling height of the lower line.*

The only exception I can think of might be the DLR at Bank.


*Which is presumably why the northbound Bakerloo at Piccadilly Circus
had to be extended over the crossover at the north end, because the
ceiling of the eastbound Piccadilly would have been where they'd have
needed to build the platform at the other end.

London Bridge interchange
 

In message , at 01:44:25 on Sun, 3 Jan
2010, David A Stocks remarked:
I believe the Northern Line station is roughly under the main line
bridge across Borough High Street.

I understand the building to the left of the bus in this picture

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie...088942&spn=0,3
59.997707&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.505758,-0.088855&panoid=M2QGsJwg0TBS9XLyj
J0H4w&cbp=12,101.81,,0,5.53

is part of the original Northern Line station building at the head of
the lift shaft, now a ventilation shaft. If so, the south end of the
tube platforms will be slightly north of this location, probably the
other side of the main line bridge.

I agree about the building (and I've been inside and down to the old
C&SLR station). What I'm not so clear about is why that marks the
southern end of the platforms. Do you have a station plan showing the
position of the lift shaft with respect to the platforms?

My own recollection is that the bottom of the liftshaft is just to the
south of the current passageway from the bottom of the main escalators
to the Northern Line platforms, but I can't remember how far along the
platform that passageway emerges.

The Borough St entrance, which is at the top of a set of escalators, is
some considerable distance south of there, and might be a useful place
to start estimating the position of the platforms.
--
Roland Perry

London Bridge interchange
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 01:44:25 on Sun, 3 Jan
2010, David A Stocks remarked:
I believe the Northern Line station is roughly under the main line
bridge across Borough High Street.

I understand the building to the left of the bus in this picture

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie...088942&spn=0,3
59.997707&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.505758,-0.088855&panoid=M2QGsJwg0TBS9XLyj
J0H4w&cbp=12,101.81,,0,5.53

is part of the original Northern Line station building at the head of the
lift shaft, now a ventilation shaft. If so, the south end of the tube
platforms will be slightly north of this location, probably the other side
of the main line bridge.

I agree about the building (and I've been inside and down to the old C&SLR
station). What I'm not so clear about is why that marks the southern end
of the platforms. Do you have a station plan showing the position of the
lift shaft with respect to the platforms?

My own recollection is that the bottom of the liftshaft is just to the
south of the current passageway from the bottom of the main escalators to
the Northern Line platforms, but I can't remember how far along the
platform that passageway emerges.

I'm relying on my memory of the station before the Jubilee Line was built. I
used to go through it most working days and recall the passageway from the
bottom of the escalators emerging at the extreme south end of the northbound
platform. The northbound platform was extended to the south (I'm not sure
how far, but it can't be very much) when the old southbound platform tunnel
was converted into a circulation area between the platforms.

The OPs suggestion that the Jubilee Line should have built further north in
order to facilitate an interchange with the existing Northern would probably
have meant putting the Jubilee Line plaforms under the river. This would
have been a bad interchange with the main line, and may well have run into
other problems because ISTR one of the reasons for building a new southbound
(rather than northbound) platform tunnel was that the new tunnel had to be
threaded around the foundations of both the current and pre-1830 London
Bridges, not to mention the old C&SLR tunnels to King William Street
station.

D A Stocks

London Bridge interchange
 

In message , at 13:33:12 on Sun, 3 Jan
2010, David A Stocks remarked:
The OPs suggestion that the Jubilee Line should have built further
north in order to facilitate an interchange with the existing Northern
would probably have meant putting the Jubilee Line plaforms under the
river.

Only if the two sets of platforms aren't allowed to overlap. Looking at
the surface maps, and drawing a line between Waterloo, Southwark, and
London Bridge, it does seem very likely that the Jubilee line platforms
are south of Southwark St.

This would have been a bad interchange with the main line, and may well
have run into other problems because ISTR one of the reasons for
building a new southbound (rather than northbound) platform tunnel was
that the new tunnel had to be threaded around the foundations of both
the current and pre-1830 London Bridges, not to mention the old C&SLR
tunnels to King William Street station.

The C&SLR tunnels are above the Northern Line tunnels, so don't have to
be "threaded around". They also curve sharply just beyond the station to
cross the river west of the bridge, whereas the Northern Line goes to
the right.

It would also surprise me to find that the Northern Line platforms went
under the river, so that sets some kind of bound upon the southern end.
From the "liftshaft building" to the river bank is 400ft, so that's
about seven cars.
--
Roland Perry

London Bridge interchange
 

On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:16:51 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:

*Which is presumably why the northbound Bakerloo at Piccadilly Circus
had to be extended over the crossover at the north end,

I didn't know the northbound platform had been extended over the
crossover. Does this mean a southbound train using the crossover to
enter the northbound platform has to go beyond the platform before it
can reverse and become a northbound train?

