On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 02:29 +0100 (BST), (Colin
Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article ,
(Aidan Stanger) wrote:

Travelators probably do cost more than escalators, but they still exist
elsewhere on the Tube system, and they have the advantage of being
wheelchair accessible.

"They"? How many are there beyond the two at Bank (W&C)?

Waterloo (JLE Link to Nthn/Bloo lines).

The Heathrow ones belong to BAA and are nothing to do with LUL.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 at 13:17:00, Colin Rosenstiel
wrote:

In article ,
(Annabel Smyth) wrote:

"They"? How many are there beyond the two at Bank (W&C)?

There are two at Waterloo, and, of course, the ones at Heathrow
Central.

Are the Heathrow travelators in the tube station? I know there are lots in
the airport.

They actually run, I think, between the Terminal 123 station and the
actual terminals. Or some of them (I have a feeling one terminal, and I
can't think which off the top of my head, is close enough not to need
one).
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 8 March 2004

"Jonn Elledge" wrote in message
...
"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Jonn Elledge" wrote in message
...

Plus those in great swathes of East London get
direct access to the west End for the first time.

The cross-platform interchange at Stratford means
that they pretty much have this already.

Well, yes, but it gets very cold up there in winter.

That is an argument for a couple of perspex walls at Stratford, it's not an
argument for Crossrail.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Annabel Smyth wrote the following in:


On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 at 14:42:34, Robin May
wrote:

An example of that sort of
thing, the North London line, seems fairly heavily used with the
trains often being uncomfortably packed at busy times. I know I go
on about this all the time, but I think it would be even more
heavily used if a more frequent and reliable service was provided
and the stations were done up a bit.

And if it were better-publicised. My Canadian colleague had no
idea of its existence, and was solemnly travelling from Islington
to Canning Town via Central London until I realised that it was
the North London Lines that went to Canning Town (which I hadn't
known until I looked, out of curiosity, at what lines did go
there), and told her it would be quicker for her. Which it is! I
just wish the South London Line (which I use) would be extended
beyond London Bridge/Victoria.....

I don't know about it needing to be better publicised. I mean, it's
quite clearly shown on the tube map and I would have thought that was
quite hard to miss if you were to spend any amount of time at all
planning a route. I'm a bit confused about how your colleague could not
have realised where it went.

--
message by Robin May, enforcer of sod's law.
"Dust Hill guy likes the Gordon clock"

"You MUST NOT drive dangerously" - the Highway Code
Spelling lesson: then and than are different words.

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 at 17:12:03, Robin May
wrote:

I had said:

And if it were better-publicised. My Canadian colleague had no
idea of its existence, and was solemnly travelling from Islington
to Canning Town via Central London until I realised that it was
the North London Lines that went to Canning Town (which I hadn't
known until I looked, out of curiosity, at what lines did go
there), and told her it would be quicker for her. Which it is! I
just wish the South London Line (which I use) would be extended
beyond London Bridge/Victoria.....

I don't know about it needing to be better publicised. I mean, it's
quite clearly shown on the tube map and I would have thought that was
quite hard to miss if you were to spend any amount of time at all
planning a route. I'm a bit confused about how your colleague could not
have realised where it went.

It's quite possible not to notice it unless you are looking for it, if
you see what I mean. I mean, I knew vaguely that it was there, but had
no idea it went to Canning Town until I looked it up on the Internet.
And wasn't it omitted from some recent editions of the Diagram?
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 8 March 2004

Annabel Smyth wrote:
On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 at 14:42:34, Robin May
wrote:


An example of that sort of
thing, the North London line, seems fairly heavily used with the trains
often being uncomfortably packed at busy times. I know I go on about
this all the time, but I think it would be even more heavily used if a
more frequent and reliable service was provided and the stations were
done up a bit.


And if it were better-publicised. My Canadian colleague had no idea of
its existence, and was solemnly travelling from Islington to Canning
Town via Central London until I realised that it was the North London
Lines that went to Canning Town (which I hadn't known until I looked,
out of curiosity, at what lines did go there), and told her it would be
quicker for her. Which it is! I just wish the South London Line (which
I use) would be extended beyond London Bridge/Victoria.....

Well, the ELL will be running 4tph along the South London Line to
Clapham Junction whenever it finally opens (2010 is currently floated).

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"John Rowland" wrote [about the NLL]...

The main bottleneck is generally alleged to be freight paths between just
west of Stratford and Camden Road (and to a lesser extent as far as South
Acton).



Since most of this frieght is coming from places outside London and going to
other places outisde London, does it look like there's a case for opening
outer orbital routes like Cambridge/Huntingdon/Bedford? Even if they don't
generate enough passengers to be viable *on* *their* *own*, by helping
freight avoid the London bottlenecks, they'd still free up capacity for
better services in London such as improved NLL frequencies.

Oh, no, wait. That would mean integrated transport planning. Silly me.
It'll never happen...

In article , Aidan Stanger
writes
Travelators probably do cost more than escalators,

Not in principle - a travalator is simply an escalator with slightly
different treads (since they don't need to slide perpendicular to each
other) and possibly a longer track. Indeed, the original ones at Bank
*were* modified Otis escalators.

The longer track will mean a bit more cost, but a 100m travalator should
cost the same as a 50m vertical drop escalator, since both have the same
track length.

There's a station on the Paris Metro which has hybrids: escalators that
a

\
\
\_________
\
\
\

and

\
\
\_________

shaped.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

In article , Michael Bell
writes
Pi being what it is, on field where there is no preferred direction, an
orbital route will be shorter than an in and change and go out the other
side route for a journey of upt to 120° rotation round the city centre.

Actually 2 radians, which is 114.59 degrees.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

In article , Aidan Stanger
writes
The main obstacle in that area is not vaults nor gradients - it's
foundations! Many City buildings (especially the taller ones) have
foundations that go down a very long way, preventing any tube line from
getting through.

However, planning has taken this into account, with gaps being left in
the lines of buildings. One of the constraints of the route of Crossrail
is threading it through the existing gaps in the building line in the
City.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address