In article , Barry Salter
writes
If they do try Paris, is it a greater or lesser challenge than London?
Slightly greater, I believe. The statistics for 2002 were as follows
(with the LU equivalents in brackets, where known):

I would have thought it was less. Assume that the average speed of
trains is 30 km/h and each station stop costs you a minute (this
averages out simple stops with changes), then you get theoretical times
of:
London: 408/30 + 275/60 = 18.2 hours
Paris: 211/30 + 380/60 = 13.4 hours

Maximum Length: Line 13 - 22.5km (Central - 74km)

I thought 7 was longer, but I don't have the statistics to hand. I know
Mark Brader reads this group and has the data.

Minimum Length: Line 3 'encores' - 1.3km (Waterloo & City - 2.4km)

Where did you get *this*? It's called "Line 3bis" (there's also a 7bis
and used to be a 13bis).

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

"Sir Benjamin Nunn" wrote in message ...
"geoff tech" wrote in message
...

Somone else I know wrote to them, and they came back saying that they were
only interested in London and New York. So once we've done Paris (just
for
the hell of it .. ), then it'll be time to head across the pond and do the
NYS! double running tracks .. .24 hour operation .. what more could you
want? :-)


I'd like to see how they'd decide the criteria for completion in NYC, as
it's much harder to define what constitutes an individual station.

There are several stations with the same name that are completely seperate
from one another, and other stations with different names that are
accessible from one another without coming to the surface, very different
from the composite interchange stations that we're used to.

And then you have the fast running lines that don't pass a platform surface
when they go through the station - would travelling on a fast train through
these stations count? And then there are the stations where the up and down
platforms are effectively seperate stations, with no subterrain connection
between the two.

If you're extrapolating from London rules, going fast through a
station definitely doesn't count -- you'll need to take a 6 train up
the East Side, not a 4/5. And stations where up and down are
segregated are generally pretty obviously one station.

The real trouble comes where you have stations with a whole load of
internal connections and some of the platforms have different names
from the others; the only example in the UK is Bank/Monument, and my
memory of the Guinness rules is that you don't need to visit the
Monument platforms in addition to the Bank platforms. As such, it
doesn't matter whether the platforms you visit are called 42nd St/Port
Authority, Times Square or 42nd St/Times Square -- they're all the
same station and connected inside the barriers.

Hmm. What about Aqueduct Racetrack? Does that count?

(And yes, I'm listed on Geoff's website too )

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:03:57 GMT, "geoff tech"
wrote:

Oh, and Paris will be done next spring/easter. although Guinness don't
actually recognise this as an official record attempt.

Somone else I know wrote to them, and they came back saying that they were
only interested in London and New York. So once we've done Paris (just for
the hell of it .. ), then it'll be time to head across the pond and do the
NYS! double running tracks .. .24 hour operation .. what more could you
want? :-)


You didn't quite crack the London-Epson record on Thursday night,
though, from what I heard

Rupert

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:23:01 +0100, Annabel Smyth
wrote:

Tony Bryer wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 29 Sep 2004:

"The record for visiting all 275 London Underground stations has been
broken by 43 minutes.

Geoff Marshall, 32, from Epsom, Surrey, and Neil Blake, 31, from
Deptford, south-east London, recorded a time of 18 hours, 35 minutes
and 43 seconds."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3700658.stm

How sad.

Yes, obviously much more tragic than hanging around on newsgroups....
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

Barry Salter:
Maximum Length: Line 13 - 22.5km (Central - 74km)

Clive Feather:
I thought 7 was longer, but I don't have the statistics to hand.
I know Mark Brader reads this group and has the data.

I have two sources: "Paris Metro Handbook" (1988 edition) by Brian
Hardy and "Un Siecle de Metro en 14 Lignes" (2000 edition) by Jean
Tricoire. Neither gives all details, but here's what they have.
All distances in km.

Hardy Tricoire
1 14.637* 16.628
2 12.316 12.316
3 11.684 11.665
3bis 1.289 1.289
4 10.598 10.599
5 14.629 14.634
6 13.624 13.665
7 22.8 18.594(+3.882)
7bis 3.066 3.066
8 22.05 22.057
9 19.565 19.562
10 11.708 11.712
11 6.287 6.286
12 13.888 13.888
13 16.854/14.77 22.5
14 * 7.022

*Hardy's book predates the extension of Line 1 beyond Pont de Neuilly
and the opening of the modern Line 14.

For line 7, the first number given by Tricoire apparently shows the
longest distance between two endpoints, i.e. the common part plus the
Mairie d'Ivry branch, while the second number is the length of the
Villejuif branch alone. The two numbers make a total of 22.476 km
of route length.