London Bridge interchange
 

On 3 Jan, 15:13, asdf wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:16:51 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:
*Which is presumably why the northbound Bakerloo at Piccadilly Circus
had to be extended over the crossover at the north end,

I didn't know the northbound platform had been extended over the
crossover. Does this mean a southbound train using the crossover to
enter the northbound platform has to go beyond the platform before it
can reverse and become a northbound train?

Ah, no, because like many Bakerloo stations, the platforms are on the
outside, unlike the island platform layout that was used on the CLR.

So from the platform, you simply look across the crossover. I should
have said "beyond" rather than "over".

London Bridge interchange
 

On 3 Jan, 21:34, MIG wrote:
On 3 Jan, 15:13, asdf wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:16:51 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:
*Which is presumably why the northbound Bakerloo at Piccadilly Circus
had to be extended over the crossover at the north end,

I didn't know the northbound platform had been extended over the
crossover. Does this mean a southbound train using the crossover to
enter the northbound platform has to go beyond the platform before it
can reverse and become a northbound train?

Ah, no, because like many Bakerloo stations, the platforms are on the
outside, unlike the island platform layout that was used on the CLR.

So from the platform, you simply look across the crossover. *I should
have said "beyond" rather than "over".

Duh. I see what you mean now.

Yes, I suppose so, but maybe they'd only reverse north from the
southbound platform.

London Bridge interchange
 

On 3 Jan, 21:37, MIG wrote:
On 3 Jan, 21:34, MIG wrote:





On 3 Jan, 15:13, asdf wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:16:51 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:
*Which is presumably why the northbound Bakerloo at Piccadilly Circus
had to be extended over the crossover at the north end,

I didn't know the northbound platform had been extended over the
crossover. Does this mean a southbound train using the crossover to
enter the northbound platform has to go beyond the platform before it
can reverse and become a northbound train?

Ah, no, because like many Bakerloo stations, the platforms are on the
outside, unlike the island platform layout that was used on the CLR.

So from the platform, you simply look across the crossover. *I should
have said "beyond" rather than "over".

Duh. *I see what you mean now.

Yes, I suppose so, but maybe they'd only reverse north from the
southbound platform.

And in fact (why don't I check before posting) there's only the
trailing crossover, so you can't get into the northbound platform from
the north.

London Bridge interchange
 

On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 13:40:18 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:

On 3 Jan, 21:37, MIG wrote:
On 3 Jan, 21:34, MIG wrote:
On 3 Jan, 15:13, asdf wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 18:16:51 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:
*Which is presumably why the northbound Bakerloo at Piccadilly Circus
had to be extended over the crossover at the north end,

I didn't know the northbound platform had been extended over the
crossover. Does this mean a southbound train using the crossover to
enter the northbound platform has to go beyond the platform before it
can reverse and become a northbound train?

Ah, no, because like many Bakerloo stations, the platforms are on the
outside, unlike the island platform layout that was used on the CLR.

So from the platform, you simply look across the crossover. *I should
have said "beyond" rather than "over".

Duh. *I see what you mean now.

Yes, I suppose so, but maybe they'd only reverse north from the
southbound platform.

And in fact (why don't I check before posting) there's only the
trailing crossover, so you can't get into the northbound platform from
the north.

I guess I'm the one that should have checked - for some reason I
thought it was a facing crossover.

London Bridge interchange
 

On 2010-01-04 00:55:12 +0000, asdf said:

On

Ah, no, because like many Bakerloo stations, the platforms are on the
outside, unlike the island platform layout that was used on the CLR.

So from the platform, you simply look across the crossover. *I should
have said "beyond" rather than "over".

Duh. *I see what you mean now.

Yes, I suppose so, but maybe they'd only reverse north from the
southbound platform.

And in fact (why don't I check before posting) there's only the
trailing crossover, so you can't get into the northbound platform from
the north.

I guess I'm the one that should have checked - for some reason I
thought it was a facing crossover.

My memory may be erroneous, but I thought that once there was a
scissors crossover here.

London Bridge interchange
 

On 5 Jan, 16:37, Ken Wheatley wrote:
On 2010-01-04 00:55:12 +0000, asdf said:





On

Ah, no, because like many Bakerloo stations, the platforms are on the
outside, unlike the island platform layout that was used on the CLR.

So from the platform, you simply look across the crossover. I should
have said "beyond" rather than "over".

Duh. I see what you mean now.

Yes, I suppose so, but maybe they'd only reverse north from the
southbound platform.

And in fact (why don't I check before posting) there's only the
trailing crossover, so you can't get into the northbound platform from
the north.

I guess I'm the one that should have checked - for some reason I
thought it was a facing crossover.

My memory may be erroneous, but I thought that once there was a
scissors crossover here.

It was replaced last year, but it seems to have been the same
immediately before according to the 2002 Quail.

London Bridge interchange
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 13:33:12 on Sun, 3 Jan
2010, David A Stocks remarked:
The OPs suggestion that the Jubilee Line should have built further north
in order to facilitate an interchange with the existing Northern would
probably have meant putting the Jubilee Line plaforms under the river.

