![]() |
Aldwych / Strand Underground
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Mon, 3 Dec 2012 23:40:00 -0000, "michael adams" wrote: wrote in message . .. No reporter can be expected to know the intricacies of every subject but a good one should have the skill to research and check. More and more of the upcoming crop seem unable to do so . The "upcoming crop" could write anything the market demanded, providing they were given sufficient time to do so. As far as current management is concerned, there's no point in allowing staff to waste Company time in researching anything in depth, when most of their efforts would be over the heads of 95% of their intended readership. In the current environment, in both print and broadcasting the primary requirement is to fill space or time at the lowest possible cost. And its only those often unpaid trainees who can fulfil that need most efficiently, and to order, who will land any permanent jobs that are going. In the present context Aldwych Station will indeed be a "secret" to the majority of visitors to the "Mail" website, most of whom will probably never have visited London in their lives. While words such as "secret", "ghost", and "mystery" while clichéd, can still stimulate reader interest when used in connection with topics such as the Underground. So the word "secret" is defined by reference to the ignorance of Daily (Hurrah for the Blackshirts!) Mail readers ? All words are defined by reference to the assumed knowledge and preconceptions of the intended readership. Otherwise they won't be interested in reading what you've written, your website will get fewer hits, your advertisers will be demanding rate cuts, and you will go out of business. Your "Hurrah for the Blackshirts" reference there, is interesting. The original article was written by Rotheremere the increasing eccentric surviving Harmsworth brother in 1934. Who was on nodding terms with both Hitler and Mussolini. Support for Moseley was dropped in that very same year. As a matter of interest do you think this change of policy was instigated so as to increase circulation among the Mail's supposedly BUF supporting readership ? By and large newspapers along with all media will only prosper by providing their audience with what they want to read or hear. Readers don't want to be preached at or hectored and will simply move elsewhere. The same applied to the original U.K tabloids as conceived by Harmsworth, the "Daily Mail" and the "Daily Mirror" the latter changed within a year, as it does to any of Murdoch's titles. They can only succeed by reflecting the public mood - inconvenient as this can be, for some people to acknowledge. Sunny Jim may never have actually uttered the words "Crisis what Crisis" (Larry Lamb) but it was Sunny Jim, ignoring all advice who insisted on holding a press conference at Heathrow regaling the assembled hacks with accounts of being able to swim for hours on end in the warm waters of Guadaloupe during the Conference, while those in the UK froze. michael adams .... |
Aldwych / Strand Underground
On Mon, 03 Dec 2012 18:09:42 +0000
Phil Cook wrote: On 03/12/2012 17:40, allantracy wrote: For those of us, not London based, and whose world view of London owes mostly (or even only) to the scale afforded by the Tube map, what was the extent of the inconvenience (if any) that was caused by the station closing. In other words, how close is the nearest alternative? Temple on the District/Circle is only 200m away. Covent Garden and Holborn on the Picadilly are no more than 700m away. A 700m walk through crowded london streets is actually quite a long way. B2003 |
Aldwych / Strand Underground
On Mon, 3 Dec 2012 20:19:14 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 18:09:42 on Mon, 3 Dec 2012, Phil Cook remarked: For those of us, not London based, and whose world view of London owes mostly (or even only) to the scale afforded by the Tube map, what was the extent of the inconvenience (if any) that was caused by the station closing. In other words, how close is the nearest alternative? Temple on the District/Circle is only 200m away. Although anyone heading for Aldwych would have needed to go via Holborn, so a diversion to Temple could be quite time consuming. Covent Garden and Holborn on the Picadilly are no more than 700m away. You could close Covent Garden if walking 200m (from Leicester Square) isn't an issue. I suspect if it wasn't for the huge volume of crowds travelling into that part of town they probably would have long ago. Those lifts can't be cheap to maintain. B2003 |
Aldwych / Strand Underground
|
Aldwych / Strand Underground
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:33:20 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:56:17 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012, d remarked: You could close Covent Garden if walking 200m (from Leicester Square) isn't an issue. I suspect if it wasn't for the huge volume of crowds travelling into that part of town they probably would have long ago. Those lifts can't be cheap to maintain. There are plenty of stations with much less passenger traffic where they keep the lifts going. Goodge St, for example. It's close enough to both Warren St and TCR that it's a bit of a luxury. Its a pity the tube doesn't have local and express lines like the new york subway. I know the met sort of has them but its not really the same thing since its way out of the centre. B2003 |
Aldwych / Strand London Underground
On 4 Dec, 11:49, wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:33:20 +0000 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:56:17 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012, remarked: You could close Covent Garden if walking 200m (from Leicester Square) isn't an issue. I suspect if it wasn't for the huge volume of crowds travelling into that part of town they probably would have long ago. Those lifts can't be cheap to maintain. There are plenty of stations with much less passenger traffic where they keep the lifts going. Goodge St, for example. It's close enough to both Warren St and TCR that it's a bit of a luxury. Its a pity the tube doesn't have local and express lines like the new york subway. I know the met sort of has them but its not really the same thing since its way out of the centre. This is something that could have been considered for Crossrail. Crossrail could have had more stations, with express trains skipping the "local" stations. Of course costs would have risen exponentially. |
Aldwych / Strand London Underground
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 03:55:28 -0800 (PST)
77002 wrote: This is something that could have been considered for Crossrail. Crossrail could have had more stations, with express trains skipping the "local" stations. Of course costs would have risen exponentially. Crossrail should have gone with double decker trains. The bullet should just have been bitten and regauge all the pre-existing lines it'll run on to UIC gauge. It would cost a lot in the short term but the long term gains would almost certainly make it worth it. B2003 |
Aldwych / Strand Underground
Oddly, ISTR that the daily closings of Aldwych were performed by the
Station Supervisor at St Paul's station. |
Aldwych / Strand London Underground
On 4 Dec, 12:18, wrote:
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 03:55:28 -0800 (PST) 77002 wrote: This is something that could have been considered for Crossrail. Crossrail could have had more stations, with express trains skipping the "local" stations. Of course costs would have risen exponentially. Crossrail should have gone with double decker trains. The bullet should just have been bitten and regauge all the pre-existing lines it'll run on to UIC gauge. It would cost a lot in the short term but the long term gains would almost certainly make it worth it. That would probably have lengthened load/unloading times. |
Aldwych / Strand Underground
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk