|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"TP" wrote in message ... That is the reason why I suggested a regular Waterloo-Ashford service using former Eurostar paths and connecting with Eurostar trains at Ashford International. I think that is the only way Eurostar can hope to retain this large and affluent customer base. I can see one problem with this.... You suggest using the former Eurostar paths to Ashford. Surely these paths will only be "available" up to where the current Waterloo - CTRL line meets the CTRL, as the actual Eurostar to St Pancras will be using the paths on the CTRL. Anyway, from Waterloo, you can cross over to Waterloo East and catch a South Eastern service to Ashford, which, for the fast trains, are just over an hour.. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:31:58 on Wed, 24 Nov 2004, TP remarked: You have missed the point. That is, the customer profile of Eurostar passengers from the UK would indicate that there is an exceptionally high proportion whose journeys originate in the SWT corridor. That's because the SWT corridor is where so many 'movers and shakers' choose to locate. It ain't called 'the stockbroker belt' for nowt. St Pancras is not really a viable option for those people. Instead, they will head around the M25 for Heathrow or Gatwick. Isn't that why they are building a new E* station on the M25? No, not really, because Ebbsfleet is positioned almost diametrically opposite to the market we are discussing. Faced with the options of St Pancras, Ebbsfleet, Heathrow and Gatwick I think most of the SWT corridor executive types would take Heathrow as their first choice, followed by Gatwick. The big commercial mistake here is abandoning the easy, high value full fare/first class customer base of the SWT corridor's movers and shakers in favour of the £59 a time cheapskates who will allegedly flock to St Pancras from points north. I think Eurostar are committing a grievous error. At first the abandonment seemed logical - concentrating all efforts at St Pancras seems like a good idea, until you think about it. Perhaps this decision is being forced on Eurostar because so few passengers would choose to travel from St Pancras if Waterloo International remained open. It is easy to see the flagship St Pancras project becoming a seriously expensive commercial flop if the far superior connections at Waterloo remained available. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In article ,
Paul Terry wrote: Incidentally, you are only considering travel FROM London. I wonder how many of the foreign tourists who come TO London for a short break, and who can currently walk to many attractions from Waterloo, will bother to come here when they find they are deposited amid the delights of King's Cross? If only King's Cross had some kind of transport links to allow people to travel to other parts of London and beyond... Dave -- Email: MSN Messenger: |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Paul Terry" wrote in message
... In message , Dave Liney writes "are those cohorts of people in other parts of the capital likely to require business trips or desire leisure breaks in Eurostar destinations?" Yes, that is the question I asked. You didn't answer it, though. To put it more clearly for you: There are business people who work and live north of the Thames. I expect they also have to go to Paris on business and no doubt they would also like to go for leisure breaks there as well. I don't think it is an assumption to read what you wrote as meaning Sheesh! There you go again! PLEASE stop assuming what I think. I'm not. I'm interpreting what you've written -- in the same way that everyone has to interpret what anyone has written. You posed the question about people outside the SWT corridor requiring Eurostar in such a way as to make it obvious that you don't think there are significant numbers of them. Perhaps you could clarify your statements if you don't mean this. "They have one [a good, cheap public transport solution to getting to Paris] already - it is called Waterloo". You said it. Hardly an assumption. Oh gawd, and you can't spot irony either. I am pointing out the fallacy in your argument that the St Pancras - Waterloo change is so quick and easy. Only if you take as truth that most of the people getting on Eurostar trains are from SWT destinations and that is because people can't cope with the "struggle" of 1.9 miles/20-30 minutes from St Pancras. I don't. when there isn't a business case for two terminals then one will have to close. Closing StP isn't an option (it would make the CTRL phase 2 rather pointless) so Waterloo has to. Only if you believe that Eurostar have done their sums properly ... or, if cynical, that Eurostar will use the threat of closure of Waterloo to get money out of the government. Personally, I find it very difficult to believe there is a good business case. Considering that they won't survive if they haven't done their sums properly I'd expect them to have taken the job seriously. Perhaps you don't know all the facts? Incidentally, you are only considering travel FROM London. I wonder how many of the foreign tourists who come TO London for a short break, and who can currently walk to many attractions from Waterloo, will bother to come here when they find they are deposited amid the delights of King's Cross? I'd expect them to do the same as they do at Heathrow which is head for the tube/train to where they want to go. It's not as if they go out and about in the delights of Hounslow. Dave |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 11:59:32 on
Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Dave Liney remarked: To put it more clearly for you: There are business people who work and live north of the Thames. I expect they also have to go to Paris on business and no doubt they would also like to go for leisure breaks there as well. Yes, and the current best way to do that is to drive to Ashford (via Dartford). Having a terminal at St Pancras will very likely increase the number of people using rail door-to-door. -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Dave Liney wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 24 Nov 2004:
There is nothing wrong with that suggestion. But when there isn't a business case for two terminals then one will have to close. Closing StP isn't an option (it would make the CTRL phase 2 rather pointless) so Waterloo has to. Granted - but I think you'll find that the whole point of the argument is that there *is* a business case for two terminals. This is what we are disagreeing with - the necessity of closing Waterloo International. We reckon that there would be sufficient passenger numbers to make retaining it worthwhile, AS WELL AS the new terminus at St Pancras. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 22 November 2004 |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
TP wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 24 Nov 2004:
"Dave Liney" wrote: There is a world outside of London where people live and commute. You seem to be suggesting that business people only live south west of London whereas looking at arrivals in the northern termini on a weekday morning would suggest otherwise. You have missed the point. That is, the customer profile of Eurostar passengers from the UK would indicate that there is an exceptionally high proportion whose journeys originate in the SWT corridor. To be absolutely fair, could that not be because Eurostar, so far, has been more convenient for those whose journeys so originate, and with the move to St P that demographic might change? -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 22 November 2004 |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Matt Wheeler" wrote:
I can see one problem with this.... You suggest using the former Eurostar paths to Ashford. Surely these paths will only be "available" up to where the current Waterloo - CTRL line meets the CTRL, as the actual Eurostar to St Pancras will be using the paths on the CTRL. I would be astonished if there were any shortage of paths along the CTRL. In fact I am astonished that you even suggested there might be! Anyway, from Waterloo, you can cross over to Waterloo East and catch a South Eastern service to Ashford, which, for the fast trains, are just over an hour.. True. But I am suggesting higher quality trains that make direct timetabled connections at Ashford rather than using existing trains that are timetabled with other purposes in mind. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
TP writes:
That is the reason why I suggested a regular Waterloo-Ashford service using former Eurostar paths and connecting with Eurostar trains at Ashford International. I think that is the only way Eurostar can hope to retain this large and affluent customer base. I still can't see what's wrong with taking the new super-glamorous Jubilee line extension from Waterloo to the new super-glamorous Eurostar station at Stratford. It'll only be a few stops, is 4 billion quid's worth of underground line too downmarket for this affluent customer base or something? -- -- Chris. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Mrs Redboots wrote:
Granted - but I think you'll find that the whole point of the argument is that there *is* a business case for two terminals. This is what we are disagreeing with - the necessity of closing Waterloo International. We reckon that there would be sufficient passenger numbers to make retaining it worthwhile, AS WELL AS the new terminus at St Pancras. If Waterloo International remained open, St Pancras International would be little more then a hideously expensive flop. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Mrs Redboots wrote:
To be absolutely fair, could that not be because Eurostar, so far, has been more convenient for those whose journeys so originate, and with the move to St P that demographic might change? Yes, indeed it could. But the fact remains that the SWT catchment, more than any other, includes a very much higher proportion of the movers and shakers who are likely to pay full fares or premium fares (first class) on Eurostar. No doubt St Pancras International will open doors to many who might currently be dissuaded by the difficulty of getting to Waterloo International, but they are far more likely to be travelling on cheaper tickets. I am in that category, and am much more likely to use Eurostar as a result. However, that doesn't prevent me from seeing that the decision to abandon Waterloo International will tend to hurt the customer base that Eurostar needs most, that is, not me! ;-) |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 12:50:19 on
Wed, 24 Nov 2004, TP remarked: If Waterloo International remained open, St Pancras International would be little more then a hideously expensive flop. With half the number of trains to reach critical mass, that might well be the case. Meanwhile, the journey time from Waterloo will be unattractive also. What's wrong with promoting the Waterloo East to Ashford services as a compromise? -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Roland Perry wrote:
