"David of Broadway" wrote in message
...
Paul Terry wrote:

A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been
possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been
rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the
number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small indeed.

If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to
District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to?

http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...geViewsIndex=1

It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road?
--
David Biddulph

David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in message
...
Paul Terry wrote:

A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been
possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been
rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the
number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small indeed.

If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to
District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to?

http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...geViewsIndex=1

It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road?

What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not "an
underground passageway"?
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

"David of Broadway" wrote in message
...
David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in message
...
Paul Terry wrote:

A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been
possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been
rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the
number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small
indeed.

If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to
District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to?

http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...geViewsIndex=1

It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road?

What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not "an
underground passageway"?

I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link between the
two stations.
--
David Biddulph

David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in message
...
David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in message
...
Paul Terry wrote:

A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been
possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been
rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the
number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small
indeed.
If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to
District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to?

http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...geViewsIndex=1
It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road?
What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not "an
underground passageway"?

I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link between the
two stations.

If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station, how
much more work could it be to connect it inside the station?
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

In article , david.of
(David of Broadway) wrote:

David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in
message ...
David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in
message ...
Paul Terry wrote:

A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would
have been possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith
Broadway has been rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it
never happened because the number of passengers requiring
such an interchange is very small indeed.
If there was never an underground passageway, then what
"Subway to District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former)
sign referring to?


http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...Id=15350&g2_im
ageViewsIndex=1
It could have been referring to one of the subways under the
road?
What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not
"an underground passageway"?

I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link
between the two stations.

If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station,
how much more work could it be to connect it inside the station?

Quite a lot as I remember the subway. Neither end was that near either
station (especially the Met/H&C one) and the levels were all wrong too, I
suspect. Why something wasn't included with the Hammersmith (District and
Piccadilly) station redevelopment is beyond me, however.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , david.of
(David of Broadway) wrote:

David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in
message ...
David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in
message ...
Paul Terry wrote:

A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would
have been possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith
Broadway has been rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it
never happened because the number of passengers requiring
such an interchange is very small indeed.
If there was never an underground passageway, then what
"Subway to District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former)
sign referring to?


http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...Id=15350&g2_im
ageViewsIndex=1
It could have been referring to one of the subways under the
road?
What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not
"an underground passageway"?

I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link
between the two stations.

If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station,
how much more work could it be to connect it inside the station?

Quite a lot as I remember the subway. Neither end was that near
either station (especially the Met/H&C one) and the levels were all
wrong too, I suspect. Why something wasn't included with the
Hammersmith (District and Piccadilly) station redevelopment is
beyond me, however.

Since the D & P platforms are islands, you would need any interchange
subway to go up or down from them first. Unless you put four escalators
in the subway, which I doubt could have been justified, such a subway
would not be more convenient than the present street-level crossing
which has the advantage that it's at platform level for the H&C station.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In message , David of Broadway
writes

If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station, how
much more work could it be to connect it inside the station?

An awful lot. The north end emerged in the street not particularly close
to the H&C station. But the real problem would have been on the south
side - projecting the subway any further south would have meant crossing
the District and Piccadilly lines on the level (!) especially to reach
the westbound platforms.

Since the H&C is a surface level station, and the ticket barriers of the
D&P station are also at surface level, a surface-level crossing makes
sense - and I suspect that the solution of a pedestrian crossing also
appealed as a "traffic calming" measure (the subway was never LU
property, so I doubt they had much say in the matter).

--
Paul Terry