On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:16:17 +0100
Ian Jelf wrote:


In message , writes
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:47:31 +0100
Ian Jelf wrote:
Are they any more frequent than our Tube? I didn't get that impression
(I appreciate that they have express services superimposed.). I also
found it a much harder system to navigate.

The frequency was about the same, but it always seemed reliable. There was
none of this 15 min wait in the rush hour ********

Do you mean on the outer end of a branch like at Amersham or somewhere?
I don't think I've ever waited more than 6 or 7 minutes even in places
like Stanmore or Ruislip Gardens at 7.30am on a Sunday.

Early on a sunday is when the trains are most likely to be reliable.
I'm talking about endless waits at various stations in and outside the
centre because of some reason or the other. I had many occasions waiting
for a northbound piccadilly line train at finsbury park when 3 or on rare
occasions 4 northbound victoria line trains would come and go. It does seem
the automatic lines are more reliable (except when they fail completely)
in terms of service which tells you all you need to know really about
the real reasons for **** poor service on the other lines.

B2003

On Apr 28, 10:46*am, Huge wrote:

On 2009-04-28, Ian Jelf wrote:

In message , writes

The frequency was about the same, but it always seemed reliable. There was
none of this 15 min wait in the rush hour ********

Do you mean on the outer end of a branch like at Amersham or somewhere?
I don't think I've ever waited more than 6 or 7 minutes even in places
like Stanmore or Ruislip Gardens at 7.30am on a Sunday.

You've obviously never waited for a Circle Line train at Monument.


You haven't observed one of the basic rules of the Underground - don't
rely on the Circle line!

"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...
In message ,
writes

I wouldn't categorise it as anything
close to the best. I'll take frequent services and cheap tickets over tidy
stations any day. The NYC subway is a dump but the trains are fast,
frequent,
air conditioned and it doesn't cost much.

Are they any more frequent than our Tube? I didn't get that impression (I
appreciate that they have express services superimposed.). I also found
it a much harder system to navigate.

I remember it took a while to get used to the conventions it has on
signposting within stations. There is (or maybe was - I was living there in
1991/2, and haven't returned since) a deliberate lack of signs within
stations, but a very consistent set of rules about where each type of sign
is and what it says. It takes a while to get used to the rules, but once you
know where to look it's a doddle.

D A Stocks

In message , writes
Early on a sunday is when the trains are most likely to be reliable.

Just for the record, I don't *just* use them early on a Sunday morning.
:-)) I would say I have an above-average pattern of use by time and
area, simply because I don't have a "standard commute.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

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

Mizter T wrote:
On Apr 28, 10:46 am, Huge wrote:

On 2009-04-28, Ian Jelf wrote:

In message , writes

The frequency was about the same, but it always seemed reliable.
There was none of this 15 min wait in the rush hour ********

Do you mean on the outer end of a branch like at Amersham or
somewhere? I don't think I've ever waited more than 6 or 7 minutes
even in places like Stanmore or Ruislip Gardens at 7.30am on a
Sunday.

You've obviously never waited for a Circle Line train at Monument.


You haven't observed one of the basic rules of the Underground - don't
rely on the Circle line!


Take the red line, the green line, the silver or blue
Take a trip with your family -- and see where they go
Any line you can think of -- except for the yellow
Give them a free ticket -- it's the best thing to do
And if you wind up on the circle line
Then if you run into the yellow

Well that's up to you
Hell, it's not from lack of options

Round and around
Round and around
Getting no higher from the ground
The circle has an empty sound
The endless full circle -- for the next in line
The endless full circle -- are you the next in line
Round and around

In message , Huge
writes
On 2009-04-28, Ian Jelf wrote:
In message , writes
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:47:31 +0100
Ian Jelf wrote:
Are they any more frequent than our Tube? I didn't get that impression
(I appreciate that they have express services superimposed.). I also
found it a much harder system to navigate.

The frequency was about the same, but it always seemed reliable. There was
none of this 15 min wait in the rush hour ********

Do you mean on the outer end of a branch like at Amersham or somewhere?
I don't think I've ever waited more than 6 or 7 minutes even in places
like Stanmore or Ruislip Gardens at 7.30am on a Sunday.

You've obviously never waited for a Circle Line train at Monument.

Yes, fair enough. Waiting for the Circle Line is one of those
occasions I'd overlooked when posting and I'm happy to correct myself!
:-) That said, Circle Line train always seem to come quickly and
often.......whenever I'm wanting a District Line one!

It's just one of those features of the Underground, like "whichever
entrance I use at Charing Cross is always the one furthest from the
platform I want" and "don't change at Green Park unless you can help
it"!

Mind you, the change at Opera/Auber in Paris often seems to *involve* a
walk via London.......
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

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

"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...

Mind you, the change at Opera/Auber in Paris often seems to *involve* a
walk via London.......

Any trip that I make to my client in Aubervilliers *always* involves a cab
from Gare Du Nord! ;-)

Ian

In message
,
Alex writes
If they were to rate architecture and general impressiveness of
appearance - then Moscow Metro would probably win. But as a transport
service it certainly lags behind.
I found the Moscow Metro a curious setup, the trains seemed old but all
had rheostatic braking, and I didn't like the juice rail right under the
platform instead of furthest away. Paris has stations too close together
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like
Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.
New York, (where every car is both a power car and driving car) can be
confusing and has a habit of missing stations unless you're very
careful, I've had to walk back the full length of Central Park before
now. Outside of London I would vote BART as the best of the lot
especially as the trains do 75mph in the tunnels, more than double all
the rest. But for good coverage and a reasonably reliable service I
would vote for London.
--
Clive

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:42:41 +0100
Clive wrote:
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like

I find that rubber tyred stock has a nasty bouncy characteristic when
going fast.

Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.

Sounds like the central line. The current crop of ATO systems seem pretty
braindead.

B2003

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

Barcelona's was fine when i was there several years ago, but quite like
Rome, ie nothing exciting. The fact that the network also includes
funiculars and cable-cars is rather excellent, though!

Maybe we should campaign for some in London, up Gants Hill, maybe.

There was a semi-serious proposal for one in Chatham or something, wasn't
there?

Barcelona's has its middle stop at the summit of a mighty tower:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=barc...03523762807984
http://bacn.me/37l

Perhaps the Post Office Tower could be pressed into service? The line
could run from Primrose Hill to the GPO, then across the river to the Eye.

tom

--
Swords not words!