Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to Heathrow
airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district line to Hounslow
and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing? Why? Because district trains
are much bigger and so they would have been much more room for passengers
and their luggage rather than the pokey little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it would have
entailed for passengers with luggage?

B2003

Unless I'm very much mistaken, it was Boltar ),
in message who said:
Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to
Heathrow airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district
line to Hounslow and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing? Why?
Because district trains are much bigger and so they would have been
much more room for passengers and their luggage rather than the pokey
little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it
would have entailed for passengers with luggage?


I'm not entirely sure that D-stock trains would fit through the tunnels,
unless they deliberately bored them at a wider gauge to prepare for this
eventuality.

BTN

"Boltar" wrote in message
m...
Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to Heathrow
airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district line to Hounslow
and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing? Why? Because district
trains
are much bigger and so they would have been much more room for passengers
and their luggage rather than the pokey little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it would
have
entailed for passengers with luggage?

B2003

There was some discussion by LUL about extending the District Line to
rayners and Uxbridge, leaving the Picc Line to run the Ealing Bdy and
heathrow lines. I dont know what became of this idea!
But then it is LUL!!

(Boltar) wrote the following in:
m

Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to
Heathrow airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district
line to Hounslow and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing?
Why? Because district trains are much bigger and so they would
have been much more room for passengers and their luggage rather
than the pokey little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it
would have entailed for passengers with luggage?

It may have been because the Piccadilly skips a few stations that the
District stops at between Earl's Court and the start of the Heathrow
section, so it's a bit quicker

--
message by Robin May, consumer of liquids
Hello. I'm one of those "roaring fascists of the left wing".

Hacker is to computer as boy racer is to Ford Escort.

In message , Boltar
writes

Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to Heathrow
airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district line to Hounslow
and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing? Why? Because district trains
are much bigger and so they would have been much more room for passengers
and their luggage rather than the pokey little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it would have
entailed for passengers with luggage?

I imagine that the reason may have been that the Piccadilly goes more
directly to traditional "hotels zones" - Knightsbridge, Hyde Park Corner
(for Park Lane), Green Park (for Piccadilly) and Russell Square.

While the District serves Victoria (and also, like the Picc, Earls
Court) the cheaper hotels in these areas were seldom used by tourists
arriving by air in the days when the Heathrow extension was built -
their popularity has largely been a phenomenon of the much cheaper
flights of the last decade.

--
Paul Terry

Surely the main reason for not doing this was that the frequency of the
Ealing service on the District was so much less than the Piccadilly to
Hounslow. And you could not increase it without decreasing the Wimbledon or
Richmond services; not an option given the loadings on both branches,
particularly Wimbledon.
The Piccadilly had a much more frequent service to Hounslow and only that
frequency could cope with loadings to Heathrow.

"Boltar" wrote in message
m...
Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to Heathrow
airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district line to Hounslow
and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing? Why? Because district
trains
are much bigger and so they would have been much more room for passengers
and their luggage rather than the pokey little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it would
have
entailed for passengers with luggage?

B2003

"Lawrie" wrote in message ...
Surely the main reason for not doing this was that the frequency of the
Ealing service on the District was so much less than the Piccadilly to
Hounslow. And you could not increase it without decreasing the Wimbledon or
Richmond services; not an option given the loadings on both branches,
particularly Wimbledon.
The Piccadilly had a much more frequent service to Hounslow and only that
frequency could cope with loadings to Heathrow.

"Boltar" wrote in message
m...
Something I was wondering the other day , when the extension to Heathrow
airport was built why didn't they re-extend the district line to Hounslow
and beyond and divert the piccadilly to ealing? Why? Because district
trains
are much bigger and so they would have been much more room for passengers
and their luggage rather than the pokey little tube trains on the picc.

Was there a good reason for not doing this given the benefits it would
have
entailed for passengers with luggage?

B2003

The tunnels from Hounslow West to Heathrow were built using the
cut-and-cover method that was used on the district/met lines when they
were built, unusually. The piccadilly stock has specially built
luggage spaces. Also it is much quicker I find to central london. I
would guess you could find the feasability study for the extension
online or if you phoned up LU.

"CJC" wrote in message
om

The tunnels from Hounslow West to Heathrow were built using the
cut-and-cover method that was used on the district/met lines when they
were built, unusually.

There is some cut and cover tunnel, but much of the Heathrow extension is
deep-bored, including all of the line under the airport itself.
Cut-and-cover would hardly have been an option for a line that was tunneled
under an active and very busy runway, a number of taxiways, probably some
hangars and (presumably) Terminal 3.

"Nigel Pendse" wrote in message
...
"CJC" wrote in message
om

The tunnels from Hounslow West to Heathrow were built using the
cut-and-cover method that was used on the district/met lines when they
were built, unusually.

There is some cut and cover tunnel, but much of the Heathrow extension is
deep-bored, including all of the line under the airport itself.
Cut-and-cover would hardly have been an option for a line that was
tunneled
under an active and very busy runway, a number of taxiways, probably some
hangars and (presumably) Terminal 3.

Just because it was deep-bored doesn't mean it has to be small bore. In this
city there are deep level main line rail tunnels (for double deck stock) as
well as deep-bored road tollway tunnels (3 lanes each way).
Peter
Sydney

(CJC) wrote in message . com...
were built, unusually. The piccadilly stock has specially built
luggage spaces. Also it is much quicker I find to central london. I

Yes , that stock AFAIK was built especially for the new heathrow link.
But then if they'd decided to use the district line then they'd have
built new district line trains (the district stock on the line then was
due to be replaced soon anyway , hence the D stock from 1978) that had
the same type luggage space but had generally more room. You can't get
around that fact that tube stock trains are small and if you have more
than a few suitcases in any given luggage area then things get awkward
and passengers boarding on and off end up tripping over them.

To be honest , short of using stock from the Romney Hythe and Dymchurch
railway you couldn't really use less appropriate trains to serve a major
international airport IMO and LU only made things worse when the
refurbishment of the trains substaintially reduced the amount of seating
(but did little to improve the standing room) which has resulted (I know
cos I've seen it) in people having to stand all the way from heathrow.

B2003