Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

Batman55 wrote:
It appears the BBC rely on post codes, often something happening in
what everyone else would think of as South London e.g Brixton, but
they call south west because it is SW3 or because adjacent Herne Hill
is SE24, it becomes SE London. They have no actual geographical
knowledge.

The occasional description by the local news of something happening in
'Middlesex' is equally baffling, due to that county ceasing to exist 44
years ago. And as it would cover nearly half of their transmission area,
it is not very geographically helpful either.

To give BBC London their due, the recent coverage of the gas (and
electricity) failures in East Barnet has correctly been described as
north London.

However National Grid was totally confused about the location in their
press releases, stating that they were liaising with the emergency
planning department in Bedfordshire, then Hertfordshire before finally
(correctly) settling on the London Borough of Barnet.

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

"Basil Jet" wrote in message

MIG wrote:
On 23 Dec, 10:58, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

And could selective door opening
be used to allow a decent train length to run on the Circle?

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

I didn't realise that, and it seems very odd. Doesn't the problem
apply to several stations in a row? Either there will be one coach
not used by anyone on that stretch, or it would have to be a
different end at different stations.

This sort of thing was tried on the Hampstead tube wasn't it, and I
didn't think it had been all that successful?

The Hampstead tube didn't have articulated carriages.

Nor does the S Stock (or any other LU trains). What the S Stock does
have is open gangways.

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

"MIG" wrote in message

On 23 Dec, 10:58, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24 am, (Neil Williams)

And could selective door opening
be used to allow a decent train length to run on the Circle?

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

I didn't realise that, and it seems very odd. Doesn't the problem
apply to several stations in a row? Either there will be one coach
not used by anyone on that stretch, or it would have to be a different
end at different stations.

This sort of thing was tried on the Hampstead tube wasn't it, and I
didn't think it had been all that successful?

Thwe S Stock has open gangways, so even if a full car is off the
platform (unlikely), passengers are still not imprisoned.

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

In article , (David A
Stocks) wrote:

Historically, East London *is* Essex. Similarly all of London to
the south of the Thames is Kent or Surrey. Surrey County Council
has its HQ at Kingston-upon-Thames and Surrey County Cricket Club
is based at The Oval, neither of which are in the present day
county of Surrey. The rest of London - including the cities of
London and Westminster - is in Middlesex, still used by some people
on postal addresses. Middlesex Guildhall still stands in Parliament
Square - I think it now houses the Supreme Court.

Historically the City of London has *not* been in Middlesex.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, MIG wrote:

On 23 Dec, 16:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Maybe if they did, they could stop referring to North London as East
London at the same time.

As someone who actually lives in the bit of North London that risks being
referred to as East London, i am strongly behind this as well!

tom

--
Big Bang. No god. Fadeout. End. -- Stephen Baxter

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, John B wrote:

On Dec 23, 4:54*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The
same applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill
journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As
someone who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Apart from that, bang on, of course!

LAHNDON! ESSEX! LAHNDON! ESSEX!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKEBCG3iJtw

You are, of course, right - I thought Upminster was outside GL
boundaries, but it's LB Havering.

Oh, forget local authorities, it's London as far as the A130!

tom

--
Big Bang. No god. Fadeout. End. -- Stephen Baxter

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, David A Stocks wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
rth.li...

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As
someone who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

What's more distressing - coming from London or Essex?

London. Specifically, deep East London.

I was born in Wanstead

No offence!

which, in 1964, was in Essex. If I'm asked what county I was born in I
can reply either "Essex" or "London", although I would say I was *from*
Surrey or Sussex because that's where I've spent nearly all of my life.

Historically, East London *is* Essex. Similarly all of London to the
south of the Thames is Kent or Surrey.

Right, but what you might have missed is that we don't live in history, we
live in the present. Otherwise, you might as well say it's all just
Provincio Britannia.

Surrey County Council has its HQ at Kingston-upon-Thames and Surrey
County Cricket Club is based at The Oval, neither of which are in the
present day county of Surrey. The rest of London - including the cities
of London and Westminster - is in Middlesex, still used by some people
on postal addresses. Middlesex Guildhall still stands in Parliament
Square - I think it now houses the Supreme Court.

It's not worth getting distressed about.

Until roughly the millionth time when, on revealing that you're from
Essex, you're asked "So have you got a pair of white stilletoes, then?
Been up Faces for some discount champagne and a fight lately?", etc.
Because this is the result of idiot westerners somehow thinking that Essex
means Romford, or Basildon if i'm lucky, and tarring me with their idiot
brush. When there's nothing wrong with the real Essex - it's not big or
clever, in fact it's quite quiet and backward, but it's relaxed, it's
beautiful, it's got history and soul, and i'm quite chuffed that i'm from
there. But there's no way to communicate this to anyone because the name
is immediately associated with LOL WHITE STILETTOES AND A FORD CAPRI WITH
BLUE NEONS!! At which point, one becomes distressed.

Anyway, nurse, my medicine please!

tom

--
Big Bang. No god. Fadeout. End. -- Stephen Baxter

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, wrote:

In article , (David A
Stocks) wrote:

Historically, East London *is* Essex. Similarly all of London to the
south of the Thames is Kent or Surrey. Surrey County Council has its HQ
at Kingston-upon-Thames and Surrey County Cricket Club is based at The
Oval, neither of which are in the present day county of Surrey. The
rest of London - including the cities of London and Westminster - is in
Middlesex, still used by some people on postal addresses. Middlesex
Guildhall still stands in Parliament Square - I think it now houses the
Supreme Court.

Historically the City of London has *not* been in Middlesex.

And nor has Ely Place!

tom

--
Big Bang. No god. Fadeout. End. -- Stephen Baxter

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

In message . li, Tom
Anderson writes
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, David A Stocks wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
news:alpine.DEB.1.10.0912231653390.10835@urchin. earth.li...

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As
someone who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

What's more distressing - coming from London or Essex?

London. Specifically, deep East London.

Hey, I like living in east London :p
--
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)

Edgware Road: The interchange from hell
 

In message ,
writes

Historically the City of London has *not* been in Middlesex.

Well, not since 1132 (when Henry I granted the city county status).
--
Paul Terry