Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2011 13:59:43 GMT
I used North Greenwich station for possibly the first time this week, travelling east to Stratford. As I was on a North Greenwich terminator, I had to change for the next Stratford-bound service, which involved climbing up to the balcony, along and back down to a non-adjacent platform.
It surprised me that the station had been designed like this, with the southbound and terminating platforms adjacent, rather than the northbound and terminating. The loss of convenient cross-platform northbound transfers (indeed, the following train was so close behind that it had been and gone before I reached the NB platform) seems only made up for by having a common platform for southbound passengers entering North Greenwich station on foot.
Was the station built with quick crowd-dispersal after events at the Dome deemed more important than easy northbound transfers for through passengers?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
|
Post by Chris M on Feb 11, 2011 16:35:34 GMT
I get the impression that the section between North Greenwich and Stratford is far busier than it was predicted to be. Don't forget that the Dome was going to be a huge destination that millions of people would journey across the country to go and see several times. The infrastructure was designed with this in mind, but unfortunately the attractions weren't.
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Feb 11, 2011 17:07:28 GMT
Now you know!
It has always been common sense never to remain on a train to a short turn destination unless that is where one wants to alight. Get off at an earlier station and catch the one behind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2011 18:09:25 GMT
Is the platform a bay or connected on both sides? I can't quite remember.
|
|
jazza
Guess my Favourite Number?
Posts: 196
|
Post by jazza on Feb 11, 2011 18:29:19 GMT
Is the platform a bay or connected on both sides? I can't quite remember. Bay platform (platform 2)
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Feb 11, 2011 18:41:38 GMT
Is the platform a bay or connected on both sides? I can't quite remember. Bay platform (platform 2) It's not a bay platform, as there are connections at both ends (and to both tracks).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2011 20:45:04 GMT
I have WTT1 here for the JLE here staring me in the face; for this brief period starting 28 Feb 99 it shows a shuttle running Stratford to North Greenwich using platform 2 there.
It does seem silly the way that is laid out but it's a bi-di platform. That and it maybe could have something to do with controlling overcrowding during the peaks?
|
|
|
Post by flippyff on Feb 11, 2011 20:55:55 GMT
Now you know! It has always been common sense never to remain on a train to a short turn destination unless that is where one wants to alight. Get off at an earlier station and catch the one behind. When I used to use the line it used to be common for an announcement to be made at Canary Wharf for passengers beyond North Greenwich to change at Canary Wharf rather than at North Greenwich.
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Feb 11, 2011 21:18:11 GMT
I was under the impression that the platforms were laid out that way for the extension to Thamesmead, with Stratford being the branch. With that in mind, It kinda makes sense, as the mainline would have an island, and the diverging branch ends up on it's own side platform.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 11, 2011 23:18:57 GMT
Same arrangement as at Mansion House and Tower Hill, and for the same reason. (also, with elegant variation, at Moorgate Met) The DL is pretty good at announcing to change at the previous station - didn't they say something at Cannery Wharf?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2011 13:51:26 GMT
I've heard the announcements at Canary Wharf before. I only boarded this train at Canary Wharf; it was announced on the platform DMIs there as a North Greenwich service, but once it stopped and the doors opened the internal DMIs were reading Stratford. 'Course, once the train pulled away from Canary Wharf they changed to North Greenwich
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2011 21:54:02 GMT
If I recall correctly, a few options of layouts were looked at for North Greenwich, including having a double-sided centre road (like at White City and Loughton). However, I think that this layout would have caused problems of some sort with the construction of the station box.
