Crossrail western termunus
 

1506 wrote:

One rarely has a problem asking the whereabouts of the bathroom in the
UK.

Indeed. You get the answer you need and then the person you asked spends
the rest of the day telling people about the odd conversation he had.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9633086.html
(50 043 at Clapham Junction, 19 Jul 1981)

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 23:59:44 -0800 (PST), 1506
wrote:
One rarely has a problem asking the whereabouts of the bathroom in
the
UK.

No, but that's because people have heard of the term and might expect
an American to use it in context.

And, had you refered to my link: John Lewis is hardly a North
American company.

Can't see a reference to them in the Wisegeek link.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, 1506 wrote:

On Jan 5, 12:23*pm, amogles wrote:
On 1 Jan., 13:41, Robert Cox wrote:

The Crossrail tunnels will cost billions and will have to be
intensively used to make any sort of financial sense.

Crossrail will be designed to handle the peak load at peak time. That
means that the rest of the time there will be spare capacity. How about
routing a limited number of intercity trains through the tunnel at off
peak times? It is precisely at late evenings that the lower density of
trains on the Underground makes changing btween London terminii take
longer. If the last trains to Bristols or Cardiff could pick up theatre
goers in central London that might help make the train an option where
it isn't today.

Great theory. Will your intercity trains be fitted with ATO and the
correct emergency equipment for the tunnel section?

Yes, and they'll be double-decker. And sleepers. Which works, because due
to the height constraints, there's only room for someone to lie down on
each deck.

tom

--
20 Minutes into the Future

Crossrail western termunus
 

On 31/12/2010 09:34, 1506 wrote:
On Dec 30, 7:56 pm, wrote:
On 30/12/2010 11:13, 1506 wrote:

And how do you think the Bristol and Norwich passengers will feel
about travelling in rapid transit trains with no bathrooms, many
draughty doors, and limited seating?

Bathrooms?! How many trains have bathrooms that you can think of?

Full bathrooms? very few trains have them. As for Half bathrooms (a
commode and hand basin), a substantial number of trains have them.

Full bathrooms? Half bathrooms? What?

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here in
Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

Phil.

Crossrail western termunus
 

In message Philip
was claimed to have wrote:

On 31/12/2010 09:34, 1506 wrote:
On Dec 30, 7:56 pm, wrote:
On 30/12/2010 11:13, 1506 wrote:

And how do you think the Bristol and Norwich passengers will feel
about travelling in rapid transit trains with no bathrooms, many
draughty doors, and limited seating?

Bathrooms?! How many trains have bathrooms that you can think of?

Full bathrooms? very few trains have them. As for Half bathrooms (a
commode and hand basin), a substantial number of trains have them.

Full bathrooms? Half bathrooms? What?

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here in
Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

In North America a "half bath" is a toilet and sink/handwashing
facilities but no bath.

A "full bath" typically includes either a tub, shower, or both.

Neither definition is entirely written in stone though so you'll find
other things described in some cases.

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 5, 7:59*am, 1506 wrote:

On Jan 5, 7:39*am, Neil Williams wrote:

On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 23:19:41 -0800 (PST), 1506
wrote:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-half-bathroom.htm

...applies only in the US and possibly Canada. *Use that phrase in
the UK and people will just get confused.

If you prefer to use US terminology in a crosspost like this,
"restroom" will at least be understood internationally; in the UK a
"bathroom" always contains a bath, and indeed need not contain a WC.

One rarely has a problem asking the whereabouts of the bathroom in the
UK. *And, had you refered to my link: John Lewis is hardly a North
American company.

Have you ever considered surrendering your British passport?!

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 12:23*am, Grumpy wrote:
On Jan 1, 12:41*pm, Robert Cox wrote:

The Crossrail tunnels will cost billions and will have to be
intensively used to make any sort of financial sense.

If only.
The business case purports to show a net *present value of £11bn.
To get that they build a case based on huge future growth (like HS2)
and then offset the costs by trying to put a value on benefits for
such as "time savings" and "easing congestion".
For example of the net present value, £10bn is claimed to be for the
value of "time savings".
Given that this is principally going to be a London commuter
railway,it means that most of the time savings will be people having
another 15-20 minutes in bed on a morning. Meanwhile the billions
spent will have to be paid by the rest of us in real taxes/rates.
Madness. If the faster service is so valuable why cant the users be
expected to pay premium fares to use it?
The whole project just hasn't been thought through properly-witness
the confusion (aka lack of any decent planning on the Western end)
which the recently published London RUS exposes. This makes clear
there simply isn't capacity to run separate Crossrail trains to
Maidenhead as well as the FGW services. Also that a second branch (to
the LNW lines) should be provided. This sort of thing should have been
thought through well before now.

IMHO, the Crossrail branches should be served by only Crossrail
trains. Otherwise, there is a likelyhood of train frequency on the
core section being disrupted by delays on the branches. IIRC, this is
termed "service polution". Unless LNW frieght can be diverted
elsewhere, utlization of the slow AC pair is a non-starter.

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 12:59*am, Mizter T wrote:
On Jan 5, 7:59*am, 1506 wrote:





On Jan 5, 7:39*am, Neil Williams wrote:

On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 23:19:41 -0800 (PST), 1506
wrote:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-half-bathroom.htm

...applies only in the US and possibly Canada. *Use that phrase in
the UK and people will just get confused.

If you prefer to use US terminology in a crosspost like this,
"restroom" will at least be understood internationally; in the UK a
"bathroom" always contains a bath, and indeed need not contain a WC.

One rarely has a problem asking the whereabouts of the bathroom in the
UK. *And, had you refered to my link: John Lewis is hardly a North
American company.

Have you ever considered surrendering your British passport?!- Hide quoted text -

Absolutely NOT. I reserve the right to spell "check" Cheque. :-)

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 5, 7:16*pm, Neil Williams wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 23:59:44 -0800 (PST), 1506
wrote:

One rarely has a problem asking the whereabouts of the bathroom in
the
UK.

No, but that's because people have heard of the term and might expect
an American to use it in context.

* And, had you refered to my link: John Lewis is hardly a North

American company.

Can't see a reference to them in the Wisegeek link.

Neil

After reading your post I looked again. The link has gone. It was
there earlier, honestly, :-)

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:06:19 +0000, Philip wrote:

On 31/12/2010 09:34, 1506 wrote:
On Dec 30, 7:56 pm, wrote:
On 30/12/2010 11:13, 1506 wrote:

And how do you think the Bristol and Norwich passengers will feel
about travelling in rapid transit trains with no bathrooms, many
draughty doors, and limited seating?

Bathrooms?! How many trains have bathrooms that you can think of?

Full bathrooms? very few trains have them. As for Half bathrooms (a
commode and hand basin), a substantial number of trains have them.

Full bathrooms? Half bathrooms? What?

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here in
Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

Phil.

But that word is a euphemism. Who was it who joked about bathing his brow with toilet water when the seat fell onto his head ?

Why not just say bog ?

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 9:13*am, 1506 wrote:

After reading your post I looked again. *The link has gone. *It was
there earlier, honestly, :-)

The site appears to include automatically generated advertisements, of
which John Lewis was probably one when you looked at it, but for some
reason not where I am. As I am in Switzerland at this particular
second and I don't believe they have a presence there, that's not
entirely surprising :)

John Lewis, of course, do sell items for bathrooms, but I think they
would largely be of the kind that actually contain baths.

Neil

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 10:10*am, Neil Williams wrote:
On Jan 6, 9:13*am, 1506 wrote:

After reading your post I looked again. *The link has gone. *It was
there earlier, honestly, :-)

The site appears to include automatically generated advertisements, of
which John Lewis was probably one when you looked at it, but for some
reason not where I am. *As I am in Switzerland at this particular
second and I don't believe they have a presence there, that's not
entirely surprising :)

John Lewis, of course, do sell items for bathrooms, but I think they
would largely be of the kind that actually contain baths.

Back in the 1960s one of my first jobs was in retail. I worked on
Regents St. We were told that customers would ask for the bathroom,
and how to direct them.

Crossrail western termunus
 

Crossrail western termunus
 

Chris Tolley (ukonline really) wrote

1506 wrote:

One rarely has a problem asking the whereabouts of the bathroom in
the
UK.

Indeed. You get the answer you need and then the person you asked
spends
the rest of the day telling people about the odd conversation he had.

Same if they ask for directions to "the subway".

That a term is understandable doesn't make it correct usage.

--
Mike D

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 8:21*am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Graham Harrison" wrote in message

...







"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...

"Tim Fenton" wrote in message
...

"Graham Harrison" wrote in
m...

I sort of understand the principle of what you're arguing but, as I
understand it, there is a traffic imbalance between the east and west
ends of Crossrail; significantly more traffic from the east side of
London than the west. * If your suggestion helped to balance the
imbalance I might support it, but it doesn't as far as I can see.

I expect that traffic from the west end of Crossrail will build quickly
when it is seen to relieve the Central Line. But the idea that other
traffic would be allowed through I doubt: compare with the Munich or
Frankfurt-M S-Bahn tunnels.

The London and South East 2nd generation RUS draft proposes:
extending Maidenhead services to Reading (as generally expected),
incorporating HEx as well as Connect, with both at 4 tph,
incorporating WCML stoppers from Tring, possibly another 4 tph?

AIUI that will get the misbalance down to 18tph west, 24 tph east.

Paul

Reading
HEx
HC

that's 3 x 4 =12

Not sure how you get the WCML stoppers in to the tunnel but that still
only makes 16tph. * Or is the base Crossrail to Maidenhead/Reading 6tph?

There are two Crossrail that terminate at West Drayton. *The 10 tph in the
published plan was 4 tph Connect, 4 tph Maidenhead, 2 tph West Drayton.

Reaching Crossrail from the WCML slows would presumably be via Old Oak
Common, using the same underpass the SN services use, with a bit of extra
electrification and posibly new track. *Doesn't seem too difficult, though I
assume it'll all have to fit round HS2...

How far do you want to send these rapid transit trais, Bletchley?
Milton Keynes Central? Northampton? Birmingham? Are Euston to
Birmingham trains to share the WCML slow pair? What about freight?
This looks like a formula to destroy Crossrail sheduling.

Crossrail western termunus
 

"Why, it's a closet, where we store our water..."

-miles

--
Discriminate, v.i. To note the particulars in which one person or thing is,
if possible, more objectionable than another.

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:

wrote

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:06:19 +0000, Philip wrote:

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here
in Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

Yes, i've often heard that said about Yorkshire.

But that word is a euphemism. Who was it who joked about bathing his
brow with toilet water when the seat fell onto his head ?

Why not just say bog ?

/All/ of them are euphemisms, really, and in fact mostly concerned with
/wash/ like the US usage of bathroom as a euphemism that this
subsubthread stated with.

latrine, toilet, can, convenience, head, john, johnny, lavatory, loo,
privy, water closet

****house is perhaps the only term that isn't.

And that's slang. Is there really no proper word for it that isn't a
euphemism?

tom

--
curry in a sack

Crossrail western termunus
 

"DevilsPGD" wrote in message
...

In North America a "half bath" is a toilet and sink/handwashing
facilities but no bath.

A "full bath" typically includes either a tub, shower, or both.

Neither definition is entirely written in stone though so you'll find
other things described in some cases.

While I'm familiar with the American usage of 'bathroom' to cover all types
of bathrooms/loos etc, whether or not they contain a bathtub, I hadn't come
across these niceties of 'full' and 'half' baths. Though, returning to the
sleeper train theme, I did travel on a night train in Australia once which
had a shower room attached to the sleeping compartment...

Martin

Crossrail western termunus
 

"Martin Rich" writes:
I hadn't come across these niceties of 'full' and 'half' baths.

I've only seen those used in real-estate advertisements, presumably to
avoid using a "low" word like toilet (which is what a "half bath" is...).

-Miles

--
"Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
you do it." Mahatma Gandhi

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:31:21 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:

wrote

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:06:19 +0000, Philip wrote:

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here
in Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

Yes, i've often heard that said about Yorkshire.

But that word is a euphemism. Who was it who joked about bathing his
brow with toilet water when the seat fell onto his head ?

Why not just say bog ?

/All/ of them are euphemisms, really, and in fact mostly concerned with
/wash/ like the US usage of bathroom as a euphemism that this
subsubthread stated with.

latrine, toilet, can, convenience, head, john, johnny, lavatory, loo,
privy, water closet

****house is perhaps the only term that isn't.

And that's slang.

No more than the others. The established names in the non-English
national languages of the UK all translate as "small house" which IMU
is not translated slang as the equivalents to "house" are not
restricted to describing habitations.

Is there really no proper word for it that isn't a euphemism?

"Sh1tter" isn't a euphemism but probably won't impress the
wife/boss/minister. Urinal is not euphemistic but does not answer the
entire question; I formally stake a copyright claim on the creation of
the "faectory". As for "privy", that is arguably not euphemistic (and
has well established formal use in previous times) as it derives from
the non-public nature of its use rather than from what takes place.

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 7:40*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"1506" wrote in message

...





On Jan 6, 8:21 am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
There are two Crossrail that terminate at West Drayton. *The 10 tph in
the
published plan was 4 tph Connect, 4 tph Maidenhead, 2 tph West Drayton..

Reaching Crossrail from the WCML slows would presumably be via Old Oak
Common, using the same underpass the SN services use, with a bit of extra
electrification and posibly new track. *Doesn't seem too difficult,
though I
assume it'll all have to fit round HS2...

How far do you want to send these rapid transit trais, Bletchley?
Milton Keynes Central? Northampton? Birmingham? *Are Euston to
Birmingham trains to share the WCML slow pair? What about freight?
This looks like a formula to destroy Crossrail sheduling.

They would be 'stoppers from TRING', as I quite clearly posted earlier, so
why exaggerate? *

Point taken. I had not retained cognizance of your earlier post.

As I also made clear in my post, it wasn't my idea - it's
in a recently published Network Rail RUS. *Stopping trains already run from
Tring, which has dedicated turnback arrangements for this. *

Although Tring Station as out of the way. It is close to nowhere in
particular, least of all Tring. Aldbury (sp) might be the closest
village.

There's no
fundamental reason why it would be any less reliable than Crossrail's
currently planned GWML services to Maidenhead, which will also run on a
mixed traffic railway, including freight, and other services running to
Reading and beyond.

Your comments suggest you haven't really got much of a clue about how
Crossrail will work on the GW reliefs.

Does anybody? Feel free to cite a working timetable post Crossrail
and WR electrification. My guess is that the Reading service will
look very different to the one with which we are familier.

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 11:31*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:

wrote

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:06:19 +0000, Philip wrote:

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here
in Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

Yes, i've often heard that said about Yorkshire.

Careful: I have three children and four grandchildren in West
Yorkshire. Although, Mr. Dolbear does remind me of the rural
Yorkshireman. When out on a date he endevoured to impress the lady
with "Ah want thee to know, lass, Ah've been to Leeds"

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 6, 11:31*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Michael R N Dolbear wrote:

wrote

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:06:19 +0000, Philip wrote:

I realise that others like to complicate matters more than we do here
in Yorkshire, but let's be clear: It's a bloody toilet.

Yes, i've often heard that said about Yorkshire.

Careful: I have three children and four grandchildren in West
Yorkshire.

Although, Philip does remind me of the rural
Yorkshireman. When out on a date he endevoured to impress the lady
with "Ah want thee to know, lass, Ah've been to Leeds"

Crossrail western termunus
 

Tom Anderson wrote:

And that's slang. Is there really no proper word for it that isn't a
euphemism?

For a former house, I acquired two miniature enamelled BR Totems. The
upstairs one, in WR brown, said BATH, and the downstairs one, in SR
green, said WATERLOO. Two moves of house on, I've lost track of where
they are.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632877.html
(33 106 at Reading, 4 Mar 1980)

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:52:31 -0800 (PST), 1506
wrote:
Although Tring Station as out of the way. It is close to nowhere in
particular, least of all Tring. Aldbury (sp) might be the closest
village.

True, but it is *very* busy - it acts basically as a mid-Bucks
Parkway.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Crossrail western termunus
 

"1506" wrote in message
...

There's no
fundamental reason why it would be any less reliable than Crossrail's
currently planned GWML services to Maidenhead, which will also run on a
mixed traffic railway, including freight, and other services running to
Reading and beyond.

Your comments suggest you haven't really got much of a clue about how
Crossrail will work on the GW reliefs.

Does anybody? Feel free to cite a working timetable post Crossrail
and WR electrification.

I can link to the currently proposed Network Rail track access option for
the Crossrail to Maidenhead situation, without GW electrification. There
are three 24 hr schedules in the document, for Crossrail, residual GW and GE
passenger services, and for freight:

http://tinyurl.com/38s2j9q

Clearly if Crossrail gets extended to Reading, some of the DMU services will
disappear, but the freight will still be there.

Paul

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 7, 7:17*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:

"Neil Williams" wrote:

Although Tring Station as out of the way. *It is close to nowhere in
particular, least of all Tring. *Aldbury (sp) might be the closest
village.

True, but it is *very* busy - it acts basically as a mid-Bucks Parkway.

The number of parking spaces gives you a clue ;-)

I genuinely wonder how many commuters those 506 spaces (as per NRE)
provide for, as it were - i.e. how many cars will have 2+ occupants/
commuters. (Ok, before anyone says it, I'm perhaps being a bit sloppy
by using the term 'commuters' there - I'm guessing that some car
parking spaces might still be available for non-commuter rail
travellers - that's leaving aside the issue of how one defines a
commuter!)

