![]() |
The wrong way up
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and
only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. Grebbsy -- "All vampires suck, but not all who suck are vampires." (--B.J.Kuehl) :::Grebbsy :::::::lemon curry?::: |
The wrong way up
Grebbsy McLaren wrote:
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. I like that, very clever indeed. As someone from that part of the world, I love the idea of a tube station at Chessington North, although by a quirk of geography, the Crooked Billet underpass gets a tube station, but not Kingston Upon Thames! |
The wrong way up
Stuart writes:
I like that, very clever indeed. Yes, brilliant idea. As someone from that part of the world, I love the idea of a tube station at Chessington North, although by a quirk of geography, the Crooked Billet underpass gets a tube station, but not Kingston Upon Thames! Er, Beckton is Kingston. (On the other hand, Wimbledon is Beckton. And Plaistow is Wimbledon. Nothing is Plaistow, though.) -- Mark Brader "Relax -- I know the procedures backwards." Toronto "Yeah, well, that's a quick way to get killed." -- Chris Boucher, STAR COPS My text in this article is in the public domain. |
The wrong way up
--- "Mark Brader" wrote... Er, Beckton is Kingston. (On the other hand, Wimbledon is Beckton. And Plaistow is Wimbledon. Nothing is Plaistow, though.) Actually, Stepney Green is Wimbledon -- Plaistow is Berrylands. OTOH I'm a bit confused about Palace Gate. Presumably Crystal Palace is the old high-level station, while Palace Gate is the existing low-level one? |
The wrong way up
Mark Brader wrote:
Stuart writes: As someone from that part of the world, I love the idea of a tube station at Chessington North, although by a quirk of geography, the Crooked Billet underpass gets a tube station, but not Kingston Upon Thames! Er, Beckton is Kingston. Oh blimey yes, what's it doing all the way over there to the west of Richmond? |
The wrong way up
Er, Beckton is Kingston. (On the other hand, Wimbledon is Beckton.
And Plaistow is Wimbledon. Nothing is Plaistow, though.) Actually, Stepney Green is Wimbledon -- Plaistow is Berrylands. Dogs is dogs, and cats is dogs, and squirrels in cages is parrots, but this here turtle is a h'insect, and we won't charge you nothin'. [One of many versions of this.] -- Mark Brader "The world little knows or cares the storm through Toronto which you have had to pass. It asks only if you brought the ship safely to port." -- Joseph Conrad |
The wrong way up
Grebbsy McLaren wrote in message ...
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. Simply incredible! -- Larry Lard Replies to group please |
The wrong way up
Grebbsy McLaren wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 1 Sep 2004:
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. Wouldn't it be marvellous! (You can tell I'm Sarf Lun'on, can't you!) -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ |
The wrong way up
Grebbsy McLaren wrote:
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. Grebbsy Heaven! Thanks for the link :) |
The wrong way up
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:34:07 +0100, Grebbsy McLaren
wrote: What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html that's rather clever. I shall have to print some copies off at work and see if anyone notices the difference :-) -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
The wrong way up
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:34:07 +0100, Grebbsy McLaren wrote: What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html that's rather clever. I shall have to print some copies off at work and see if anyone notices the difference :-) It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as someone from north of the river). SR |
The wrong way up
In article ,
Stephen Richards wrote: It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as someone from north of the river). But the reason for this is not some anti-sarf London bias by London underground companies but because the geology makes it very difficult to build tunnels there. -- http://www.election.demon.co.uk "The guilty party was the Liberal Democrats and they were hardened offenders, and coded racism was again in evidence in leaflets distributed in September 1993." - Nigel Copsey, "Contemporary British Fascism", page 62. |
The wrong way up
Almost made no difference to the Silverlink Metro - still starts at (almost)
Silvertown and goes East. -- Ian Tindale |
The wrong way up
David Boothroyd wrote:
In article , Stephen Richards wrote: It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as someone from north of the river). But the reason for this is not some anti-sarf London bias by London underground companies but because the geology makes it very difficult to build tunnels there. And the main line companies wanted to keep it for themselves. |
The wrong way up
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote:
David Boothroyd wrote: In article , Stephen Richards wrote: It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as someone from north of the river). But the reason for this is not some anti-sarf London bias by London underground companies but because the geology makes it very difficult to build tunnels there. And the main line companies wanted to keep it for themselves. The way i heard it, Southern's suburban rail services were so good that LT didn't feel that south London needed tubes as well - the north presumably had crappy rail services. A similar mechanism might also explain the lack of tubes in Hackney, although there, i prefer to think it's blatant bias by westerners against the oppressed masses of that borough. tom -- Mathematics is the door and the key to the sciences. -- Roger Bacon |
The wrong way up
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 22:20:06 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote: And the main line companies wanted to keep it for themselves. The way i heard it, Southern's suburban rail services were so good that LT didn't feel that south London needed tubes as well - the north presumably had crappy rail services. tom Was there not some sort of Truce between LT and the Southern after various proposals were put foward . Called the Morden Agreement. Southern dropped objection of Northern Line to Morden providing it stopped there and LT gave up pre WW1 ideas of getting District trains to what now seem unlikely destinations over what had become Southern tracks .Sutton ? Leatherhead? Have to go digging amongst some books now . G.Harman |
The wrong way up
Grebbsy McLaren wrote in
: What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Somehow I feel that Sydenham Hill doesnt have the same ring as Mornington Crescent. |
The wrong way up
Ian Tindale wrote:
Almost made no difference to the Silverlink Metro - still starts at (almost) Silvertown and goes East. In fact the same is true of the other end of the Silverlink Metro - both the start and end points are nearly where they already are right now, more or less. -- Ian Tindale |
The wrong way up
"Ian Tindale" wrote in message
... Ian Tindale wrote: Almost made no difference to the Silverlink Metro - still starts at (almost) Silvertown and goes East. In fact the same is true of the other end of the Silverlink Metro - both the start and end points are nearly where they already are right now, more or less. And the first stops away from each end are exactly where they are now. Big thanks to Grebbsy for bringing this to our attention! -- 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 |
The wrong way up
WOW! So many stops in my area!
Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to help my journey to work in Docklands! Regards, Nes. -- Please remove the spam-deflecting X's to reply directly to me - or simply reply to the group! -- "Grebbsy McLaren" wrote in message ... What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. Grebbsy -- "All vampires suck, but not all who suck are vampires." (--B.J.Kuehl) :::Grebbsy :::::::lemon curry?::: |
The wrong way up
I'd love to go back to the District...NO UPMINSTERS, wonderful idea
|
The wrong way up
"General Von Clinkerhoffen" wrote in message
... I'd love to go back to the District...NO UPMINSTERS, wonderful idea Franborough instead - surely it'd take even longer if the line went to Hampshire... Jonn |
The wrong way up
Grebbsy McLaren wrote:
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa? http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them nevertheless. Any chance of getting this funded? It would be a great improvement on the current system and wouldn't let all those people from north London get into town so easily and scare the tourists. :) Matt |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk