Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?

Richard [in PE12]

No.

Unless, of course, someone else knows better...

Endymion Ponsonby-Withermoor III wrote:
Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?

I've not heard anything official, but personally this is one fairly
simple change I'd like to see. I think it makes a great deal of sense
to have a "Trafalgar Square" station (think of the tourists) - plus
showing an interchange here is not particularly helpful, especially if
coming from the Bakerloo side of things.

Sam

Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?

I've not heard anything official, but personally this is one fairly
simple change I'd like to see. I think it makes a great deal of sense
to have a "Trafalgar Square" station (think of the tourists) - plus
showing an interchange here is not particularly helpful, especially if
coming from the Bakerloo side of things.

On line diagrams inside Bakerloo and Northern line trains it is not
shown as an interchange:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tube/maps/line.asp

"TKD" wrote in message
...
Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?

I've not heard anything official, but personally this is one fairly
simple change I'd like to see. I think it makes a great deal of sense
to have a "Trafalgar Square" station (think of the tourists) - plus
showing an interchange here is not particularly helpful, especially if
coming from the Bakerloo side of things.

On line diagrams inside Bakerloo and Northern line trains it is not
shown as an interchange:


I don't think that reverting the Northern Line to Strand would be
particularly beneficial at this stage, but renaming the Bakerloo would
definitely have it's benefits.

They could then be shown on the map as a 'Bank/Monument' type interchange.

Personally, I'd like to rebuild at least one from Elephant, Waterloo,
Embankment or Charing X to allow cross platform interchange with the
Northern line. It's annoying that none of the interchanges are particularly
convenient.

BTN

On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 16:04:55 -0000, "TKD" wrote:

Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?

I've not heard anything official, but personally this is one fairly
simple change I'd like to see. I think it makes a great deal of sense
to have a "Trafalgar Square" station (think of the tourists) - plus
showing an interchange here is not particularly helpful, especially if
coming from the Bakerloo side of things.

On line diagrams inside Bakerloo and Northern line trains it is not
shown as an interchange:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tube/maps/line.asp

Although it _does_ on platform maps, pocket diagrams, etc., so many
people will have made the decision to interchange there before they
even see the in-car diagram.
--
Nick Cooper

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

The London Underground at War, and in Films & TV:
http://www.nickcooper.org.uk/

On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 17:57:39 -0000, "Sir Benjamin Nunn"
wrote:


"TKD" wrote in message
...
Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?

I've not heard anything official, but personally this is one fairly
simple change I'd like to see. I think it makes a great deal of sense
to have a "Trafalgar Square" station (think of the tourists) - plus
showing an interchange here is not particularly helpful, especially if
coming from the Bakerloo side of things.

On line diagrams inside Bakerloo and Northern line trains it is not
shown as an interchange:

I don't think that reverting the Northern Line to Strand would be
particularly beneficial at this stage, but renaming the Bakerloo would
definitely have it's benefits.

They could then be shown on the map as a 'Bank/Monument' type interchange.

Absoultely. Another option would at least be some indication on
in-car diagrams that Waterloo is the best interchange between the two
lines, and C-X the worst (with Emb inbetween).

Personally, I'd like to rebuild at least one from Elephant, Waterloo,
Embankment or Charing X to allow cross platform interchange with the
Northern line. It's annoying that none of the interchanges are particularly
convenient.

With Emb and C-X the lines are really two far apart for this to be
feasible, while at Waterloo they're close enough that it's almost not
necssary, despite the inevitable congestion at the concourse. A major
issue is just how much need there is for a quick interchange, anyway.
The only people who need to would be those on the southbound Northern
who want to get to Lambeth North or E&C (although for the latter it's
probably just as easy to carry on to Kennington and then get a
northbound Northern train), or those on the southbound Bakerloo who
want to get to Kennington-Morden marginally quicker than carrying on
to E&C and changing to the Northern there. Northbound traffic is
similarly limited.

As regards a better interchange at E&C, you get into a bit of a
Catch-22 on the grounds that in most cases people coming south on the
Bakerloo would have been better changing to the Northern at Waterloo,
while those on the southbound Northern could wait until Kennington and
then change there. Of course, if it was decided to extend the
Bakerloo, it would be a good idea to work in a better interchange
then, but that seems unlikely.
--
Nick Cooper

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

The London Underground at War, and in Films & TV:
http://www.nickcooper.org.uk/

Sir Benjamin Nunn wrote:
"TKD" wrote in message
...
Now that the Jubilee Line no longer serves the complex
that was Charing Cross, the two remaining lines are
so far apart that interchange between them is too long.
Is there any truth that they are going to be reseparated
back into two stations (with or without an interchange) ?
I've not heard anything official, but personally this is one fairly
simple change I'd like to see. I think it makes a great deal of sense
to have a "Trafalgar Square" station (think of the tourists) - plus
showing an interchange here is not particularly helpful, especially if
coming from the Bakerloo side of things.
On line diagrams inside Bakerloo and Northern line trains it is not
shown as an interchange:


I don't think that reverting the Northern Line to Strand would be
particularly beneficial at this stage, but renaming the Bakerloo would
definitely have it's benefits.

I'm not sure... calling one "Trafalgar Square" when the other isn't
(i.e. as it was pre-Jubilee) might result in a Covent Garden scenario
where tourists want to go to Trafalgar Square and so make an unnecessary
change to the Bakerloo line from the Northern.

The same might apply for those unfamiliar with the area trying to get to
Charing Cross mainline station - if only the Northern line station is
called Charing Cross, they might think they have to go there; if there
is *no* station called Charing Cross, they might wonder why, and if
Embankment gets renamed Charing Cross, then people end up going to the
only station out of the three that actually has no integrated connection
with the main line station :-)

They could then be shown on the map as a 'Bank/Monument' type interchange.

That could work - but then one of the reasons for renaming one was to
avoid people interchanging there.

Personally, I'd like to rebuild at least one from Elephant, Waterloo,
Embankment or Charing X to allow cross platform interchange with the
Northern line. It's annoying that none of the interchanges are particularly
convenient.

BTN




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

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

They could then be shown on the map
as a 'Bank/Monument' type interchange.

That could work - but then one of the reasons for
renaming one was to avoid people interchanging there.

So the Bakerloo station should be renamed Trafalgar Square, and shown as a
separate station with a walking interchange with Charing Cross, in the way
that Euston Square is (or was) marked as a walking interchange with Euston.

--
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

John Rowland wrote:
So the Bakerloo station should be renamed Trafalgar Square, and shown as a
separate station with a walking interchange with Charing Cross, in the way
that Euston Square is (or was) marked as a walking interchange with Euston.

Yes, I'm very much in favour of this. Get Trafalgar Square sorted first
and stop showing an interchange here on all maps. I can't see any
drawbacks other than presumably no-one's willing to pay for it!

Sam