castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Nov 3, 2011 8:38:33 GMT
Similarly, in about 1966, I remember being on a late-running 65 bus twixt Chessington Zoo & Leatherhead. A 65 coming up from Leatherhead flashed our driver as we were obviously speeding, and yes, there was a police speed trap just before Leatherhead. There is no doubt we were travelling at more than 46 mph. I would have estimated about 55mph. It was a clear road then before the M25 junction was built and no PAX to interfere with the run.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Nov 2, 2011 14:03:46 GMT
Aha Auxsetreq : > The chocolate raisins in the poppet valves will no doubt be:
"Paynes Poppets or Poppets is confectionery manufactured by Fox's Confectionery, first introduced in 1937. It comes in five different flavours (Mint, Choc Chip Cookie, Toffee, Raisin, and Orange). The Orange and Mint varieties are made of a fondant centre with a dark chocolate covering, the Choc Chip Cookie, Toffee and Raisin varieties have their filling coated with milk chocolate".
These were regularly dispensed in card packets for 6d before decimalisation at most railway stations (with the obvious exception of Castlebar Park). l wondered where they'd all gone so thank you for supplying the answer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hey, My clock has just reverted back to BST. Why??
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Nov 1, 2011 8:39:57 GMT
The trick would be to arrange to all turn up together one day and overload the coach.
They could hardly tell those who couldn't get on to wait for the one behind. Would they have to find a duplicate? They could always try and save money by trying to turn this into a driverless coach (see other thread), meaning of course, no coach at all. Play them at their own game.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 29, 2011 8:21:46 GMT
Some 20 years ago, there was a most magificent set of manual gates controlled by an adjacent Victorian signal box at Shoreham-by-Sea station in W Sussex. Many photos exist.
The day before it was due to have a listing (Grade 2 I think) as a historic structure, it was demolished. Similar speedy demolition action was apparantly once carried out on the Firestone building on the Great West Road too. Our heritage is still being destroyed on the grounds of "progress"
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 26, 2011 19:22:54 GMT
v52gc said > "Part of the platform surface top layer has been removed meaning there's a step between this and the nosing stones".
So there is nobody to let Pax getting off Uxb trains know, (madness in itself), terminators de-trained a station earlier, yet although there could be signage and somebody supervising the platform, nobody is allowed to board at all!!
There should be an enquiry into this.
Without doubt, if what I have read is accurate and I were in L.U. management, somebody would be looking for a new job tomorrow.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 26, 2011 18:42:50 GMT
Even worse!
Pure Sesame Street.
I would fire whoever "arranged" ('organised' is not the appropriate word), for this to happen
This is mind numbing concrete thinking.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 26, 2011 17:55:47 GMT
Madness, Absolute non-joined up thinking madness. What about those who want to board at R.L. westbound platform? Should they take the next e/b Met and change at W Harrow?? Proof if ever it was needed that the Pax come last when an apparatchik has what he thinks is a good idea. Whoever arranged for trains to run non-stop through the station is not fit for purpose in my opinion. L.T, & LUL used to be full of people like this years ago, but l thought times had moved on. I suppose the whole thing has now been taken over by the Health & Safety Stazi
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 25, 2011 15:08:15 GMT
Looks SO realistically like the South Acton shuttle (No PAX inside adds more reality) Trip number was 100 white on black. Fabulous model.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 24, 2011 20:17:50 GMT
No doubt that Chesham PAX suffered again
Oh for a Watford Met - Chesham shuttle that would have connected with the Chiltern.
Stiil people not wishing to look "outide the box" to the detriment of the (Chesham) people who pay the fares.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 24, 2011 11:20:24 GMT
Old Street actually has eight exits
It is on acrossroads. Each arm has an exit on both sides of all four roads
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 23, 2011 20:31:15 GMT
As I've said on other threads, the "Why it can't be done" brigade are always more stubborn that those who see that it can IF people were prepared to try.
Perhaps a Chesham - Ricky - Watford shuttle isn't so daft after all, perhaps with 2 x separate 4 car units > > thus giving a 30 minute sevice to Chesham. These could be A stock or Chiltern - I don't think the Chesham residents would care IF their 20 minute service became reliable because of it.
Henry T Ford said "If I'd given people what they wanted, all I would have done would have been to try and design a faster horse". It really is time to try and 'think outside the box' regarding Chesham services.
