Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

On 10 Oct, 09:10, Mwmbwls wrote:
On Oct 10, 8:20 am, lonelytraveller

wrote:
On 10 Oct, 07:56, James Farrar wrote:

The new issue of Private Eye, out today, has the following interesting
section on the much-delayed Shepherd's Bush WLL station:

---

At the heart of the new £1.6bn mega-development in London, just north
of Shepherd's Bush, there is to be a new railway station on the West
London line. It is a key part of the plan to ensure good public access
to the 300 shops, 14-screen cinema and all the rest of this huge
scheme. All very Green.

The station is virtually complete but surprisingly there is no
announcement about when it will open. Although it should have been
handed over to operators Silverlink at the end of August, the handover
has now been postponed indefinitely. That's because one of the
platforms is 18 inches shorter than the minimum specified by the
Railway Inspectorate. This might not sound like much, but with the
numbers expected to use the station, it is enough to pose a genuine
safety risk.

It might sound simple to resolve, too, with a bit of extra concrete,
but unfortunately there is a huge wall in the way and the estimated
cost is a staggering £7n. The issue is now the subject of a major
dispute between all the players - developer Westfield, Transport for
London and the safety inspectors. There seems no easy resolution, but
someone is going to have to cough up £7m for what will be the most
expensive 18 inches of railway platform in the world.

Can they not just use platform edge doors?

Sensible suggestion but will it work with variable train lengths and
differing stock types with differing door spacing. It works on the
Jubilee because of uniform stock types and lengths ?- remember the
insertion of extra coaches could only be done on a block closure
basis.

If there are variable train lengths, then surely there can be trains
short enough to safely use the platfoms?

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

On 10 Oct, 15:24, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"John B" wrote in message

(snip)

That's slightly saner - the '18 inches of length' point as reported in
the Eye made no sense whatsoever, but I can see that adding 45cm of
width to a full-length platform could be an expensive undertaking, and
that a narrow platform might actually be dangerous (whereas a short
platform can be dealt with by SDO). In which case, somebody involved
with the design needs shot.

I'm not sure which is 'up' or 'down', but I'm sure its the western side
platform that is the problem. The bit where the stairs and lifts come down
is quite deep, possibly for about a coach length, but to the north of that
it is quite narrow, and the back wall is quite substantial, I wonder if it
is supporting the higher ground of the bus station?

Dave Arquati's site links to some photos, which seem to predate the
retaining wall going in:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/davearq...et-72157594243...

Paul

I'm intrigued to know whether this was an error on the plans or an
error on the ground, but it would all seem to strongly suggest that
the width of the retaining wall wasn't given proper consideration.

Shepherd's Bush WLL - opening winter 2009?

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

Mizter T wrote:

I'm intrigued to know whether this was an error on the plans or an
error on the ground, but it would all seem to strongly suggest that
the width of the retaining wall wasn't given proper consideration.

It's the Hastings Line all over again!

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

On 10 Okt., 15:24, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
I'm not sure which is 'up' or 'down', but I'm sure its the western side
platform that is the problem. The bit where the stairs and lifts come down
is quite deep, possibly for about a coach length, but to the north of that
it is quite narrow, and the back wall is quite substantial, I wonder if it
is supporting the higher ground of the bus station?

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and took some
photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...m-debacle.html

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

"Mr Thant" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 10 Okt., 15:24, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
I'm not sure which is 'up' or 'down', but I'm sure its the western side
platform that is the problem. The bit where the stairs and lifts come
down
is quite deep, possibly for about a coach length, but to the north of
that
it is quite narrow, and the back wall is quite substantial, I wonder if
it
is supporting the higher ground of the bus station?

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and took some
photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...m-debacle.html


Well done, a picture is worth a thousand words. My last view was from the
window of a passing Silverlink service

Always seems to me that there must be a better solution than all these lamp
standards as well, they don't exactly help the passenger circulation. But
in this case, perhaps they have too many? There seems to be a pole every few
yards, given its only a four car platform...

Paul

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

Mr Thant wrote:
On 10 Okt., 15:24, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
I'm not sure which is 'up' or 'down',

'Up' is towards Broad Street. :-)

but I'm sure its the western side platform that is the problem.
The bit where the stairs and lifts come down is quite deep,
possibly for about a coach length, but to the north of that
it is quite narrow, and the back wall is quite substantial, I
wonder if it is supporting the higher ground of the bus
station?

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and
took some photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...m-debacle.html

That's great. Thanks.

Can't they just move the yellow line? No, really. It seems a long way
from the edge of the platform. What's the speed limit on this line?

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

Paul Scott wrote:
"Mr Thant" wrote in message
ups.com...

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and took
some photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...m-debacle.html


Well done, a picture is worth a thousand words. My last view was from
the window of a passing Silverlink service

Always seems to me that there must be a better solution than all
these lamp standards as well, they don't exactly help the passenger
circulation. But in this case, perhaps they have too many? There
seems to be a pole every few yards, given its only a four car
platform...

It's not obvious why the posts are there at all. Wouldn't fixing the lamps
be to the wall solve the problem?

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

At 23:58:22 on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 John Rowland opined:-

Paul Scott wrote:
"Mr Thant" wrote in message
ups.com...

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and took
some photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...bush-platform-
debacle.html


Well done, a picture is worth a thousand words. My last view was from
the window of a passing Silverlink service

Always seems to me that there must be a better solution than all
these lamp standards as well, they don't exactly help the passenger
circulation. But in this case, perhaps they have too many? There
seems to be a pole every few yards, given its only a four car
platform...

It's not obvious why the posts are there at all. Wouldn't fixing the lamps
be to the wall solve the problem?


What are the regulations re the yellow line, and are they different for
National Rail and LUL? At Paddington, Platform 14 (NR) has the line 3-4
ft from the edge, whereas Platform 15 (Underground) has it 1 ft or less
from the edge.
--
Thoss
E-mail address usenetatamoladdotorgdotuk

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

"thoss" wrote in message
...
At 23:58:22 on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 John Rowland opined:-

Paul Scott wrote:
"Mr Thant" wrote in message
ups.com...

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and took
some photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...bush-platform-
debacle.html


Well done, a picture is worth a thousand words. My last view was from
the window of a passing Silverlink service

Always seems to me that there must be a better solution than all
these lamp standards as well, they don't exactly help the passenger
circulation. But in this case, perhaps they have too many? There
seems to be a pole every few yards, given its only a four car
platform...

It's not obvious why the posts are there at all. Wouldn't fixing the lamps
be to the wall solve the problem?


What are the regulations re the yellow line, and are they different for
National Rail and LUL? At Paddington, Platform 14 (NR) has the line 3-4
ft from the edge, whereas Platform 15 (Underground) has it 1 ft or less
from the edge.

Probably different - LU hasn't generally # had to deal with either slam
doors being
opened while the train moving, or passing HSTs, turbulence caused by passing
freights etc.

But it seems recent NR installations do have a certain standard depth of
edging, then the tactile strip, then the yellow line.

# I'm aware LU & NR share platforms here and there...

Paul

Shepherd's Bush WLL
 

On 12 Oct, 11:38, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"thoss" wrote in message

...





At 23:58:22 on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 John Rowland opined:-

Paul Scott wrote:
"Mr Thant" wrote in message
groups.com...

I was intrigued enough to pay a visit to the site today, and took
some photos:
http://londonconnections.blogspot.co...bush-platform-
debacle.html

Well done, a picture is worth a thousand words. My last view was from
the window of a passing Silverlink service

Always seems to me that there must be a better solution than all
these lamp standards as well, they don't exactly help the passenger
circulation. But in this case, perhaps they have too many? There
seems to be a pole every few yards, given its only a four car
platform...

It's not obvious why the posts are there at all. Wouldn't fixing the lamps
be to the wall solve the problem?

What are the regulations re the yellow line, and are they different for
National Rail and LUL? At Paddington, Platform 14 (NR) has the line 3-4
ft from the edge, whereas Platform 15 (Underground) has it 1 ft or less
from the edge.

Probably different - LU hasn't generally # had to deal with either slam
doors being
opened while the train moving, or passing HSTs, turbulence caused by passing
freights etc.

But it seems recent NR installations do have a certain standard depth of
edging, then the tactile strip, then the yellow line.

# I'm aware LU & NR share platforms here and there...

Paul


Has there ever been a regulation?

The original yellow lines were used to advertise the IC125 service out
of Paddington. They were accompanied by little signs attached to
posts saying "High speed trains pass this platform". I am sure it was
more of a publicity than a safety thing.

But more recently yellow lines started appearing everywhere. I am
sure it is generally a good idea to stand back from the platform edge,
but if there was ever a higher level of risk associated with high
speeds, it has been lost and the warning devalued.