For line 13, Hardy's two numbers are the distances from the Chatillon
terminus to the two termini at the other end, St-Denis and Gabriel Peri
respectively. He does not give the total route length, while Tricoire
does not give the branch lengths.

Given this and the fact that some of the numbers are given to only one
decimal place, this is not sufficient data to say clearly whether Line 7
or 13 is longer in terms of total route length, although it is clear
that Line 7 has the longest single route. However, both authors *say*
that Line 7 is longest, as Clive does above.

Minimum Length: Line 3 'encores' - 1.3km (Waterloo & City - 2.4km)

Where did you get *this*? It's called "Line 3bis"

Someone was trying to translate "bis" into English?

(there's also a 7bis

True.

and used to be a 13bis).

First I've heard of it, if so.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "The singular of 'data' is not 'anecdote.'"
| -- Jeff Goldberg

My text in this article is in the public domain.

In article , Mark Brader
writes
and used to be a 13bis).
First I've heard of it, if so.

Look for maps of the 1960s and 1970s. The western branch of the old 13
was 13bis (though unlike 3bis or 7bis trains ran all the way from the
southern terminus, rather than just on the branch).

Aha: http://www.paris.org/Maps/Map3/map.cgi/h3?143,29

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In article ,
Kat wrote:
In message , Sir Benjamin Nunn
writes

Wow! I'm on his website!

http://www.geofftech.co.uk/tubechallenge/others.htm

That's because you're a knight to remember.....

We'll take your word ....

Nick
--
"And we will be restoring neurotypicality just as soon as we are sure
what is normal anyway. Thank you". -- not quite DNA

In article ,
Sam Holloway wrote:

Lesser, I would have thought. If they're only doing the Paris Metro
and not the RER, the area the network covers is substantially smaller.

Wonder if anybody's ever bothered registering a record attempt on the
Glasgow underground? :-)

I know one was done on the Al;dwych branch ;-)

Nick
--
"And we will be restoring neurotypicality just as soon as we are sure
what is normal anyway. Thank you". -- not quite DNA

In article , (Sir
Benjamin Nunn) wrote:

"Sam Holloway" wrote in message
...

Shame you see it that way. It's quite an achievement, maybe not on the
global scale of things, but it's certainly good exercise!

Congratulations to Geoff: I know he's been after this for a while. His
website (http://www.geofftech.co.uk/) details all his previous
attempts. I think if someone's achieved their ambition, you shouldn't
knock it.

Wow! I'm on his website!

http://www.geofftech.co.uk/tubechallenge/others.htm

Good grief! And the picture of me there is over 20 years old!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Clive Feather and I (Mark Brader) wrote:

and used to be a 13bis).

First I've heard of it, if so.

Look for maps of the 1960s and 1970s. The western branch of the old 13
was 13bis (though unlike 3bis or 7bis trains ran all the way from the
southern terminus, rather than just on the branch).

Ah, interesting. Okay, I have one book from that period: "Notre Metro"
by Jean Robert (1967 edition). The color map at the back of the book,
specifically dated December 1 of that year, shows both branches as
Line 13, the same as today. But on flipping through the book, I see
that the track diagram of the system does show Line 13bis as Clive
describes. As far as I can see, all other maps show both branches as
Line 13 (or Line B, depending on the time period depicted), and so does
the text as well as the table of opening dates.

However, while checking this out, I found references to two *other*
"bis" lines.

The original 1898 plan for Line 8 had it running from Opera to Porte
d'Auteuil, with the western part following what is now Line 10. This
was modified in 1910 to a plan with two branches, one as just described
and the other following the line's present route to Balard. But the
line as actually first opened in 1913 followed the original plan,
running to Porte d'Auteuil only. The second branch was not built
until 1937. But the line never operated with two branches, because
by the time the branch was built, it was part of a project to reroute
and extend two other lines, and Line 10 took over the Porte d'Auteuil
branch the same day that Line 8 first ran to Balard.

Anyway, in the section where this is discussed, Robert repeatedly
refers to the new Balard section of Line 8 as Line 8bis. Presumably
this was a working name for the branch during construction.

The other "bis" line was Line 5bis. According to both Robert and
Tricoire, this was the name originally used for the new section of
Line 5 when it was extended in 1942 from Gare du Nord to Eglise de
Pantin. Note that this was never a separate service, not even a
branch, but a simple extension of an existing line, but it was given
a "bis" number anyway. The extension did involve relocating the
line's Gare du Nord station, which was originally on a terminal loop.
--
Mark Brader "How can we believe that?"
Toronto "Because this time it's true!"
-- Lynn & Jay: YES, PRIME MINISTER

My text in this article is in the public domain.