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 7, 4:43*pm, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 23:52:31 -0800 (PST), 1506
wrote:

Although Tring Station as out of the way. *It is close to nowhere in
particular, least of all Tring. *Aldbury (sp) might be the closest
village.

True, but it is *very* busy - it acts basically as a mid-Bucks
Parkway.


And, of course, Tring replaced Hemel Hempstead as the location with
flexible turnback facilities. So serving Tring also allows trains to
call at Berkhamstead.

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 7, 7:52*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On Jan 7, 7:17*pm, "Tim Fenton" wrote:

"Neil Williams" wrote:

Although Tring Station as out of the way. *It is close to nowhere in
particular, least of all Tring. *Aldbury (sp) might be the closest
village.

True, but it is *very* busy - it acts basically as a mid-Bucks Parkway.

The number of parking spaces gives you a clue ;-)

I genuinely wonder how many commuters those 506 spaces (as per NRE)
provide for, as it were - i.e. how many cars will have 2+ occupants/
commuters. (Ok, before anyone says it, I'm perhaps being a bit sloppy
by using the term 'commuters' there - I'm guessing that some car
parking spaces might still be available for non-commuter rail
travellers - that's leaving aside the issue of how one defines a
commuter!)

A 506 space car park is quite large, Watford Junction only has 750
spaces. There will also be the 'kiss and ride' passengers and the
route to Tring is easily cycle-able and not out of the question for
walking from much of town.

Crossrail western termunus
 

"Andy" wrote

And, of course, Tring replaced Hemel Hempstead as the location with
flexible turnback facilities. So serving Tring also allows trains to
call at Berkhamstead.

Trains turning back at Tring (with the new layout) don't block a running
line, like they did at Hemel Hempstead.

Peter

Crossrail western termunus
 

"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...


"1506" wrote in message
...

There's no
fundamental reason why it would be any less reliable than Crossrail's
currently planned GWML services to Maidenhead, which will also run on a
mixed traffic railway, including freight, and other services running to
Reading and beyond.

Your comments suggest you haven't really got much of a clue about how
Crossrail will work on the GW reliefs.

Does anybody? Feel free to cite a working timetable post Crossrail
and WR electrification.

I can link to the currently proposed Network Rail track access option for
the Crossrail to Maidenhead situation, without GW electrification. There
are three 24 hr schedules in the document, for Crossrail, residual GW and
GE
passenger services, and for freight:

http://tinyurl.com/38s2j9q

Clearly if Crossrail gets extended to Reading, some of the DMU services
will
disappear, but the freight will still be there.

Paul




That's very interesting, thank you.

As an aside I find it intriguing that the first item in schedule 2 is for a
class 180 and that is the only reference to a 180 that I can find.

Crossrail western termunus
 

In message , at
23:56:18 on Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Martin Rich
remarked:
While I'm familiar with the American usage of 'bathroom' to cover all
types of bathrooms/loos etc, whether or not they contain a bathtub, I
hadn't come across these niceties of 'full' and 'half' baths.

There's also a "Jack and Jill" bathroom, which is an en-suite shared
between two bedrooms.

Note that Americans will also "wash up" in a bathroom (sic), whereas
Brits tend to do that in a sink in the kitchen!
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail western termunus
 

In message , at 09:03:55 on Fri, 7 Jan
2011, Miles Bader remarked:

I hadn't come across these niceties of 'full' and 'half' baths.

I've only seen those used in real-estate advertisements, presumably to
avoid using a "low" word like toilet (which is what a "half bath" is...).

In US-English a WC is also called a bathroom (especially in public
places like shops and restaurants). So in a house you do need to be able
to distinguish between 'full' and 'half'. It also allows a more compact
advert because you can simply say (eg) "2.5 bathrooms".

In the UK the half-bath is normally called a "cloakroom" in real-estate
speak. Ironically, many in older houses really are a conversion of a
room off the entrance hall for storing coats; which I suppose they'd
have to describe as a "coat cupboard".
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Jan 9, 2:39*pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:03:55 on Fri, 7 Jan
2011, Miles Bader remarked:

I hadn't come across these niceties of 'full' and 'half' baths.

I've only seen those used in real-estate advertisements, presumably to
avoid using a "low" word like toilet (which is what a "half *bath" is....).

In US-English a WC is also called a bathroom (especially in public
places like shops and restaurants). So in a house you do need to be able
to distinguish between 'full' and 'half'. It also allows a more compact
advert because you can simply say (eg) "2.5 bathrooms".

In the UK the half-bath is normally called a "cloakroom" in real-estate
speak.

Ah yes, from the Latin 'cloaca'...

Crossrail western termunus
 

In message Roland Perry
was claimed to have wrote:

In message , at
23:56:18 on Thu, 6 Jan 2011, Martin Rich
remarked:
While I'm familiar with the American usage of 'bathroom' to cover all
types of bathrooms/loos etc, whether or not they contain a bathtub, I
hadn't come across these niceties of 'full' and 'half' baths.

There's also a "Jack and Jill" bathroom, which is an en-suite shared
between two bedrooms.

There are other even weirder combinations too. My grandmother's place
has a main bathroom with doors opening into the living room and guest
bedroom, while the master bedroom has it's own full bath.

Crossrail western termunus
 

In message , at 19:22:32 on
Sun, 9 Jan 2011, DevilsPGD
remarked:
There's also a "Jack and Jill" bathroom, which is an en-suite shared
between two bedrooms.

There are other even weirder combinations too. My grandmother's place
has a main bathroom with doors opening into the living room and guest
bedroom,

One design I've seen a few times is a "guest suite" behind a double
garage, where along the back wall of the house there's a bedroom in the
corner, then a bathroom en-suite to the bedroom, but also with a door to
the corridor leading to the hall/kitchen public area.
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail western termunus
 

On 10/01/2011 08:52, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:22:32 on
Sun, 9 Jan 2011, DevilsPGD
remarked:
There's also a "Jack and Jill" bathroom, which is an en-suite shared
between two bedrooms.

There are other even weirder combinations too. My grandmother's place
has a main bathroom with doors opening into the living room and guest
bedroom,

One design I've seen a few times is a "guest suite" behind a double
garage, where along the back wall of the house there's a bedroom in the
corner, then a bathroom en-suite to the bedroom, but also with a door to
the corridor leading to the hall/kitchen public area.


This thread reminds me of a soap add about 20 years ago. Opened with a
shot of an Eastern European steam train battling through a blizzard.
Cut to a shot of an interior of one of the carriages with a young lady
taking a bath in an opulent tub using Cussons Imperial Leather soap.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net

Crossrail western termunus
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"1506" wrote in message

On Jan 5, 12:58 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
"amogles" wrote in message



On 30 Dez. 2010, 20:56, Philip wrote:
On 30/12/2010 11:13, 1506 wrote:

And how do you think the Bristol and Norwich passengers will feel
about travelling in rapid transit trains with no bathrooms, many
draughty doors, and limited seating?

Bathrooms?! How many trains have bathrooms that you can think of?

The Orient Express?

Actually, the Venice Simplon-Orient-Express train is quite poorly
equipped in this regard. Cabins only have washbasins, with
lavatories at the end of the carriages.

So, a bathroom at the end of each car. I assume that there are shower
facilities on board?

Unfortunately not (one of the reasons I wouldn't contemplate a trip on
it). From www.orient-express.com/web/vsoe/journey_questions.jsp#122965
"Are there showers on board the Orient-Express?

No. These are the original 1920s carriages and as such do not have all the
modern amenities such as showers. Each cabin contains a wash basin with
hot and cold water."

However, the more modern Eastern & Oriental Express does have en suite
bathrooms with showers and toilet. The even more luxurious Rovos Rail in
South Africa offers a bathroom complete with separate shower and victorian
bath with its Royal suites (which take up half a carriage each).
www.rovos.com/train-royal.html

That's one train I would like to experience, but probably in the more
affordable Pullman suites which only have showers, not baths.



Some of the Indian luxury trains such as the "Deccan Odyssey" have showers
attached to the cabin (Coupe)

http://www.deccan-odyssey-india.com/...-on-board.html

Crossrail western termunus
 

"Graham Harrison" writes:
Some of the Indian luxury trains such as the "Deccan Odyssey" have
showers attached to the cabin (Coupe)

http://www.deccan-odyssey-india.com/...-on-board.html

"The famous Ayurvedic Body Massage with Steam bath is available to
rejuvenate you. A Gymnasium is also there for your routine workouts."

-miles

--
`Cars give people wonderful freedom and increase their opportunities.
But they also destroy the environment, to an extent so drastic that
they kill all social life' (from _A Pattern Language_)

Crossrail western termunus
 

On Dec 30 2010, 1:42*pm, wrote:
(NOT bathrooms PLEASE)

Oh I don't know. After most train journeys I feel like I need a
bath. Getting the TOC to pay for the hot water sounds like a good
idea.