With half the number of trains to reach critical mass, that might well be the case. Meanwhile, the journey time from Waterloo will be unattractive also. What's wrong with promoting the Waterloo East to Ashford services as a compromise? Because they will be desperately unattractive to those people who can now transfer from their SWT service to a Eurostar at Waterloo. Adding an extra leg to a journey is never attractive, especially when that extra leg is itself inconvenient. Surely you can understand that? |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"TP" wrote in message ... "Matt Wheeler" wrote: I can see one problem with this.... You suggest using the former Eurostar paths to Ashford. Surely these paths will only be "available" up to where the current Waterloo - CTRL line meets the CTRL, as the actual Eurostar to St Pancras will be using the paths on the CTRL. I would be astonished if there were any shortage of paths along the CTRL. In fact I am astonished that you even suggested there might be! OK, so maybe the paths will be there on the CTRL, but then some capacity on the CTRL is going to be taken up by the slower domestic services. Anyway, from Waterloo, you can cross over to Waterloo East and catch a South Eastern service to Ashford, which, for the fast trains, are just over an hour.. True. But I am suggesting higher quality trains that make direct timetabled connections at Ashford rather than using existing trains that are timetabled with other purposes in mind. Interesting idea, would you propose an extension on the order for the CTRL Domestic services, or a completely new build of stock ? Either case, since the domestic stock isn't expected until 2009, the stock for your service won't be ready until then, or even later. What do you do in the interim, especially given that the NoL eurostars may well end up on the CTRL kent Domestic services. By the time your stock is available, most passengers will have got used to either going to St Pancras, or Ashford (or Ebbsfleet or Stratford), and therefore wouldn't see the benefit of your proposed service. Lets say they did keep Waterloo open for Eurostar services. How would you split them between Waterloo and St Pancras ? Regardless of how you split them, you will still end up with people in SWT region having to transfer to St Pancras, as the train they need at the time they need will run from St Pancras rather then Waterloo. Looking at the current timetable on Eurostar's website.... 1: Apart from the early morning, Brussells services are every 2 hours (hourly early morning), even if this was moved to hourly all day, that still means, at best, 1 train every 2 hours from each of Waterloo and St Pancras. Is there even enough demand for an hourly brussells service ? The current timetable would suggest not, in which case you end up with a train every 4 hours from each of the two termini. 2: "other destinations", where do you run these from ? Its going to be too confusing to have the disneyland train running from one station one day/week and the other the following day/week. You could suggest a train from each, but is there the passenger numbers to warrant doing this ? 3: "Paris". There generally seems to be at least 1 train per hour, sometimes two. Lets say you increase to two per hour, every hour, you can then have 1 per hour from each. However, due to the extra time on the current route over CTRL2, if they left London about 30 mins apart, by the time they get to Ashford/The Tunnel, they could well be running within a few minutes of each other, and therefore arrive in Paris about the same time. To get even spaced arrivals at Paris you'd probably have to have both trains leave London at the same time, effectively turning a half hourly service into an hourly one. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 13:43:31 on
Wed, 24 Nov 2004, TP remarked: With half the number of trains to reach critical mass, that might well be the case. Meanwhile, the journey time from Waterloo will be unattractive also. What's wrong with promoting the Waterloo East to Ashford services as a compromise? Because they will be desperately unattractive to those people who can now transfer from their SWT service to a Eurostar at Waterloo. Adding an extra leg to a journey is never attractive, especially when that extra leg is itself inconvenient. Surely you can understand that? Yes, but I also understand that funds aren't limitless; and there are easier ways for SWT passengers to "catch up" with E* than there are for people currently arriving at KX/StP. -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:13:21 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote: You can currently do Waterloo East to Ashford in 1hr 4 mins, direct. That's almost as fast as E* manages. But considerably slower than the 56 minutes achieved in the 1960s! -- Bill Hayles http://www.rossrail.com |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Bill Hayles" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:13:21 +0000, Roland Perry wrote: You can currently do Waterloo East to Ashford in 1hr 4 mins, direct. That's almost as fast as E* manages. But considerably slower than the 56 minutes achieved in the 1960s! And quicker than will be possible with the SRA's Train Service Specification for the IKF (from the consultation document), as the best off-peak train will have 7 or 8 intermediate stops, and the best peak train will have 4 or 5. Just as there are E* passengers who would prefer to go direct to Waterloo, there are SET passengers who will prefer to use Charing Cross, Waterloo East, London Bridge or Cannon Street, and don't want to go to Stratford or St Pancras. Peter |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:23:16 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote: Incidentally, you are only considering travel FROM London. I wonder how many of the foreign tourists who come TO London for a short break, and who can currently walk to many attractions from Waterloo, will bother to come here when they find they are deposited amid the delights of King's Cross? That's a good point. Does anyone know if any tourists have ever visited Paris? ISTR a friend went there a while back, but maybe he was the only visitor this year. After all, Paris North station is hardly in the best area, so perhaps Paris gets no visitors. The area around Brussels South is a little dodgy. Presumably no-one goes to Belgium for short breaks? Out of interest, what are the big tourist attractions in Hounslow or Crawley which the tourists who fly come to see? -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Liney
writes Only if you take as truth that most of the people getting on Eurostar trains are from SWT destinations and that is because people can't cope with the "struggle" of 1.9 miles/20-30 minutes from St Pancras. I don't. The argument is more finely balanced than the inconvenience of a poor interchange. There is the additional time and the fact that there is now an additional leg of the journey in both directions. It is the *combination* of these factors that will make St Pancras far less attractive than Waterloo for customers currently using the latter. Considering that they won't survive if they haven't done their sums properly Since Eurostar isn't even remotely "commercial" in the normal sense of the term, there is every likelihood that they would survive a bad decision. The shareholders are hardly short of funds! I'd expect them to have taken the job seriously. Perhaps you don't know all the facts? I don't any more than you do. But one only has to look at the history of the line - customer predictions that were miles off-target, the great plan for direct services from Manchester, Edinburgh and Leeds that never transpired - oh, yes, and the famous South Wales to Paris night service. I'd expect them to do the same as they do at Heathrow which is head for the tube/train to where they want to go. And you think that's better than stepping off the train in Waterloo? -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"David Marsh" wrote in message al.lan... [Outlook Express bug: message invisible. See http://viewport.co.uk/outlook ] Do the world a favour, FOAD Plonk... |
Pedestrianise Euston Road was Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, David Marsh wrote:
So Waterloo is a good and cheap solution for those north of London The interchange between St Pancras and Waterloo is poor, especially when carrying luggage. How infeasible (read: costly) would it be to build an underground travelator link between Euston Station (with access from the mainline and the Underground) to St Pancras International Better: PEDESTRIANISE EUSTON ROAD! Think about it - a broad, leafy (plant some trees), elegant avenue running from Paddington to King's Cross (if you also do the Marylebone Road and integrate the land around Paddington Basin), in front of some of the most refined buildings in northern central London (and some ****ty ones too, of course). It would be completely wonderful! Stick that in your Piazza San Marco, Venice, and smoke it! Not sure what you'd do with the cars, though. I'd suggest cut-and-covering a highway underneath the avenue, but the Metropolitan Line's got there first. Perhaps another tunnel could be dug alongside it. Yes! And at the eastern end, it could carry on through the Widened Lines tunnels, to Moorgate! Two birds with one stone! Also not sure how cars would get from the tunnel and the side roads; i bet that Funky Junction guy could work something out. Really, though, consider the alternatives: (a) Cars on the surface, people underground (b) People on the surface, cars underground Not rocket science. (And while I'm in tunnel-digging mode, why not merge Embankment and Charing Cross Northern/Bakerloo stations into one station (on each line) with travelators to shrink the distance/time from the existing entrances, to save the time of an extra station stop? This is also obviously right. tom -- Understand the world we're living in |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In article , Matt Wheeler wrote:
"TP" wrote in message ... Anyway, from Waterloo, you can cross over to Waterloo East and catch a South Eastern service to Ashford, which, for the fast trains, are just over an hour.. And pay another £16.70 for a return ticket from Waterloo East to Ashford, followed by the full Eurostar fare from Ashford? |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In article , Stevie D wrote:
Martin Rich wrote: Which line is that? For many (most?) Waterloo commuters the natural way to St Pancras is to get off their national rail train at Vauxhall, admittedly not the nicest or easiest of interchanges, and get the Victoria Line which in my experience is usually quick and efficient. The problem is that so many trains don't stop at Vauxhall, which means an additional change at Clapham Junction, which is not an experience for the faint-hearted! And at peak times few of the longer distance mainline trains stop at Clapham Junction either, making for another change at Woking. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
An aspect of this subject which has not been aired here is the fact that
St.Pancras/KX from a public transport point of view is the most overcrowded in London and distribution of passengers from there is extremely problematical.This is greatly exacerbated at peak times. This problem will not be helped by the arrival of the CTRLDS and the absence of an upgraded Thameslink (3,000?). MJW |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:10:06 -0000, "M.Whitson"
wrote: An aspect of this subject which has not been aired here is the fact that St.Pancras/KX from a public transport point of view is the most overcrowded in London and distribution of passengers from there is extremely problematical.This is greatly exacerbated at peak times. This problem will not be helped by the arrival of the CTRLDS and the absence of an upgraded Thameslink (3,000?). MJW Agreed. The London transport planning community is well aware of this, hence TfL's plans for LUL upgrades as well as the continuous review the bus network undergoes.... Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"M.Whitson" wrote:
An aspect of this subject which has not been aired here is the fact that St.Pancras/KX from a public transport point of view is the most overcrowded in London and distribution of passengers from there is extremely problematical.This is greatly exacerbated at peak times. This problem will not be helped by the arrival of the CTRLDS and the absence of an upgraded Thameslink (3,000?). All very good points, and all true. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
David Marsh wrote:
[Outlook Express bug: message invisible. See http://viewport.co.uk/outlook ] begin Paul Terry's quote in uk.railway about: Eurostar to quit Waterloo So Waterloo is a good and cheap solution for those north of London No. Now you are making your third false assumption. The interchange between St Pancras and Waterloo is poor, especially when carrying luggage. Eurostar had the opportunity of enabling all of their customers to avoid making that cross London journey. They have chosen not to. Just a general comment in this thread; everyone is assuming that people will transfer from Waterloo to St Pancras, but there will also be a direct transfer between Waterloo and Stratford, which only takes 23 minutes platform to platform, compared to the 16 minutes for Waterloo to St Pancras. There will hopefully be a travelator at Stratford to compensate for it being a longer interchange than St Pancras. How infeasible (read: costly) would it be to build an underground travelator link between Euston Station (with access from the mainline and the Underground) to St Pancras International (also linking with King's Cross and King's Cross / St Pancras Underground)? It's only about 500 m on the surface, and given the nature of all the existing gubbins underground, probably less than that in practice. The existing gubbins underground is rather the problem. There's so much down there, it would be difficult to find somewhere to put the tunnel (unless you put it very deep, which just defeats the point if you spend ages trekking down into the bowels of the earth and out again at the other end). This would put Waterloo and Euston (and Victoria, come to that) within easy reach of St Pancras, with only one Underground transfer required. Er, Victoria already has a pretty decent link to St Pancras :-) Better yet: build Cross River Transit; surface light rail between Waterloo and King's Cross, every 90 seconds in the peaks. No need to journey to the centre of the earth, and you get a view. Such a link could also be extended to Euston Square Underground to make it a proper interchange both for Euston Station and for Eurostar from the likes of Paddington, Liverpool St, Fenchurch St, etc (although presumably the latter two would have better Eurostar interchange at Stratford). (And while I'm in tunnel-digging mode, why not merge Embankment and Charing Cross Northern/Bakerloo stations into one station (on each line) with travelators to shrink the distance/time from the existing entrances, to save the time of an extra station stop? Or would that require an incredible amount of underground reconstruction work?) Ouch. Charing Cross Northern and Bakerloo platforms are miles away from Charing Cross SET as it is, without merging them. It would make more sense to split them back into what they used to be before the Jubilee Line arrived - Trafalgar Square (Bakerloo) and Strand (Northern). The Bakerloo platforms are certainly more suited to Trafalgar Square than Charing Cross. After all, Embankment used to be called Charing Cross... -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quitWaterloo)
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Dave Arquati wrote: Dave Liney wrote: If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. Why on earth isn't there a direct bus between Waterloo and King's Cross?! I never even noticed that before. These are arguably the two most important railway termini. No, since one of those is Liverpool Street. Just because it mostly serves Essex and Hackney doesn't mean you can ignore it! Gaaah! Unless you have some definition of 'important' that is not related to passenger numbers, in which case you will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes. Liverpool Street is very important - but when I was referring to King's Cross I meant (and didn't make at all obvious) the combination of King's Cross, St Pancras and King's Cross Thameslink. I'm not sure on the passenger numbers but combined it must be at least a competitor to Liverpool St. Whatever the passenger numbers, my rant is justified because Waterloo has two buses to Liverpool Street :-) (26 and express 705) It also has buses to Moorgate, Euston, Marylebone (Baker St), Paddington, Victoria, Charing Cross, London Bridge, Fenchurch Street, Cannon Street and City Thameslink. The only one left out seems to be Blackfriars - and the buses to London Bridge and Elephant & Castle should cover that. This is especially bad when there isn't even a direct Tube route between the two. You are of course quite right that there should be a direct bus. There should probably be direct, and perhaps somewhat expressed, bus services linking every pair of mainline termini that do not have a direct rail link. At least they're part of the way there with the 705 (and the non-express 205). -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Pedestrianise Euston Road was Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Tom Anderson wrote in message ...
