In article ,
wrote:
Er, probably not. I rather doubt that the number of journeys between each
possible pair of stations is equal.

True, but in the absence of data I approximated.

I really should put in a FoI request to get better data...

I would expect the steep-free stations
cover most of the busier stations so the percentage of journeys that are
possible step-free is much higher than 6%.

I think this is not true; look at the Central Line. The accessible
stations are Stratford (probably one of the busier stations on the
line; but I'd guess Liverpool Street and Bank are as busy), Woodford,
Roding Valley, Hainault, and Epping.

Two things are noticeable: They're all out east; and most of them
are teeny-tiny-overground stations.

Looking at Central London, the only station inside the Circle Line
that's accessible is Green Park and Bank DLR (is that inside or
outside the circle?).

Basically, tiney-tiny overground (or nearly overground) stations
out in the sticks are much easier and cheaper to make accessable -
bung in a couple of short lifts and you're done. The busier central
stations are complex, and often deep. underground; this makes them
much harder to make step-free as you'd have to put in more lifts
and they're much longer. And you have to do it underground. And
there's less space on the surface, so you'd need to buy and demolish
an expensive building to do much.

All in all much more expensive. If you were TfL, and you had some
dosh explicitly to improve accessibility, would you make Oxford
Circus accessible, or make every station north of Leyton accessible?
It wouldn't surprise me if both of those plans would cost the same;
and the best thing to do for disabled Londoners is not at all obvious.

If LuL wish to improve things, more power to them: 6% is dreadfully
low. Remember that the design life of S-Stock is probably around
30 years - and a lot can change in that time. In the mean time,
step free adaptations are mostly benifiting those with prams and
luggage; for them, a step free station at one end of the journey
will help as they have the option of strugling up the stairs at the
other end.

This paragraph is therefore partly based on a false assumption.

An approximation, yes, but I think it's reasonable.


--
Mike Bristow

"Mike Bristow" wrote in message
...

In article ,
wrote:
Er, probably not. I rather doubt that the number of journeys between each
possible pair of stations is equal.

True, but in the absence of data I approximated.

I really should put in a FoI request to get better data...

I would expect the steep-free stations
cover most of the busier stations so the percentage of journeys that are
possible step-free is much higher than 6%.

I think this is not true; look at the Central Line. The accessible
stations are Stratford (probably one of the busier stations on the
line; but I'd guess Liverpool Street and Bank are as busy), Woodford,
Roding Valley, Hainault, and Epping.

The other factor is that even if the start and destination are both
accessible, most interchange stations are not accessible which limits the
options further.

Peter Smyth