|
|
Post by wellgroomed on Jan 8, 2009 22:27:35 GMT
The following is a quick sample of 6 proportional fonts showing that even "Aylesbury Vale Pkway" is likely to fit in the space of "Birmingham New Street" The PIS will shortly be updated and changed from AVP. |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jan 8, 2009 22:33:48 GMT
Was AVP done quickly then, as it wasn't as complicated to set up as Aylesbury Vale Parkway?
|
|
|
|
Post by wellgroomed on Jan 10, 2009 10:24:42 GMT
Was AVP done quickly then, as it wasn't as complicated to set up as Aylesbury Vale Parkway? At a guess (and it's only a guess!) - yes.  ) |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 10, 2009 18:59:57 GMT
Saw a turbo with [Aylesbury V P] on the front - progress being made!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2009 15:59:55 GMT
Some time after the opening of Aylesbury Vale Parkway (can't remember when), I noticed in announcements at Marylebone that "Aylesbury" was being referred to as "Aylesbury Town", which it was until around 1963.
Does anyone know if it has been officially renamed back to Aylesbury Town (and if so when, please), or is it being used unofficially to distinguish it from Aylesbury Vale Parkway?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,776
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 20, 2009 16:05:12 GMT
The Wikipedia article starts:
The [1] citation is
To me this implies that the station is still, officially, known simply as "Aylesbury"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2009 17:51:55 GMT
It is. All the station name signs still just say Aylesbury.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2009 19:55:38 GMT
Thanks chaps. Reg.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2009 16:30:21 GMT
Consistency is a bit lacking, as seen today at Marylebone:
Departure boards showed either "Aylesbury" or "Aylesbury Vale Parkway".
Arrival board list showed either "Aylesbury Town" or "Aylesbury Vale Parkway".
|
|
|
|
Post by wellgroomed on Jan 21, 2009 19:18:34 GMT
Consistency is a bit lacking, as seen today at Marylebone The boards all over the network are driven from a group database, transcribed directly from TOPS. At a guess, Aylesbury Town has been added manually - but, evidently, it has yet to be spotted by the people who would instruct it to be removed.  The station itself will certainly remain 'Aylesbury' at present. When the new CIS screens were being tested, we found ourseleves being quite adept at changing destinations - but found it incredibly difficult to change them back, once one change had been made!! Thus, one service found itself with the destination 'Exeter Central', but, thankfully, this was only on an internal test bed. It is more than capable of showing diverse locations such as Neasden LUL, Neasden South Jn, Wembley Siding, and Aynho Jn though! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2009 22:03:16 GMT
Many thanks.
Showing my age, but the mention of Aynho reminds me of the station that used to be, also Wembley Stadium, West Wycombe. I'll stop there!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2009 19:05:17 GMT
What a shame we are still lagging behind
Scotland
Wales
And both parts of Ireland when it comes to railway reopenings!
|
|
|
|
Post by upfast on Feb 6, 2009 0:11:06 GMT
What a shame we are still lagging behind Scotland Wales And both parts of Ireland when it comes to railway reopenings! Anything to do with devolution I wonder   Plus look at the places with new stations and lines and the correllation with their MPs/MSPs/AMs!.....  |
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Feb 6, 2009 1:01:29 GMT
The problem with England is that it's proven surprisingly hard to find lines it would genuinely be a good idea to reopen. I know enthusiasts bandy about a lot of different schemes, but thus far none of them have stood up to serious scrutiny. I can't think of any that have been unfairly rejected.
On the plus side there may be some movement this year on Oxford-Bedford and Bristol-Portishead, which are two of the better schemes.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,776
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Feb 6, 2009 8:32:33 GMT
The impression I've gathered from various places is that the political will to subject schemes to serious scrutiny is lack in England compared to the developed regions. For example I get the impression that the rail option was not "farily" considered in the Cambridge-St Ives link, the council being determined that it would be a guided busway.
Also subjective of course, but it feels like the timescales, particularly in Scotland and Wales, are shorter than in England. Partly because of a perception that the perception that in Wales reopening disused railways is seen as a good thing and only why the individual scheme merits restoration needs justification, whereas in England it has to be justified that rail reopening in general is a good thing and only once that hurdle is cleared can the scheme be considered on it's individual merits.
|
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Feb 6, 2009 10:04:38 GMT
I think the difference is more that the Welsh and Scottish governments are willing to reopen lines with questionable or borderline merits (to say the least), whereas the DfT flatly aren't. The Cambridge scheme was looked at on its merits and found the bus would offer a better service for far less money, and none of the arguments for heavy rail stacked up. See here for a summary. |
|
)
