"John Rowland" wrote in news:ettvch
:

Tom Anderson wrote:

The only problem i can see with the 'Anglostar' name is if services
are run up north - i really can't see the Scots being happy with that
one!

We need a British version of "Bullet Train". How about "Knife Train"?



python
What about a Pointed Stick?
/python
--
www.lightningnews.com Lightning fast anonymous usenet downloads for 5$ only !

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:10:27 +0000, Mike Roebuck
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:15:51 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

The only problem i can see with the 'Anglostar' name is if services are
run up north - i really can't see the Scots being happy with that one!

We need a British version of "Bullet Train". How about "Knife Train"?

Cosh train?

Since we're moving away from Waterloo, perhaps we could stick two fingers
up at the French by calling it the Arrow Train instead .

We've already had the "Golden Arrow". How about "The Longbow" instead?

:-)
No, that's what you use to send it out of the station. I suppose
"Golden Bolt" could be misunderstood.

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:10:27 +0000, Mike Roebuck
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:15:51 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

The only problem i can see with the 'Anglostar' name is if services
are
run up north - i really can't see the Scots being happy with that one!

We need a British version of "Bullet Train". How about "Knife Train"?

Cosh train?

Since we're moving away from Waterloo, perhaps we could stick two fingers
up at the French by calling it the Arrow Train instead .

We've already had the "Golden Arrow". How about "The Longbow" instead?

:-)
No, that's what you use to send it out of the station. I suppose
"Golden Bolt" could be misunderstood.
'The Golden Shot' cue.. 'Bernie- the bolt..'
Brian

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:10:28 -0000, "BH Williams"
wrote:


"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:10:27 +0000, Mike Roebuck
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:15:51 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

The only problem i can see with the 'Anglostar' name is if services
are
run up north - i really can't see the Scots being happy with that one!

We need a British version of "Bullet Train". How about "Knife Train"?

Cosh train?

Since we're moving away from Waterloo, perhaps we could stick two fingers
up at the French by calling it the Arrow Train instead .

We've already had the "Golden Arrow". How about "The Longbow" instead?

:-)
No, that's what you use to send it out of the station. I suppose
"Golden Bolt" could be misunderstood.
'The Golden Shot' cue.. 'Bernie- the bolt..'
Brian

Oi! You're giving our ages away. ;-)

In article ,
(Jack Taylor) wrote:

The suggestion was that there would not be access to the platforms from

the front of the station - perhaps things have changed since, following

consultation.

That's my concern as a cyclist. Access from Euston Road or Gray's Inn
Road to trains via a footbridge is not acceptable.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article .com,
(Paul Oter) wrote:

On 20 Mar, 14:15, "TimB" wrote:
On Mar 20, 11:20 am, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
Every train does have a designated platform.

Not in my experience

Hull Trains have so few services that it wouldn't be a good use
of space.

I didn't mean they should be the only TOC on that platform, just
that their trains should always be on the same platform - which would

help loading supplies as well as helping passengers.

If you mean that the same service (e.g. the 1915 to Cambridge)
should depart from the same King's Cross platform every day, then in my
experience of commuting it usually does, about 90% of the time. (It
uses platform 7).

It does in the current timetable indeed. I am sitting on the 1915 now and
it did leave from 7.

Unfortunately that means that all of us with bikes (quite a few because
it's the first train after the peak restrictions on which bikes are
allowed) have to get up and move our bikes after the train leaves the
Cross or else they block the doors at Letchworth and Royston.

I did put this point to WAGN several timetables ago and for a time they
did have it leave the Cross from an even-numbered platform, avoiding the
problem. No doubt the point got lost in the franchise change and we never
see FCC management any more.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

That's my concern as a cyclist. Access from Euston Road or Gray's Inn
Road to trains via a footbridge is not acceptable.

As a fellow cyclist, who sometimes brings his bike through town en route to
Peterborough or Cambridge, I'd agree. However, as we're talking about a
situation following the GN link-up with the Thameslink services, it may be
that any remaining FCC (or successor's) services are concentrated on the
suburban station and the entire main trainshed used for InterCity services -
so, certainly for us, the issue may not be relevant. Of course, there was a
desire to try and get rid of the suburban platforms entirely, with the main
trainshed used for everything. That objective may not be possible in view of
rising passenger numbers and increased service frequencies, but if it is
then access via the front of the station to the trainshed would be
preferable to battling with lifts in order to use the new footbridge!

In article ,
(Jack Taylor) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

That's my concern as a cyclist. Access from Euston Road or Gray's
Inn Road to trains via a footbridge is not acceptable.

As a fellow cyclist, who sometimes brings his bike through town en
route to Peterborough or Cambridge, I'd agree. However, as we're
talking about a situation following the GN link-up with the
Thameslink services, it may be that any remaining FCC (or
successor's) services are concentrated on the suburban station and
the entire main trainshed used for InterCity services - so,
certainly for us, the issue may not be relevant. Of course, there
was a desire to try and get rid of the suburban platforms entirely,
with the main trainshed used for everything. That objective may not
be possible in view of rising passenger numbers and increased
service frequencies, but if it is then access via the front of the
station to the trainshed would be preferable to battling with lifts
in order to use the new footbridge!

I have a feeling that work to King's Cross will precede the St Pancras
Midland Road GN connection and by the time that happens I'll have
retired.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

The only problem i can see with the 'Anglostar' name is if services
are run up north - i really can't see the Scots being happy with
that one!

We need a British version of "Bullet Train". How about "Knife Train"?

Cosh train?

Since we're moving away from Waterloo, perhaps we could stick two
fingers up at the French by calling it the Arrow Train instead .

St Pancras already has Arrow trains, they go from downstairs.

"Colin Rosenstiel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Jack Taylor) wrote:

The suggestion was that there would not be access to the platforms from

the front of the station - perhaps things have changed since, following

consultation.

That's my concern as a cyclist. Access from Euston Road or Gray's Inn
Road to trains via a footbridge is not acceptable.


Why are you still concerned then? The information provided earlier shows
quite clearly that the 'main' access, and all the exits, for platforms 1-7
is from the south west corner and south end of the station, where the steps
come up from the tube ticket hall, in fact. Platform 8 is accessed on the
level, from either end of the ticket hall. The footbridge provides one way
access to platforms 1-7 from the mezzanine floor (where the shops and cafes
are) for people waiting for a while for long distance trains.

Paul