On 20 Apr, 13:22, Mizter T wrote:
ITYM "If you wanted to go *east*"...

No, this is the Piccadilly Line we're talking about, where east is
north and east is west and south is west and, one can only assume, at
Baron's Court west is east.

U

On Apr 21, 10:10*am, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 20 Apr, 13:22, Mizter T wrote:

ITYM "If you wanted to go *east*"...

No, this is the Piccadilly Line we're talking about, where east is
north and east is west and south is west and, one can only assume, at
Baron's Court west is east.

U

Fair enough! I remember some slightly ridiculous discussion over what
constituted what direction was "officially" what, with some arguing
that regardless of what the compass might say, what LU said was the
"official" direction meant that is what it was. To which I thought,
balls, East is East!

Mr Thant wrote:
On 20 Apr, 13:22, Mizter T wrote:
ITYM "If you wanted to go *east*"...

No, this is the Piccadilly Line we're talking about, where east is
north and east is west and south is west and, one can only assume, at
Baron's Court west is east.

I don't think so, but at Cockfosters, West is East.

On 21 Apr, 12:34, "John Rowland"
wrote:
I don't think so, but at Cockfosters, West is East.

Yep, passengers heading towards Cockfosters are heading west (even
though the signs say east). Therefore passengers heading from Baron's
Court to Earl's Court - which is also towards Cockfosters - must also
be heading west, whatever the so-called signs say.

U

On Apr 21, 12:45*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 21 Apr, 12:34, "John Rowland"
wrote:
I don't think so, but at Cockfosters, West is East.

Yep, passengers heading towards Cockfosters are heading west (even
though the signs say east). Therefore passengers heading from Baron's
Court to Earl's Court - which is also towards Cockfosters - must also
be heading west, whatever the so-called signs say.

U

And no-one - neither staff nor passengers - wear piccadills either.
Someone's trying to have us on.

In message
,
Mizter T writes

On Apr 21, 12:45*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 21 Apr, 12:34, "John Rowland"
wrote:
I don't think so, but at Cockfosters, West is East.

Yep, passengers heading towards Cockfosters are heading west (even
though the signs say east). Therefore passengers heading from Baron's
Court to Earl's Court - which is also towards Cockfosters - must also
be heading west, whatever the so-called signs say.

U

And no-one - neither staff nor passengers - wear piccadills either.
Someone's trying to have us on.

Very good! You weren't on my Tyburn Trail walk in Sunday were you,
where this very subject featured? ;-)
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:55:17 +0100, tim..... wrote:

As you say it allows connection into the District trains to/from Richmond
when the Ealin services are less frequent.

But IME, the evening service starts much later than it needs to without
disrupting the service. It could easily start an hour earlier and none of
the Picc pax would be disrupted.

Err, what? How can trains in that hour stop at Turnham Green without
increasing the journey time for Picc passengers not getting on/off
there?

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:31:57 GMT, Richard J. wrote:

Wouldn't it make more sense to get rid of Barons Court on the Picc and
replace it with Turnham Green?

No. Baron's Court has more passengers entering and exiting the station
per year (6.7M) than Turnham Green (5.9M). (2007 figures on the TfL
site, the most recent available)

I don't see any reason to link these two issues. If a Picc stop at
Barons Court is not justified, then that's the case regardless of
whether it stops at Turnham Green. And vice versa.

On Apr 22, 11:30*pm, asdf wrote:

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:31:57 GMT, Richard J. wrote:
Wouldn't it make more sense to get rid of Barons Court on the Picc and
replace it with Turnham Green?

No. Baron's Court has more passengers entering and exiting the station
per year (6.7M) than Turnham Green (5.9M). * (2007 figures on the TfL
site, the most recent available)

I don't see any reason to link these two issues. If a Picc stop at
Barons Court is not justified, then that's the case regardless of
whether it stops at Turnham Green. And vice versa.

The point is if a Picc stop could be justified at both Barons Court
and Turnham Green, then this could mean the Picc making an extra stop
compared to the current service - and that has all sorts of knock-on
implications for journey durations (esp. notable is Heathrow - central
London), timetabling and the number of trains required. So if there's
a desire not to upset that apple cart, then it becomes a bit of a
battle between Barons Court and Turnham Green.

Of course once the Picc has new signalling and ATO (? I presume that's
the plan) then maybe another stop could be slotted in without messing
up the timings too much.

If the main issue with a long term stop at Turnham Green is the
increased journey times for Piccadilly line users then i'm all up for
replacing the stop at Barons Court with a stop at Turnham Green.
Barons Court and Turnham Green may have similar entry and exit numbers
but Turnham Green is at a point where the district line divides and
hence it has potential as a very useful interchange stop. If I'm
travelling from Richmond, Kew or Gunnersbury on the District Line and
need to travel West on the Piccadilly Line, this currently requires me
to first change on to an Ealing bound district line service to Acton
Town and then change on to the Piccadilly Line from there, adding
10-15 minutes to my journey. Likewise, if a traveller is on the
Heathrow or Uxbridge branch of the Piccadilly Line going east and
wishes to travel on the Richmond Branch of the District Line they also
have this time wasting double change.

Let's not forget that Richmond is a major station, Kew Gardens a major
tourist attraction, and Gunnersbury an important business location and
a link with the Overground. The Piccadilly lines mentioned above also
have a large number of stations and a large catchment area including
Heathrow Airport. So this 10-15 minute time saving could translate
into a big overall time saving for a lot of people.

A stop at Turnham green would also benefit Chiswick Park, Richmond,
Kew and Gunnersbury east bound travellers who could get on the quicker
Piccadilly line going east at an earlier opportunity, the Ravenscourt
Park and Stamford Brook west bound travellers who could get on the
Piccadilly line going west at an earlier opportunity and of course the
Turnham green residents themselves:-)

So overall, a benefit to lots of people compared with a disadvantage
for the people at 1 underground stop (Barons Court) who will still
have two District Line services and a 1 stop west/2 stops east easy
change on to the Piccadilly Line.