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, David Marsh wrote: So Waterloo is a good and cheap solution for those north of London The interchange between St Pancras and Waterloo is poor, especially when carrying luggage. How infeasible (read: costly) would it be to build an underground travelator link between Euston Station (with access from the mainline and the Underground) to St Pancras International Better: PEDESTRIANISE EUSTON ROAD! Think about it - a broad, leafy (plant some trees), elegant avenue running from Paddington to King's Cross (if you also do the Marylebone Road and integrate the land around Paddington Basin), in front of some of the most refined buildings in northern central London (and some ****ty ones too, of course). It would be completely wonderful! Stick that in your Piazza San Marco, Venice, and smoke it! Not sure what you'd do with the cars, though. I'd suggest cut-and-covering a highway underneath the avenue, but the Metropolitan Line's got there first. Perhaps another tunnel could be dug alongside it. Yes! And at the eastern end, it could carry on through the Widened Lines tunnels, to Moorgate! Two birds with one stone! Also not sure how cars would get from the tunnel and the side roads; i bet that Funky Junction guy could work something out. Really, though, consider the alternatives: (a) Cars on the surface, people underground (b) People on the surface, cars underground Or (c) People on the surface, buses crossing at grade (side street to side street - maybe there can be a bus lane in each direction along the Euston Rd), cars use A406 or M25 to the correct radial. Then demolish Westway. Add a rail connector from the H&C to the Central, turn all Central Line trains at White City, whilst the Inner Suburban services (eg Gerrard's Cross, Slough, Heathrow) are transferred into Paddington over the H&C (basically an extra pair of tracks). Demolish the West Cross Route too. That way, you can get four tracks on the WLL, allowing both local and through services (Birmingham/Manchester/Liverpool to Brighton/Eastbourne/Kent, anyone?). This would be better for North Kensington than any amount of Funky Junk. (And while I'm in tunnel-digging mode, why not merge Embankment and Charing Cross Northern/Bakerloo stations into one station (on each line) with travelators to shrink the distance/time from the existing entrances, to save the time of an extra station stop? This is also obviously right. And very expensive. Perhaps they could install cross-platform interchange at the same time. James. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Arquati
writes Just a general comment in this thread; everyone is assuming that people will transfer from Waterloo to St Pancras, but there will also be a direct transfer between Waterloo and Stratford, which only takes 23 minutes platform to platform, compared to the 16 minutes for Waterloo to St Pancras. There will hopefully be a travelator at Stratford to compensate for it being a longer interchange than St Pancras. But I wonder how many Eurostar services will actually stop at Stratford? Hopefully more than currently stop at Calais Frethun! -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 21:10:06 on Wed,
24 Nov 2004, M.Whitson remarked: An aspect of this subject which has not been aired here is the fact that St.Pancras/KX from a public transport point of view is the most overcrowded in London and distribution of passengers from there is extremely problematical.This is greatly exacerbated at peak times. This problem will not be helped by the arrival of the CTRLDS and the absence of an upgraded Thameslink (3,000?). Perhaps you've not noticed that KX/StP is currently in the midst of a huge rebuilding programme to address these very issues? -- Roland Perry |
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quit Waterloo)
In message , at 01:44:03 on Thu, 25 Nov
2004, Dave Arquati remarked: Liverpool Street is very important But won't most Essex folk headed for E* drive to Ebbsfleet through the Dartford tunnel, rather than trek all the way via London? -- Roland Perry |
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quitWaterloo)
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 01:44:03 on Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Dave Arquati remarked: Liverpool Street is very important But won't most Essex folk headed for E* drive to Ebbsfleet through the Dartford tunnel, rather than trek all the way via London? I wouldn't. I *would* go via Stratford rather than King's Cross, though! tom -- 24-Hour Monkey-Vision! |
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quitWaterloo)
