I use public transport mainly at weekends so my experiences almost
certainly are not representative of what most people have to contend with.

When I pass through City Thameslink Station at weekends it seems
almost a ghost station, with no passengers in sight. How busy is
this station from Monday to Friday?

"Robin9" wrote in message
...

I use public transport mainly at weekends so my experiences almost
certainly are not representative of what most people have to contend
with.

When I pass through City Thameslink Station at weekends it seems
almost a ghost station, with no passengers in sight. How busy is
this station from Monday to Friday?

It's extremely quiet outside the peaks on Mon - Fri as well, in my
experience.

I think this is probably because it isn't really a destination in its own
right, and there are no signed interchanges with the underground (although
St Pauls on the Central line is not that far from the northern entrance.)

I suspect it has no advantage for offpeak travellers and tourists over the
stations either side.

Paul S

Paul Scott wrote:

It's extremely quiet outside the peaks on Mon - Fri as well, in my
experience.

I think this is probably because it isn't really a destination in its own
right, and there are no signed interchanges with the underground (although
St Pauls on the Central line is not that far from the northern entrance.)

The Central Line runs right under the street outside though - was there ever
any talk of an interchange station? (Okay today passenger loadings making
additional Central Line stations a nightmare but maybe one day...)

I suspect it has no advantage for offpeak travellers and tourists over the
stations either side.


It's not that far from St Paul's Cathedral - hence the original name.

It's also located on the 25 bus route so in theory offers a relatively
stress free central zone interchange for me on journeys to south London and
beyond, particularly at weekends when other lines are hit by engineering
works. Unfortunately whenever I've tried to do that trick I've tended to
arrive at the station to discover it's closed.

--
My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c

On Jun 3, 11:24*am, Robin9 wrote:
When I pass through City Thameslink Station at weekends it seems
almost a ghost station, with no passengers in sight. How busy is
this station from Monday to Friday?

According to the official station usage estimates for 2010/11, City
Thameslink was the network's 60th busiest station. This suggests that
the station can get quite busy; as others have said it's main custom
is business people.

PhilD

--

I never liked the name. It does not really give one an idea of where it is.
A reasonable name might have been LUDGATE.

In article ,
says...

I never liked the name. It does not really give one an idea of where it is.
A reasonable name might have been LUDGATE.

It couldn't really have been LUDGATE because one entrance is at Holborn
Viaduct.

I much preferred the original name of ST PAUL'S THAMESLINK but
presumably this was changed to avoid confusion with St Pauls underground
station.

On 04/06/2012 09:35, Jim wrote:
In ,
says...

I never liked the name. It does not really give one an idea of where it is.
A reasonable name might have been LUDGATE.

It couldn't really have been LUDGATE because one entrance is at Holborn
Viaduct.

I much preferred the original name of ST PAUL'S THAMESLINK but
presumably this was changed to avoid confusion with St Pauls underground
station.

Why not Ludgate Thameslink, then?

wrote in message
...
On 04/06/2012 09:35, Jim wrote:

It couldn't really have been LUDGATE because one entrance is at Holborn
Viaduct.

I much preferred the original name of ST PAUL'S THAMESLINK but
presumably this was changed to avoid confusion with St Pauls underground
station.

Why not Ludgate Thameslink, then?

However the idea of naming a double ended station for only one of its ends
seems to be considered OK for Crossrail, although we don't know yet what
they'll actually display at their entrances or on the platform fascias.

Paul S

On Monday, 4 June 2012 12:12:26 UTC+1, wrote:
On 04/06/2012 09:35, Jim wrote:

I never liked the name. It does not really give one an idea of where it is.
A reasonable name might have been LUDGATE.

It couldn't really have been LUDGATE because one entrance is at Holborn
Viaduct.

I much preferred the original name of ST PAUL'S THAMESLINK but
presumably this was changed to avoid confusion with St Pauls underground
station.

Why not Ludgate Thameslink, then?

The thing about the Thameslink part is that it doesn't really help; it is just an adscititious 10 letters that have to be added to every sign, map and timetable.
If it DID help, then those 10 letters would be added to the names of all the stations on the route...

On 2012\06\04 09:35, Jim wrote:
In ,
says...

I never liked the name. It does not really give one an idea of where it is.
A reasonable name might have been LUDGATE.

It couldn't really have been LUDGATE because one entrance is at Holborn
Viaduct.

I much preferred the original name of ST PAUL'S THAMESLINK but
presumably this was changed to avoid confusion with St Pauls underground
station.

How about "New Bailey"?