Only if the two sets of platforms aren't allowed to overlap. Looking at
the surface maps, and drawing a line between Waterloo, Southwark, and
London Bridge, it does seem very likely that the Jubilee line platforms
are south of Southwark St.

The Wiki page for the JLE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_Line_Extension

has a link to a satellite image showing ground settlement in Central London
thought to be due to the JLE. There is a large blob of red (denoting
settlement) along Southwark Street to the west of Borough High St, and
smaller blobs in the St Thomas St and Joiner St areas. It looks like the
route may have had to run between tower/office blocks in this area.

This would have been a bad interchange with the main line, and may well
have run into other problems because ISTR one of the reasons for building
a new southbound (rather than northbound) platform tunnel was that the new
tunnel had to be threaded around the foundations of both the current and
pre-1830 London Bridges, not to mention the old C&SLR tunnels to King
William Street station.

The C&SLR tunnels are above the Northern Line tunnels, so don't have to be
"threaded around". They also curve sharply just beyond the station
... although the C&SLR didn't have a station at London Bridge, but I know
what you mean

to cross the river west of the bridge, whereas the Northern Line goes to
the right.

The pre-1830 London Bridge was about 30m downstream of the current bridge,
so the Northern Line probably runs between the two sets of foundations. This
would make sense because I believe it was pre-1830 bridge foundations (which
had been there for about 600 years when the bridge was demolished) that were
considered to be a bigger problem than the either of the successor bridges.

It would also surprise me to find that the Northern Line platforms went
under the river, so that sets some kind of bound upon the southern end.
From the "liftshaft building" to the river bank is 400ft, so that's about
seven cars.
I can't find any plans/diagrams of the station online, but various pages on
subterranea britannica etc. agree with my memory of the station. The
passages from the bottom of the main escalator to the platforms didn't
change much when the station was enlarged and you could still see where the
bottom of the lift shaft was when I last went through. These pages

http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/..._Street_5.html
http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/RaggaJohn.html

have some particularly relevant detail.

D A Stocks

London Bridge interchange
 

On 2010-01-05 20:35:40 +0000, MIG said:

On 5 Jan, 16:37, Ken Wheatley wrote:
On 2010-01-04 00:55:12 +0000, asdf said:





My memory may be erroneous, but I thought that once there was a
scissors crossover here.

It was replaced last year, but it seems to have been the same
immediately before according to the 2002 Quail.

I'm talking about when my brother and I used to occasionally travel to
Willesden Junction. We, being aged about 8 and 6, called the north end
of the northbound Bakerloo platform at Piccadilly Circus 'The Noise
Box' because of the extremely loud noise of the 1938TS crashing over
the points. I'd say about 1963-5!

We got to hear this noise quite a lot, as it seemed to us that most
trains went to Stanmore and most of the rest terminated at Queens Park.
We couldn't catch the latter and change onto the Euston-Watford service
as it seemed to be against my father's religion.

London Bridge interchange
 

In message , at 22:28:41 on Tue, 5 Jan
2010, David A Stocks remarked:
The C&SLR tunnels are above the Northern Line tunnels, so don't have
to be "threaded around". They also curve sharply just beyond the
station
... although the C&SLR didn't have a station at London Bridge, but I
know what you mean

Having been in the C&SLR tunnels, and looked down (through some
ventilation grills) on the passengers on the Northern Line platform
below, I tend to conflate the two.

to cross the river west of the bridge, whereas the Northern Line goes
to the right.

The pre-1830 London Bridge was about 30m downstream of the current
bridge, so the Northern Line probably runs between the two sets of
foundations. This would make sense because I believe it was pre-1830
bridge foundations (which had been there for about 600 years when the
bridge was demolished) that were considered to be a bigger problem than
the either of the successor bridges.

It would also surprise me to find that the Northern Line platforms
went under the river, so that sets some kind of bound upon the
southern end. From the "liftshaft building" to the river bank is
400ft, so that's about seven cars.
I can't find any plans/diagrams of the station online, but various
pages on subterranea britannica etc. agree with my memory of the
station. The passages from the bottom of the main escalator to the
platforms didn't change much when the station was enlarged and you
could still see where the bottom of the lift shaft was when I last went
through. These pages

http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/..._Street_5.html
http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/RaggaJohn.html

have some particularly relevant detail.

From that I gather that the old liftshaft is exactly at the passage from
the escalators to the platforms (and when I was exploring the area maybe
that was down some old emergency stairs immediately to the south). But
the platforms have been extended slightly south as part of the station
re-build. However, it's therefore very likely the platform's northern
end is on the Thames shoreline.
--
Roland Perry

Hello guys!
I agree with the above information and I'm trying to get to Bank station from London Bridge tomorrow, is that journey possible?

Yes.may be possible and its depends upon your idea and have a nice journey....