I now await lots of reasons why it can't be done, but why not try and see how it might be done? How many more occasions will there be such as we have read about here where there will be a missing train and thus an hour wait?? Guaranteed to be the fastest way > > > > to send people into their cars.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 21, 2011 16:11:17 GMT
@ The Tram Man
There was a big budget film made around 1960, where James Bond or whoever the hero was, took off in a Vickers Viscount, there was a mid-air flight scene showing a Super Constellation, and he arrived in a Boeing 707.
I don't expect film makers to have the ability to give much attention to detail, but that one was a bit extreme!
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 21, 2011 11:49:24 GMT
Question: How many trains a day run on the National Rail line twixt W & S Ruislip - Paddington?
Secondary question: How many trains a day did that line take 60 years ago?
Is it beyond the ability of mankind for there ever to be 'joined up thinking' about national rail policy?
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 21, 2011 10:00:41 GMT
I no longer live in the area so l can speak dispassionately as an observer and former user.
One of the most important lessons I learned in my business career was that it is easier to argue "why not", (why things shouldn't be done), than to argue the reasons why they should. Those who argue for "why not" tend to be the most stubborn. It's called being in a "comfort zone" and feeling comfortable with the existing regime rather than become "exposed" via proposing or implementing a new "why" one
Also I learned that money is quicker spent unnecessarily (probably in case of a change of mind), than is spent on "necessary spends" > different sources of funding seem to be found. Linecontroller66 makes the point with his comment about the 'Fit for London' junket. Money should be spent on N Harrow junction as a priority and not on unnecessary spends.
I could write for hours on this, but I'm afraid I would upset some people. But I would say, If the Met can't or don't want to run a decent service to Watford, Amersham or Chesham, concentrate on Watford and give Ricky etc to Chiltern. If the Met think the Rick (& beyond) stub is an inconvenience, don't moan about it but get rid of it. Free up the infrastructure for Chiltern to run a more frequent (proper) "Metro" service. Let Chiltern run services to Croxley and Watford from Chesham off-peak via Ricky. (I can hear the "Why not" brigade fidgeting already).
Let the PAX of Amersham and district remember: "Be careful of what you pray for in case your prayers are answered"
The country ends of the Met (& Central) are a case in point. A rail service should be about what passengers want WITHIN REASON. Managers should therefore try and implement reasonable requests rather than look for immediate reasons "Why not". Give W. Ruislip to Chiltern's new "Metro service", all trains calling there & S Ruislip. From North Acton the Central was built as a duplicate line. S Ruislip to W Ruislip did NOT need duplicating. There was NO vision, and the Central should have run from Ruislip Gdns to Ickenham, Hillingdon & Uxb in 1948. PLEASE don't waste my time on telling me "why not". The Picc should have been curtailed at Rayners Lane off peak with peak hour terminators at Ruislip and not beyond. With money spent on a Park Royal interchange, and Centrals running to Uxb, Piccs wouldn't need to run to Uxb anyway.
These are a couple of examples of spending money to provide better service to passengers. THAT is what running a railway should be about. And things such as these should be prioritised before spending money on fixing things that "ain't broke". N Harrow junction is effectively broke, so it needs fixing and let's not hear reasons "Why not". New signage, new offices and new colour schemes are not always a priority, (at least, they shouldn't be).
TfL desperately needs people with vision as a concept rather than people who maintain that what was designed before 1939 is still best for London. It isn't.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 19:37:59 GMT
I agree the area has changed radically. The original "why not" reason was duplication of route Mile End - Liv St, as it was already covered by the Met., and an incredibly intense (by todays standards) bus/trolleybus service along roads that were quite free of private cars.
Now, yes, things are different.
But trust me, it is not just a matter of "Just" putting in a couple of tunnels and a few stairs. This would cost MORE than a Park Royal interchange, and l know which is most needed.
A Cental Line/ELL interchange at Shoreditch is a long way down the "wish list"
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 16:53:28 GMT
Remember where the old Bakerloo Trafalgar Square station was?? And Charing Cross on the Dist/Circle??
Years ago, I remember a load of French Tourists turning up at the Trafalgar Square ticket office and they asked for 7 singles to Charing Cross! These were dutifully supplied.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 13:34:20 GMT
Yes Chris
Signage is never that easy. It will have to be designed and they will want a new logo for it. This will require a committee to decide who should design it. Then they will all want to discuss proposals. And then the colour, etc etc etc and so it will go on. You have no idea how these people work and how slowly they can work when their own money is not involved in them spending it.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 12:57:15 GMT
@ chrisvandankietc.,
You said, "For CR, signage is going to need some updating. For instance, a proper National Rail sign will do.", and whereas you are correct, and no doubt this will be given a priority, (Don't quangomeisters just love corporate identity), have you any idea just 'designing a sign' actually costs??, (and getting it approved by an overpaid committee)
I expect they could build the long overdue Park Royal interchange for the same money!!
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 9:06:09 GMT
@ videomaniac
I'll concede that on property prices to a point. But adjacent properties would be affected, both above and under the ground. (Subsidence)
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 8:29:45 GMT
@ videomaniac
Agreed.
And as l said, if starting from scratch today, it would be done. But there was no need at the time the infrastructure was built. There was no need recently. There might be some need now, but that is catered for by Mile End-Whitechapel easy PAX interchange. That doesn't mean there won't be need at some time in the future. At the time of original build, property prices in Shoreditch etc were dirt cheap. It could have been done then for comparatively little cost, but that cost WAS unjustified, even then. Now it's megawonga. The very high cost has got to justify the benefits and at the moment l suspect it's nowhere near. EVEN IF money were an infinite resource, this would still come way down the list - even if it were on the list.
There are much better candidates for any available money such as a Park Royal interchange and a Central Line PAX link from Ruislip Gdns to the Picc towards Hillingdon - Uxbridge.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 20, 2011 7:29:21 GMT
A CentralLine stn, at Shoreditch High Street really is a no-no. Any Pax from N E London for the ELL can change at Mile End. There really is neither money nor need for such a project.
I'm also aware that things would be different if we were starting today with a blank map, - it would be there. But we are where we are. There was no need for a connection at the time of the building of the infastructure. This will not happen, and it doesn't inconvenience more than a few people by not happening, - don't forget, the ELL as part of NR is a very recent concept. Honestly, there is no need to waste money on this.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 19, 2011 20:12:02 GMT
I suspect that this is more to do with the "Disability Act" than with the Equality Act > > No point in having a wheelchair and an enormous gap to cross getting in/out of a carriage.
Also, I suspect rules might be different for new curved platforms where the line is already extant, rather than 'new lines' where I expect legislation to be much more rigid.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 19, 2011 14:21:50 GMT
Further to my posting of 08:49 this morning, another factor for lack of intermediate stops twixt Liverpool St & Mile End was the intensity if the extensive, high capacity trolleybus network in the area in those days. As both buses and Underground came under the same (LPTB) umbrella, and private cars were in quite insignificant numbers by todays standards, the very frequent trolleybuses easily took the bulk of the PAX. Other than Bethnal Green, there was no need for any more stops on the Central in the days when this was all planned. Planners seldom looked far into the future.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 19, 2011 7:49:03 GMT
abe is correct.
It was deliberate LT policy to create a faster journey between Liverpool Street and Mile End than the Met offered, but there had to be one intermediate stop (Bethnal Green) as opposed to 3. Also, at Mile End, there's the District to take the crowds further east too. It has to be remembered that in those days, travel patterns were MUCH different and much more concentrated in the rush hours. Liverpool St Met platforms got very crowded whilst Circles and Aldgate terminators went through.
Commuters knew that it was often quicker to travel to/from Liverpool St to East Ham (for example) via the Central and change at Mile End, than getting a through service on the Met. This was encouraged by LT policy, hence no connection at Shoreditch.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 18, 2011 10:26:57 GMT
Ah, so!!
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 18, 2011 8:38:39 GMT
That ARP Warden in front of the station entrance is very Japanese looking to me....................... I doubt that would have been allowed in WW2.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 18, 2011 8:26:42 GMT
Is Station A Aldwych??
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 17, 2011 21:22:52 GMT
Stupid boy!!!!
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 17, 2011 20:41:37 GMT
Dummkopf!! Mit der Fighter Command Sector H Q just up ze road, Zey are not even likely to even Uxbridge have put outside ze station, or ze names of ze lines even. What is your name boy!!! Would more likely ze wrong name have been put there (such as "East Croydon") just to confuse us when we invaded.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 17, 2011 20:10:10 GMT
Although brilliant, were thay allowed to display maps outside stations in 1940?? After all, all the directional road signs had to be taken down, and you were told to listen for ze foreign accents if ein stranger for ze directions asked, (especially if wearing a Luftwaffe uniform)
|
|