A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

On Aug 10, 2:40*pm, West Yorkshire Bus
wrote:
A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

Why was it taken out of the Underground map? It would help if there
was a common fare structure in the inner area.

On Aug 10, 10:56*pm, 1506 wrote:

On Aug 10, 2:40*pm, West Yorkshire Bus
wrote:
A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

Why was it taken out of the Underground map? *It would help if there
was a common fare structure in the inner area.

There kind of already is a common fare structure, on Thameslink at
least. There's full 'interavailability' of LU tickets on Thameslink,
meaning that within zone 1 single LU tickets can be used on Thameslink
as if it were an Underground line (actually I think this
interavailability applies to & from Kentish Town in zone 2 as well) -
and passengers can change from LU to Thameslink or v.v. just as if
they were interchanging between LU lines.

Of course Travelcards and Oyster PAYG can be used on the line as well.

However there are also 'Not Underground' fares available for say a
London Bridge to St Pancras journey by Thameslink, these are limited
to use on the Thameslink route only. I don't see any big deal about
retaining these - I doubt that many are sold at all, but it does
enable FCC to offer a cheaper fare than the £4 LU paper ticket single.

In essence I don't think there's a ticketing issue here - not in this
context at least. It gets more complicated when considering NR fares
from further afield - those issued to "London Terminals" from points
north are only valid to St Pancras and no further, and from points
south are only valid as far as City Thameslink (but because of loose
programming seem to operate the gates at St Pancras anyway!) -
passengers travelling further need to specify that when they book
their ticket and should get the appropriate ticket to a named
destination (e.g. St Pancras, Farringdon etc).

When was it taken off the Tube map - well, it's vanished off the map a
number of years ago, well before the current Thameslink Programme
works began. One can make a number of guesses as to why - the less
frequent, slower, and at rush hour very busy service was perhaps
considered a bit misleading to be included on the Tube map. The 'Great
Northern Electrics' / Northern City line twixt Moorgate and Finsbury
Park also used to feature, but that too went (at the same time?).

AIUI the current thinking seems to be that the Thameslink Programme is
going to get cut back somewhat - the signalling will be for 20tph
rather than 24tph (for which the planners considered an ATO signalling
system to be a requirement), it won't get the planned fleet of new
trains, perhaps 'Key Output 2' (with the extensive Bermondsey duck-and-
diveunder arrangements) will get put on the backburner - so the 'new
generation' Thameslink service may be a little bit less Tube-like
than had originally been thought.

"Mizter T" wrote in message
...

AIUI the current thinking seems to be that the Thameslink Programme is
going to get cut back somewhat - the signalling will be for 20tph
rather than 24tph (for which the planners considered an ATO signalling
system to be a requirement),

Did you miss the announcement (and ensuing thread started on the 29th July)
about the 24 tph signalling contract being let by NR?

Paul S

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT), West Yorkshire Bus
wrote:

A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.


The tourist area?

Since when did Thameslink serve the London Eye, Houses of Parliament,
Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace, Oxford Street, Bond Street,
Knightsbridge, Madame Tussauds and Regents Park?

On Aug 11, 12:11*am, Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT), West Yorkshire Bus

wrote:
A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

The tourist area?

Since when did Thameslink serve the London Eye, Houses of Parliament,
Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace, Oxford Street, Bond Street,
Knightsbridge, Madame Tussauds and Regents Park?

When I was helping some German friends plan a weekend away in London,
a bit of research found that the best bet for budget hotels in a
reasonably central location was in the area around Kings Cross (and I
don't mean by-the-hour hotels either), and for getting to either the
area around the tower, or to St Pauls and across to the Tate Modern,
Thameslink proved to be quite a useful route. Also handy for pax
flying via Gatwick. By all accounts, plenty of other tourists had
come to the same conclusion regarding hotels.

Robin

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 22:52:52 -0700 (PDT), bob
wrote:

On Aug 11, 12:11*am, Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT), West Yorkshire Bus

wrote:
A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

The tourist area?

Since when did Thameslink serve the London Eye, Houses of Parliament,
Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace, Oxford Street, Bond Street,
Knightsbridge, Madame Tussauds and Regents Park?

When I was helping some German friends plan a weekend away in London,
a bit of research found that the best bet for budget hotels in a
reasonably central location was in the area around Kings Cross (and I
don't mean by-the-hour hotels either), and for getting to either the
area around the tower, or to St Pauls and across to the Tate Modern,
Thameslink proved to be quite a useful route. Also handy for pax
flying via Gatwick. By all accounts, plenty of other tourists had
come to the same conclusion regarding hotels.


The reason that those areas are "the best bet for budget hotels" is
that there is comparatively little demand. The majority of tourists
stay in areas several miles west of Thameslink, none of which are
remotely as seedy as Kings Cross, whose seediness and relative
cheapness are directly connected.

On 11 Aug, 09:34, Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 22:52:52 -0700 (PDT), bob
wrote:





On Aug 11, 12:11*am, Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT), West Yorkshire Bus

wrote:
A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get near
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

The tourist area?

Since when did Thameslink serve the London Eye, Houses of Parliament,
Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace, Oxford Street, Bond Street,
Knightsbridge, Madame Tussauds and Regents Park?

When I was helping some German friends plan a weekend away in London,
a bit of research found that the best bet for budget hotels in a
reasonably central location was in the area around Kings Cross (and I
don't mean by-the-hour hotels either), and for getting to either the
area around the tower, or to St Pauls and across to the Tate Modern,
Thameslink proved to be quite a useful route. *Also handy for pax
flying via Gatwick. *By all accounts, plenty of other tourists had
come to the same conclusion regarding hotels.

The reason that those areas are "the best bet for budget hotels" is
that there is comparatively little demand. *The majority of tourists
stay in areas several miles west of Thameslink, none of which are
remotely as seedy as Kings Cross, whose seediness and relative
cheapness are directly connected.

If there is comparitively little demand, why are there more hotel
rooms within a 5 minute walk of King's Cross than in the whole of
Cambridge (not exactly an unpopular city with the tourists)? I
counted 4 large travelodges, 2 comfort inns, a premier inn, a novotel
and (from a quick google search) 25 non-chain hotels. When I was
showing my friends around, from the people swarming around these
various hotels, I would guess that the vast majority were tourists
(the dress sense, photographic equipment and propensity for european
languages were all give aways).

I suspect the real reason the hotels there work out cheap for tourists
is that they are mostly serving the city-bound buisness market, and
are prepared to let their rooms go cheaply at the weekends rather than
stand empty. The area isn't nearly as seedy as it used to be, and
it's jolly handy for Eurostar.

Robin

On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:25:19 -0700 (PDT), bob
wrote:
On 11 Aug, 09:34, Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 22:52:52 -0700 (PDT), bob
wrote:
On Aug 11, 12:11=A0am, Bruce wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT), West Yorkshire Bus

wrote:
A simple question, in a year or two when the Thameslink works get nea=
r
to being finished, should the route be added (or be reinstated) onto
the tube map?

At the moment I feel that visitors to the city are not aware of the
route and once Blackfriars is finished, are not aware of the handy
link straight through the centre of the tourist area.

The tourist area?

Since when did Thameslink serve the London Eye, Houses of Parliament,
Westminster Abbey, Buckingham Palace, Oxford Street, Bond Street,
Knightsbridge, Madame Tussauds and Regents Park?

When I was helping some German friends plan a weekend away in London,
a bit of research found that the best bet for budget hotels in a
reasonably central location was in the area around Kings Cross (and I
don't mean by-the-hour hotels either), and for getting to either the
area around the tower, or to St Pauls and across to the Tate Modern,
Thameslink proved to be quite a useful route. =A0Also handy for pax
flying via Gatwick. =A0By all accounts, plenty of other tourists had
come to the same conclusion regarding hotels.

The reason that those areas are "the best bet for budget hotels" is
that there is comparatively little demand. =A0The majority of tourists
stay in areas several miles west of Thameslink, none of which are
remotely as seedy as Kings Cross, whose seediness and relative
cheapness are directly connected.

If there is comparitively little demand, why are there more hotel
rooms within a 5 minute walk of King's Cross than in the whole of
Cambridge (not exactly an unpopular city with the tourists)?


What on earth has Cambridge got to do with anything? Why not include
Newquay in your comparison? Or Thurso?


I counted 4 large travelodges, 2 comfort inns, a premier inn, a novotel
and (from a quick google search) 25 non-chain hotels.


That's a very tiny fraction of the number of hotels in the west of the
city - the area that traditionally caters for tourists.


When I was
showing my friends around, from the people swarming around these
various hotels, I would guess that the vast majority were tourists
(the dress sense, photographic equipment and propensity for european
languages were all give aways).

I suspect the real reason the hotels there work out cheap for tourists
is that they are mostly serving the city-bound buisness market, and
are prepared to let their rooms go cheaply at the weekends rather than
stand empty.


In other words, you are talking about a business area whose hotels
offer cheap deals to tourists only at weekends. You are talking about
an area that has a tiny fraction of the number of hotel rooms in
London's tourist areas, none of which are served by Thameslink.

You don't appear to be able to see beyond the end of your nose, and as
for your "inclusion" of Cambridge, thanks for the best laugh I've had
so far today! ;-)

On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:25:19 -0700 (PDT), bob
wrote:

The reason that those areas are "the best bet for budget hotels" is
that there is comparatively little demand. *The majority of tourists
stay in areas several miles west of Thameslink, none of which are
remotely as seedy as Kings Cross, whose seediness and relative
cheapness are directly connected.

If there is comparitively little demand, why are there more hotel
rooms within a 5 minute walk of King's Cross than in the whole of
Cambridge (not exactly an unpopular city with the tourists)? I
counted 4 large travelodges, 2 comfort inns, a premier inn, a novotel
and (from a quick google search) 25 non-chain hotels.

Extend that by another 5 minutes and you get all the small 'b&b' type
hotels around Tavistock Place and the Russell Square area. Hardly
quiet, especially at this time of year. I've not been inside them but
there are some nice looking places around Cartwright Gardens, a
generous stone's throw from Euston and St. Pancras. I generally stay
in that area when in London so I'm within walking distance of the
station.

Conclusion: The Poster Currently Known As Bruce doesn't know what
he's talking about, as usual.