As has already been said, for east-to-west reversals the layout works like those at Mansion House and Tower Hill. If the line was ever to be extended towards Thamesmead, then I can see the layout operating with one eastbound platform (the two branches splitting east of the station) and two westbound platforms (one for trains from Stratford and the other for trains from Thamesmead). That would avoid having westbound trains queueing up outside the station for just one westbound platform.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 14, 2011 22:19:23 GMT
If the line was ever to be extended towards Thamesmead, then I can see the layout operating with one eastbound platform (the two branches splitting east of the station) and two westbound platforms (one for trains from Stratford and the other for trains from Thamesmead). That would avoid having westbound trains queueing up outside the station for just one westbound platform. Similar to what was intended for South KensingtonThe positions of the connections with the Jubilee at th exit end of the platfoms in both directions) show that the same arrangment was also used at Baker Street (bakerloo) in the 1938-1978 era, when the Stanmore branch was part of the Bakerloo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2011 22:32:01 GMT
The positions of the connections with the Jubilee at th exit end of the platfoms in both directions) show that the same arrangment was also used at Baker Street (bakerloo) in the 1938-1978 era, when the Stanmore branch was part of the Bakerloo. Harsig's lovely 1939 Bakerloo signalling diagram shows this rather well!
|
|
|
Post by abe on Feb 15, 2011 7:54:16 GMT
Similar to what was intended for South KensingtonThe positions of the connections with the Jubilee at th exit end of the platfoms in both directions) show that the same arrangment was also used at Baker Street (bakerloo) in the 1938-1978 era, when the Stanmore branch was part of the Bakerloo. Cheeky blighters - that image has been scanned from London's Lost Tube Schemes without permission or a credit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 11:18:34 GMT
At the East end of the "box" that the whole station is built in provision was made for two tunnels to dive off under the river towards London City Airport. The thinking when the the station was designed was that the Eastbound service would be split between Stratford and the Airport. At some time after the design was finalised and construction had begun the DLR extention came off the drawing board and was deemed to be better value as it would eventually link Woolwich with Docklands. The areas where the Airport tunnels would have left North Greenwich are difficult to see from a train but if you sit on the right hand side (in the direction of travel) as you leave Nth Greenwich Eastbound as you go over the points look diagonally to your right and if you are lucky you will notice a large area running away to the right just before you enter the tube tunnel proper. There is a corresponding area as you exit the Westbound pipe. Sadly its not possible to see these area from the platform due to the distance they are from the public areas.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 15, 2011 11:44:10 GMT
Does this mean that access to the centre road from the eastbound direction would be before (from the stratford direction) the junctions diverged towards LCY?
So... um....
. /--- LCY --------< ####. >----- SRA --------< . >----- SRA --------< #### \------ LCY
Gah, wont display properly... three tracks turning into 4 with a vertical line of symmetry
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 12:06:25 GMT
The driver of a North Greenwich destination train should make a PA at Canary Wharf and/or play the pre-recorded announcement advising passengers for Canning Town, West Ham and Stratford to wait for the next train. Aside from being the helpful thing to do, it filters the people you get asked questions by when changing ends down to headphone-wearers and the gormless.
However, in all other instances on the Jubilee I'd advise taking the first train that comes along because trains can and do get 're-formed', sometimes at the very last moment!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 13:36:28 GMT
However, in all other instances on the Jubilee I'd advise taking the first train that comes along because trains can and do get 're-formed', sometimes at the very last moment! Indeed. That was what I thought had happened in this instance: a North Greenwich service being reformed into a Stratford service. Presumably it was actually being reformed from Stratford to North Greenwich, and although the Canary Wharf platform DMIs had caught onto this, the on-train displays hadn't. I was wearing my headphones at the time, so didn't hear any tannoy announcements that may've been made
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Feb 15, 2011 14:59:45 GMT
Does this mean that access to the centre road from the eastbound direction would be before (from the stratford direction) the junctions diverged towards LCY? So... um.... . /--- LCY --------< ####. >----- SRA --------< . >----- SRA --------< #### \------ LCY Gah, wont display properly... three tracks turning into 4 with a vertical line of symmetry ..er... and
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 15:14:32 GMT
No not quite.. The Eastbound track to the Airport would leave NGW as an extention of the middle road to dive below the Westbound somewhere under the river. The Westbound line from LCY would have joined the existing Westbound road just before the points from the westbound road into the middle. The thinking was that a quiet times the airport service may have operated as a shuttle from NGW Pfm 2.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 15, 2011 17:48:51 GMT
I of course ment an horizontal line of symmetry. The second picture you posted M, but the westbound line from LCY would instead attach to the bottom line just before the platform; after the line to the central platform had diverged. Moot though! If only we could have a standard set of track icons on here, such as the wiki ones! Anyway, would this City airport route have been the other option as suggested in the 1990 report? www.lddc-history.org.uk/transport/3tran4.jpg
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2011 11:55:05 GMT
This is a fairly common 3 platform station layout (usually at junctions and termini) on metro systems. It allows WB passengers to board both through and starting trains. It should not cause a problem to EB passengers as long as passengers are informed to transfer from a North Greenwich to Stratford bound train at Canary Wharf. Obviously this did not happen in your case.
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Feb 18, 2011 13:16:12 GMT
I of course ment an horizontal line of symmetry. The second picture you posted M, but the westbound line from LCY would instead attach to the bottom line just before the platform; after the line to the central platform had diverged. Moot though! If only we could have a standard set of track icons on here, such as the wiki ones! Anyway, would this City airport route have been the other option as suggested in the 1990 report? www.lddc-history.org.uk/transport/3tran4.jpgQuestion is, is that branch better on Crossrail or the Jubilee?
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Feb 19, 2011 18:03:30 GMT
Funny how the route on that map has now been split up between Jubilee, Crossrail and DLR services. Had the ATO been up and running from the beginning I would have liked the Jub to take the Thamesmead branch as planned, matching this with a second northern branch. The core would be Wembley Park-North Greenwich and services would be balanced at each end with no short running or blocking back.
|
|
|
Post by version3point1 on Feb 20, 2011 17:15:21 GMT
Was the station built with quick crowd-dispersal after events at the Dome deemed more important than easy northbound transfers for through passengers? This has probably been answered in various ways, but as much as many people would like to believe it, the station was not built with this in mind. No matter how much you beg Service Control, and no matter how willing the driver(s), we don't just get given trains into Platform 2 as and when to help with crowd-dispersal! Egress usually lasts between 50 minutes, to just over an hour for more difficult crowds, though with the ATO (when it does work) we are slowly starting to see these times reducing. When the Dome was originally opened, passenger flow was a constant stream, much how it is if you visit the station during midday. It is also worth stating that 10 years ago, we did not have a mass number of high-density residential areas within a 5-mile radius of the station. The Dome did not have a mass egress back then like what now happens with functions in the O2 Arena, thus since the re-opening of the Dome in June 2007, we had to change our congestion and evacuation plans, because we found we were having to deal with 17,000 all in one hit (plus an additional 2,000 - 4,000 if there is a show in the Indigo, not to mention the additional numbers within the various other establishments and the cinema). The station layout now as it stands is poorly designed for this; we find that as a train terminates in the middle platform when an egress is in process, passengers who need to make the transfer for the Stratford service are often left fighting to get off the platform at either end (as the fixed staircase then becomes unusable to anybody who isn't going down to the westbound platform). There is no work-around. Even if the secondary ticket hall was built, it wouldn't have made any difference to how the station operates today. The station is located within a 358 metre-long box sunk into waterlogged (and partly contaminated) soil. Early original ideas proposed that the station would be a two-level cut-and-cover box (like South Ken) and it was seen to be cheaper if the box did not have a 'lid', with all the daylight and quick access from ground level quite appealing. Although the original idea was strongly backed by London Underground to some degree, the difficulty of having to deal with the contaminated ground (and recommendations from British Gas at the time) meant the station box was then given a lid, with plans to perhaps make developments on top at ground level. If you can call a dinky WHSmith a 'development'. I don't know whether the additional cost of having to deal with more contaminated ground, more waterlogged clay soil and the cost of the initial coffer-dam in order to excavate the original box had anything to do with whether or not London Underground saw the potential extension towards the Royal Docks as 'worth it', but it probably would've swayed the decision.
|
|