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Dave Arquati wrote: Dave Liney wrote: If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. Why on earth isn't there a direct bus between Waterloo and King's Cross?! I never even noticed that before. These are arguably the two most important railway termini. No, since one of those is Liverpool Street. Just because it mostly serves Essex and Hackney doesn't mean you can ignore it! Gaaah! Unless you have some definition of 'important' that is not related to passenger numbers, in which case you will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes. Liverpool Street is very important - but when I was referring to King's Cross I meant (and didn't make at all obvious) the combination of King's Cross, St Pancras and King's Cross Thameslink. That's what i assumed - i don't think of them as separate stations. I'm not sure on the passenger numbers but combined it must be at least a competitor to Liverpool St. I think Greater King's Cross is the second busiest station in London, after Liverpool Street; i think Waterloo is a lot further down. I can never find the figures, though! One thing to consider is the nature of the journeys: i think LS is so busy because of all the commuter traffic into the city, but handles relatively little long-haul traffic (there isn't really anywhere to long-haul to, except Chelmsford, Colchester and Norwich), whereas KX, along with Euston, is the hub for pretty much all of the trips along the length of the country. I should imagine Waterloo's in a similar situation to Liverpool Street, though: lots of inner and outer suburban traffic, not a lot of long-distance. If you think long-distance traffic is more important in some way, you could argue that KX is more important than LS, but i don't think it works for Waterloo. Whatever the passenger numbers, my rant is justified because Waterloo has two buses to Liverpool Street :-) (26 and express 705) It also has buses to Moorgate, Euston, Marylebone (Baker St), Paddington, Victoria, Charing Cross, London Bridge, Fenchurch Street, Cannon Street and City Thameslink. The only one left out seems to be Blackfriars - and the buses to London Bridge and Elephant & Castle should cover that. While we're ranting [1] - the buses at Blackfriars are a disgrace! The stops for some of them are about twenty miles up the road! And there's only one night bus - which is pretty daft, given that trains run there until pretty late at night. I had to do Wallington to Clapton on a sunday night once, which is why i'm bitter about this :). tom [1] By which i obviously mean "While *i'm* ranting" -- 24-Hour Monkey-Vision! |
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quit Waterloo)
In message ,
at 14:43:10 on Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Tom Anderson remarked: But won't most Essex folk headed for E* drive to Ebbsfleet through the Dartford tunnel, rather than trek all the way via London? I wouldn't. I *would* go via Stratford rather than King's Cross, though! That might suit you, but I doubt it would suit the majority. -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:10:51 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 21:10:06 on Wed, 24 Nov 2004, M.Whitson remarked: An aspect of this subject which has not been aired here is the fact that St.Pancras/KX from a public transport point of view is the most overcrowded in London and distribution of passengers from there is extremely problematical.This is greatly exacerbated at peak times. This problem will not be helped by the arrival of the CTRLDS and the absence of an upgraded Thameslink (3,000?). Perhaps you've not noticed that KX/StP is currently in the midst of a huge rebuilding programme to address these very issues? Which has now been cut back due to cost over-runs, so its adequacy must be in doubt. -- Peter Lawrence |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Peter Lawrence" wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:10:51 +0000, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:10:06 on Wed, 24 Nov 2004, M.Whitson remarked: An aspect of this subject which has not been aired here is the fact that St.Pancras/KX from a public transport point of view is the most overcrowded in London and distribution of passengers from there is extremely problematical.This is greatly exacerbated at peak times. This problem will not be helped by the arrival of the CTRLDS and the absence of an upgraded Thameslink (3,000?). Perhaps you've not noticed that KX/StP is currently in the midst of a huge rebuilding programme to address these very issues? Which has now been cut back due to cost over-runs, so its adequacy must be in doubt. Exactly so. In particular, the provision for Thameslink services will be grossly inadequate. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk