|
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
Oh what a morning Thursday was. WAGN had the usual electrical problems at Moorgate so we got diverted to Kings Cross. Then after getting on the Circle Line platform the infamous "Emergency clear the station" announcement went off. Why? Several staff said in all honesty it was because the station was too busy ?!! Now I know there are risks associated with full platforms, but they can't be as bad as shoving hundreds of bewildered tourists & commuters out onto the Marylebone road :-) Whoever cooked this idea up should see the misery of lost tourists with suitcases and mothers with young children. Can I make a plea that London Transport trust the public to behave sensibly on full platforms and please shut stations as a last resort ?! -- Edward Cowling London UK |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
Then after getting on the Circle Line platform the infamous
"Emergency clear the station" announcement went off. Why? Several staff said in all honesty it was because the station was too busy ?!! Boy who cried wolf? |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
In message .com, Paul
Weaver writes Then after getting on the Circle Line platform the infamous "Emergency clear the station" announcement went off. Why? Several staff said in all honesty it was because the station was too busy ?!! Boy who cried wolf? Well of course no one believes the announcements because they're often used because the system "Is a victim of it's own success." :-) So no doubt one day while we're all standing there and cursing yet another pointless clearance of the station..... we'll all get blown to bits. Plus although it's below the belt it has to be said. If Brixton station wasn't often closed for no good reason that Brazilian guy would have got on the train he wanted and still be alive today. As I say....... last possible resort guys !! -- Edward Cowling London UK |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
|
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
Now I know there are risks associated with full platforms,
but they can't be as bad as shoving hundreds of bewildered tourists & commuters out onto the Marylebone road :-) Euston Road is an area from which people can easily escape if they begin to get crushed (either into Kings Cross mainline, either way along the road or into a side street). On the deep-level tube platforms this is not the case -- if the number of people down there isn't regulated then it could easily lead to someone falling or being accidentally pushed onto the tracks. Whoever cooked this idea up should see the misery of lost tourists with suitcases and mothers with young children. What's worse -- the 'misery' of being lost (and only lost until you ask a member of staff for directions, at that) or the misery of seeing that young child go under a train? Can I make a plea that London Transport trust the public to behave sensibly on full platforms and please shut stations as a last resort ?! London Underground can't trust people to behave sensibly on full or busy platforms because people prove every working day that they can't be trusted to do it. I'm sure we've all seen people refuse to pass down the platform, block entrances and exits in large groups and do other things to endanger safety. I doubt I am the only one who is amazed by the people who, upon seeing that a station is closed for an emergency try to argue their way past the staff and into the station so that they can continue their journey. Can I make a plea to members of the public to trust London Underground to use their experience to keep people safe, even if they sometimes err on the side of caution and sometimes you can't understand why they are doing what they are doing? Pete |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
|
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
|
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
I remember a while ago getting a train into Waterloo mainline station
and the undergroung was shut due to over crowding, so they got everyone to walk to Embankment which then was over crowded, although left open. |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
|
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
|
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
In article , Edward Cowling
London UK writes WAGN had the usual electrical problems at Moorgate so we got diverted to Kings Cross. One train failed at Moorgate. The following train was sent in to couple to it and draw it clear, but the fault transferred to it. That meant the service was in the hands of the fitters. [I was on the first 313 to be diverted to King's Cross, having transferred from a KX service at Finsbury Park :-]. -- 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: |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
"Peter Lawrence" wrote in message
... On 26 Mar 2006 02:21:29 -0800, wrote: Whoever cooked this idea up should see the misery of lost tourists with suitcases and mothers with young children. What's worse -- the 'misery' of being lost (and only lost until you ask a member of staff for directions, at that) or the misery of seeing that young child go under a train? What is the point of asking staff for directions? All they canl say is, effectively 'go away', ie off the station, so you are no longer our responsibility. That's not true at all. I've had lots of great directions from Underground staff. I think your generalisation is a bit inaccurate. Can I make a plea that London Transport trust the public to behave sensibly on full platforms and please shut stations as a last resort ?! London Underground can't trust people to behave sensibly on full or busy platforms because people prove every working day that they can't be trusted to do it. I'm sure we've all seen people refuse to pass down the platform, block entrances and exits in large groups and do other things to endanger safety. I doubt I am the only one who is amazed by the people who, upon seeing that a station is closed for an emergency try to argue their way past the staff and into the station so that they can continue their journey. That was not the subject if complaint. The point is that a platform approaching congestion is not of itself a reason for emergency clearance. Further entry should be blocked but there is not an imminent emergency which requires evacuation. That's not what he was saying. He was pointing out that people act like asses on the tube. And he's right - they'll do the most ridiculous things. Standing so the platform is blocked is dangerous, as people trying to get by can accidentally force people, or be forced, onto the track. Stopping people from entering the station doesn't help at all - people will keep pushing down towards the platforms, and if the volume of trains isn't sufficient to remove people from the platform to counter the crush, people will end up on the track. Not to mention if there was a fire. Evacuations without the risk of death are always preferrable to those with. Can I make a plea to members of the public to trust London Underground to use their experience to keep people safe, even if they sometimes err on the side of caution and sometimes you can't understand why they are doing what they are doing? Yes, provided we can trust them to distinguish between a crowd and a real emergency. It was a real emergency. If something wasn't done, there very well could have been one or more people under a train, and LU would be getting their asses handed to them by various parts of the public. They're erring on the side of caution, as public backlash has demonstrated that's the best way for everyone. dave -- Peter Lawrence |
Kings Cross Shut - Thursday
d wrote:
That was not the subject if complaint. The point is that a platform approaching congestion is not of itself a reason for emergency clearance. Further entry should be blocked but there is not an imminent emergency which requires evacuation. That's not what he was saying. He was pointing out that people act like asses on the tube. And he's right - they'll do the most ridiculous things. Standing so the platform is blocked is dangerous, as people trying to get by can accidentally force people, or be forced, onto the track. Stopping people from entering the station doesn't help at all - people will keep pushing down towards the platforms, and if the volume of trains isn't sufficient to remove people from the platform to counter the crush, people will end up on the track. Not to mention if there was a fire. Evacuations without the risk of death are always preferrable to those with. While I agree in general that stopping people entering an Underground station wouldn't avoid the risk of dangerous congestion, the OP was talking about the KXSP Metropolitan line station. This is an unusual case, in that the ticket barrier does directly control platform access and so closing the barrier would have addressed the risk adequately. It would be perfectly reasonable for LUL to have a system-wide rule to avoid ambiguity, saying that in such cases the station must be closed, rather than either relying on staff judgement or having an enormously complicated set of station-by-station closure criteria. However, as with the enforcement of the non-smoking rule on open-air LUL ex-BR stations[*], it's also reasonable for people to get a bit frustrated when there seems to be no justification for the rule's applicaiton in a particular situation. (see also endless discussions about fare-dodgers vs honest passengers forced to miss their train because they're not allowed through the barriers) [*] I'm thinking of the late 1980s when the rule was introduced and when smoking outside of enclosed spaces was generally considered acceptable, here. I'm aware attitudes have now changed so that even smoking in a bus queue is frowned upon... -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:20 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk